Galileo Starry Messenger

Our 1989 translation of Starry Messenger was in print form from The University of Chicago Press. This translation makes it easier to understand Galileo because it is written in English which gave us a greater understanding of Galileo’s work. However, Galileo's original words and illustrations were altered. This was apparent in the illustration of the Orion constellation which compared to our 1610 facsimile the dimensions and amount of stars were different. It states it translated Wesley College’s copy which makes it impossible to verify the exact differences between the two. When looking at Jupiter's moons the publisher used a composite polymer form of image duplication and still had difficulty printing and suffered from of excess ink. Many

Our Facsimile was a digitized copy of an original 1610 version from the National Library in Florence, Italy. Facsimiles reveal that when these were printed it was very difficult to make sure every copy was the same. Digital facsimiles lack the physical feeling that the physical books bring. In addition, the moons had a significant amount whitespace in the margins undermining the overall tone of the book. Moreover, the lack of detail in the duplicated images contradict Galileo’s original observations. They lack the effect of the grey and black shadows that proved that the moon rotated on its own axis. Due to the digital format and scanning software, the images were significantly darker and the rich detail of the shadows was gone. Instead, because this detail is left out from the facsimile it no longer becomes an example of how Galileo challenged the prior belief that the moon was “spherical and unchanging orb” (Dear 105). If someone was needing to research Galileo's drawing techniques they would need to visit the physical book. However, it is important to point out that these facsimile images were interpreted and printed in second hand and “by a Venetian artisan” and “feature craters that are exaggerated for effect” (Schmidle, 2013). When we examined the images of the moon it already passed through two separate modifiers. Viewing Galileo’s original observations of “rough and mountainous” (Dear 105) through the telescope even harder without Galileo’s real drawings

Working with these copies presented many challenges including looking for a specific image. I would have to look at the facsimile image instead of the page number because the translation and the facsimile numbers did not correspond. In addition, when working on the English Old Books database it was very unorganized and difficult to change pages, which adds time to anyone's research. My experiences were similar to Schmidle’s article in regards to “you never even question authenticity” (Schmidle). This was apparent when our team discovered that the 1989 translation’s bracket around the left moon. However, when compared to the 1610 facsimile, the moon was originally included. Without the aid of the facsimile the reader would be unwilling to question the publishers’ edits. In addition, when Schmidle noted that “the top half of the letters to sit awkwardly” (Schmidle) reminded me of the disoriented “O” that appeared different in everyone’s copies. I thought that the quote from Oscar Wilde “ the best intentions that the worst work is done” (Schmidle) can be applied to all facsimiles. My advice would be very careful in believing in what one is seeing because it has passed through many stages including editing, cropping and digitalizing. Overall facsimiles and translations are made to make money for the publisher and not in the best interest of the reader. Publishers are similar to DeCaro who forged and stole all with intent to make money not to help Richard