part 1

, p. 127:--“In this acte limitinge the tymes for buieing and sellyng of wolles, mention is made of chamblettes, wolstende, saies, stamine, _knitte hose_, _knitte peticotes_, _knitte gloves_, _knitte slieves_, hattes, coives, cappes, arrasse, tapissery, coverlettes, girdles, or any other thing used to be made of woolle.”

[902] This account is to be found in Hollingshed’s Chronicles. “Dr. Sands at his going to bed in Hurleston’s house, had a paire of hose newlie made, that were too long for him. For while he was in the Tower, a tailor was admitted to make him a pair of hose. One came in to him whose name was Beniamin, dwelling in Birchin-lane; he might not speak to him or come to him to take measure of him, but onelie to look upon his leg; he made the hose, and they were two inches too long. These hose he praied the good wife of the house to send to some tailor to cut two inches shorter. The wife required the boy of the house to carrie them to the next tailor, which was Beniamin that made them. The boy required him to cut the hose. He said I am not the maister’s tailor. Saith the boy, because ye are our next neighbour, and my maister’s tailor dwelleth far off, j come to you. Beniamin took the hose and looked upon them, he took his handle work in hand, and said, these are not thy maister’s hose, but Dr. Sands, them j made in the Tower.”

[903] “Item, his best coat, jerkin, doublet and breeches. Item, his hose or nether stockings, shoes and garters.”--Survey of the Cathedral of St. Asaph, by Browne Willis, 1720, 8vo.

[904] Hollingshed’s Chronicle, 1577, p. 213.

[905] In his satyre called The Steel of Glass:--“In silk knitt hose, and Spanish leather shoes.”

[906] In Hollingshed, third part, p. 1290:--“Upon the stage there stood at the one end eight small women children, spinning worsted yarne, and at the other as manie knitting of worsted yarn hose.”

[907] Buch des Alten Pommerlandes, 1639, 4to, p. 388:--“Duke Bogislaus VIII. suffered himself at length to be overcome by love, and married Sophia, daughter of Procopius margrave of Moravia, who was a very prudent and moderate lady. In her old age, when her sight became bad, so that she was incapable of sewing or embroidering, she never put the knitting-needle out of her hands, as is written in our chronicles. The rhymes which she always had in her mouth are remarkable:--

Nicht beten, gern spatzieren gehn, Oft im Fenster und vorm Spiegel stehn, Viel geredet, und wenig gethan, Mein Kind, da ist nichts Fettes an.

‘Never to pray; to be fond of walking; to stand often at the window and before the looking-glass; to talk much and do little; is not, my child, the way to be rich.’”

[908] Mezeray, where he speaks of the silk manufactories under Henry IV.

[909] The first description of the stocking-loom illustrated by figures, with which I am acquainted, is in Deering’s Nottingham, 1751, 4to, but it is very imperfect. A much better is to be found in the second volume of the Encyclopédie, printed at Paris, 1751, fol. p. 94-113. The figures are in the first volume of the second part of the Planches, and make eleven plates, eight of which are full sheets. [The reader will also find a very good description of the stocking-loom illustrated with woodcuts in Ure’s Dictionary, art. HOSIERY.]

[910] The following passage occurs in the petition, p. 302: “Which trade is properly stiled framework-knitting, because it is direct and absolute knit-work in the stitches thereof, nothing different therein from the common way of knitting (not much more antiently for publick use practised in this nation than this), but only in the numbers of needles, at an instant working in this, more than in the other by an hundred for one, set in an engine or frame composed of above 2000 pieces of smith, joiners, and turners work, after so artificial and exact a manner, that, by the judgement of all beholders, it far excels in the ingenuity, curiosity, and subtility of the invention and contexture, all other frames or instruments of manufacture in use in any known part of the world.”

[911] This account is given by Aaron Hill in his Rise and Progress of the Beech-oil Invention, 1715, 8vo.

[912] The inscription may be found in Seymour’s Survey of London, 1733, fol. vol. i. p. 603: “In the year 1589 the ingenious William Lee, Master of Arts of St. John’s College, Cambridge, devised this profitable art for stockings (but being despised went to France) yet of iron to himself, but to us and others of gold; in memory of whom this is here painted.”

[913] In his History of the World, already quoted, p. 171: “Nine and thirty years after was invented the weaving of silk stockings, westcoats, and divers other things, by engines, or steel looms, by William Lee, Master of Arts of St. John’s College in Cambridge, a native of Nottingham, who taught the art in England and France, as his servants in Spain, Venice, and Ireland; and his device so well took, that now in London his artificers are become a company, having an hall and a master, like as other societies.”

[914] Of this Aston the following account is to be found in Thoroton’s Nottinghamshire, 1677, fol. p. 297: “At Calverton was born William Lee, Master of Arts in Cambridge, and heir to a pretty freehold here; who seeing a woman knit, invented a loom to knit, in which he or his brother James performed and exercised before Queen Elizabeth, and leaving it to ... Aston his apprentice, went beyond the seas, and was thereby esteemed the author of that ingenious engine, wherewith they now weave silk and other stockings. This ... Aston added something to his master’s invention; he was some time a miller at Thoroton, nigh which place he was born.”

[915] Dell’ Agricoltura, dell’ Arti, e del Commercio. Ven. 1763, 8vo.

[916] Le Siècle de Louis XIV.

HOPS.

My object, in this article, is not to give a history of beer, because for that purpose it would be necessary to define accurately the different kinds of grain mentioned in the writings of the Greeks and the Romans; and this would be a tedious, as well as difficult, and to me a very unpleasant labour; as I should be obliged to controvert a great many received opinions. I shall only endeavour to answer the question, Where and at what time did hops begin to be used as an addition to beer? This subject has already engaged the attention of two learned men[917], whose researches I shall employ and enlarge by my own observations.

Hops at present are so well known, that a formal description of them would be superfluous. I think it necessary, however, for the sake of perspicuity, to state what follows. This plant at present grows wild in the greater part of Europe, and in Germany is common in the hedges and fences. It clings to the trunks of trees, and often climbs round poles, if long enough, to the height of twenty or thirty feet. It is almost everywhere rough and sharp to the touch, and sometimes clammy. The leaves are generally divided into three, and often into five indented lobes; but the upper ones are shaped like a heart and undivided. The male plants bear flowers, like those of the currant-bush or of the male hemp; the female plants produce their flowers in cones, which are not unlike those of the fir, except that the latter are woody, while the former are foliaceous. These cones only are used for beer; on that account the female plants alone are cultivated, and from these they are picked and dried as soon as they begin to become pulverulent. They are transplanted or propagated by means of seedlings, in hop-grounds properly prepared, where the cones become larger and better than those of the wild plants, which however are not entirely useless. They are added to beer to render it more palatable, by giving it an agreeable bitter taste; and, at the same time, to make it keep longer; and it must indeed be confessed, that of the numerous and various additions which since the earliest periods have been tried, none has better answered the purpose, or been more generally employed.

Among the botanists of the last two centuries, who perused the writings of the Greeks and the Romans, and endeavoured to discover those plants which they meant to describe, many imagined that they found in them hops. But when one takes the trouble to examine without prejudice their opinions, nothing appears but a very slight probability; and some even of these learned botanists, such as Matthioli and others, have acknowledged that it cannot be proved that the Greeks and the Romans were acquainted with our hops.

The plant which perhaps has been chiefly considered as the hop is the _Smilax aspera_[918] of Dioscorides[919], the same no doubt as that described by Theophrastus under the name of _smilax_, without any epithet[920]. That the description agrees for the most part with our hops cannot be denied; but it is equally true that it might be applied, with no less propriety, to many other creeping plants, and certainly with the greatest probability to that which in the Linnæan system has retained the name _Smilax aspera_. What the Grecian writer says of the fruit is particularly applicable to this plant; but, on the other hand, it differs from the fruit of the hop.

One might with more probability conjecture that hops occur in Pliny[921], under the name _Lupus salictarius_. But the whole of what he says of this plant is, that it was esculent, and grew in the willow plantations. This is undoubtedly true of hops, for that the young shoots are eaten in spring as salad is well known; but the name _lupus_ alone has induced the commentator to apply all this, though equally applicable to other plants, to our hop, which at present is called _lupulus_. Much more unfounded is the conjecture, that the hop is that wild plant which, according to the account of Cato, was used as fodder for cattle[922]. But the word in manuscripts is differently written, and consequently uncertain; besides, there are many plants which might be employed in the place of straw.

It is certainly possible that hops might have been in use among the northern nations, at the time of these writers, without their having any knowledge of them; for the Romans were acquainted with beer only from the accounts given of the Germans and their manners[923], and they considered that beverage merely as an unsuccessful imitation of their wine. But I agree in opinion with Conring, Meibomius, and others, that hops were not used till a much later period. The names _humulus_ and _lupulus_ also are of no great antiquity. The former is the oldest, and seems to belong to the people who first added this improvement to beer. The _humble_ and _humle_ of the Swedes and Danes, the _chumel_ of the Bohemians, the _houblon_ of the French and the Spanish, Hungarian and Persian appellations, all seem to be derived from the same origin, as well as the Latin names of later times, _humelo_, _humolo_, _humulo_, _humlo_[924]. _Lupulus_ does not occur till a much later period. The German word, which the English also have adopted, appears first to have been written _hoppe_, from which was formed afterwards in High German _Hopfen_, by converting, as it commonly does, the double _p_ into the harder _pf_. Thus from _toppe_ it has made _topf_, and from _koppe_, _kopf_, &c. As far as I know, this word is found, for the first time, in a dictionary which seems to be of the tenth century[925], and which has _Timalus_, _Hoppe_ and _Brandigabo Feldhoppe_. According to my conjecture, _timalus_ has been erroneously printed for _humulus_; but in regard to _brandigabo_ I can give no explanation. It is derived perhaps from _brace_ or _bracium_. The former was known to Pliny[926]; and the latter occurs in the same dictionary along with the translation, malt.

No mention is made of hops either in Walafrid Strabo, who died in 849, or in Æmilius Macer, who cannot have lived earlier than the year 850; in the laws of the old Franks, in which beer and malt are often mentioned, or in the Capitulare de Villis Imperatoris, which are ascribed to Charles the Great. Had beer been then used and brewed in Germany, it would certainly have been at any rate mentioned by the emperor. Haller says[927] it is related by Isidorus that the experiment of adding hops to beer was first made in Italy. Were this the case, it would be the oldest mention of that circumstance, for Isidorus died in the year 636. It is however not only highly improbable that the use of hops should be discovered in Italy, which is a wine country, but it can be proved to be false. Not the smallest notice of it is to be found in the whole work of Isidorus; and in the Bibliotheca Botanica, when Haller had the book before him and extracted from it many things remarkable, he does not repeat this assertion[928]. The passage which has given rise perhaps to this error, appears to be that where the author describes a kind of beer called by him _celia_, and where the germination of corn, the shooting of malt, and the sweet wort made from it, together with its fermentation, are clearly mentioned, but not hops[929]. Some one perhaps thought that hops also ought to be supposed in this passage, else beer would not acquire that strong taste and intoxicating quality spoken of by Isidorus, who very properly ascribes both to fermentation. The same account has been repeated by Vincentius[930], without any change or addition. But as Isidorus scarcely contains anything which is not borrowed from earlier writers, I endeavoured to discover the source of that information, and at length found it in the history of Orosius[931], who, as is well known, lived in the fifth century.

In the Latin translation of the works of the Arabian physician Mesue[932] is a description, but as is commonly the case, a defective one, of a creeping plant, with rough indented leaves under the name of _lupulus_, which indeed corresponds exceedingly well with our hops. The cones in particular are exactly described. The author, however, speaks there only of the medicinal qualities of the plant, and makes no mention of its application to beer. Mesue lived about the year 845, consequently is the first who uses the term _lupuli_. But we have only a wretched old translation of the writings of this physician; it is probable that the word _lupulus_ comes only from the translator. This passage therefore can prove nothing.

It is however certain that hops were known in the time of the Carolingian dynasty, for a letter of donation by King Pepin speaks of _humolariæ_, which without doubt must have been hop-gardens[933]. In like manner Adelard, abbot of Corbey, in the year 822, freed the millers belonging to his district from all labour relating to hops, and on this occasion employed the words _humlo_ and _brace_, by which is to be understood corn and malt used for beer. In the Frisingen collection of ancient documents, there are many which were written in the time of Ludovicus Germanicus, consequently in the middle of the ninth century; and in some of these, hop-gardens, which were then called _humularia_, are mentioned[934]. In the tax registers of the two following centuries, among the articles delivered to churches and monasteries, _modii_ and _moldera humuli_ are very often named[935]. Hop-fields and the delivery of hops occur much oftener in the thirteenth century, under the appellations _humuleta_, _humileta_, and _humularia_[936]. In the Sachsenspiegel[937] and the municipal law of Magdeburg (Weichbildsrechte[938]), there is an order in regard to the hop-plants which grew over hedges. I shall omit the still more numerous instances where they occur in the fourteenth century as well as the proofs that hops were then cultivated in many parts of Germany; and it is perhaps true, as said by Möhsen, and after him by Fischer, on whose bare word however I do not entirely rely, that many towns in Germany were indebted for the great sale of their beer to the use of hops (which undoubtedly appears to be a German discovery), and to their peculiar goodness. However, it is certain that this method of seasoning beer was adopted at a much later period by our neighbours the English, Dutch, Swedes, and others.

If the two passages above quoted, where the word _lupuli_ occurs, be rejected because they are doubtful, I must consider this name of hops to be more modern than the word _humulus_; and if this be true, it is impossible to believe, with Du Cange, that the latter was formed from the first by throwing away the initial letter. As yet I had not found the name _lupulus_ given to hops earlier than the thirteenth century.

About this time lived Simon of Genoa, commonly called _Johannes de Janua_ or _Januensis_, who also had the surname of _Cordus_. He was physician to Pope Nicholas IV.; afterwards chaplain and sub-deacon to Pope Boniface VIII.; and therefore flourished at the end of the thirteenth century. Of his writings none is better known, or was formerly more esteemed, than his Catholicon, a book in which he describes, in alphabetical order, all the substances then used in medicine, and on which, as he says himself, he was employed thirty years. In this dictionary, which is commonly considered as the first of the Materia medica, there is an article under the head _lupulus_, copied however from the before-mentioned Latin translation of Mesue, but with the addition, that this plant by the French and Germans is named _humilis_, and that the flowers of it were used in a beverage which he calls _medo_[939]. This Italian, however, does not seem to have been properly acquainted with the subject; for he tells us himself[940], that under the name _medo_ or mead, is understood a beverage made of diluted honey, for which hops are never employed. In Italy also, at that time, hops were not in use. About the same period, Arnold de Villanova, in his commentary on the work on Regimen, published by John of Milan, in the name of the celebrated school of Salerno, mentions _lupuli_, and the use of them in brewing beer[941].

Professor Tychsen, to whose friendship I have been frequently indebted for assistance in my researches, suggested to me the conjecture that _lupulus_ perhaps is derived from _lupinus_, because Columella says that the bitter seeds of this plant were added, in Egypt, to beer in order to moderate its sweetness[942]. This use is confirmed also by G. W. Lorsbach, from the Arabic historian Ebn Chalican[943]. At any rate, this proves that in Egypt at that time bitter things began to be added to beer. It is also well known that in Italy lupines were rendered fit for the use of man as well as of animals, by macerating them in water[944]; and I am of opinion, that on this account Varro required water to be in the neighbourhood of a farm-yard[945]. Lupines softened in water are still employed for making dough. But if _lupulus_ was formed from _lupinus_, it must however be proved that the use of it for beer was common beyond the boundaries of Egypt. Even if we admit with Schöttgen, that the poet employs _zythum_ for beer in general, this beverage was never used in Italy, and I have met with no other mention of lupines in brewing.

In the breweries of the Netherlands, hops seem to have been first known in the beginning of the fourteenth century; for about this time we find many complaints that the new method of brewing with hops lessened the consumption of _gruit_, and also the income arising from _gruitgeld_. The word _gruit_ seems to have many meanings: in the first place it signifies malt; but though I formerly considered this as the proper meaning, and though some approved my opinion, I must confess that on further examination I am not able fully to prove it. In the second place, it signified a certain tax paid at each time of brewing: thirdly, a certain addition of herbs used for beer in the fourteenth century: and in the last place, the beer brewed with it was itself sometimes called _gruit_.

That this word always denoted malt is impossible; for it is said that after hops were introduced, less _gruit_ was used and sold than formerly had been the case. But how could hops be employed instead of malt? John, bishop of Liege and Utrecht, complained to the emperor Charles IV., that for thirty or forty years a new method of brewing, that is to say, with the addition of a certain plant called _humulus_ or _hoppa_, had been introduced, and that his income arising from _gruitgeld_ had been thereby much lessened. The emperor, therefore, in the year 1364, permitted him, for the purpose of making good his loss, to demand a _groschen_ for each cask of hops; and this right was confirmed to bishop Arnold by pope Gregory[946]. By this and similar accounts I am induced to conjecture that a beverage composed of different herbs was at that time prepared, and that the sale of this mixture and of _gruit_ was converted into a so-called _regale_. Nay, it almost appears that _gruit_ was a fermenting substance, indispensably necessary to beer, instead of the yeast used at present.

According to every appearance the ancient beer could not be long kept; and beer fit to be preserved seems to have come into use after the introduction of hops. The oldest writers who treat of the good and bad effects of hops, reckon among the latter, that they dried up the body and increased melancholy; but among their good qualities, they praise their property of preserving liquors from corruption[947]. It was soon remarked also, that the keeping of beer depended a great deal on the season in which it was brewed; for M. Anton quotes from the Ilm statutes of 1350, that people were permitted to brew only from Michaelmas to St. Walpurgis’ day[948]; at other times it was forbidden under certain penalties. At that period various kinds of beer seem to have been in use, and perhaps became fashionable instead of wine, coffee, and tea. Thus M. Anton quotes, from a Hervord document of the year 1144, _cervisia mellita_ and _non mellita_. However, even at present, honey is used for many kinds of beer; such for example as that brewed at Nimeguen, which has an extensive sale under the name of _moll_, a word derived no doubt from _mollig_, mild; which is applied also to wine. In the same manner the English used liquorice.

