克里斯托夫·赛因那Christoph Scheiner

克里斯托夫·赛因那的出生日期是确定的，7月25日，但历史学家们一直在争论他出生于1573年还是1575年。两种出生年份在几乎同等数量的讣告中都有记载。然而，最近的发现使1573年这个日期最有可能，因为这是最近发现的一份写于1650年（即他去世那年）的讣告中记录的日期。在1591年5月进入奥格斯堡的圣萨尔瓦多耶稣会拉丁学校之前，赛因那的早年生活一无所知。他在这所学校学习了四年多，于1595年10月毕业。毕业两天后，他进入格奥尔格·兰茨贝格的耶稣会神学院，成为耶稣会（耶稣会教团）的初学生。他在兰茨贝格作为初学生学习了两年，由Rupert Reindl授课。随后他前往奥格斯堡，在1597-98年间学习修辞学。正是在奥格斯堡，他宣誓了初愿，并从奥格斯堡主教Sebastian Breuning那里接受了小品秩。

1598年，赛因那前往因戈尔施塔特的耶稣会大学，在那里继续他长期的耶稣会教育。他的主要学习领域是哲学，尤其是形而上学和数学。这三年间，他的数学老师是Johann Lantz（1564-1638），后者后来出版了重要的算术著作Institutiones arithmeticae Ⓣ（《论算术》）（1616年）。著名语言学家和历史学家Matthäus Rader（1561-1634）在因戈尔施塔特的耶稣会文理中学（Gymnasium）工作，对年轻的对科学、特别是天文学感兴趣的耶稣会士给予了特别支持。赛因那已经对制作数学和天文仪器产生了兴趣，他承诺为Rader制作一个象限仪。然而，他觉得他制作的仪器不够好。他在1603年9月写信给Rader（引自[7]）：-

……这安慰了我：最尊贵的画家Apelles，将他（如果有的话）的错误展示在画作中，以便人们可以纠正它们。为了以这种方式变得更加完美，他从不外出而不展示他的作品。事实上，如果我发现我的作品不令他人满意，它们也不会令我满意。让这个理由足以说明我愿意一次又一次地将我的错误暴露给他人的审视，尽管还有另一个动机：我从一开始就知道您的仁慈和谦逊。

1603年，他被派往迪林根的耶稣会文法学校教授人文学科。Otto主教在迪林根创办了一所神学院，该学院于1564年成为耶稣会大学，并在那里建立了一所培养神职人员的学院。在迪林根期间，赛因那与一位画家交谈，这位画家在开始绘画之前使用一种机制在纸上绘制轮廓。这位画家对这个机制保密，但赛因那对此很感兴趣，并研究出如何构造一个缩放仪，即一种允许以放大或缩小形式复制图表的仪器。在迪林根教学两年后，赛因那回到因戈尔施塔特的耶稣会大学。他已经获得了硕士学位，但耶稣会的培训很长，他还有很多年的学习。他的老师Johann Lantz看到了这个年轻人的巨大潜力，并在1605年夏天写道（引自[7]）：-

赛因那在迪林根时，写信给Ferdinand Crendel神父，解释说他发现了一些描述日晷的新而简单的方法。他没有写它是什么，但我希望它是某种优秀的东西，特别是因为他说他花了几年时间发明它，并且在发明新事物方面很出色。毫无疑问，用他的这种方法，他远远超过了我所完成的小事。

尽管他在接下来的几年里在因戈尔施塔特学习神学，但他的发明已经为他赢得了相当大的名声。事实上，他的名声如此之大，以至于对绘画感兴趣的巴伐利亚公爵命令他于1606年来到慕尼黑展示他的缩放仪。赛因那的神学研究从1605年持续到1609年：他于1609年3月14日被Marcus Lyresius主教任命为执事，并于1609年6月30日因他的Theses Theologicae而获得神学博士学位，该论文他以通常方式在辩论中进行了答辩。他被派往Ebersberg服务一年，然后回到因戈尔施塔特，在那里他被任命为Johann Lantz的继任者。Lantz已搬到慕尼黑，赛因那在因戈尔施塔特接替他担任数学和希伯来语教授，教授几何学、天文学，此外还有他的专业科目日晷和望远镜。由于对数学和天文仪器着迷，赛因那很快获得了一台高质量望远镜，我们知道到1611年春天，他和他的助手Baptist Cysat正在观察木星的卫星。Lantz于1611年5月14日写信给保罗·古尔丁（引自[7]）：-

