The University of Michiganhas confirmed that the 100-year-old manuscript attributed toGalileo was actually written by a prominent figure. clarified. Counterfeiter.
This document was thought to be a draft of a letter Galileo sent to the Governor of Venice concerning his telescope built in 1609. The lower half of the manuscript allegedly contained drafts recorded by Galileo as he used the telescope. A telescope that observes the moons of Jupiter.
A professor of history at Georgia State Universitybegan investigating this document and, in fact, anotherforgery had him imprisoned in the 1930s by Tobia his I discovered that it was the work of Nicotra.
This document was bequeathed to the university in 1938 by Tracy McGregor, a Detroit businessman who collected books and manuscripts. The document was previously owned by the American Art Anderson Gallery, which had sold the library of wealthy manuscript collector Roderick Terry.The document is in the collection of Mr. Terry, Archbishop of Pisa. It is said to have been authenticated by Cardinal Pietro Mafi.
The cardinal reportedly compared the forgery to a letter signed by Galileo that he had in his personal collection.
Nick Wilding, a professor of history at the University of Michigan, suspected the letter might be a forgery, and in May 2022 told Pablo Alvarez, the University's curator, that he emailed about the suspicion of He had exposed other Galileo forgeries in the past, including a manuscript of Sidereus Nunsius that belonged to a rare book dealer in New York City.
Ultimately, Mr. Wilding concluded that the manuscript was a forgery by his Nicotra. A university expert also examined the manuscript and Mr. Wilding's evidence and agreed with his conclusions.
"It was quite heartbreaking when we first learned that our Galileo wasn't actually Galileo," said Donna L Hayward, interim dean of the University of Michigan Libraries. 25} told The New York Times..
The university decided to make the survey results available to the public to ensure transparency.
"Sweeping it under the rug goes against what we stand for," said Ms. Hayward. was found not to appear in the documents before 1770, so the documents cannot be said to be authentic.
Furthermore, there is no evidence of the existence of documents found prior to 1930.