In England, the use of hops seems to have been introduced at a much later period; but it is said that they were at first considered as a dangerous production, and that the planting of them was forbidden in the reign of Henry VI., about the middle of the fifteenth century[949]. This I will not venture to deny, though I very much doubt it. I have found no proof of it in any English writer, and I have searched in vain for the prohibition among the orders of that prince, in which however there occurs one in regard to malt[950]. On the contrary, many English historians assert that the use of hops was first made known in England by some people from Artois, in the reign of Henry VIII., or about the year 1524[951]. It is nevertheless true, that this sovereign, in an order respecting the servants of his household, in the twenty-second year of his reign, that is in 1530, forbade brewers to put into ale hops and sulphur[952]. But perhaps his majesty was not fond of hopped beer. Even at present, most of the dictionaries call ale, beer brewed without hops; and an English physician says expressly that the difference between ale and beer is, that hops are not employed for the former[953]. But according to the English instructions for brewing, hops are required for ale also.

In the English laws hops are mentioned for the first time in the fifth year of the reign of Edward VI., that is in 1552, at which period some privileges were granted to _hop-grounds_. The cultivation of hops however, which, like the art of brewing, has in England been carried to the greatest perfection, was very limited even in the beginning of the seventeenth century; for James I., in the fifth year of his reign, that is in 1603, found it necessary to forbid, under severe penalties, the introduction and use of spoilt and adulterated hops. At that time, therefore, England did not produce a quantity sufficient for its own consumption.

In Sweden, at least in the fifteenth century, hops seem not to have been very common[954]; for at that time sweet gale (_Myrica gale_) was employed for beer; and so generally, that king Christopher, in 1440, confirmed the old law, that those who collected this plant before a certain period, on any common or on another person’s land, should be subjected to a fine. A similar punishment however was appointed for the too early picking of hops; and the cultivation of them was so strongly enforced, that every farmer who had not forty poles with hops growing round them was punished, unless he could show that his land was unfit for producing them[955].

But it was long doubted in Sweden whether this plant would thrive in the cold climate of that country; in which however it grows wild. In the time of Gustavus I., who became king in 1523, Sweden was obliged to give for the foreign hops it used 1200 _schifpfunds_ of iron, which was about the ninth part of all the iron made in the kingdom. In the year 1558 the king complained, in an edict, that a pound of hops cost as much as a barrel of malt, and on that account was desirous to encourage the cultivation of the hop-plant. But his exertions were attended with so little effect, that even under the reign of queen Christina, that is, in the middle of the seventeenth century, all the hops used in the kingdom were imported from Germany, and particularly from Brunswick and Saxony. The queen had some hop plantations as rarities in her garden; yet the cultivation of hops was begun under this princess, and carried so far that German hop farmers, who before had been accustomed to travel to Sweden every three years, to receive payment and take new orders, returned very much dissatisfied, and suffered a part of their hop-grounds to run to waste. Under Charles XI., however, who reigned from 1660 to 1697, the cultivation of hops was first brought to a state of considerable improvement.

In the year 1766, Linnæus hazarded a conjecture that hops, spinage, chenopodium, tarragon, and many other garden vegetables were brought to Europe by the Goths, during their periods of emigration, from Russia and particularly the Ukraine, because the old writers make no mention of these plants, and because in those districts they all grow wild at present[956]. It however appears certain that hops belong to our indigenous plants, as they grow everywhere wild in Germany, Switzerland, England, and Sweden, and even in countries into which the cultivation of them has never yet been introduced, and where it cannot be supposed that they accidentally became wild by being conveyed from hop-fields and gardens. The want of information in works older than the emigrations of the northern tribes, is no proof that a plant did not then exist. At that time there was no Linnæus to transmit plants to posterity, as Hipparchus, according to the expression of Pliny, did the stars. Such vegetable productions only as had become remarkable on account of their utility or hurtful qualities, or by some singular circumstance, occur in the works of the ancients. Many others remained unknown, or at least without names, till natural history acquired a systematic form; and even at present botanists have often the satisfaction to discover some plant not before observed.

Is it probable that the Chinese even are acquainted with our hops? They have a kind of beer made from barley and wheat, which is called _tarasun_; and according to the account of J. G. Gmelin, who purposely made himself acquainted with the preparation of it, hops formed by pressure into masses, shaped like a brick, are added to it[957]. It is well known that the Chinese have also a kind of tea formed into cakes by strong pressure. Our hops are compressed in the same manner in Bohemia; and in that state will keep without losing any of their strength for fifty years. They are put into a sack or bag of coarse canvass, and subjected to a press. A square sewed bag, each side of which is two ells, contains fifty bushels of hops prepared in this manner; and when any of them are required for brewing, the bag is made fast to a beam, and as much as may be necessary is cut out with an axe. The whole mass is of a brown colour, and has a resemblance to pitch, in which not a single hop-leaf can be distinguished. Whether the Chinese conceived the idea of employing our common hops for the like purpose, is a question of some importance in regard to the history of them; but at present I am not able to answer it.

[Hops are extensively cultivated in Kent, Sussex, and Herefordshire; and to a less extent in Worcestershire, Wiltshire, Hampshire, Gloucestershire, Surrey, and several other counties.

From 50,000 to 60,000 acres of land are covered in England with hop-gardens, about one-half being in Kent; an excise duty of 18_s._ 8_d._ per cwt. is levied upon their produce. British hops are exported to Hamburg, Antwerp, St. Petersburg, New York, Australia, and other places. A trifling quantity is also imported, principally from Flanders. The duty on hops of the growth of Great Britain produced in 1842, £260,979.]

FOOTNOTES

[917] One of these, in particular, is J. F. Tresenreuter, in A Dissertation on Hops, which was printed at Nuremberg, 1759, 4to, with a preface by J. Heumann.

[918] Σμίλαξ τραχεῖα.

[919] Dioscor., iv. 244.

[920] Hist. Plant. iii. 18.

[921] xxi. 15, sect. 50.

[922] Cato De Re Rustica, xxxvii. p. 55.

[923] Most of the passages in ancient authors which relate to beer have been collected by Dithmar in his edition of Tacitus De Moribus German. cap. xxiii.; and by Meibom De Cerevisiis Veterum in Gronovii Thes. Antiq. Græc., ix. p. 548.

[924] [The word _humulus_ is derived from _humus_, fresh earth, the hop only growing in rich soils.--Loudon and Sir W. Hooker.]

[925] This valuable monument of antiquity is to be found in (Nyerup) Symbolæ ad Literaturam Teutonicam, sumtibus A. F. Suhm, Havniæ 1787, 4to, pp. 331, 404.

[926] Lib. xviii. cap. 7.

[927] Histor. Stirpium, ii. p. 290.

[928] Biblioth. Botan. i. p. 161.

[929] Originum lib. xx. 3, p. 487.

[930] Speculum Naturale, lib. xi. 109.

[931] Lib. v. cap. 7.

[932] Joh. Mesuæ Opera. Venetiis, 1589, fol.

[933] Du Cange Doublet Hist. Sandionys. i. 3, p. 669.

[934] In C. Meichelbeck’s Histor. Frising. I. Instrument. p. 359.

[935] See the works quoted by Tresenreuter, p. 15: Pezii Thesaur. Anecdot. i. P. 3, pp. 68, 72.--J. C. Harenberg Histor. Gandersheim. p. 1350.--Eccard Origin. Saxon. p. 59.--Leukfeld Antiquit. Poeldens. p. 78.

[936] F. G. de Sommersberg Silesiac. Rer. Scriptor. i. pp. 801, 829, 857.--Von Ludwig Reliq. Histor. v. p. 425.--Tresenreuter, p. 20, quotes later information in the fourteenth century.

[937] L. ii. art. 52.

[938] Art. 126.

[939] For an account of the author and his works, which are now scarce, see Haller’s Bibliotheca Botan. i. p. 222.

[940] Article Ydromel.

[941] This celebrated work, known as the Schola Salernitatis, was first printed in 1649, and has since been frequently republished and translated into various languages. A very complete edition, with an English version and a history of the book, was given by the late Sir Herbert Croft. The history of this book may also be found in Giannone’s History of Naples.

[942] [Loudon observes in his Encycl. Plants, that _lupulus_ is a contraction of _Lupus salictarius_, the name by which it was, according to Pliny, formerly called, because it grew among the willows, to which, by twining round and choking up, it proved as destructive as the wolf to the flock.]

[943] Columella, x. 116. The root (radish?) was sliced and put into the Egyptian beer along with steeped lupines, in order to render it more palatable. Lorsbach über eine Stelle des Ebn Chalican. Marburg, 1789, 8vo, p. 21.

[944] Plin. xviii. 14, sect. 36.--Geopon. ii. 39, p. 189, and the passages quoted there by Niclas: Galen. de Fac. Simpl. Med. vi. 144: and Alim. Fac. i. 30.

[945] De Re Rustica, i. 13, 3.

[946] This document is in Matthæi Analecta Vet. Ævi, iii. p. 260. See also Du Cange, under the word _Grutt_, and its derivatives.

[947] St. Hildegard in Physicæ, lib. ii. cap. 74. Petro Crescentio d’Agricoltura, lib. vi. cap. 56. This writer lived in the thirteenth century.

[948] A celebrated female saint of the eighth century, said to have been a native of England, but canonised in Germany, where she was abbess of a nunnery at Heidensheim in Thuringia.--TRANS.

[949] This is asserted in the Götting. Gel. Anzeigen, 1778, p. 323.

[950] Statutes at Large, vol. i. p. 591.

[951] Husbandry and Trade Improved, by J. Houghton. Lond. 1727, 8vo. ii. p. 457.--Anderson’s Hist. of Commerce. [The fermented liquor anciently in use in this country is usually termed ale, but we have in fact no certain account of its composition, and all that is now known respecting it is, that it was a pleasant but intoxicating liquor. Our Saxon ancestors were so far addicted to its use, that so far back as the time of king Edgar, it was found necessary to order marks to be made in their cups at a certain height, beyond which they were forbidden to fill, under a severe penalty. This probably gave rise to the _peg tankard_, of which there are a few still remaining. It held two quarts, and had on the inside a row of eight pegs, one above the other, from top to bottom, so that the space between each contained half a pint. The law of compotation was, that every one who drank was to empty the exact space between peg and peg, and if he either exceeded or fell short of his measure, he was bound to drink down to the next. In archbishop Anselm’s canons, made in the council of London, A.D. 1102, we find an order, by which priests were enjoined not to go to drinking bouts, nor to drink to pegs.]

[952] Archæologia, vol. iii. p. 157. [Indeed, at a much later period, the common council of the city of London petitioned parliament against the use of hops, “in regard that they would spoyl the taste of drinks and endanger the people.”--See Walter Blithe in his Improver Improved, published in 1649.]

[953] Hamburgisches Magazin, xxxiii. p. 465.

[954] Instead of this plant, which grows wild in Sweden, another wild plant in Germany called _post_, and by botanists _Ledum palustre_, was in old times used for beer by poor people in its stead; but it occasioned violent headaches.--See Linnæi Amœnitat. Acad. viii. p. 270. [This plant is still extensively used in the northern parts of Germany for imparting a bitter flavour to beer, although, owing to its deleterious nature, it is strictly forbidden by the laws. In this country _Cocculus indicus_ is sometimes employed for a like purpose.]

[955] This law is said to have been made as early as the reign of Magnus Smeek; but it was confirmed by king Christopher in 1440, and by the command of Charles IX. was printed at Stockholm, in folio, in 1608, in a work entitled Swerikes Rijkes Landz-lagh. The passage which belongs to this subject stands in Bygninga Balker, cap. 49 and 50, p. xl. a.

[956] Linnæi Amœnitat. Academ. vii. p. 452.

[957] Gmelin’s Reise durch Sibirien. Gött. 1752, 8vo, iii. p. 55.

BLACK LEAD.

To ascertain how old the use of black lead is for writing might be of some importance in diplomatics, as the antiquity of manuscripts ruled or written with this substance, or of drawings made with it, could then be determined.

I allude here to pencils formed of that mineral called, in common, _plumbago_ and _molybdæna_, though a distinction is now made between these names by mineralogists. The mineral used for black-lead pencils they call _reissbley_, _plumbago_, or _graphites_; but under the term _wasserbley_ and _molybdæna_ they understand a mineral once considered to be the same as the former, but which, however like it may be in appearance, differs from it in being heavier, occurring much seldomer, and containing a new metal, almost of a steel-grey colour, exceedingly brittle, and named _molybdænum_. Plumbago, which is the substance here meant, when exposed to an open fire, is almost entirely consumed, leaving nothing but a little iron and siliceous earth. It contains no lead; and the names _reissbley_ and _bleystift_ have no other foundation than the lead-coloured traces which it leaves upon paper. The darker, finer, and cleaner the lines it makes are, the fitter it is for drawing and writing. These lines are durable, and do not readily fade; but when one chooses, they may be readily rubbed out. Black lead, therefore, can be used with more convenience and speed than any coloured earth, charcoal, or even ink.

It is well known that transcribers, more than a thousand years ago, when they wished their writing to be in a particular manner beautiful and regular, drew fine parallel lines, which they followed in writing. These lines may be still clearly distinguished in old manuscripts. In many instances, they have only been impressed on the parchment by some hard, sharp body; but they often exhibit a leaden colour; from which one might suppose that they had been drawn with our plumbago, and consequently believe that the use of this substance is as old as we must consider, from certain marks, the oldest ruled manuscripts. But, on a little reflection, one will be convinced that this would be a very fallacious conclusion. For lines so like those made with plumbago, that the eye can scarcely perceive the difference, may be made with lead[958].

It can be proved that the ancients drew their lines with lead; and this could be done with more convenience, as this soft metal was easily rubbed off by the parchment, which, being harder and rougher than our paper, had therefore more body. It is well known that, formerly, when people wished to draw lines, a small round plate of lead, which could not so readily cut the parchment or become bent as a leaden style, was employed[959].

Old manuscripts, ruled with lead-coloured lines, have been pointed out by modern diplomatists. Our learned Professor Schönemann, who was unfortunately hurried off by a premature death, has given a description of the Codex Berengaris Turonensis, of the eleventh or twelfth century, and the Codex Theophyli Presbyteri de Temperamento Colorum of the latter century, both preserved in the library of Wolfenbuttel; and remarks that lines are drawn on the first partly with a style and

## partly in a light manner with lead; but he says of the other, that it

exhibits very fine lines drawn with a black-lead pencil[960]. Le Moine quotes a document of the year 1387, which is ruled with black lead, and at the same time says that the custom of ruling ceased about the year 1421 and 1424. The lines, therefore, after that period, became crooked and oblique[961].

But the antiquity of black-lead pencils cannot be determined by the help of diplomatic documents. It might be traced out with more ease were it known by what mineralogical writer _plumbago_, and the uses of it, were first mentioned. The following is what I have remarked on this subject; but I suspect that there must be some older mention of it than any I have yet been able to find. I do not, however, believe that those who require more than bare conjecture will discover this mineral in the works of the Greeks and the Romans; for it cannot possibly be proved that it is to be understood under the terms _plumbago_, _galena_, _molybdæna_, and _molybdoides_, as has been confidently asserted by many, who, were it not superfluous, might easily be refuted. But in whatever obscurity these names may be involved, one can with certainty discover that they sometimes denote _galena_, or a real lead ore, or else some production of lead works.

The first author in whose writings I have as yet found certain mention of _plumbago_ is Conrad Gesner, whose name I can never pronounce without respect. In his book on fossils, printed at Zurich in 1565, he says that people had pencils for writing which consisted of a wooden handle, with a piece of lead, or, as he believed, an artificial mixture, called by some _stimmi Anglicanum_. Such pencils must at that time have been scarce, because he has given a figure of them in a wood-cut. To judge by this, the pencil seems to have had a wooden sheath or covering.

Thirty years after, Cæsalpinus gave a more complete account of this mineral, which he calls _molybdoides_, because he thinks it was so named by Dioscorides. He says that it was a lead-coloured shining stone, as smooth as if rubbed over with oil; it gave to the fingers an ash-grey tint, with a plumbeous lustre, and pointed pencils were made of it for the use of painters and draftsmen. He adds, that it was called Flanders’ stone, because it was brought from the Netherlands to Italy[962].

Three years after Cæsalpinus, a still better description was given by Imperato. The latter calls the black lead _grafio piombino_, and says that it is much more convenient for drawing than pen and ink, because the marks made with it appear not only on a white ground, but, in consequence of their brightness, show themselves also on black; because they can be preserved or rubbed out at pleasure; and because one can retrace them with a pen, which drawings made with lead or charcoal will not admit[963]. This mineral is smooth; appears greasy to the touch, and has a leaden colour, which it communicates with a sort of metallic lustre. It can resist for a long time the strongest fire; it even acquires in it more hardness, and therefore has been considered as a kind of talc. Sometimes it is foliaceous, and may be crumbled to pieces in scales; but it is frequently found denser and stronger, and in this case writing-pencils are made of it. The first kind was mixed with that clay called _rubrica_, and manufactured into crucibles, which were exceedingly durable in the fire. It is here seen that these Italians, at that time, were well acquainted with this mineral. It has been reckoned a species of talc by Justi, by Wallerius in the first edition of his mineralogy, and also by others. Its durability in resisting heat is certainly manifested, when it is kept in a close fire and between coals. But it is proved by the experiments of modern mineralogists, that in an open, strong, and long-continued fire, it becomes almost entirely consumed.

Bartholomew Ambrosinus, in the continuation of Aldrovandi’s Musæum Metallicum, printed at Bologna in 1648, uses the name _lapis plumbarius_. The short account which he gives of it has been borrowed from the two Italians last mentioned; but it deserves to be remarked, that even then he thought it worth his while to give Gesner’s figure enlarged.

In the works of Albertus Magnus, George Agricola, Encelius, Cæsius, Kircher, and many other old mineralogists, I have found no mention of black lead. But as the advantageous use of it for crucibles was known to Imperato, and as the crucibles made at Ips, which till very lately were employed by all the mints in Europe, and even in other parts, derived their superiority from plumbago being mixed with the blue clay, and as these crucibles are introduced more than once by Agricola without any mention of the addition, it must either at that time have not been usual, or it must have escaped the notice of this diligent man. How old then are the pits at Leizersdorf, which furnish plumbago for the crucibles of Ips or Passau? I know of one mineralogist only who has described that district, but on this subject he has given us no information.