赛因那和Baptist Cysat大师继续稳定地观察木星那四颗行星的运动，最近还寄给我他们的一些观测结果。

事实上，正是在1611年3月，赛因那开始进行他最著名的观测，即对太阳黑子的观测。他并非因首次已知的太阳黑子观测而闻名，这一荣誉属于托马斯·哈里奥特，他在1610年12月18日当地时间上午10点观测到了太阳黑子，当时太阳位于地平线上方7°或8°。托马斯·哈里奥特记录道：

当时有霜和雾……我看了两三次，一次用右眼，另一次用左眼。在太阳变得清晰后的一分钟时间内。

他画了一张图，清楚地显示了三个大太阳黑子。然而，哈里奥特的这些观测并未发表，直到许多年后他的优先权才得以确立。

伽利略对太阳黑子进行了许多观测，并于1613年春天出版了Istoria e dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari e loro accidenti Ⓣ（关于太阳黑子及其特性的历史与演示）。他能够利用贝内代托·卡斯泰利使用望远镜将太阳图像投射到纸上的想法进行观测。赛因那在太阳黑子发现的故事中变得重要，是因为他在1611年秋天写给奥格斯堡的马克·韦尔瑟（1558-1614）的三封信，描述了他自己对太阳黑子的观测。韦尔瑟是一位希腊语和拉丁语学者，对历史和语文学充满热情，与许多耶稣会学者通信，包括克里斯托佛·克拉乌。他于1612年1月5日以Tres epistolae de Maculis Solaribus scriptae ad Marcum Velserium Ⓣ（赛因那写给马克·韦尔瑟的三封信）为标题出版了赛因那的信件，尽管由于赛因那希望保持匿名，他在信上署名为“Apelles latenspost tabulam”（藏在画后的阿佩莱斯）。他在Rosa Ursina Ⓣ（太阳黑子）（1630年）中给出了他的理由（见[7]）：

但由于这件事不仅新颖而且困难，被认为在许多方面与哲学家的观点相悖，以免该大学的某人草率鲁莽地发表什么，然后难以收回且不体面，我的上级命令我谨慎缓慢地进行，直到现象本身被其他人的经验所证实，并且在没有相反证据的情况下不要随意偏离哲学家走过的道路，也不要以我的名义在给韦尔瑟的信中发表我的观测。因为这样他们会给任何人更大的判断自由，也不会引起嫉妒。由于这些预防措施，结果以阿佩莱斯笔名发表的信件比我实际写给韦尔瑟的要少得多。

韦尔瑟在1612年1月和2月将Tres epistolae的副本寄给了许多科学家，包括伽利略。让我们简要看看这份出版物包含了什么。

赛因那画了一系列图，显示不同日期的太阳黑子，这些图是通过在望远镜前放置深色玻璃制成的。然而，他故意没有试图准确记录黑子的大小和形状，写道[20]：-

关于所展示的观察，我有以下告诫。……它们并非非常精确，而是根据眼睛所见手绘在纸上，没有确定和精确的测量，有时由于恶劣和多变的天气，有时由于时间不足，有时由于其他障碍而无法进行。……但这也应注意：黑子与太阳的比例不应从图中获取，因为我将它们画得比应有的更大，以便更显眼，特别是对于一些非常小的黑子，否则它们几乎无法成为我们视觉的对象。

赛因那关于黑子是什么的理论相当不正确。他写道[18]：-

我一直认为在太阳的明亮天体上放置比月球上见过的任何黑子（除一个小黑子外）更暗的黑子是不合适的。这样做不合理，因为如果它们在太阳上，它们的运动将意味着太阳旋转，我们应该看到黑子以它们彼此之间以及相对于太阳的相同顺序和位置返回。到目前为止，它们未能重新出现，尽管其他黑子跟随第一批黑子穿过太阳圆盘。这是一个明确的论据，表明它们不在太阳上。因此，我不认为它们是真正的黑子，而是部分遮蔽太阳的物体，即位于太阳和我们之间或围绕太阳旋转的恒星。

