Galileo’s rapid ascent to fame in 1610 and the controversial method and implications of his astronomical discoveries brought already simmering tensions to the fore, putting his contemporaries on edge. His discoveries made explicit things that often remained unsaid, giving us unique insight into the considerations that influenced the construction and assessment of fame in the seventeenth century. Anna Luna-Post traces these discussions in search of a greater understanding of the nature, development, and significance of scholarly fame. Rather than the direct result of merit or extraordinary achievements, fame, she reveals, is shaped through human intervention. Galileo’s Fame shifts the focus from the recipient of fame to its brokers. Galileo’s contemporaries knew his rise to fame was not a matter of course. Not only were his discoveries highly contested, he was also not the first to observe Jupiter’s four largest moons. Yet, of the three men who did so between the summer of 1609 and the winter of 1610, Galileo is the only one who achieved both widespread fame and posthumous glory. This is only in part the result of his efforts to publish his findings swiftly, and of the later effect of the Roman Catholic Inquisition in 1633. From the beginning of Galileo’s career, well before the publication of the Sidereus Nuncius, his contemporaries took pains to shape his reputation and fame. They were fully aware that their efforts would shape the course of his career; they also knew that they would profit from helping him.