I am equally unacquainted with the time when the pits in Cumberland, which, as is well known, produce the best plumbago, were discovered. They are situated on the Borrowdale mountains, about ten miles from the town of Keswick. The families to whom these pits belong, according to an established regulation, can open them only once every seven years, and take out but a certain quantity of the mineral, in order to keep up the price, and prevent the pits from being exhausted[964]. This production is called there _black lead_, _kellow_ or _killow_, _wad_ or _wadt_, which words properly mean black[965]. I have found no older information in regard to these pits than that of Merret, who wrote in the year 1667, and who calls this mineral _nigrica fabrilis_, because it had then no Latin name[966]. Pettus remarked, in his Fleta Minor, published 1683, that the pencils made from it were inclosed in fir or cedar. It is related by Robinson[967] and others, that at first the country-people around Keswick marked their sheep with it. Afterwards the art was discovered of employing it for earthenware, and for preserving iron from rust. The last-mentioned author says also, that it is used by the Dutch in dyeing, in order to render black more durable, and that it is bought up by them in large quantities for that purpose. But this is only a pretence. I am inclined to think that they prepare from it black-lead pencils.

The greater part of the plumbago at present used in commerce, but which, as far as I know, is fit only for iron-black, comes from Spain, where it is dug up in the neighbourhood of Ronda, a town in Grenada, a few miles distant from the sea; but, in regard to the antiquity of these pits, I have found no information. In commerce, it is called _potloth_; and the mills, such as those at Bremen, where it is ground fine, are named _potloth_ mills, an appellation which in all probability has been borrowed from the Dutch, among whom _potloot_ signifies as much as potters’ lead. From this word the French have made _potelot_, which however in many dictionaries is omitted. If I am not mistaken, this mineral was first found in France at a very late period in Upper Provence, near Curban, and not far from the river Durance, between Sisteron and Gap, from which it is sent to Marseilles.

It appears to me probable, that in the sixteenth century the use of plumbago was first introduced into Italy, a country which abounds with draftsmen and drawing-schools; where other minerals had been long used for drawing, and where the best kinds had been carefully sought out. It is likely, therefore, that some one may have made a trial with plumbago, induced by its appearance; and indeed nothing but a trial was necessary to show its superiority to charcoal, and to black and red chalk. I am inclined to think also, that the earliest mention of it will be found in the oldest Italian works on drawing, rather than in those on mineralogy, to the authors of which this substance first became known by its use. For a long time, all the black-lead pencils employed in Germany and in the neighbouring countries were made at Nuremberg. I shall here observe, that the very convenient method of wiping out writing made with a black-lead pencil, by means of Indian rubber, was discovered about twenty or thirty years ago, and, as I believe, first in England.

After I had completed this article, Professor Fiorillo, who as an artist has studied the master-pieces, and as a man of letters the writings of the Italians, communicated to me, at my request, the following information, which at any rate will form an additional fragment towards the history of drawing. The pencils first used in Italy for drawing were composed of a mixture of lead and tin fused together, and the proportion was two parts of the former and one of the latter[968]. To obliterate a drawing or piece of writing, it was rubbed over with crumbs of bread. A pencil of this kind was called _stile_. Petrarch has immortalized a painter named Simone Memmi by a couple of sonnets, out of gratitude for a picture of his beloved Laura[969]. In these he says that the artist made the drawing with a _stile in carte_. The author here evidently alludes to a drawing-pencil, and not to a graver, as some have supposed. Boccacio, a scholar of Petrarch, celebrates an artist who was equally expert at drawing with the _stile_, the pen, and the pencil. Michael Angelo also, who died in 1564, says, in a sonnet on Vasari, quoted by Fiorillo, “Se con lo stile e co’ colori avete.” Such pencils were long used also in Germany; and formerly they were found at the most common writing-desks.

The use of red and black chalk seems to be more modern. The former is called by the Italians _matita rossa_, and the latter _matita nera_. This name is derived from _hæmatites_. Vasari celebrates Baccio Bondinelli, who died in the middle of the sixteenth century, because he could handle equally well _lo stile, e la penna, e la matita rossa e nera_. Baldinucci says, that the best red chalk comes from Germany; good black chalk from France; but the very best from Spain, whence that of the first quality is obtained at present.

I can, however, point out no mention of our plumbago in the works of the old Italian artists. Armenini, who wrote at the end of the sixteenth century, relates how pupils were taught to draw a hundred years before his time[970]. He says that they made the first sketches with _piombo over cannella col lapis nero_, and afterwards filled them up with a pen. But when his whole description is read, there can remain no doubt that the substance here meant is black chalk. Baldinucci, who did not write till 1681, has introduced particularly into his dictionary _matita rossa_, _nera_, and also _lapis piombino_; and says that the last-mentioned is an artificial production, which gives a leaden colour, and is employed for drawing. It is evident therefore that the author here alludes to plumbago, which was then very common. But when Bottari says[971] that artists first began to use red and black chalk in the time of Vasari, whereas _lapis piombino_ only was employed before that period, he has named _plumbago_, commonly used in his time, instead of the metallic pencil which was called _stile_. If I am not mistaken, the Italians have no proper appellation for black lead, but call it sometimes _matita_ and sometimes _piombino_.

[Great difficulty was formerly experienced in protecting the Borrowdale black-lead mine from robbery. At present, the treasure is protected by a strong building, consisting of four rooms upon the ground floor; and immediately under one of them is the opening, secured by a trap-door, through which workmen alone can enter the interior of the mountain. In this apartment, called the dressing-room, the miners change their ordinary clothes for their working-dress as they come in; and after their six hours, post or journey, they again change their dress, under the superintendence of the steward, before they are allowed to go out. In the innermost of the four rooms two men are seated at a large table, sorting and dressing the plumbago, who are locked in while at work, and watched by the steward from an adjoining room, who is armed with two loaded blunderbusses. In some years the net produce of the _six weeks’_ annual working of the mine has, it is said, amounted to from 30,000_l._ to 40,000_l._

An inferior kind of plumbago is imported from Mexico and Ceylon; and a composition with which more common pencils are manufactured is made of a mixture of plumbago-powder, lamp black and clay.

A useful and convenient application of the black lead in the form of minute cylinders which slightly projected from a cylindrical cone, and which was fitted to a pencil-case, was patented in 1822 by Mr. Mordan, and has come into general use: the cylindrical form of the plumbago is produced by passing square strips of it through holes in a ruby, somewhat in the manner of wire-drawing. It is stated that the supply of plumbago from the Cumberland mine is almost exhausted; fortunately, a process has been devised by which the same firmness and equality may be communicated to the powder by compression. This is effected by carefully washing and grinding the dust obtained in sawing plumbago into thin plates, sifting it through spaces less than the 1/50000th part of an inch, and placing it under a powerful press, on a strong die or bed of steel, with air-tight fittings. The air is then pumped from the dust, and while thus freed from air, a plunger descends upon it and it becomes solidified. The power employed to perform this operation is estimated at 1000 tons, several blows having been given, each of this power. This process was invented by Mr. W. Brockedon, the talented draftsman of Alpine and Italian scenery.]

FOOTNOTES

[958] Plin. lib. xxxiii. 3, sect. 19.

[959] A plate of this kind was called παράγραφος, also τροχαλὸς, γυρὸς, κυκλοτερὴς, which last appellation denotes the form. The Romans, at least those of later times, named this lead _præductal_. The ruler by which the lines were drawn was called κανὼν and κανονίς. Thus the ruled sheet which Suffenus filled with wretched verses is styled by Catullus _membrana directa plumbo_. Pollux has παραγράφειν τῇ παραγραφίδι. See Salmasius ad Solinum, p. 644, where some passages, in which these leaden plates are described, are quoted from the Anthologia.

[960] Versuchs e. System d. Diplomatik. Hamb. 1802, 8vo, ii. p. 108.

[961] Diplomatique-pratique: à Metz, 1765, 4to, p. 62.

[962] De Metallicis, lib. iii. Rome, 1596, or Norib. 1602.

[963] This, however, is not exactly the case. With ink somewhat thick one may indeed write on a piece of paper which has been rubbed over with black lead.

[964] [This was formerly the case, but for a considerable number of years past the mine has been constantly open. The whole of the produce is sent up to London (Essex Street, Strand), where it is disposed of by public auction, held once a month.]

[965] In the Cumberland dialect, _killow_ or _collow_, as well as _wad_, means black. Therefore when the manganese earth, which is found chiefly at Elton not far from Winster, and when burnt is employed as an oil-colour, but particularly for daubing over ships, is called _black wad_, that expression signifies as much as _black black_. See Pennant’s Tour in Scotland, i. p. 42. Gentleman’s Magazine, 1747, p. 583.

[966] Pinax Rerum Natural. London, 1667, 8vo, p. 218.

[967] Natural Hist. of Westm. and Cumberland, 1709, 8vo, p. 74. See also Gent.’s Mag. xxi. 1751, p. 51, where there is a map of this remarkable district.

[968] Borghini, il Riposo. Artists used sometimes also silver pencils. Baldinucci’s Vocab. dell’ arte del Disegno: Stile.

[969] These sonnets are the 57th and 58th. Of Simon and his drawings an account may be found in Fiorillo Gesch. der zeichnenden Künste, Gött. 1798, 8vo, i. p. 269.

[970] De’ veri precetti della pittura. Ravenna, 1587, 4to, p. 53.

[971] In his observations on Vasari, iii. p. 310.

SAL-AMMONIAC.

It is not very probable that Dioscorides, Pliny, and others who lived nearly about the same time, were acquainted with sal-ammoniac, or mentioned it in their works; for no part of mineralogy was then so defective as that which is the most important, and which treats of salts. The art of lixiviating earths and causing saline solutions to crystallize was then so little known, that, instead of green vitriol, vitriolic minerals, however impure, were employed in making ink, dye-liquors, and other things. Places for boiling vitriol were not then established, and therefore Pliny beheld with wonder blue vitriol, which in his time was made only in Spain, as a thing singular in its kind, or which had not its like. On this account those salts only were known which occur in a native state, or which crystallize as it were of themselves, without any artificial preparation, as is the case with bay salt. But that neutral salt, formed of muriatic acid and ammonia, occurs very seldom in a native state, and almost exclusively among the productions of volcanoes. I do not, however, suppose that this volcanic sal-ammoniac was the first known, but that it was first considered to be sal-ammoniac after that salt had been long obtained by another method, and long used.

But even if it should be believed that our sal-ammoniac was known to the ancients, how are we to discover it with certainty in their writings? This salt has little or nothing by which these writers could characterize it. Neither its external form nor taste is so striking that it could be described by them with sufficient precision. The use of it also could not at that time be so important and necessary, as to enable us to determine whether they were acquainted with it; whereas, on the other hand, green vitriol and alum can easily be distinguished among the materials for dyeing.

Nay, if this salt had been then made, as it is made at present in Egypt, and if any allusion to it were found, one might readily conjecture that sal-ammoniac were really meant. But even though it must be admitted that traces of sublimation being employed occur in the writings of Dioscorides and others, who lived nearly at the same period, we are not authorized to suppose that the knowledge of it was sufficient for the preparation of this salt.

Besides, there are two properties with which the ancients might have accidentally become acquainted, and which in that case would have been sufficient to make known or define to us this salt. In the first place, by an accidental mixture of quicklime, the strong smell or unsupportable vapour diffused by the volatile alkali separated from the acid might have been observed. In the second place, it is very possible that the complete volatilization of this salt on burning coals may have been remarked; for it had been long known that common salt decrepitates in the fire. This excited wonder, and in examining other salts people were accustomed to observe whether they possessed that property also. Had any one, with this view, thrown a bit of sal-ammoniac on a burning coal, he must have seen with astonishment that instead of decrepitating it became entirely volatilized. For this experiment, however, very pure sal-ammoniac would have been necessary. Had a little common salt been mixed with it, decrepitation would not have been altogether prevented; and if the sal-ammoniac had been rendered impure by earthy particles, as is almost always the case with the volcanic, some earth at least would have remained behind on the coals.

The name _sal-ammoniacus_ is indeed old; but as those who, in consequence of the name, considered the _alumen_ of the ancients to be our alum, and their _nitrum_ to be our saltpetre, were in an error, we should be equally so were we to consider their sal-ammoniac to be the same as ours. Our forefathers believed that the ancient writers were acquainted with all minerals, as well as with all plants; and when they discovered a new one, they searched in old books till they found a name which would suit it, or which at any rate had not been given to another. Our sal-ammoniac, in all probability, acquired in the same manner its name, which is not often to be found in the writings of the ancients[972].

When everything they have said of it is collected and impartially examined, no proofs will be found that under that name they understood our sal-ammoniac. On the contrary, one will soon be convinced that _sal-ammoniacus_ was nothing else than impure marine salt. As the ancients were not acquainted with the art of separating salts, of refining and crystallising them, they gave to each variety or kind in the least different, which was distinguished either by the intermixture of some foreign substance or by an accidental formation, a particular name; and, considering the wants of that period, this method was not so bad. For among the impure saline substances, there were always some which were found to be fitter than others for certain purposes. On this account they distinguished with so much care _misy_, _sory_, _chalcitis_ and _melanteria_, instead of which we use a substance contained in all these minerals, that is to say, green vitriol. Our apothecary shops however have at present the lixivious salt under the name of various plants, from which it is extracted, with different degrees of purity.

When this is known, it will excite no wonder that the _sal-ammoniacus_ of the ancients was nothing else than our common salt. Dioscorides and Pliny speak of it expressly as a kind of this salt; and Columella[973], in a prescription for an eye-salve, recommends rock-salt, either Spanish, Ammoniacal, or Cappadocian. Pliny says[974] that _sal-ammoniacus_ was found in the dry sandy deserts of Africa, as far as the oracle of Ammon. It is stated, both by him and Dioscorides[975], that this salt can be split or broken into smooth pieces; and the former adds, that the best are white and transparent; that it however has an unpleasant taste, but can be used in medicine. In like manner later physicians, when they wish to prescribe common salt, recommend in

## particular the ammoniac. Thus Aetius, who lived in the fifth century,

remarks, that when fossil, or as we say at present native salt, is employed, ammoniac or Cappadocian ought to be chosen.

From what is said by Pliny, it may with certainty be concluded that this salt was dug up from pits or mines in Africa; for he relates, that it appeared wonderful that a piece of it, which in the pit was very light, became, on exposure to the open air, much heavier. Without repeating the explanation which he gives of this phænomenon, I shall only remark, that many kinds of rock-salt, taken from the mines of Wieliczka, experience the same change in the air; so that blocks which a labourer can easily carry in the mine, can scarcely be lifted by him after they have been some time exposed to the air. The cause here is undoubtedly the same as that which makes many kinds of artificial salt to become moist and to acquire more weight. In this case it is owing to some impurity, such as muriate of lime, which is called _sal-ammoniacus fixus_[976], and which attracts from the atmosphere so much moisture, that it deliquesces in it to the so-called oil of lime.

Synesius, who was born in Egypt in the fifth century, in the Pentapolitan town Cyrene, and who resided as bishop in Ptolemais, the capital of the district, says, in a letter wherein he describes many rarities of his native country, that what was called _sal-ammoniacus_[977], both according to its appearance and taste, was a salt of a good quality, fit for use; that it lay under a soft kind of stone which covered it like a crust, and that it could be easily dug up when this stone was removed.

Herodotus, Strabo, Arrian, and others, speak of rock-salt which was dug up in Ammonia, and carried thence as an article of merchandise. The first mentions a hill of salt; and we are told by the last, that native salt was brought to Egypt as a present to the king and others, from the neighbourhood of the oracle of Ammon, by the priests of that place, in boxes made of palms worked together. Many pieces were three inches in length; and because this substance was purer than bay salt, and as clear as crystal, it was particularly employed in sacrifices. This salt is certainly that which, under the name of _sal-ammoniacus_, was sent from Egypt to the king of Persia, like the water of the Nile, as is related by Athenæus from an historian long since lost[978].

It is also certain that the old Arabian physicians, Avicenna and Serapion, who both lived in the eleventh century, under the name _sal-ammoniacus_ understood nothing else than rock-salt. The former says that it ought to split easily, and to be clear and transparent like crystal; and the latter states that this salt is cut from the solid rock, and that it is sometimes clear as crystal, sometimes reddish, sometimes blackish, sometimes of another colour, sometimes hard, and sometimes friable, or, as the translator expresses it, pulverulent. All these colours and properties are not uncommon in rock-salt, and always proceed, no doubt, from an admixture of ferruginous earth. Serapion says that this salt was obtained from Corasini. I shall leave it to others to determine where this country was situated. He often names it, and says that _mala granata_ and _bezaar_ were obtained from it. But who knows how the name was written in the original? And the Arabian author perhaps did not mention the place where the salt was dug up, but that from which, in his time, it was procured[979].

In regard to the purpose to which the ancients applied their _sal-ammoniacus_, it appears that it required only common salt and not sal-ammoniac. It is oftenest mentioned by the physicians, because it was the purest table salt that could then be procured. On that account it has been praised by Scribonius Largus, who lived in the first century, and by Aetius who lived in the fifth, as well as by Avicenna, Serapion, and others. I have however not yet met with it in the writings of Hippocrates or Galen. In the works of the Greek agriculturists it occurs in a recipe for the preparation of a cement employed to close up wine vessels[980]. According to a recipe of Apicius, in his book on cookery, _sal-ammoniacus_ was to be roasted. By these means this rock-salt lost its water of crystallization and became stronger. On this account, in Transylvania, Siberia, and other countries, before it is brought to the table it is pounded and roasted. Of our sal-ammoniac, however, were it roasted, very little would remain. But whether the _ammonium_ which Palladius recommends for a cement[981] be that salt, I will not pretend to determine. On the other hand, I have no hesitation to contradict the old commentator on Ovid, who, in a passage where the poet recommends _sal-ammoniacus_ in making a cosmetic water, understands the resin or gum of that name. Ovid however had no intention that young women should lacker themselves.

For the reasons therefore already mentioned, I am convinced that the _sal-ammoniacus_ of the ancients was rock-salt, and not our _sal-ammoniac_. The oldest commentators also on these writers had no idea of any other than rock-salt; and it was not till a later period, when our sal-ammoniac was introduced into commerce, and acquired that name, that the most learned commentators began expressly to remark, that the new sal-ammoniac, notwithstanding its appellation, was different from the _sal-ammoniacus_ of the ancients. As this could not then be obtained, people used the former, which they considered only as an artificial substitute for the latter, though it was incapable of supplying its place. But in more modern times, when our sal-ammoniac became common, and physicians and mineralogists no longer took the trouble to read the works of the ancients, some of them, if not the greater part, spoke in such a manner as if our sal-ammoniac had been the _sal-ammoniacus_ of the ancients; and it was then generally believed that it had been, at any rate, known and used since the time of Dioscorides and Pliny.