当然，人们可以原谅赛因那在太阳旋转后没有认出相同的黑子，因为它们变化显著。然而，由于黑子在穿过太阳可见面时变化显著，他本可以弄清楚发生了什么。1613年，伽利略和赛因那之间因太阳黑子爆发了争论。伽利略不公平地指责赛因那剽窃，但尽管赛因那对太阳黑子的发现确实独立于伽利略的任何工作，他的解释完全错误。然而，朱塞佩·比安卡尼为他的耶稣会同伴赛因那辩护，随之而来的是相当大的争议。伽利略正确地声称黑子在太阳表面，并由太阳的旋转带动。整个1612年，伽利略与Welser通信讨论太阳黑子，赛因那继续定期观察。1612年9月，Welser以笔名Apelles出版了赛因那的第二本小册子，题为De maculis solaribus et stellis circa Jovem errantibus accuratior disquisitio Ⓣ（关于太阳黑子和围绕木星游荡的恒星。更准确的探究）。对Welser的尊重阻止了伽利略用他非常擅长的毁灭性措辞攻击Apelles。他在1612年11月写信给Cesi（见[18]）：-

我打算展示耶稣会士处理此事的方式多么愚蠢，并如他所应得的那样谴责他。但要做到这一点而不冒犯Signor Welser是一个重大困难，并阻碍了我的工作。

伽利略于1613年初以Istoria e dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari e loro accidenti Ⓣ（关于太阳黑子及其特性的历史与论证）为题出版了他写给Welser的信件。该出版物由Accademia dei Lincei出版，大约同时Welser被选入该科学院。

这场争论似乎没有给赛因那带来问题，他开始出版重要著作：（与Johann Georg Locher合著）Disquisitiones mathematicae Ⓣ（论数学研究）（1614年）；Sol ellipticus Ⓣ（椭圆形的太阳）（1615年）；（与Georg Schönberger合著）Exegeses fundamentorum gnomonicorum Ⓣ（日晷学基础阐释）（1615年）；以及Refractiones coelestes Ⓣ（天空中的折射）（1617年）。在两部独著作品中，他指出太阳接近地平线时看起来呈椭圆形，并用折射解释了这一现象。1617年7月31日，他在教皇面前发了最后誓愿，并请求允许他作为传教士前往中国。他的请求被拒绝，并被告知必须留在欧洲继续从事数学研究。从1614年起，他多次收到Archduke Maximilian III的邀请，前往Innsbruck就数学和天文学事务，特别是天文仪器提供建议。1617年，大公要求赛因那永久留在Innsbruck担任他的顾问。1618年Maximilian III去世后，其继任者Archduke Leopold V继续聘用赛因那作为顾问。他出版了Oculus hoc est: Fundamentum opticum Ⓣ（这就是眼睛：光学基础）（1619年），论述眼睛的本质[16]：-

赛因那被指派负责在Innsbruck建造一座新的耶稣会教堂。他还为他的赞助人寻找宗教圣物，许多……信件叙述了他在这些探寻中的成功与困难。……赛因那在这七年期间的行踪，……包括在Freiburg im Breisgau的长期逗留以及访问Neisse，在那里他创办了一所新的耶稣会学校。

1624年，赛因那被教皇召至罗马。目前尚不清楚教皇发出这一召唤的确切原因，但一些历史学家认为这与教会和伽利略之间的争论有某种关联。正是在1623年，伽利略出版了Il saggiatore Ⓣ（试金者），其中对那些被伽利略指控窃取其思想的人进行了猛烈攻击。尽管伽利略几乎肯定没有针对赛因那，但赛因那并不这么认为。伽利略正确地相信，赛因那对太阳黑子的解释是错误的，而到此时，赛因那接受了伽利略的论点，即它们位于太阳表面。然而，赛因那完全有理由对优先权问题感到不满，他在其最重要的著作Rosa Ursina sive Sol Ⓣ（太阳上的黑子）中讨论了这些问题，该书于1630年出版。在书中，他承认伽利略关于太阳黑子位于太阳表面的主张是正确的。Grant McColley在[14]中写道：-

在十七世纪初专门论述望远镜所揭示现象的书籍中，如今很少有比Christopher Scheiner的《Rosa Ursina》更受推崇的。事实上，那个时期没有一部作品在它所描述的太阳观测的数量和准确性上能与之相比。然而，《Rosa Ursina》还有第二个值得推崇的理由，尤其是在科学史家中，因为它呈现了显然是十七世纪对所谓的亚里士多德固体天球和天体不腐性学说最完整、最详尽的攻击。赛因那对 these 观念的攻击用了十四章、150对开页。

Rosa Ursina Ⓣ（太阳上的黑子）包含四卷。第一卷叙述了与伽利略的优先权争论，并对他进行了猛烈攻击。赛因那正确地声称，他是第一个进行具有科学价值的连续太阳黑子观测的人。第二卷描述了观测太阳的方法，第三卷给出了大量太阳黑子数据，第四卷讨论了太阳的自转周期、自转轴、太阳耀斑以及光球颗粒状等其他问题。它还包含赛因那支持地心宇宙的论点，他引用经文来支持这一论点。然而，他的观测表明，水星和金星围绕太阳旋转。在罗马期间，赛因那还出版了Pantographice seu ars delineandi Ⓣ（论用缩放仪绘画的艺术）（1631年），描述了他25年多前发明的缩放仪。他在罗马期间写了Prodromus pro Sole Mobili et Terra Stabili contra Galilaeum a Galileis Ⓣ（支持运动太阳和静止地球反对伽利略的入门论著），其内容由标题充分描述，但该书直到1651年，即他去世一年后才出版。同样在罗马期间，他于1629年观测到距太阳28°角的一个晕。这个晕，现在被称为赛因那晕，被认为是由地球大气中某些冰晶对阳光的折射引起的，见[21]。

1633年，赛因那离开罗马前往维也纳。此时欧洲正处于三十年战争之中，战争在不同地点爆发，军队——主要是雇佣兵——为罗马天主教统治者、路德宗统治者或加尔文宗统治者作战。尽管赛因那可能打算前往奈斯，但实际上战争使他大约四年无法成行。直到1637年，他才回到奈斯的耶稣会学校，在那里工作直至1650年去世。

Christoph Scheiner's day of birth is certain, 25 July, but historians have argued whether he was born in 1573 or 1575. Both years of birth are given in an almost equal number of obituaries. However, recent discoveries make the date of 1573 the most likely for this is the date recorded in a recently discovered obituary written in 1650, the year of his death. Nothing is known of Scheiner's early life before he entered the Jesuit Latin School of St Salvator in Augsburg in May 1591. He spent over four years studying at this school before graduating in October 1595. Two days after graduating, he entered the Jesuit seminary at Landsberg as a novice in the Society of Jesus (the Jesuit Order). He spent two years studying as a novice in Landsberg, taught by Rupert Reindl. He then went to Augsburg where he spent 1597-98 studying rhetoric. It was in Augsburg that he took his first vows and received minor orders from the Bishop of Augsburg, Sebastian Breuning.

In 1598 Scheiner went to the Jesuit University in Ingolstadt where he continued his long Jesuit education. His main studies were in philosophy, in particular metaphysics and mathematics. His mathematics teacher during these three years was Johann Lantz (1564-1638) who later published the important arithmetic text Institutiones arithmeticae Ⓣ (1616). Matthäus Rader (1561-1634), a prominent philologist and historian, worked at the Jesuit gymnasium in Ingolstadt and was a particular support to the young Jesuits who were taking an interest in science, particularly in astronomy. Scheiner had already become interested in constructing mathematical and astronomical instruments and he promised to construct a quadrant for Rader. However, he felt that the instrument he had made was not too good. He wrote to Rader in September 1603 (quoted in [7]):-

... this consoles me: the most noble of painters, Apelles, displayed his errors (if any such existed) in a painting so that they might be corrected by the people. So that he might emerge in this way always more perfect, he would never go out without displaying his works. My works, in fact, would not please me if ever I saw that they were displeasing to others. Let this reason suffice for my willingness to expose my errors time and again to the scrutiny of others, though there is another motive as well: I have known from the outset the kindness and modesty of Your Reverence.