No one has maintained this with greater confidence and zeal than F. I. W. Schröder[982], whose judgement however was perverted by alchemistic conceits. According to his assertion, the Egyptians practised from the earliest periods the art of making sal-ammoniac, but they kept it a secret; and he obscurely hints at the purpose for which these great chemists used so much salt. He refers, on this occasion, to what Pliny says of _flos salis_[983], in which he thinks he can find the martial sal-ammoniac[984] flowers of our chemists, or the so-called _flores salis ammoniaci martiales_. Those who cannot make this discovery he declares to be ignorant and blind. This decision, however, when the character of the person who gives it is considered, cannot dissipate a single doubt. It is certain that what Dioscorides and Pliny call _flos salis_ has never yet been defined. It was moist, oily, and saline; and in the vessels, in which it was sent from Egypt, was grey at the top, saffron-coloured at the bottom, and emitted a bad smell. The most ingenious conjecture was that of Cordus[985], who thought that it might be _sperma ceti_; but though I should prefer this opinion to that of Schröder, I must confess that, on the grounds adduced by Matthioli and Conrad Gesner, it has too much against it to be admitted as truth.

The first distinct traces of our sal-ammoniac which I have yet met with are to be found in the works of the Arabians[986]. In a writing of Geber, there is a prescription how to purify sal-ammoniac by sublimation, and in another a receipt for making it; so that there can be no doubt that the author was acquainted with our salt. But this furnishes very little towards the history of it. The period when that celebrated chemist lived is uncertain. If, as Leo says[987], he flourished a hundred years after Mahomet, that is to say in the eighth century, his works must have been interpolated with many additions, which criticism has not yet been able to separate. Many of them cannot be of great antiquity; and the uncertainty is increased by some of the editions differing from each other in important passages. Whole sections, which some have, are wanting in others; and the titles and order of the books and sections are different almost in each. When the same circumstances are found in several editions, it is observed that they essentially differ. What, therefore, is now found in the writings of Geber, as they are called, was certainly not all known in the eighth century.

The same uncertainty prevails in regard to the chemical works of Avicenna, who lived in the beginning of the eleventh century, and who certainly treats of sal-ammoniac. But when these are compared with the medical works of this author, which are subject to no doubt, it is evidently perceived that the former must have been the production of a very different and much younger writer. In the works of the physician Avicenna, _sal-ammoniacus_ means always rock-salt. It is worthy of remark, that Avicenna the chemist says, that sal-ammoniac comes from Egypt, India, and Forperia.

We know with more certainty that Albucasis, or Bulcasis, was acquainted with sal-ammoniac, as well as the method of preparing it, which he describes, and also the preparation of medicines in general, in his book often printed under the title of _Liber servitoris_[988]. However unintelligible the translation often is, one can easily discover in what manner sublimation was formerly performed in earthen vessels. But the period when this Arabian writer lived is doubtful, though it is generally admitted that he died in the year 1122.

But whence did Europe obtain this salt, in the twelfth and succeeding centuries? When and in what manner was the preparation of it found out in Egypt? For what purpose was it first used by our ancestors? I have not yet met with any information to enable me to answer these questions, though it is probable that it might be found in old books of travels, and particularly in the works of Arabian writers. In the valuable but not altogether intelligible book of Pegolotti[989], from which I have learned many things respecting the trade of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, nothing is said in regard to the place where it was obtained, but that it was procured in white, hard, and opake cakes. It is mentioned in the custom-house tariff of Pisa for the year 1408.

Biringoccio, who lived in the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the following century[990], knew nothing more than that, according to report, it came from Cyrene or Armenia. Cæsalpin, his contemporary, gave, for the preparation of it, a prescription which is undoubtedly borrowed from the Arabians. This author says, very properly, that it is obtained in white transparent cakes, blackish on the outside; but adds, erroneously, that it comes from Germany, though the same thing has been repeated by Brasavolus and Matthioli. Porta says, with more truth, that it comes from the East. He asserts also, that he was the first person who found real sal-ammoniac on volcanic mountains, and he wishes that his discovery might be confirmed by skilful naturalists[991]. This may serve as an additional proof, were such necessary, in opposition to those who think that the first real sal-ammoniac introduced into commerce was the volcanic. Imperato considers Porta’s observation as generally acknowledged, but without naming him. The former has described, in a fuller and more correct manner than any of his predecessors, the properties of sal-ammoniac[992]; and he states, as does also Agricola[993], that it is entirely dissipated in the fire. He adds, that it promotes the production of a celestial blue colour, and in all probability he here alludes to a solution of copper.

Without attempting to examine at what time the art was discovered of converting the nitric acid into aqua regia by the addition of sal-ammoniac, I shall only remark that, at any rate, it was known in the sixteenth century; for Imperato says that sal-ammoniac is employed in the solution of gold; and Biringoccio[994], who is older, recommends nitrous acid prepared with sal-ammoniac for dissolving metals, and

## particularly gold. I will not either determine how old the use of this

salt is in soldering and tinning; but I must observe, that it was known to Agricola[995] and Imperato. I however doubt whether it was very common, because Biringoccio[996] recommends borax for that purpose, without so much as mentioning sal-ammoniac; though it is possible that I may have overlooked it.

We are now arrived at the modern history, which I shall give in as brief a manner as I can, because it has been already fully treated on by others. What was long ago shown by the celebrated Mr. Boyle was proved in the year 1716 by Geoffroy the younger, that sal-ammoniac was composed of the muriatic acid and volatile alkali, and that it could be thence prepared in Europe by sublimation[997]. In the same year the jesuit Sicard gave the first certain account of the sal-ammoniac manufactories at Damayer, in the Delta, and described in what manner this salt was prepared there, by sublimation in glass vessels, from the soot of the burnt dung of camels and cows, which is used in Egypt for fuel, with the addition of sea salt and urine[998]. In the year 1719, the Academy of Sciences at Paris received from Lemere, the French consul at Cairo, an account of the process employed; but it contained no mention either of sea salt or of urine[999]. Afterwards this information was in part confirmed, and in part rectified and enlarged, by Paul Lucas[1000], Granger, or, as he was properly called, Tourtechot[1001], and the celebrated travellers Shaw, Pocock, Norden, Hasselquist, Niebuhr, and Mariti.

Several writers have asserted that sal-ammoniac comes also from the East Indies. It is mentioned by Tavernier among the wares which in his time were brought from Amadabat, in the territories of the Mogul, to Surat; and Geoffroy states, that when the trade of Marseilles was interrupted by the plague, the French obtained from Holland sal-ammoniac, which was shaped like a truncated cone, and was given out to be Indian[1002]. Pomet also says, that some of the same kind was formerly procured from Venice and Holland. But Gaubius asserts that he was never able to hear of any such sal-ammoniac in Holland[1003]; nor is it to be found in the price currents of the East India Company. I am almost inclined to suspect that these truncated cones were formed by the merchants from broken pieces or fragments of the Egyptian sal-ammoniac, by solution and imperfect crystallization or sublimation. In this manner the merchants at Marseilles convert the refuse of the Egyptian sal-ammoniac into cakes by a new sublimation, in order that it may become more saleable, though it is not readily purchased by artists. Gaubius, however, has described a kind of sal-ammoniac which he obtained from India, with the information that it was made in Hindostan from the soot of animal dung; but in my opinion this requires further confirmation[1004].

Where and at what time the first works for making sal-ammoniac were established in Europe, I am not able to determine. The account given by Thurneisser, that the first sal-ammoniac was made in the Tyrol in the ninth century, is truly ridiculous. It is not worth the trouble to inquire where he or Paracelsus found this foolish assertion. One might be almost induced to believe, that in the time of Boyle there were manufactories of sal-ammoniac in Europe[1005]. But perhaps there may be no other foundation for all this than the before-mentioned assertion of Cæsalpinus, that this salt came from Germany. At Bamberg, the Germans were long accustomed to boil the sediment of the salt-pans with old urine, and to sell it cheap for sal-ammoniac; and Weber asserts that some of the same kind is still made at Vienna. The hundred weight costs from twenty to thirty florins, but the refuse may be purchased for a mere trifle. If I am not mistaken, the first real manufactories of sal-ammoniac were established in Scotland; and the oldest of these, perhaps, was that erected by Dovin and Hutton at Edinburgh in 1756, and which, like many in England, manufactures this salt on a large scale[1006]. Among the later undertakings of this kind is Gravenhorst’s manufactory at Brunswick, and that which in the neighbourhood of Gothenburg manufactures sal-ammoniac from the refuse left in making train oil.

[Sal-ammoniac is now prepared either by the destructive distillation of bones or coal. The gas-liquor supplies, we believe, the largest part. This fluid contains hydrosulphuret and carbonate with some other salts of ammonia. It is decomposed with sulphuric acid, and on evaporation the sulphate of ammonia is obtained in a crystalline state. This is then mixed with common salt and the mixture heated in iron vessels, whereupon the muriate of ammonia sublimes.

Sal-ammoniac is exported in considerable quantities to Russia and other parts of the continent and to the United States.]

FOOTNOTES

[972] It is indeed a matter of indifference whether the name be derived from αμμος, _arena_, or rather from _Ammonia_, the name of a district in Libya, where the oracle of Jupiter Ammon was situated. The district had its name from sand. An H also may be prefixed to the word. See Vossii Etymol. p. 24. But _sal-armoniacus_, _armeniacus_, sal-armoniac, is improper.

[973] De Re Rust. vi. 17, 7.

[974] Lib. xxxi. cap. 7, sect. 39.

[975] Lib. v. cap. 126.

[976] This name was first used by Js. Holland.

[977] Synesii Opera, ep. 147.

[978] Athen. lib. ii. cap. 29, p. 67.

[979] I am fully of opinion that a town named in the new maps Kesem, and which lies in Arabia Felix, opposite to the island of Socotora, is here meant. It has a good harbour. See Büsching’s Geography, where the name _Korasem_ also occurs.

[980] Geopon. lib. vi. cap. 6.

[981] Pallad. i. tit. 41.

[982] Bibliothek d. Naturwiss. u. Chemie. Leip. 1775, 8vo, i. p. 219.

[983] Lib. xxxi. cap. 7, sect. 42.

[984] [The double chloride of ammonium and iron].

[985] Liber de holosantho in C. Gesner’s treatise De omni Rerum Fossilium Genere. Tiguri 1565, 8vo, p. 15.

[986] What a noble people were the Arabs! we are indebted to them for much knowledge and for many inventions of great utility; and we should have still more to thank them for were we fully aware of the benefits we have derived from them. What a pity that their works should be suffered to moulder into dust, without being made available! What a shame that those acquainted with this rich language should meet with so little encouragement! The few old translations which exist have been made by persons who were not sufficiently acquainted either with languages or the sciences. On that account they are for the most part unintelligible, uncertain, in many places corrupted, and besides exceedingly scarce. Even when obtained, the possessors are pretty much in the same state as those who make their way with great trouble to a treasure, which after all they are only permitted to see at a distance, through a narrow grate. Had I still twenty years to live, and could hope for an abundant supply of Arabic works, I would learn Arabic. But ὁ βίος βραχὺς, ἡ δὲ τέχνη μακρή.

[987] Africæ Descriptio, iii. p. 136, b.

[988] This book is often printed along with Mesue. See Haller’s Biblioth. Botan. i. p. 201. Biblioth. Chirur. i. p. 137.

[989] Della decima, iii. pp. 298, 373; and iv. pp. 59, 191.

[990] Pirotechnia, 1550, 4to, p. 36, a.

[991] Magia Natur. lib. x. cap. 20. Porta was born in 1545, and died in 1615.

[992] Lib. iii. cap. 8.

[993] De Natura Fossil, lib. iii. p. 212.

[994] Lib. ix. cap. 6, p. 131, b: also lib. ix. cap. 10, p. 141, b.

[995] De Natura Fossil. lib. iii. p. 215; in which he speaks of iron pins with tinned heads.

[996] Page 135, a and b, pp. 136, 375.

[997] Mémoires de l’Acad. 1720, p. 195. Basil Valentine had before taught how to separate the volatile alkali from sal-ammoniac by means of the fixed alkali.

[998] Nouveaux Mémoires des Missions de la Compag. de Jesus, ii.

[999] Mémoires de l’Acad. 1720, p. 191.

[1000] Voy. au Levant.

[1001] Mémoires de l’Acad. 1735, p. 107.

[1002] Mém. de l’Acad. 1723, p. 221, where a figure is given of it.

[1003] Gaubii Adversaria. Leidæ 1771, 4to, p. 138.

[1004] [As Dr. Royle observes, in his Essay on the Antiquity of Hindoo Medicine, p. 41, this salt must have been familiar to the Hindoos ever since they have burnt bricks, as they now do, with the manure of animals; as some may usually be found crystallized at the unburnt extremity of the kiln.]

[1005] Though the sal-ammoniac that is made in the East may consist in great part of camel’s urine, yet that which is made in Europe (where camels are rarities) and is commonly sold in our shops, is made of man’s urine.--Nat. Hist. of the Human Blood (Works, iv. p. 188).

[1006] Arnot’s History of Edinburgh. Ed. 1779, 4to, p. 601.

FORKS.

At present forks are so necessary at table among polished nations, that the very idea of eating a meal without them excites disgust. The introduction of them, however, is of so modern a date, that they have scarcely been in use three centuries. “Tam prope ab origine rerum sumus,” says Pliny, in speaking of a thing which, though very new, was then exceedingly common. Neither the Greeks nor the Romans have any name for these instruments; and no phrase or expression which, with the least probability, can be referred to the use of them, occurs anywhere in their writings. But had forks been known, this could not have been the case, since so many entertainments are celebrated by the poets or described by other writers; and they must also have been mentioned by Pollux, in the very full catalogue which he has given of articles necessary for the table.

The Greek word _creagra_ signified indeed a fork, but not a fork used at table. It meant merely a flesh-fork, or that instrument employed by cooks to take meat from a boiling pot, as is proved by the connexion of the words in all those passages where it occurs. It is mentioned by Pollux, and by Anaxippus, in Athenæus[1007], among the utensils of the kitchen; and the scholiast on Aristophanes says that this fork had a resemblance to the hand, and was used to prevent the fingers from being scalded. Suidas quotes a passage where the word denotes a hook at the end of a long pole, with which people, even at present, draw up water-buckets from wells and other deep places. This instrument, therefore, appears sometimes to have had only a hook, but sometimes two or more prongs. _Creagra_ occurs once in Martianus Capella, a Latin writer, but in a passage which is not intelligible.

Equally inapplicable to our forks are the words _furca_, _fuscina_, _fucilla_, _fuscinula_, and _gabalus_, which are given in dictionaries. The first two were undoubtedly instruments which approached nearly to our furnace and hay forks. The trident of Neptune also was called _fuscina_. The _furcilla_ even was large enough to be employed for a weapon of defence, as is proved by the expressions _furcillis ejicere_ and _expellere_. _Fuscinula_, which in modern times is used chiefly for a table fork, is not to be found even once in any of the old Latin writers. The old translation of the Bible only explains the word κρεάγρα by _fuscinula_. _Gabalus_, according to every appearance, has given rise to the German word _gabeln_, but it denotes the cross or gallows, which last word Voscius deduces from it.

A learned Italian, who asserts also that the use of forks is very new, is of opinion that the Romans often used _ligulæ_ instead of forks[1008]. This I shall not deny; but the _ligula_ certainly had more resemblance to a small spatula, or tea-spoon, than to our forks. According to Martial, many spoons at the other end seem to have been _ligulæ_[1009]. But the two epigrams must be read in conjunction, so that the second may appear a continuation of the first; for the epithets _habilis_ and _utilis_ can be applied to no other term than _ligula_. Besides, it is certain that the titles of the epigrams, or at least the greater part of them, were not added by the poet, but by transcribers. The name also, which originally was _lingula_, gives an idea of the form. We read likewise that this instrument was used for scumming, for which purpose nothing is less fit than a fork[1010].

I have, I know not how, a great unwillingness to represent the tables of our ancestors as without forks; yet this was certainly the case: and when we reflect on their manner of eating, it will readily be perceived that they could much easier dispense with the use of them than we can. All their food, as is still customary in the East, was dressed in such a manner as to be exceedingly tender, and therefore could be easily pulled to pieces. It appears however that people, though not in the earliest periods, employed the same means as our cooks, and suffered meat to lie some time that it might be easier dressed. We often read that cooks, in order to provide an entertainment speedily, will kill an animal, and having cleaned and divided it, roast it immediately, and then serve it up to their guests. But it is well known that the flesh of animals newly killed, if cooked before it has entirely lost its natural warmth, is exceedingly tender and savoury, as we are assured in many books of travels.

Formerly all articles of food were cut into small morsels before they were served up; and this was the more necessary, as the company did not sit at table, but lay on couches turned towards it, consequently could not well use both their hands for eating. For cutting meat, persons of rank kept in their houses a carver, who had learned to perform his duty according to certain rules, and who was called _scissor_, _carpus_, _carptor_, and by Apuleius is named _diribitor_[1011]. This person used a knife, the only one placed on the table, and which in the houses of the opulent had an ivory handle, and was commonly ornamented with silver[1012].

Bread also was never cut at table. In former times it was not baked so thick as at present, but rather like cakes, and could easily be broken; hence mention is so often made of the breaking of bread. Juvenal, when he wishes to describe old bread, does not say that it could not be cut, but that it could not be broken[1013]. The ancient form of bread is still retained in the paschal cake of the Jews, and in the _knæckbröd_[1014] of the Swedes. The latter, which is almost as brittle as biscuit, is not cut when used, but broken.

The Chinese, who also use no forks, have however small sticks of ivory, which are often of very fine workmanship, and inlaid with silver and gold. A couple of these is placed before each guest, who employs them for putting into his mouth the meat which has been cut into small bits. But even this resource was not known two centuries ago in Europe, where people, as is still done by the Turks, everywhere used their fingers. As a proof, I shall not quote passages where mention is made of persons putting their hands or fingers into the dish[1015]; for such a mode of speaking is yet employed, though forks, as is well known, are in common use. I shall refer only to one passage in Ovid, which admits of no doubt[1016], and where the author would certainly have mentioned these instruments, or rather have communicated to his pupils in the art of love a precept which at present is given to children, had the former been taught when young how to make use of forks.