In 1603 he was sent to teach humanities at the Jesuit grammar school in Dillingen. Bishop Otto had founded a seminary in Dillingen which had become a Jesuit University in 1564 and he had built a college there for training priests. While in Dillingen Scheiner talked to a painter who used a mechanism to draw outlines on paper before he began to paint. The painter kept the mechanism a secret by Scheiner was intrigued and worked out how to construct a pantograph, that is an instrument which allows the copying of a diagram in an enlarged or reduced form. After two years teaching at Dillingen, Scheiner returned to the Jesuit University in Ingolstadt. He had received an M.A. but the training for the Jesuit Order was long and he still had many years of study ahead of him. His teacher Johann Lantz saw much promise in the young man and wrote in the summer of 1605 (quoted in [7]):-

Master Scheiner, when in Dillingen, wrote Father Ferdinand Crendel explaining that he had discovered some new and easy method of describing sundials. He does not write what it is, but I hope that it is something excellent, especially since he says that he worked for several years inventing it and excels in inventing new things. Without doubt with this method of his he was far surpass the trifles I have accomplished.

Although he studied theology at Ingolstadt over the following few years, he had achieved quite a name for himself with his inventions. In fact his fame had become so great that the Duke of Bavaria, who was interested in painting, ordered him to come to Munich in 1606 to demonstrate his pantograph. Scheiner's studies of theology lasted from 1605 to 1609: he was ordained a deacon by bishop Marcus Lyresius on 14 March 1609, and was awarded a doctorate in theology on 30 June 1609 for his Theses Theologicae which he had defended in a disputation in the usual manner. He was sent to Ebersberg to serve for a year before returning to Ingolstadt where he was appointed as Johann Lantz's successor. Lantz had moved to Munich and Scheiner succeeded him in Ingolstadt as Professor of Mathematics and Hebrew, teaching geometry, astronomy and, in addition, his specialist subjects of sundials and telescopes. Being fascinated by mathematical and astronomical instruments, Scheiner had quickly acquired a good quality telescope and we know that by the spring of 1611 he and his assistant Baptist Cysat were observing the moons of Jupiter. Lantz wrote to Paul Guldin on 14 May 1611 (quoted in [7]):-

Father Scheiner and Master Baptist Cysat continue steadily to observe the motion of those four planets of Jupiter, having recently sent me some of their observations.

In fact it was in March 1611 that Scheiner began to make the observations for which he is most famed, namely his observations of sunspots. He is not famed for making the first known observations of sunspots, this honour goes to Thomas Harriot who observed sunspots at 10 a.m. local time on 18 December 1610 when the sun was 7° or 8° above the horizon. Harriot recorded:-

It being a frost and a mist ... I saw it twice or thrice, once with the right eye and other time with the left. In the space of a minute time, after the sun was to clear.

He drew a diagram clearly showing three large sunspots. However, these observations by Harriot were not published and only many years later was his priority established.

Galileo made many observations of sunspots and published Istoria e dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari e loro accidenti Ⓣ in the spring of 1613. He had been able to make his observations using Benedetto Castelli's idea of using a telescope to project the sun's image onto a sheet of paper. The fact that Scheiner has become important in the story of the discovery of sunspots is because of three letters he wrote to Marc Welser (1558-1614) in Augsburg in the autumn of 1611, describing his own observations of sunspots. Welser was a scholar of Greek and Latin with a passion for history and philology who corresponded with many Jesuit scholars, including Christopher Clavius. He published Scheiner's letters under the title Tres epistolae de Maculis Solaribus scriptae ad Marcum Velserium Ⓣ on 5 January 1612 although, since Scheiner wished to remain anonymous, he had signed the letters as 'Apelles latenspost tabulam' (Apelles hiding behind the painting). He gave his reasons in Rosa Ursina Ⓣ (1630) (see [7]):-