Had they been used by the Romans, they must necessarily have occurred among the numerous remains of antiquity which have been collected in modern times. But Baruffaldi and Biörnstähl[1017], who both made researches respecting them, assure us that they were never able to find any. Count Caylus[1018] and Grignon[1019] only assert the contrary. The former has given a figure and description of a silver two-pronged fork, which was found among rubbish in the Appian Way. It is of exceedingly beautiful workmanship, and at one end terminates in a stag’s foot. Notwithstanding the high reputation of this French author, I cannot possibly admit that everything of which he has given figures is so old as he seems to imagine. Grignon found in the ruins of a Roman town in Champagne some articles which he considers as table-forks; but he merely mentions them, without giving a description sufficient to convince one of the truth of what he asserts, which, in regard to a thing so unexpected, was certainly requisite. One fork was of copper or brass; two others were of iron; and he says, speaking of the latter, that they seem to have served as table-forks, but were coarsely made. I however doubt whether he conjectured right in regard to the use of them.

As far as I know, the use of forks was first known in Italy towards the end of the fifteenth century; but at that time they were not very common. Galeotus Martius, an Italian, resident at the court of Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary, who reigned from 1458 to 1490, relates, in a book which he wrote in regard to the life and actions of this prince, that in Hungary, at that time, forks were not used at table, as they were in many parts of Italy[1020], but that at meals each person laid hold of the meat with his fingers, and on that account they were much stained with saffron, which was then put into sauces and soup. He praises the king for eating without a fork, yet conversing at the same time and never dirtying his clothes.

That in France, at the end of the sixteenth century, forks even at court were entirely new, is proved by a book, already quoted in the present volume of this work, entitled l’Isle des Hermaphrodites. It will therefore excite no wonder that in the same century forks were not used in Sweden.

But it must appear very strange that Thomas Coryate, the traveller, should see forks for the first time in Italy, and in the same year be the first person who used them in England, on which account he was called, by way of joke, Furcifer[1021].

In many parts of Spain, at present, drinking-glasses, spoons and forks are rarities[1022]; and even yet, in taverns, in many countries,

## particularly in some towns of France, knives are not placed on the

table, because it is expected that each person should have one of his own; a custom which the French seem to have retained from the old Gauls. But as no person would any longer eat without forks, landlords were obliged to furnish these, together with plates and spoons.

Among the Scotch highlanders, as Dr. Johnson asserts, knives have been introduced at table only since the time of the revolution. Before that period every man had a knife of his own as a companion to his dirk or dagger. The men cut the meat into small morsels for the women, who then put them into their mouths with their fingers. The use of forks at table was at first considered as a superfluous luxury, and therefore they were forbidden to convents, as was the case in regard to the congregation of St. Maur.

The English, Dutch and French have adopted the Italian names _forca_ and _forchetta_, given to our table-forks; though these appellations, in my opinion, were used at an earlier period to denote large instruments, such as pitch-forks, flesh-forks, furnace-forks; because in the low German, _forke_ is a very old name given to such implements. The German word _gabel_, which occurs first in dictionaries for these large instruments, is of great antiquity, and has been still retained in the Swedish and Dutch. It appears to have been used for many things which were split or divided into two; at any rate, it is certain that it is not derived from the Latin word _gabalus_.

FOOTNOTES

[1007] Athen. lib. iv. p. 169.

[1008] Hieron. Baruffaldi Sched. de armis convivalibus. In Salengri Nov. Thes. Antiq. Rom. iii. p. 742.

[1009] Mart. Epigr. xiv.

120. _Ligula Argentea._

Quamvis me ligulam dicant equitesque patresque, Dicor ab indoctis lingula grammaticis.

121. _Cochlearia._

Sum cochleis habilis, sed nec minus utilis ovis; Num quid scis potius cur cochleare vocer?

[1010] Plin. Hist. Natur. xxi. 14. Columella, ix. 15, 13. That the _ligula_ was smaller than the _cochlear_ is proved by Martial, viii. 23.

[1011] See this word in Pitisci, Lexicon Antiq. Rom.

[1012] Clemens Alexandr. Pædagog. lib. ii. p. 161. Posidonius relates, in Athenæus, iv. 13, p. 151, that the Gauls used to take roast meat in their hand and tear it to pieces with their teeth, or to cut it with a small knife which each carried in his girdle. This was told as a thing uncommon to the Greeks. Baumgarten, who quotes this passage in Algem. Welgeschichte, xvi. p. 657, adds, that Posidonius said also that the Gauls had bread so flat and hard that it could be easily broken. But this circumstance I cannot find in Athenæus.

[1013] Sat. v. 65.

[1014] This word, according to the Swedish dictionaries, signifies thin cakes, hard and crisp.

[1015] Homeri Odyss. xiv. 453.

[1016] De Arte Amandi, iii. 755.

[1017] Reisen, i. p. 268.

[1018] Rec. d’Antiq. iii. p. 312. tab. lxxxiv.

[1019] Bulletin des Fouilles, i. p. 17; ii. p. 131.

[1020] Galeoti Martii de Dictis et Factis Regis Matthiæ Liber. This work has also been printed in Schwandtneri Script. Rerum Hungar. tom. i. p. 548.

[1021] Coryate, in the year 1608, travelled for five months, through France, Italy, Switzerland, and a part of Germany. An account of this tour was published by him, in 1611, under the singular title of Crudities, a new edition of which appeared in 1776. He travelled afterwards to the East Indies, and in 1615 wrote in that country some letters which may be seen in Purchas his Pilgrims, vol. ii.; also in the second edition of the Crudities published in 1776. In page 90 of the Crudities the author says, “Here j will mention a thing that might have been spoken of before in discourse of the first Italian towne. J observed a custome in all those Italian cities and townes through the which j passed, that is not used in any other country that j saw in my travels, neither do j thinke that any other nation of Christendome doth use it, but only Italy. The Italian, and also most strangers that are commorant in Italy, do alwaies at their meales use a little forke when they cut their meat. For while with their knife which they hold in one hand they cut the meate out of the dish, they fasten their forke, which they hold in their other hand, upon the same dish; so that whatsoever he be that sitting in the company of any others at meale, should unadvisedly touch the dish of meate with his fingers from which all at the table doe cut, he will give occasion of offence unto the company, as having transgressed the lawes of good manners, insomuch that for his error he shall be at least brow beaten if not reprehended in wordes. This form of feeding j understand is generally used in all places of Italy; their forkes being for the most part made of yron or steele, and some of silver, but those are used only by gentlemen. The reason of this their curiosity is, because the Italian cannot by any meanes indure to have his dish touched with fingers, seeing all men’s fingers are not alike cleane. Hereupon j myselfe thought good to imitate the Italian fashion by this forked cutting of meate, not only while j was in Italy, but also in Germany, and oftentimes in England since j came home, being once quipped for that frequent using of my forke by a certain learned gentleman, a familiar friend of mine, one Mr. Laurence Whitaker, who in his merry humour doubted not to call me at table _furcifer_, only for using a forke at feeding, but for no other cause.”

[The use of forks was at first much ridiculed in England, as an effeminate piece of finery; in one of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays, “your fork-carving traveller” is spoken of with much contempt; and Ben Jonson has joined in the laugh against them in his Devil’s an Ass, Act. v. Scene 4. Meercraft says to Gilthead and Sledge:--

“Have I deserved this from you two? for all My pains at court, to get you each a patent.

“_Gilthead._ For what?

“_Meercraft._ Upon my project of the _forks_.

“_Sledge._ _Forks!_ What be they?

“_Meercraft._ The laudable use of forks, Brought into custom here as they are in Italy, To the sparing of napkins.”]

[1022] Fischer’s Reise nach Madrid, p. 238.

LOTTERY. TONTINE.

At present there are two kinds of lottery in Europe. One is called the Italian or Genoese lotto, or merely the lotto; the other is the common lottery well known in England. Of the former, which has been long proved to be attended with great deception, and must soon be universally acknowledged to be hurtful, I do not mean here to treat, but only of the latter, which at any rate may be honourable or harmless, if we do not take into account the delusion it occasions to credulous and ignorant people, by exciting hopes which have little probability in their favour. I however do not promise a complete history of this invention: it experienced so many changes before it acquired its present form, that to give a full account of them would be tiresome to me as well as to the reader.

I shall not either, as some have done, reckon among the first traces of lotteries every division of property made by lot, otherwise it might be said, that Joshua partitioned the promised land into lottery-prizes, before it was conquered. In my opinion the peculiarity of lotteries consists in this, that numbers are distributed gratuitously, or, as in our public lotteries, for a certain price, and it is then left to chance to determine what numbers are to obtain the prizes, the value of which is previously settled. The various conditions and changes invented by ingenuity to entice people to purchase shares, and to conceal and increase the gain of the undertakers, are not here taken into consideration, because they do not appear to be essential.

In the whole history of antiquity, I find nothing which has a greater resemblance to our lotteries than the _congiaria_ of the Romans; and I am inclined to think that the latter furnished the first hint for the establishment of the former. Rich persons at Rome, as is well known, and particularly the emperors, when they wished to gain or to strengthen the attachment of the people, distributed among them presents, consisting of eatables and other expensive articles, which were named _congiaria_. In general, tokens or tickets called _tesseræ_[1023] were given out, and the possessors of these, on presenting them at the store or magazine of the donor, received those things which they announced. In many cases these tickets were distributed _viritim_, that is, to every person who applied for them; and in that case these donations had a resemblance to our distributions of bread, but not to our lotteries, in which chance must determine the number of those who are to participate in the things distributed.

But in the course of time it became customary to call the people together, and to throw among them, from a stage, the articles intended for distribution, in the same manner as money is scattered among the populace at the coronation of the emperor, and on other solemnities. Such things, in this case, were called _missilia_, and belonged to those who had the good fortune to catch them. But as oil, wine, corn and other articles of the like kind, could not be distributed by throwing them in this manner, and as some articles were so much injured by the too great eagerness of the people, that they could be of little or no use, tokens or tickets were thrown out in their stead. At first these were square pieces of wood or metal, but sometimes also balls of wood inscribed with the name of the article which the possessor was to receive from the magazine[1024]. Like bank-notes they were payable to the bearer; and those who had obtained _tesseræ_ were allowed to transfer or to sell them to others. This is proved by a passage in Juvenal[1025], where allusion however is made only to the _tesseræ frumentariæ_, which were not thrown out, but distributed.

Imitations of these Roman _congiaria_, but indeed on a very reduced scale, have been employed in modern times by princes and princesses, in order to amuse themselves with distributing small presents to their courtiers. For this purpose various trinkets or toys are marked with numbers; these numbers are written upon separate tickets, which are rolled up and put into a small basket or basin. Each of the company then draws one out, and receives as a present the article marked with the same number. These small _congiaria_ were formerly called in German _glückstöpfe_, or _glückshäfen_; and in the course of time the present lotteries took their rise from them.

In Italy, where commerce, as is well known, was first formed into a regular system, and where the principal mercantile establishments and useful regulations were invented, the merchants or shopkeepers, even in the middle ages, were accustomed, in order that they might sell their wares in a speedier manner and with more advantage, to convert their shops into a _glücksbude_, where each person for a small sum of money was allowed to draw a number from the _glückstöpfe_ (jar of fortune), which entitled him to the article written upon it. At first governments gave themselves very little trouble about this mode of selling merchandise. But as the shopkeepers gained excessive profits, and cheated the credulous people by setting on their wares an extravagant price, which was concealed by the blanks, these _glückshäfen_ were forbidden, or permitted only under strict inspection, and in the course of time on paying a certain sum to the poor, or to the sovereign. In Germany they are still retained at many of the annual fairs; but in most countries they are subject to many limitations.

From these _glückshäfen_ were produced our lotteries, when articles of merchandise were no longer employed as prizes, but certain sums of money, the value of which was determined by the amount of the money received, after the expenses and gain required by the undertakers were deducted, and when the tickets were publicly drawn by charity-boys blindfolded. As these lotteries could not be conducted without defrauding the adventurers, it was at first believed, through old-fashioned conscientiousness, that it was unlawful to take advantage of the folly and credulity of the people, but for pious or charitable purposes.

Lotteries were then established by private persons, and in the course of time even by governments; and the clear gain was applied to the purpose of portioning poor young women, of redeeming slaves, of forming funds for the indigent, and to other objects of beneficence. It was also hoped that these public games of hazard would banish other kinds still more dangerous; and no one suspected that the exposing of tickets for sale, and the division of them, so that one could purchase an eighth or even a smaller share, would maintain and diffuse the taste of the public for gambling. This, however, increased; and the profit of lotteries became so great, that princes and ministers were induced to employ them as an operation of finance, and to hold the bank which always enriched the undertakers. People were then forbidden to purchase tickets in foreign lotteries, that the money won from the adventurers might pass into the sovereign’s treasury, or at any rate be retained in the country; and in order that tickets might be disposed of sooner and with more certainty, many rulers were so shameless as to pay the salaries of their servants partly in tickets, and to compel guild companies and societies to expend in lotteries what money they had saved[1026].

Of the oldest lotteries among the Italians I have not been able to find any account. Varchi, who wrote about the year 1537, relates that during a great scarcity of money at Florence in 1530, a lottery was established for the benefit of the state, and that the price of a ticket was a ducat. He however does not employ the term lottery, but uses the words _un lotto_, and calls a ticket _polizza_, a term which, as is well known, is generally used in regard to insurance. Le Bret says, that at Venice, in 1572, the inspection of lotteries was entrusted to the _proveditori del commune_; but as he does not mention the historian from whom this account is borrowed, the word which he translates lottery cannot be known. We nevertheless learn from his account, that this game was established at Venice in the middle of the sixteenth century, and placed under the inspection of the government.

It is certain that the chance game which gave rise to lotteries was brought from Italy to France under the name of _blanque_, a word formed from the Italian _bianca_. The greater part of the tickets drawn were always white paper, _carta bianca_, consequently blanks; and because that word occurred oftenest in drawing, it gave rise to the general appellation. Hence also is derived the phrase _trouver blanque_, to obtain nothing, to get a blank, or to lose. At the time Pasquier wrote[1027], that is, in the last half of the sixteenth century, the name _numero_ was also usual, because the numbers of the tickets, which were then called _devises_, were announced in the time of drawing. This name, instead of _nombre_, confirms the Italian origin. As each person in the time of drawing was attentive to his number, the phrase _entendre le numero_ was applied to those who knew or did not forget their numbers. Hence the expression, as Pasquier remarks, _Il entend le numero_, which is still said of those who know their own interest, or understand how to pursue it. Frisch and others, therefore, in their dictionaries have derived it improperly from the numbers with which merchants marked their goods.

In France also the first _blanques_ (lotteries) had no other prizes than articles of merchandise; and on that account they were set on foot only by merchants. But in the year 1539 Francis I. endeavoured to turn them to his own advantage by imitating the public establishment of them usual at Venice, Florence, and Genoa. He permitted these games of chance under the inspection of certain members of the government, with a view, as was pretended, of banishing deceptive and pernicious games of chance, on condition that for every ticket, _devise_ or _mise_[1028], a _teston de dix sols six deniers_ should be given to the king. But however small the sum required may have been, this _blanque_ was not filled up in the course of two years, and the king was obliged to recommend it by an order issued in the month of February 1541; yet it is not known whether it was ever completed[1029].

In the years 1572 and 1588, Louis de Gonzague, duke de Nivernois and Rethelois, established a _blanque_ at Paris, for the purpose of giving marriage portions to poor virtuous young women belonging to his estates. No lottery was ever drawn with so much ceremony and parade. Before the drawing, which began every year on Palm Sunday, mass was said; the servants employed were obliged to swear that they would

## act in a faithful and impartial manner; and even Sextus V. gave to

those who should promote this good work remission of their sins. The prize tickets were inscribed as follows: _Dieu vous a élue_, or _Dieu vous console_. The former ensured to the young woman who drew it 500 francs, which were paid to her on her wedding-day; the latter was the inscription of blanks, but suggested the hope of being more fortunate the year following[1030].

This example induced ladies of quality from time to time to establish similar _blanques_ (lotteries) for benevolent purposes. Some destined the profit to the building or repairing of certain churches and convents. Three ladies, whose names history has not thought proper to communicate, set on foot a lottery containing a certain number of tickets at forty sous each, and employed the gain in redeeming, by means of the Mathurines or Patres, as they were called, persons who had fallen into slavery among the Turks. On one occasion a _blanque_ or lottery of a very singular nature was instituted by some ladies, in order to raise a fund for their spiritual guide or confessor, who had been chosen bishop, but had no property, that they might purchase for him a carriage and horses, with every thing necessary to support his ecclesiastical dignity. Each of these grateful ladies was obliged to procure or present to him the article announced by the ticket she had drawn, “pour le remercier, par cette petite largesse, pour le bon ordre qu’il avoit apporté à leurs consciences.”

But these games of chance occur much oftener in the French history, as the means employed to make valuable presents to ladies and other persons of distinction. The largest, in all probability, is that by which Cardinal Mazarine endeavoured to increase his splendour, and render himself more popular among the courtiers. The tickets were distributed as presents; each was a prize, and the prizes were rarities of various kinds, and of different values. This, says the historian, was perhaps the first time that fortune did good to all and hurt to no one[1031].

That these games of chance became in the middle of the seventeenth century lotteries, in the proper sense of the word, is unanimously asserted by all the French historians who have touched on this subject, though in some circumstances they differ from each other. In the year 1644, Laurence Tonti came from Naples to Paris, and during a scarcity of money which then prevailed, proposed that kind of life-rents or annuities which at present are named after him _Tontines_, though they were used in Italy long before his time. But after tedious disputes in regard to his proposal, which was at length rejected, he gave in its stead a new plan for a large _blanque_, or lottery, which in 1656 obtained the royal approbation. It was to consist of 50,000 tickets, each at two _Louis d’ors_, so that the whole receipt would amount to 1,100,000 livres; but it is to be recollected that a _Louis d’or_ at that time was only eleven livres. Of this sum 540,000 livres were to be deducted for building a stone bridge and an aqueduct. The expenses of the _blanque_ were estimated at 60,000 livres, and the remaining 500,000 were to be divided into prizes, the highest of which was 30,000 livres. But this _blanque royale_, for so it was called, was never filled up, and consequently never drawn. On this account it was found necessary to construct a wooden bridge in the room of that which had been burnt. As complaints were often made by mercantile people in regard to the disposal of merchandise in this manner, which had been hitherto permitted, and as this practice had evidently injured the _blanque royale_, the former in the month of January 1658 was entirely forbidden.

In the year 1660, when the conclusion of peace and the marriage of Louis XIV. were celebrated, the first lottery on the plan of Tonti was set on foot at Paris. It was drawn publicly under the inspection of the police. A ticket cost only a _Louis d’or_, and the highest prize was 100,000 livres. This was won by the king himself; but he would not receive it, and left it to the next lottery in which he had no ticket[1032]. This was soon followed by several others. On that account, in the year 1661, all private lotteries were expressly forbidden under severe penalties, and this prohibition was repeated in 1670, 1681, 1687, and 1700[1033]. Since that time there have been no other lotteries but the _loteries royales_, the profits of which were, in general, applied to public buildings, as was the case in regard to the magnificent church of St. Sulpice, and on that account they met with great support.

Sauval, and some others, ascribe the introduction of lotteries to a person from Lyons, named De Chuyes, who by profession was a gold-beater, but had a great knowledge of trade. He afterwards undertook long sea voyages, and published a book entitled, La Guide des Chemins de Paris, redigée par ordre alphabetique. His name however does not occur in any of the king’s patents, but that only of Tonti.

This De Chuyes, according to Sauval, first proposed the name _lottery_, then usual in Italy, which however the other persons concerned did not approve. In particular, the well-known De Vaugelas, who had been chosen director of the undertaking, and who thereby hoped to pay his debts, strongly opposed it, and recommended the title _blanque royale_, though, in consequence of the many deceptions practised in the old games of chance known under that name, it was not likely to become popular. This much is certain, that the name lottery was first used in France about the year 1658; for the order before-mentioned of 1656 has the name _blanque_, but in that of 1658, the word lottery occurs for the first time, and in that of 1661 we find _espèce de blanque et loterie_, and in that of 1670, _loteries et blanques_.

It is certain that the name was much earlier used in Italy and other countries, though Varchi employs only the word _Lotto_. I am acquainted with no older mention of the name Lottery than that in the passage quoted by Menage, from a letter of Christopher Longolius, or, as he is called by the French, Longueuil. It certainly seems to show that lotteries, in the first half of the sixteenth century, were new; but I doubt much whether it can be proved from it that the name is of French, and not Italian extraction, as Menage thinks, because Longolius generally gave himself out as a Frenchman, though he was born at Mechlin in 1490. As the name is much newer in France, and as the letter was written from Padua, where Longolius died in 1522, it is far more probable that the name had its origin in Italy[1034].

In the last place, this letter was written a short time before Longolius’s death; for he mentions the election of pope Adrian, which took place the same year.

The name lottery has been used also by Simon Majolus, who describes the oldest manner in which it was conducted[1035]; but I have not been able to find at what time this Italian ecclesiastic wrote, though in all probability about the end of the sixteenth century. However it is still doubtful whether he was the author of the portion of the work referred to; for it is known that the greater part of the Dies Caniculares, published under his name, was written by Petrus Draudius, who died in the year 1630.

The word _Lot_, in many ancient as well as modern languages, and

## particularly in the English, Swedish, Danish and Dutch, has the same

signification as _sors_, and is evidently the _lotto_ of the Italians, and the _los_ or _loos_ of the Germans; consequently there is no proof that the word lottery is of French extraction, as Menage has supposed[1036].

In England the first lottery was proposed in the years 1567 and 1568, and, as the historian says, held at the west door of St. Paul’s Cathedral, and was drawn day and night[1037], from the 11th of January 1569, to the 6th of May the same year. It contained 400,000 tickets, at ten shillings each. The prizes consisted partly in money, and

## partly of silver plate and other articles. The net profit was to be

employed in improving the English harbours. The Antiquarian Society of London have still in their possession the original scheme, as it was then printed[1038]; from which it appears that the name lottery was at that time used in England. [In the year 1612 a lottery was drawn for the benefit of the English colonies in Virginia; permission was granted by special favour of king James I.; the largest prize in which, being silver-plate to the value of 4000 crowns, fell to the share of a tailor. In 1620 lotteries were suspended, in consequence of a representation from the House of Commons that they were prejudicial to the morals of the nation; but one was afterwards permitted in 1630, by a special license from king Charles I., in aid of the expenses of a project for conveying water to London; and Anderson[1039] says that this is the first time that lotteries are mentioned either in the _Fœdera_ or _Statutes_.

In the reign of Charles II., one of the methods resorted to by that monarch to reward the officers who had remained faithful to his cause, was to give them grants of plate and other valuables, with permission to dispose of them by a lottery. This gave rise to various schemes, under the titles of royal-oak and twelve-penny lotteries, &c.; which were sanctioned by government, as we learn by the following advertisement, which appeared soon after the Restoration:--“This is to give notice, that any persons who are desirous to farm any of the counties within the kingdom of England or dominion of Wales, in order to the setting up of a plate lottery, or any other lottery whatsoever, may repair to the lottery-office in Mermaid-court, over against the mews, where they may contract with the trustees commissioned by his majesty’s letters patent for the management of the said patent, on behalf of the truly loyal indigent officers.”

In 1694, a loan of a million was raised by the sale of tickets at £10 each, the prizes in which were funded at the rate of 4 per cent. for sixteen years certain. In the reign of queen Anne lotteries were forbidden as hurtful, but soon after they were again permitted under a variety of conditions, and were commonly for terminable annuities, to which both blanks and prizes became entitled at different rates; thus in 1710, the lottery consisted of 150,000 tickets, valued at £10 each; every ticket being entitled to an annuity for thirty-two years, the blanks at 14_s._ per annum, and the prizes to various annuities, from £5 to £1000. Tickets appear to have been first divided into shares during the administration of Sir Robert Walpole.

In 1746, a loan of three millions was raised on 4 per cent. annuities, and a lottery of 50,000 tickets at £10 each; and in 1747, one million was raised by the sale of 100,000 tickets, the prizes in which were founded in perpetual annuities, at the rate of 4 per cent. per annum. During the same century government constantly availed itself of this means to raise money for various public works, of which the British Museum and Westminster-bridge are well-known examples.

Probably the last occasion on which this taste for gambling was thus made use of occurred in 1780, when every subscriber of £1000 towards a loan of twelve millions, at 4 per cent., received a bonus of four lottery tickets, the intrinsic value of each of which was £10.

In 1778 an act was passed obliging every person who kept a lottery-office to take out an annual license, and to pay £50 for the same, a measure which reduced the number of lottery-offices from 400 to 51.

In 1823, however, the last act sanctioned by parliament for the sale of lottery tickets, contained provisions for putting down all state and private lotteries, and for rendering illegal the sale, in this kingdom, of all tickets or shares of tickets in any foreign lottery.]

A lottery was drawn at Amsterdam in 1549, the profit of which was employed in building a church steeple[1040]; and another was drawn at Delft in 1595. I was informed by Professor Fiorillo that there is still preserved at Amsterdam, in the hospital for old men, _oude mannen huys_, a beautiful painting by David Vinckenbooms, eight feet in height and fourteen in breadth, which represents the drawing of a lottery in the night-time. The artist is said to have been born in the year 1578.

This game of chance must have been known also at an early period in Germany; for, in the year 1521, a lottery was established by the council at Osnaburg, and is mentioned in a work published in 1582; but the prizes consisted only in articles of merchandise. The citizens of Hamburg having proposed a lottery, according to the Dutch manner, for the purpose of building a house of correction, the magistrates gave their approbation in the month of November 1611, and in 1615 it was drawn. At Nuremberg the first lottery seems to have been drawn in the year 1715. At any rate, Von Murr, in his Description of the remarkable things in that city, mentions an engraving with the following title: “Representation of the _Lotto publico_, which was drawn in the large hall of the council-house, at Nuremberg, anno 1715.” It is certain that we are not here to understand the so-called Italian _lotto_, but a common lottery, as the former was not introduced into Germany till a much later period. At Berlin the first lottery was drawn in the month of July 1740. It consisted only of one class of prizes, as was probably the case with all lotteries at first. It contained 20,000 tickets, each of which cost five dollars; so that the whole income amounted to 100,000 dollars. There were 4028 prizes, the largest of which was a house worth 24,000 dollars.

The ill-famed Italian or Genoese lottery was, as its name shows, an invention of the Genoese[1041], and arose from the mode in which the members of the senate were elected; for when that republic existed in a state of freedom, the names of the eligible candidates were thrown into a vessel called _seminario_, or, in modern times, into a wheel of fortune; and during the drawing of them it was customary for people to lay bets in regard to those who might be successful. That is to say, one chose the names of two or three _nobili_, for these only could be elected, and ventured upon them, according to pleasure, a piece of money; while, on the other hand, the opposite party, or the undertaker of the bank, who had the means of forming a pretty accurate conjecture in regard to the names that would be drawn, doubled the stakes several times. Afterwards the state itself undertook the bank for these bets, which was attended with so much advantage; and the drawing of the names was performed with great ceremony. The _venerabile_ was exposed, and high mass was celebrated, at which all the candidates were obliged to be present.

A member of the senate, named Benedetto Gentile, is said to have first introduced this lottery, in the year 1620; and it is added, that the name of Gentile having never been drawn, the people took it into their heads that he and his names had been carried away by the devil, in the same manner as Schwartz, the inventor of gunpowder, as a punishment for this unfortunate invention. But at length, the wheel being taken to pieces in order to be mended, the name, which by some accident had never been drawn, was found concealed in it. Hence it may be easily seen how this game of chance was formed, by introducing numbers instead of the names of the nobility.

However, if I am not mistaken, it continued to be peculiar to the Genoese till nearly the middle of the eighteenth century. But as all travellers spoke of this _lotto di Genoa_, and many wished to try their fortune in it, the Genoese, for their own benefit, established in many large towns commissioners, whose business was to dispose of tickets, and to pay the prizes to those who had been fortunate.

As an immoderate spirit of gambling was thus excited at Rome, Pope Benedict XIII., who sat on the papal throne from 1724 to 1730, forbade the Genoese lottery, under the pain of banishment to those who gambled in it, and to those who received the money. As this threat however did not remove the evil, the succeeding pope, Clement XII., who died in 1740, followed the example of our German princes, and caused a lottery to be established even at Rome. Since that time, permission for the same purpose has been renewed from year to year.

It was not till a much later period that the Genoese lottery was introduced into Germany. According to the account of J. A. Kalzabigi, who had made himself known in Italy by many projects, and was appointed a Prussian privy-counsellor of commerce and finance, the first was drawn at Berlin on the 31st of August 1763. In 1769, one was established in the principality of Anspach and Bayreuth, where it was continued till the year 1788. In 1774, a person named Wenceslaus Maurer came to Neufchatel, with permission from the king, and established a _Lotto_ there much against the will of the prudent inhabitants; but some one having won a capital prize, for which the undertakers ought to have paid 30,000 francs, after procrastinating as long as they could, under various pretences, they at length became bankrupts, and made their escape from the country.

These pernicious lotteries continued till the end of the eighteenth century, when they were almost everywhere abolished and forbidden. They are now permitted only in a very few states, which are not able to give up the paltry income derived from them. To the honour of the Hanoverian government, no _Lotto_ was ever introduced into it, though many foreigners have offered large sums for permission to cheat the people in this manner. Those who wish to see the prohibitions issued against the _Lotto_, after making a great part of the people lazy, indigent and thievish, may find them by the help of the index in Schlötzer’s Staats-Anzeigen.

Si son exécrable mémoire Parvient à la posterité, C’est que le crime, aussi bien que la gloire, Conduit à l’immortalité.

[The only lottery at present existing in England under the sanction of the government is the art-union of London. The first institution of this kind in Great Britain originated at Edinburgh in 1836, from the models existing in Prussia, formed under the patronage of the king and his minister Von Humboldt, about the year 1825. The money annually subscribed is expended in pictures, sculptures, &c. It is divided by the committee into several portions or prizes, from £10 to £400, and on a certain day the prizes are distributed among the subscribers in the ordinary way. The prize-holders are then allowed to select works of art to the value of their respective prizes from any of the five annual exhibitions of works of art in the metropolis for the current year. A portion of the total sum subscribed is set aside and applied to the purpose of engraving and printing some work of art, a copy of which is given to each subscriber. Hence, by the combination of a very large number of persons to subscribe for this one work of art, and the avoidance of risk, incidental expenses, and publisher’s profits, the print, though at least equal to what would be charged a guinea (the amount of subscription) in the ordinary course of trade, is supplied to the subscribers at so small a cost as to leave by far the greater part of the subscribed sum as a fund applicable to the purchase of prizes. Several similar associations have been since formed on a smaller scale in other parts of Great Britain.]

FOOTNOTES

[1023] And in Greek σύμβολα.

[1024] Many have written at considerable length on the _congiaria_, yet the difference between the _missilia_ and _tesseræ_ has not been sufficiently explained. The first, or at least the best account, is in Turnebi Adversaria, xxix. 9, p. 637. In a passage in the Life of Nero by Suetonius, xi. 11, p. 21, the articles which were thrown among the people are called _missilia_; but in regard to corn, the term _tesseræ_ is expressly named.

The passages where a description is given of the manner in which the _tesseræ_ were thrown out, are to be found in Dio Cassius. The wooden balls, like those of the Lotto, appear to have been hollow, and to have contained the ticket or written order. Those desirous of knowing how these _tesseræ_ were formed, and of what they were made, may consult Hugo de Prima Scribendi Origine, Traj. 1738, 8vo, cap. 15, p. 229.

[1025] Juven. Sat. vii. 174.

[1026] This abuse of lotteries was mentioned by the states of Wirtemberg, in the year 1764, among the public grievances; and in 1770 the duke promised that it should be abolished. I must here mention, to the honour of our prince and government (the author alludes to Hanover), that since lotteries were found necessary in this country, not a farthing of the profit has gone to the treasury of the prince, but the whole has been employed for pious or charitable purposes.

[1027] Recherches de la France. Paris, 1665, fol. viii. 49, p. 729.

[1028] This word is still used in Germany by the writers on Tontines; such, for example, as Michelsen.

[1029] Both the orders may be found in Traité de la Police, par De la Mare, Paris 1722, fol. i. pp. 502, 504.

[1030] The whole establishment is particularly described in Sauval, Histoire et Recherches des Antiquités de Paris, 1724, fol.

[1031] Sauval, pp. 71, 73, 76.

[1032] Dictionnaire de Commerce, par Savary. Art. _Lotterie_.

[1033] All the orders here quoted may be found in De la Mare. Those desirous of being fully acquainted with the nature of the first Parisian lotteries, and the method of drawing them, may consult Histoire de la Ville de Paris, par Felibien. Paris, 1725, fol. ii. p. 1462.

[1034] Christ. Longolii Epistolarum libri iv. Basiliæ, 1570, 8vo, iii. 33, p. 239. The letter is addressed to Octavius Grimoaldo, who lived, I think, at Venice, and had written, it seems, to Longolius, that he was unwilling to venture his money in the lottery. That Longolius had in his hands money belonging to Grimoaldo is proved by the letters iii. 3, iii. 7, 20. “That new kind of gambling is truly ours, and is called by us _Loteria_, as it were, a table-vessel (_vasculia_); doubtless from an arrangement of silver vessels appended to the gaming-table, which are distributed amongst those whose names are in the lottery, in such a manner that one vessel is assigned to each. But as you signify your disapproval of that kind of gaming, and do not think fit to expose my money to so much hazard, I acknowledge your prudence and kindness to me.” This derivation of the word _Loteria_ is undoubtedly false, as Menage has already remarked, in his dictionary, art. _Lot_. He there says, “Je n’ay point lu ailleurs que _lot_ signifiast _de la vaiselle_. Et je croy Longueuil s’est mal expliqué, et qu’il a voulu dire qu’on appelloit _Loterie_ la vaiselle d’argent d’un buffet, parceque de son tems on mettoit ordinairement à la loterie la vaiselle d’argent d’un buffet.”

[1035] Dier. Canicul. 1691, fol. tom. ii. colloq. 2.

[1036] See Du Cange, art. _Lot_. Muratori, Antiquit. Ital. Medii Ævi, ii. p. 1240. Among the oldest German words in Lipsii Epistolæ ad Belgas, Cent. 3, 44, p. 49, stands _Los_, sors. The _t_ is often changed into _s_. Thus _nut_ in the English and Low German, _noot_ in the Dutch, and _nöt_ in the Swedish, are the same as the German _nuss_.

[1037] The convenient machine and apparatus, by which the drawing is much forwarded at present, were not then known. A description of them may be found in Savary’s Diction. de Commerce.

[1038] Gent. Mag. xlviii. an. 1778, p. 470, from which I shall also transcribe the whole title of the scheme:--“A proposal for a very rich lottery general, without blanks, contayning a great number of good prizes, as well as of redy money as of plate, and certain sorts of merchandises, having been valued and prized by the commandment of the queen’s most excellent majesties order, to the intent that such commodities as may chance to arise thereof, after the charges borne, may be converted towards the reperations of the havens and strength of the realme, and towards such other public good workes. The number of lotts shall be foure hundred thousand, and no more; and every lott shall be the sum of tenne shillings sterling, and no more. To be filled by the feast of St. Bartholomew. The show of prises are to be seen in Cheapside, at the sign of the Queene’s Armes, the house of Mr. Dericke, goldsmith, servant to the queene, 1567, 8vo. Printed by Hen. Bynneman.” See also Maitland’s History of London, 1756, fol. i. p. 257.--Northouck’s History of London. Lond. 1773, 4to, p. 257.

[1039] Hist. of Commerce.

[1040] Commelin’s Amsterdam, i. p. 440. In the year 1561 the profit on a lottery was employed for enlarging the Orphan House. See Pontani Rerum Amst. Hist. 1611, fol. lib. ii. c. 2.