But since this matter, not only new but also difficult, was perceived to be in many ways contrary to the opinion of the philosophers, lest something would be hastily and rashly published by someone in that university whose retraction would then be difficult and unseemly, my superiors ordered me to proceed cautiously and slowly, until the phenomenon itself had been corroborated by the experience of others, and not to stray casually from the trodden path of the philosophers without evidence to the contrary, and not to publish my observations in the letters to Welser under my name. For in this way they would leave anyone with greater freedom to judge, and no envy would be created. Because of these precautions, it came about that many fewer letters were published under the pseudonym of Apelles than I had in fact written to Welser.

Welser sent copies of Tres epistolae to many scientists, including Galileo, in January and February 1612. Let us look briefly at what this publication contained.

Scheiner had drawn a series of diagrams showing sunspots on various days, made by putting dark coloured glass in front of his telescope. However, he deliberately did not try to record the size and shape of the spots accurately, writing [20]:-

About the observations shown, I have the following admonitions. ... They are not terribly exact, but rather are hand-drawn on paper as they appeared to the eye without certain and precise measurement, which could not be done sometimes due to the inclement and inconstant weather, sometimes due to the lack of time, and at other times due to other impediments. ... But this should be noted as well: the proportion of the spots to the sun should not be taken from the drawing, for I made them larger than they ought to be so that they would be more conspicuous, especially in the case of some very small ones which otherwise could scarcely be a subject of our vision.

Also Scheiner's theory of what the spots were was quite incorrect. He wrote [18]:-

I have always considered it inconvenient to place spots, darker than any ever seen on the moon (with the exception of one small spot), on the bright body of the sun. It is not plausible to do so, for if they were on the sun, their motion would imply that the sun rotates, and we should see the spots return in the same order and in the same position they had among themselves and with respect to the sun. So far, they have failed to reappear, although other spots have followed the first ones across the solar disk. This is a clear argument that they are not on the sun. I do not think, therefore, that they are real spots, but rather bodies partly eclipsing the sun, namely stars located either between the sun and ourselves or revolving around the sun.

Certainly one can forgive Scheiner for not recognising the same spots after the sun had rotated for they change markedly. However, since the spots change markedly while travelling across the visible face of the sun, he might well have worked out what was happening. In 1613 a dispute broke out between Galileo and Christoph Scheiner over sunspots. Galileo unfairly accused Scheiner of plagiarism but, although Scheiner's discovery of sunspots was certainly independent of any work by Galileo, his explanation was quite wrong. Giuseppe Biancani, however, defended his fellow Jesuit Scheiner and a considerable controversy ensued. Galileo correctly claimed that the spots were on the surface of the sun and were carried round by the sun's rotation. Throughout 1612 Galileo corresponded about sunspots with Welser and Scheiner continued making regular observations. In September 1612 Welser published a second tract by Scheiner under the pseudonym Apelles entitled De maculis solaribus et stellis circa Jovem errantibus accuratior disquisitio Ⓣ. Respect for Welser prevented Galileo attacking Apelles with the devastating turn of phrase of which he was very capable. He wrote to Cesi in November 1612 (see [18]):-

I intend to show in what a silly way the matter has been dealt with by the Jesuit, and to reprimand him as he deserves. But to do this without offending the Signor Welser is a major difficulty, and is holding up my work.

Galileo published the letters he had written to Welser under the title Istoria e dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari e loro accidenti Ⓣ in early 1613. This publication was by the Accademia dei Lincei, and around the same time Welser was elected to that Academy.