[1041] [Lotto does not consist, like the lottery, of a fixed number of tickets and a certain number of specified prizes, but is, in fact, a mere game of chance, at which the stakes are indefinite, and is thus played. A given quantity of numbers are placed together, of which a few are only to be drawn: the adventurers then select any one or more, on which they bet any sum they think proper; and, should they prove successful, they draw so much more than their stake, in a settled proportion, according as their risk was increased by the quantity of numbers which they named together. Thus the usual quantity is ninety numbers, from one upwards, and five only of these are drawn: if the adventurer chooses but _one_ number out of the 90, and that it be one of those drawn, his stake is returned fifteen fold; if _two_, he receives, if they be drawn, 270 times the stake; if _three_, 5500 times; if _four_, 75,000 times; and should he name the _entire five, in the exact order in which they happen to be drawn_, he is entitled to 1,000,000 times more than the stake he ventured. These chances are all calculated largely in favour of the banker or holder of the lotto, and there is no instance upon public record of any person having named the five numbers in regular succession; but three have been frequently fixed upon, and even four have been sometimes, though rarely, attained: by the latter chance, the lotto established in 1774 at Neufchatel was ruined.]

BOLOGNA STONE.

The Bologna stone, in consequence of its property of shining in the dark, which was observed by accident, has given rise to many laborious researches and experiments, and to writings almost without number, which have not so much enlarged our knowledge of light, as proved that all the hypotheses hitherto offered by philosophers for explaining it, if not entirely false, are at least insufficient and uncertain. The history of this stone, therefore, though not unknown, deserves to be here repeated, especially as many parts of it require to be rectified.

As a complete description of it would be superfluous to mineralogists, it may be sufficient to remark, that this kind of stone is found in plates or single pieces, which in general are more or less of a conical form, have a dirty white or semi-transparent water-colour, and a foliaceous structure, which is observed on its being broken, though the stone, considered in another direction, appears to be fibrous. The surface of single pieces is uneven. But what distinguishes this species from the gypseous spars, to which it bears the greatest resemblance, is its extraordinary weight; and this it has in common with all the varieties of heavy spar, to which, according to its component parts, it belongs.

This stone is found on different eminences around Bologna, and

## particularly on the hill of Paderno, which is situated at the distance

of about a German mile from the city, loose, and scattered about between gypseous stones, in a marly earth, some of which is still seen adhering to pieces in my possession. It is found most readily after heavy rains, particularly in the streams which run down the sides of the hill; and it is there collected by persons who sell it at Bologna. In the year 1730, when Keysler was there, a pound of it could be purchased for a _paolo_[1042].

I shall take this opportunity of remarking, that the Bologna stone, according to its external characteristics, heaviness and hardness excepted, has a great similarity to those gypseous spars or selenites which were first described by Lehman[1043], and at the time perhaps by him alone; according to whose account, it is mentioned also by Vogel[1044] and by Wallerius[1045], under the name of _Selenites globosus_: on the other hand, it has not been mentioned by modern mineralogists under any particular appellation. In the county of Mansfeld it is found in detached masses or single pieces, more or less conical; and, to judge from the earth purposely left on the specimens in my possession, which were picked up in the neighbourhood of Sangershausen, in a yellowish-red sandy clay. The pieces, many of which are round balls, two or three inches in diameter, and others longish rolls, have, externally as well as internally, a grayish colour, appear foliated on the fracture, or seem to consist of cuneiform radii, which meet in the centre of the ball. Many are hollow in the inside; and in this case the ends of the cunei or needles, which have between them a granulated gypsum mixed with a little clay, project into the cavity. Lehman says that the leaves, when placed in a heated stove, emit a hesperus, that is, shine; and this circumstance made Wallerius doubtful whether this selenite did not belong to the fluor-spars; but it is undoubtedly a sulphate of baryta. When the crude stone is put into acids, a very faint effervescence is sometimes observed, arising from foreign matters; but when burnt pieces are employed, this effect is much stronger. It does not crack or break in the fire; but if exposed only a short time to a red heat, it becomes totally opake, whiter, and void of all lustre; it is also more friable, and crumbles to dust in water, exactly in the same manner as bastard _lapis specularis_. The luminous appearance in a warm stove I did not observe in the few pieces which I subjected to experiment. I was desirous to make this remark, because the mineralogists before-mentioned place globular selenite along with the Bologna stone, to which however it does not belong.

To render it capable of shining in the dark, a piece particularly heavy, foliaceous and pure, must be selected[1046]. After being made red-hot, it is pounded and reduced to a fine powder, which, by means of a solution of gum-tragacanth, is converted into a kind of paste, and formed into small cakes. When these are dried, they are brought to a state of ignition between coals, and then suffered to cool; after which they are preserved from the air and moisture in a close vessel. If one of these cakes be exposed a few minutes to the light, and then carried into a dark place, it will shine like a burning coal. It appears therefore to attract the light, or to be as it were a light-magnet. This power of emitting light becomes lost in the course of time; but it may be restored at first by heating, and afterwards by exposure again to ignition. I shall pass over the rules necessary to be observed in the numerous experiments made with this stone, as well as the consequences deduced from them. The former may be found in works on chemistry, and the latter in those on natural philosophy.

All the Italian writers who first describe this remarkable phænomenon give the following account of the discovery. At the beginning of the seventeenth century there was at Bologna a shoemaker, who, having quitted his trade, applied himself to chemical labours, and

## particularly to the art of gold-making. I do not know whether those

who have made the very just remark, that many shoemakers go beyond their last into the province of other arts or sciences, have mentioned among the already numerous instances this shoemaker of Bologna, whose name was Vincentius Casciorolus; but he certainly deserves a niche in the temple of fame, because it may with truth be said of him, that he kindled up a light to the learned; whereas the shoemaker of Görlitz, Jacob Behmen, darkened or extinguished the existing light to the learned as well as the unlearned, so that the minds of many are still left in obscurity.

In the year 1602 Casciorolus came to Scipio Begatello of Bologna, who at that time was particularly well known by his attachment to the art of gold-making, and showed him this stone, under the mystical name of _lapis solaris_, which, on account of its weight and the sulphur it contained, as well as of its attracting the golden light of the sun, seemed to be fit for converting the more ignoble metals into gold, the _sol_ of the alchemists. He showed it also to J. A. Maginus, the professor of mathematics; and the latter, who in all probability was no adept, sent both the natural and prepared stones to princes and learned men, and perhaps contributed more than any other person to make known this singular discovery[1047].

It however appears as if the Italian chemists concealed the preparation of this stone, or were not all acquainted with it. It was always said to be a secret known only to a few individuals in Bologna. Misson, who was there in the year 1690, asserts that Bartholomew Zanichelli was the only person at that time in possession of it. In 1666 it was announced in the Philosophical Transactions[1048], that a clergyman, who exclusively possessed the art, had died, without communicating it to any one. Niceron[1049], Lemery[1050], and many others say, that Homberg, during his residence at Bologna, had again discovered it, after many experiments; and that Lemery learned it from him and made it publicly known.

This however cannot be altogether true; for in the year 1622, P. Potier, or Poterius, a French chemist, who lived at Bologna, taught the preparation of it in his work already quoted, as did Kircher[1051] in 1641, and the jesuit Casati[1052] in 1686; though the process then employed was indeed not the best or most convenient; the proper method being first found out, after many accurate experiments, by the German chemist Marggraf, who showed also how similar light-magnets or luminous stones can be prepared from most of the heavy spars and fluor-spars[1053].

But even at present, those who prepare this stone for sale at Bologna talk in such a manner as if the secret were known to them alone. This was the case, in 1771, with the director of the institute in that city[1054]. Keysler purchased a piece, as large as a dried fig pressed flat, for about two or three _paoli_.

I shall embrace this opportunity of bringing to recollection, from De Thou’s history of his own times, a relation which indeed contains many things incredible, and in all probability exaggerated, yet seems to be too well confirmed to be altogether rejected as false. If this be admitted, it may then be conjectured that, about the year 1550, either the Bologna stone, or what at present is called _phosphorus_ and _pyrophorus_, was known to a few individuals. In the above year, when Henry II. king of France made his solemn entrance into the town of Boulogne, on its restoration by the English, a stone from India, which was not hard, which had a luminous appearance like fire, and which could not be touched without danger, was presented to him by a stranger. For the truth of this account De Thou refers to the testimony of J. Pipin, in a letter to Ant. Mizaud, who asserts that he himself saw the stone. Morhof, who seems inclined to consider this stone as that of the philosophers[1055], remarks that this passage is found in the first Paris edition in octavo, and in the Frankfort re-impressions, both in folio and octavo; but not in the other editions. He quotes also the words from the letter to Mizaud, which must be printed somewhere, but in what work I do not know. It appears that the historian inserted it almost without any change.

[We may take this opportunity of describing one or two other pyrophori: thus Canton’s pyrophorus is prepared by heating a mixture of three parts of sifted calcined oyster-shells with one part of flowers of sulphur to an intense heat for one hour; Homberg’s, by mixing equal weights of alum and brown sugar, and stirring the mixture over the fire in an iron ladle until quite dry; it is then put into an earthenware or coated glass bottle and heated red-hot as long as a flame appears at the mouth; it is then removed, carefully stopped and suffered to cool. The black powder which it contains becomes glowing hot when exposed for a few minutes to the air.]

FOOTNOTES

[1042] [Several localities are now known for this peculiar variety of heavy spar; among others we may mention Amberg in the Upper Palatinate, and near Osterode in the Harz mountains.]

[1043] Geschichte von Flötz-Gebürgen. Berl. 1756, 8vo.

[1044] Mineral System. Leip. 1762, 8vo.

[1045] Syst. Mineral. 1772, 8vo, i. p. 162.

[1046] [In preparing solar phosphorus from the Bolognian stone, it should be carefully separated from any contamination of iron or other heavy metals, formed into a paste as above-described, and exposed to the heat of a wind-furnace for an hour or two.]

[1047] Fortunii Liceti Litheosphorus, sive de lapide Bononiensi. Utini 1640, 4to, p. 13. He calls the shoemaker _Casciorolus_, which seems to be wrong, as Lemery and others write his name _Cascariolo_. Licetus refers to the letters of Ovidio Montalbani. Epist. var. ad Eruditos viros de Rebus in Bononiensi tractu indigenus, ut est lapis Illuminabilis et lapis specularis, calamonastos, &c., Bonon. 1634, 4to. Among the oldest accounts are those in Petri Poterii Pharmacopœia spagyrica, ii. 27, in Opera, Fran. 1698, 4to. In this work the alchemist is called _Scipio Bagatellus_, a name which does not occur in Fantuzzi, Notizie degli scrittori Bolognesi.

[1048] An. 1666, n. 21, p. 375.

[1049] Mémoires des Hommes Illustres.

[1050] Cours de Chymie. Dresd. 1734, 8vo.

[1051] Magnes, p. 481.

[1052] De Igne. Franc. 1688, 4to, p. 350.

[1053] Marggrafs Chymische Schriften, ii. p. 119. This author says the cakes must be only as thick as the back of a knife; but that which I obtained in the year 1782 from Bologna, was an inch English measure in diameter, and two lines in thickness. It still weighs, after the brass box in which I long preserved it between cotton in a luminous state, has become black, and itself has lost its virtue, three drachms. In colour it has a perfect resemblance to the star which Marggraf prepared from German stones, and presented to Professor Hollman, and which is now in my possession. It is contained in a capsule of tin plate, over which a piece of glass is cemented.

[1054] Ferber’s Briefe aus Wälschland, p. 75.

[1055] Polyhist. i. 1, 13, 26, p. 127.

FOUNDLING HOSPITALS.

Child-murder is so unnatural a crime, that mankind can be brought to the commission of it only by the greatest desperation, for which unfortunately there is too much cause. To parents who are just able by incessant labour to procure those things indispensably necessary to support life, the birth of every child increases the fear of starving or of being reduced to beggary. Those who have secured to them a scanty subsistence, but who live amidst the torments of slavery, wish to the new-born child, which at any rate is doomed to death, a speedy dissolution, before it can know that it has had the misfortune to be brought into the world, in order that they may not bequeath to it their poverty. A young female who has acquired by education the most delicate sense of honour and shame, finds herself, on the birth of an illegitimate child, exposed at once to the utmost disgrace and contempt. Her misfortune, though viewed with an eye of pity by the compassionate, excites the hatred of the greater part of her relations and friends, by whom she was before loved and respected, and who endeavoured to render her happy; and often amidst the most poignant feelings, and an agitation bordering on madness, she sees no other means of saving her honour than the total concealment of her error by destroying the child: a resolution which, notwithstanding the vigilance of the laws, is too often attended with success. A young woman who at this moment finds herself suddenly despised and neglected by her admirer, who gained her affections by the most powerful of all means, love and confidence, and obtained from her what she can never recover, is often induced, in a fit of despair, to vent her fury on the consequences of her seduction--the child of her seducer.

These misfortunes of mankind are among the disadvantages attending civilised society, which always render marriage more difficult as well as burthensome, and thereby make it impossible to gratify one of the most powerful impulses of nature. In the savage state, parents require no more for themselves and their children than what they can easily obtain. The inhabitants of Terra del Fuego, who live at the greatest distance from all culture, find shell-fish and esculent plants sufficient to appease their hunger; never are their thoughts disturbed by care for the maintenance of a child. The black slaves in St. Domingo say, that “it is only the white man who begs;” and indeed in this they are right[1056]. Beggars exist only where they are established by religion and governments which command them to be fed. But the transition from living by one’s own industry to beggary is, in consequence of the shame attending it, most painful and insupportable to those who with the greatest exertion and waste of strength, amidst the privation of every comfort, are exposed with their children to the horrors of famine. On the other hand, to those who, in our states, are obliged to eat the bread of mendicity, children are a blessing; because as long as they are incapable of running alone, they increase their alms by exciting greater compassion, and afterwards by begging in the streets[1057].

It is not therefore poverty already reduced to the state of beggary, but the dread of being at length overwhelmed notwithstanding every exertion to swim against the stream, that occasions child-murder. The same is the effect of slavery, which excludes the possibility of even hoping for a change to a better condition. The serfs of a hard-hearted land-proprietor, who however acted according to the established laws, entered into a resolution to get no children, that they might not be under the necessity of putting any of them to death[1058]. The sense of honour becomes stronger the more the manners approach towards a certain degree of refinement; and it is proved that it is this cause which, in most instances, gives rise to child-murder. In vain have legislators endeavoured to prevent this crime by capital punishment, more cruel than the crime itself. But indeed it is difficult, or rather impossible, to proportion punishment to delinquency or the just degree of guilt.

It needs excite no wonder that many states where the Christian religion was not introduced, and even the Jewish, made no law against child-murder, though the atrocity of it was never denied[1059]. To render this crime less frequent, men fell upon the way of exposing children, in the hope that they might be found by benevolent persons, who would educate and maintain them. Parents imagined that in this manner less violence was offered to humanity, and they could more easily be induced to resign their children to chance than to become their murderers. They consoled themselves with the possibility, proved by various examples, that the exposed children might be saved, and be more fortunate than their parents[1060]. To promote this, they deposited them in places where a great many people might be expected soon to pass, and where the child would consequently be found before it should perish by cold and hunger or be devoured by ravenous animals.

With this view they made choice of the market-places, temples, places where two or more highways met, wells, the banks of rivers or the sea-shore, from which water was brought or which were the usual places of bathing; and even, when the children were placed in the water, means were contrived that they should at any rate float some time without being injured. For this purpose they were placed in small chests, trays, or close baskets, or wrapped up in waterproof bandages[1061]. At Athens children were commonly exposed in that place called _cynosarges_, which was one of the _gymnasia_. At Rome the most usual place was that pillar called _columna lactaria_, which stood in the market where kitchen vegetables were sold[1062].

When the exposure of children in civilised states began to be condemned as unlawful, it was however suffered to pass unpunished, even under the first Christian emperors. Legislators only endeavoured by regulations of every kind to render it less common, and to provide for the maintenance of children; until at last, through horror at the cruelty of it, but without thinking of the causes or attempting to remove them, they conceived the unfortunate idea, in order to guard against this crime, of declaring it to be murder, and punishing it as such. It became then much safer for parents to bury children, or to throw them into the sea, than to run the chance of exposing themselves to the utmost shame and punishment, when they were searched out and discovered. In Greece, but not at Thebes in Bœotia[1063], the exposure of children was permitted and common, and therefore many of the Greek historians mention the contrary as a foreign but meritorious custom. Strabo[1064], on this account, praises the Egyptians, and Ælian[1065] extols the laws of the Thebans against the killing and exposing of children. This cruel practice was equally common at Rome. Romulus however, who was himself a foundling, endeavoured to restrain it, and his order was confirmed in the twelve tables; but as population, luxury, scarcity, and dissipation increased, it became customary for those who had more children than they wished, to expose some of them. Many deposited with them rings and other costly ornaments; and those who were poorer, trinkets of little value, partly to entice people to receive the children, and partly that, by describing these appendages, when the children were grown up, or their own circumstances had become better, they might be able to recover them.

Even at present, in many places, the children carried to foundling hospitals are accompanied by tokens, which are carefully preserved, as is the case in the Spedale degl’ Innocenti at Florence, where a piece of lead imprinted with a number is hung round the neck of each babe, in such a manner that it cannot be easily removed, and occasions no inconvenience in the wearing. By these means one can obtain information there, even at a late period, in regard to each child[1066].

It is mentioned by Tacitus[1067], as a circumstance deviating from the Roman manners, that the old Germans considered child-murder as a crime; and where he speaks of the peculiarities of the Jews, he does not fail to relate the same thing of them[1068]. Dionysius of Halicarnassus bestows the like praise on the Aborigines[1069].

When the morals of mankind began to be improved under the influence of Christianity, its followers endeavoured by every means in their power to banish from among them this cruelty, on account of which they so bitterly reproached the Romans[1070]. The first Christian emperors, however, did not venture to forbid it as a crime; though Constantine called exposure a kind of murder, and wisely exerted himself to remove the causes of it. By an order issued in the year 331, he endeavoured to deter parents from it, as he there deprived them of all hope of being able to claim or recover exposed children, even if they should make good the expenses incurred by those who had maintained them[1071]. This cruel practice was nevertheless continued for a long time after. Lactantius[1072], who lived under the reign of Constantine, describes it as a still prevailing remnant of barbarity; and Julius Firmicus, who wrote about the year 336, considered it worth his while to give

## particular instructions for casting the nativity of foundlings[1073].

The exposure of children was not completely prohibited till the time of Valentinian, Valens and Gratian, in the last half of the fourth century[1074].