The controversy did not seem to cause problems for Scheiner who began publishing major works: (with Johann Georg Locher) Disquisitiones mathematicae Ⓣ (1614); Sol ellipticus Ⓣ (1615); (with Georg Schönberger) Exegeses fundamentorum gnomonicorum Ⓣ (1615); and Refractiones coelestes Ⓣ (1617). In the two single authored works he noted that the sun appeared to be elliptical when close to the horizon and he explained this by refraction. On 31 July 1617 he took his final vows before the pope and made a request that he be allowed to go to China as a missionary. His request was refused and he was told that he must remain in Europe and continue to undertake mathematical research. He had received several requests from Archduke Maximilian III to go to Innsbruck to advise on mathematical and astronomical matters, particularly on astronomical instruments, from 1614 onwards. In 1617 the Archduke requested Scheiner's permanent presence in Innsbruck as his advisor. Following the death of Maximilian III in 1618, his successor Archduke Leopold V continued to employ Scheiner as his advisor. He published Oculus hoc est: Fundamentum opticum Ⓣ (1619) on the nature of the eye [16]:-

Scheiner was put in charge of building a new Jesuit church in Innsbruck. He also sought out religious relics on behalf of his patrons, and many ... letters recount his successes and difficulties in these quests. ... Scheiner's whereabouts in this seven-year period, ... included an extended stay at Freiburg im Breisgau and a visit to Neisse where he founded a new Jesuit school.

In 1624 Scheiner was called to Rome by the pope. It is unclear exactly why the pope made this summons, but some historians suggest that it was in some way related to the argument between the Church and Galileo. It was in 1623 that Galileo had published Il saggiatore Ⓣ which contained a vigorous attack on those Galileo accused of stealing his ideas. Although Galileo almost certainly did not have Scheiner in mind, Scheiner did not see it that way. Galileo believed, correctly, that Scheiner's interpretation of sunspots was wrong and, by this time, Scheiner accepted Galileo's argument that they were on the surface of the sun. However, Scheiner had every right to be upset over priority issues which he discussed in his most important work, Rosa Ursina sive Sol Ⓣ, published in 1630. In it he acknowledges that Galileo is correct in claiming that sunspots are on the surface of the sun. Grant McColley writes in [14]:-

Among the books which the early seventeenth century devoted to phenomena disclosed by the telescope, few are today more respected than the 'Rosa Ursina' of Christopher Scheiner. There is in fact no work of the period which compares with it in the number and accuracy of the solar observations which it describes. The 'Rosa Ursina' has, however, a second claim for respect, particularly among historians of science, for it presents what is apparently our most complete and exhaustive of seventeenth-century attacks upon the so-called Aristotelian doctrines of solid orbs and the incorruptibility of heavenly bodies. To his attack upon these conceptions Scheiner devoted fourteen chapters of 150 folio pages.

Rosa Ursina Ⓣ contains four books. The first book gives an account of the priority dispute with Galileo and contains a vigorous attack on him. Scheiner claimed, correctly, that he was the first to make continuous observations of sunspots of scientific value. The second book describes methods of observing the sun, the third book gives a large amount of sunspot data, and the fourth book discussed the rotation period of the sun, the axis of rotation, solar flares and other issues such as the granulation of the photosphere. It also contains Scheiner's argument in favour of a geocentric universe, which he supported with quotations from the scriptures. His observations had shown, however, that Mercury and Venus revolve round the sun. While in Rome, Scheiner also published Pantographice seu ars delineandi Ⓣ (1631) describing the pantograph he had invented more than 25 years earlier. He wrote Prodromus pro Sole Mobili et Terra Stabili contra Galilaeum a Galileis Ⓣ, whose contents are well described by the title, while in Rome but this was not published until 1651, a year after his death. Also while he was in Rome, he observed in 1629 a halo at an angle of 28° from the sun. This halo, now known as Scheiner's halo, is thought to be caused by refraction of sunlight by certain ice crystals in the earth's atmosphere, see [21].

In 1633 Scheiner left Rome and went to Vienna. Europe was, at this time, in the midst of the Thirty Years War which erupted in different locations with armies, mainly of mercenary soldiers, fighting for Roman Catholic rulers, Lutheran rulers or Calvinist rulers. Although Scheiner probably intended to go to Neisse, in fact the war prevented him from doing so for around four years. Only in 1637 did he return to the Jesuit school in Neisse where he worked until his death in 1650.