One cannot, without reluctance, believe that this barbarous practice was so long permitted, or remained unpunished, in civilised states; but it must be mentioned, to the honour of antiquity, that in many countries the care of government was directed at an early period to exposed children. Not only were means pursued in Greece and Rome to encourage the reception and educating of foundlings, by assigning them as property to those who took them under their protection; but it was also made a law, that foundlings who were not received by private persons should be educated at the public expense. At Thebes, where, as already observed, child-murder and the exposure of children were forbidden, parents in needy circumstances were desired to carry their new-born children to the government, and the latter committed them into the hands of those who engaged to take the best care of them for the least money. In the like manner, at present, foundlings are placed with nurses to be maintained at the cheapest rate; but with this difference, that at Thebes the children became slaves for life to those by whom they were educated, whereas in our times, when they grow up they are free people and learn to gain a livelihood for themselves.

The humane decrees of the emperor Constantine the Great, both for Italy and Africa, the first in the year 315, and the second in 322, deserve here to be mentioned. The governments in those countries were enjoined to prevent the murder, sale, giving in pawn, or the exposure of children, by taking care that parents who were too poor to educate their offspring, should receive from the public treasury or magazines, or from the emperor’s privy purse, as we say at present, food, clothing and other necessaries; and as new-born children required immediate attention, that this should be done without any delay[1075].

The conjecture of Gothofredus, that the emperor was induced to adopt these measures by the urgent representation of Lactantius, appears to me highly probable. This writer, from the year 317, had been tutor to prince Crispus, and had before dedicated or transmitted to the emperor his book, wherein he painted, in glowing colours, the detestable practice of parents then prevalent, which gave rise to the greatest disorders; and on that account he offered them the specious advice not to beget more children than they were able to maintain. I am inclined to think that this advice did not much please the emperor, who was obliged to keep on foot a numerous army; and as it could not be very agreeable to many married persons, he comprehended this recommendation of prudence or moderation among those calamities from which he was desirous to preserve parents by the above decrees.

After these imperial orders, children remained with their parents, and were educated by them; but it appears that the cities of Athens and Rome had, at an early period, public orphan-houses, in which children were educated at the public expense. What has been already said of the gymnasium called _cynosarges_ may serve as a proof; and Festus and Victor make it still more certain that there was an institution of this kind at the _columna lactaria_. At any rate there can be no doubt that, in the sixth century, there were houses at Rome for the reception of deserted children.

The emperor Justinian, who by a particular law, in the year 529, declared foundlings to be free, and forbade those by whom they were received and educated to treat them and detain them as slaves[1076], often introduces these establishments, under the appellation of _brephotrophium_, in his laws respecting donations to churches and other beneficent institutions[1077]. This word, composed of the Greek term _brephos_ a child, and _trepho_ to educate, seems to show that houses of this kind were established at an earlier period in the cities of Greece, and were only imitated at Rome; though of this I have as yet found no proof. Du Cange and Stephen have both introduced the word in their Greek dictionaries, but refer only to the Justinian code. Gesner, in Stephen’s lexicon, makes a distinction between _brephotrophium_ and _curotrophium_; the latter, it is said, means a house in which grown-up and not new-born children are educated, and the same thing is repeated in the same words in Calvini Lexicon Juridicum. Both assert that this word, formed from κοῦρος or κόρος, _puer_, is used by Justinian, but does not occur in the book of laws, nor is used by Brisson. It is not to be found in the dictionary of Basle nor in Stephen’s Greek Lexicon, but both these have the word κουροτρόφος, which indeed occurs in Homer and in Hesiod. As Calvin and Gesner refer to Hottoman, I am inclined to think that the word was coined by him, especially as Gesner in the Thesaurus of Faber says, “Curotrophium _potest dici_ domus alendis parvulis destinata.”

It is rather astonishing that no mention of the oldest institutions of this kind, or of their establishment, is to be found in the works of the ancients. There is reason however to conjecture, that as long as the sale of children and the slavery of foundlings were permitted, the number of those maintained at the public expense could not be very great. But respecting the _brephotrophia_, even under the later Christian emperors, nothing is said to be found that can give us any idea of the manner in which they were regulated; nothing in regard to the place from which the nurses were procured, or how food and clothing were provided for the children, and as little in regard to the number of children reared in these benevolent institutions who lived to become old.

It might be satisfactory to know, whether the oldest institutions of this kind were more fortunate in answering the object of their establishment than our expensive orphan-houses are at present.

The great difficulties which attend institutions of this kind are, no doubt, the chief cause why mention of them so seldom occurs during the later centuries, in which the foundation of hospitals, and donations to these and other pious establishments, were so numerous; they are however found so often, that it is impossible to consider them as an invention of modern times. I shall here point out those instances which have hitherto occurred to me; but must first observe, that many more will be found in perusing the lives of saints, and the history of convents, religious orders, churches and towns. Wherever they are mentioned, they are always under the inspection of the clergy.

The oldest establishment for orphans in Germany, which I can mention at present, is that at Triers, in the eighth, or seventh, or even sixth century; the account of it is to be found in the life of St. Goar, who lived at Triers under Childebert, consequently in the last half of the sixth century. His historians or panegyrists relate that, being accused before archbishop Rusticus of many misdemeanours, as a proof of his innocence he hung up his hood upon one of the sun’s rays, which entered his cell, as if upon a nail, and that his enemies were still so incredulous as to consider him guilty. The archbishop then, continue they, to whom a new-born child, which had been deposited in the marble conch before the church-door, had been brought, asked him, as a proof of his sanctity, whether he could tell the father of it; upon which Goar, after a most fervent prayer, commanded the child, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, to declare who were its parents. The child, with a clear voice, immediately named its mother, and also its father, the archbishop himself, who in consequence was deprived of his dignity[1078].

The small portion of truth contained in this ridiculous story is, that, at the time when the author wrote, there was an establishment for foundlings at the church of Triers; that the children were deposited in a marble conch placed before the church; that they were received by poor people maintained in order to watch the church, and who were called _matricarii_, because they were matriculated in it, and by them carried immediately to the bishop, and that the child under his sanction was given to some person in the community who agreed to take care of it. These foster-parents were named _nutricarii_. It may be thence easily perceived, that there were then no orphan-houses properly so called, in which children are educated; but that the children, as is the case in our institutions for the poor, were given to others to be nursed, and in all probability the clergy paid to the _nutricarii_ a certain sum from the alms destined for that purpose.

One of the lives which relates to the silly tale already mentioned was written by an author who, according to the opinion of Mabillon, lived at a period not much later than St. Goar. The other is by Wandelbart, who lived in the ninth century, and who refers for his authorities to old manuscripts and other documents, _vetusta et perantiqua exemplaria_. It may therefore with safety be asserted, that this establishment for foundlings existed at Triers in the eighth century. The annalists of Triers, indeed, do not mention any bishop named Rusticus who lived about that period; but no doubt needs be excited on that account, as this difficulty may be solved in more ways than one[1079].

In the seventh century there were similar establishments at Anjou, or Angers, in France. St. Magnebodus, who was bishop of that place, where he died, and was buried in the church called at present Saint Mainbeuf, is praised in a very old life of him, never yet printed, for having caused several houses for the rearing of children to be erected[1080].

In the following century, that is about the year 787, an arch-priest named Datheus, established at Milan, at his own expense, a foundling hospital, in order to put a stop to the crime of child-murder, which had been introduced, and of which he gives a very affecting account in the letter of foundation. With this view he purchased a house near the church, and issued an order that the foundlings (_jactati_) should be suckled in it by hired nurses, and educated for seven years. They were to be taught some handicraft; to be supplied in the establishment with food, clothing and shoes, and at the age of seven to be discharged as free-born[1081]. It deserves to be remarked, that the mothers of children carried to such establishments strewed salt between the swaddling-clothes, when they wished to announce that the child had not been baptized. This perhaps had a reference to the circumstance of new-born children being washed in salt water; but I conjecture that the salt thus interspersed was meant to denote that the child had not been washed, and much less baptized.

In the capitulary of Charlemagne we meet with all the _loci venerabiles_ of the Justinian code: _xenodochium_, _ptochotrophium_, _nosocomium_, _orphanotrophium_[1082], _gerontocomium_, and also _brephotrophium_[1083]. But at that time, at least among the Franks, the foundlings belonged to those by whom they had been received and educated, unless they were demanded back by their parents or relations within ten days[1084]. It is not improbable that the same practice prevailed at this time in other countries; and perhaps the founder of the foundling hospital at Milan, on this account, declared so expressly that the children, when they grew up, were to be discharged from the institution, as persons born free.

In the year 1168, St. Galdinus, cardinal and archbishop of Milan, exercised great severity against heretics; but took particular care of the poor, who believed what he taught; namely, that the hospital there considered itself obliged, not only to receive the sick, but also such children as might be exposed in the city, and to provide them with food and clothing[1085].

In 1070 Olivier de la Trau founded at Montpellier an order, the members of which called themselves _hospitalarii_, sive _spiritus_. They entered into an engagement to take care of the poor as soon as possible, and to provide for the maintenance and education of foundlings and orphans. In the course of a little time they spread themselves into different countries; and wherever they went, the effects of their benevolent vow are still to be found. Some say that the institution for foundlings, or the Hospital of the Holy Ghost, at Montpellier, was established in the year 1180. In 1201 they settled at Rome, and, according to the testimony of historians, formed there an establishment of the same kind, after they had been confirmed by Pope Innocent III., in the year 1198, and obtained for that purpose an elegant mansion, fitted up in the best manner. In the papal bulls mention is made of many convents founded by this order; and I am inclined to think that those who might take the trouble to examine thoroughly the confused history of these hospitallers, or of this order of the Holy Ghost, and of the still existing hospitals distinguished by that title, would find much information in regard to this subject. I call the history confused, because there have been many kinds of hospitallers and similar orders, and these have often been confounded with each other[1086].

Our neighbourhood had similar establishments at an early period. At any rate there was one of this kind at Einbeck, before the year 1274, that is to say, an hospital of the Holy Ghost. It began to be built by duke Albert, who brought Einbeck to the house of Brunswick, when it submitted to him in 1272, in order to get rid of the importunity of count von Dassel. Alms were collected for its establishment and maintenance; and to promote these, the council issued recommendations, or letters-patent, in which it was expressly stated, that not only the indigent, and among these foreigners, were received into their hospital, but also orphans and foundlings, who were maintained and educated till they grew up. Such recommendations were from time to time repeated, for one still exists of the year 1300, which is a literal transcript of that issued in 1274. I do not believe that the hospital at Einbeck was established by the order before-mentioned; at any rate, hospitals of the Holy Ghost occur chiefly in the twelfth and two following centuries; and were founded, not by hospitallers, but established perhaps upon their model.

In this manner a rich citizen of Nuremberg, Conrad Heinz, surnamed _der Grosse_, founded the hospital of the Holy Ghost, in 1331. It began to be built in 1333, and was completed in 1341. Neither in the letter of foundation, however, nor in the confirmation, are foundlings

## particularly named; but it may be readily seen that this institution

received poor pregnant women, and educated the children which were either born in it or admitted into it. In the like manner pregnant females, both married and unmarried, and also foundlings, are received into the hospital of St. John, at Turin. The founder of the house at Nuremberg made it a rule, that the day of the birth or reception of each child should be written down, in order that the expense incurred by it might be known, in case it should ever be able and inclined to repay it[1087].

The magnificent foundling hospital at Florence, called at present _Spedale degl’ Innocenti_, was founded in 1316, by one Pollini. There can be little doubt that this is the same establishment for which the well-known Camaldule monk, Ambrosius, often mentioned under his family name Traversari, solicited support from the pope, in the beginning of the fifteenth century. He boasts that the foundlings received by this institution, which he calls _brephotrophium_, were first given to nurses to be suckled, and then admitted into the house and instructed. Girls fit for marriage were furnished with a portion. Citizens also were accustomed to send their children to be educated in the school of this hospital[1088].

L’Hopital du S. Esprit, at Paris, is said to have been founded in 1362, and various persons out of compassion for the exposed children contributed the money necessary to its support. A brotherhood, called la Confrairie du S. Esprit, established to conduct the affairs of the institution, was confirmed the same year by pope Urban V.

Paris, however, from time to time obtained more institutions of this kind. In the year 1638 a widow devoted her house to this purpose, and on that account it was called la Maison de la Couche, a name still given to the foundling hospital at the church of Notre Dame. But it was soon found necessary to abandon this well-meant institution, in consequence of the shameful abuses which had crept into it. The nurses often sold the children to beggars, who distorted or mutilated their limbs, in order that they might excite more compassion, and thereby obtain greater alms. Many were purchased also for magical purposes. The price for each was twenty sous.

St. Vincent de Paule, of the congregation St. Lazare, founded, in 1640, a new institution, which in 1670 was transferred to the street Notre Dame. It obtained new improvements by the chancellor Etienne d’Aligre and his lady Elizabeth Luillier. At present this house is known under the name l’Hopital des Enfans Trouvés, or de Notre Dame de la Misericorde.

That an institution for foundlings at Venice, named before the destruction of the republic Della Pietá, was established in 1380, by a Franciscan named Petruccio, I have somewhere read, but in what author I do not at present remember.

In England a proposal for a similar institution was made so early as 1687; but the present foundling hospital was not established till the year 1739[1089]. I shall not however enlarge further on the modern institutions of this kind: my object was to show that they are by no means a new invention, and that they have been continued from the oldest periods to the present time through all ages, and even in those which we are accustomed to call barbarous.

In our times most of the foundling hospitals have been suffered to fall to decay; chiefly because, to answer the benevolent purpose for which they are intended, they would require to be on a larger scale and better supported than it is possible for them to be at present; also because they do not entirely prevent child-murder, as they are not capable of completely removing the causes of it. After the establishment of the foundling institution at Cassel, not a year passed without some children being found murdered, either in that place or its neighbourhood. To this may be added also, that it is impossible with the utmost exertion to provide sound nurses for the continually increasing number of children brought in, and to ensure to them sufficient attention.

From the year 1763 to the end of 1781 the number of children brought into the foundling hospital at Cassel amounted to 740, of whom no more than eighty-eight remained alive at the end of the latter year. More than one half of them died under the age of eight, and scarcely ten attained to their fourteenth year. In Paris, in the year 1790, more than 23,000, and in 1800 about 62,000 children were brought in[1090]. In 1790, of the children which had been brought in between 1774 and that period, 15,000 only were alive; and it is estimated that 11/13 of all the children brought in perish annually through hunger or neglect. Of 100 foundlings in the foundling hospital at Vienna, 54½ died in the year 1789. In 1797, the nurses in the foundling hospital at Metz had for fourteen months received no wages, and calculation showed that 7/8ths of the whole children perished. In an institution of this kind, in a certain German principality, only one of the foundlings in twenty years attained to manhood, and yet the establishment had cost the country annually 20,000 dollars at least. The education of no German prince ever cost so much.

The case with foundling hospitals is the same as with the artificial breeding of fowls; it is easy to obtain chickens, but for want of maternal feeding and care it is almost impossible to rear them. Of what use then is it to collect chickens?

FOOTNOTES

[1056] The negroes in St. Domingo cannot bear to be thought poor, or to be called beggars. They say none but white men beg; and when any one asks alms at the door, they observe to their master, “There is a poor white man, or a poor Frenchman, begging.” Labat had a negro who gave away a small part of his property, merely that he might have the proud satisfaction of being able to say, “There, white man; there is an alms for you.” But, in all probability, there will be beggars even in St. Domingo, if the negroes are so fortunate as to establish the freedom which they have obtained at the expense of so much blood, and to form a negro state.

[1057] During a great scarcity at Hamburgh, when bread was distributed to the poor, one woman told another, to whose request no attention had been paid, that she brought her child with her, and pinching it so as to make it cry, excited compassion and by these means received bread. The latter begged the other to lend her the child for the like purpose, and having made it cry obtained bread also; but when she returned and wished to restore the child with thanks, the mother was not to be found, and therefore she was obliged to keep the child.

[1058] In the course of nine years not a single individual announced an intention of marrying. The young people supplied their wants in another manner. Hence arose a scarcity of men, who cannot be purchased in Europe, as in the West Indies. The proprietor, therefore, was obliged to sell his estate. The purchaser improved the condition of his serfs, and marriages became common among them. See Büsch vom Geld-umlauf. vi. 3. § 35, p. 393. “La dureté du gouvernement peut aller jusqu’à detruire les sentimens naturels, par les sentimens naturels mêmes. Les femmes de l’Amerique ne se faisoient-elles pas avorter, pour que leurs enfans n’eussent pas des maîtres aussi cruels?”--Montesquieu, Esprit des Loix. Amst. 1758, 12mo, ii. p. 402.

[1059] See an Enquiry by Michaelis, why Moses did not introduce into his laws anything in regard to child-murder.

[1060] The cause of children being exposed in this manner has been assigned and ably examined by Lactantius, vi. 20, 21; from whose remarks one will readily comprehend how parents could be so hard-hearted.

[1061] Many preparations for this purpose may be seen quoted in Hofmanni Lexicon Universale: art. Exponendi mos.

[1062] Pomp. Festus de Verb. Signif. p. 203.

[1063] Aristot. Polit. vii. 16.

[1064] Lib. xvii.

[1065] Variæ Histor. ii. 7.

[1066] Such appendages or tokens were called crepundia. Instances of their use may be found in Heliodor. Æthiop. iv. 7., also in many comedies.

[1067] De Mor. Germ. cap. 19.

[1068] Histor. v. 5.

[1069] Lib. i. cap. 16.

[1070] Minucii Felicis Octav. xxx. xxxi.

[1071] Cod. Theodos. lib. v. tit. 7, De Expositis, l. 1, p. 487, edit. Ritteri, where the whole has been proved and illustrated by Gothofredus.

[1072] Lactant. vi. 20, 21.

[1073] Astronom. lib. vii. c. 1. I shall refer those desirous of becoming acquainted with all the proofs belonging to this subject to Ger. Noot, Opera Omnia, Col. 1732, fol. p. 493. The observations on Minucius Felix, pp. 307 and 326, in the beautiful edition Lugd. Bat. 1709, 8vo, deserve in particular to be read.

[1074] Cod. Justin. lib. iv. tit. 52.

[1075] Codex. Theodos. lib. xi. tit. 27.

[1076] Cod. lib. viii. tit. De Infant. Expos. l. 3.

[1077] Cod. lib. i. tit. 2, De Sacrosanctis Eccles. 19, p. 19: “Si quis vero donationes usque ad 500 solidos in quibuscunque rebus fecerit, vel in sanctam ecclesiam, vel in xenodochium, vel in nosocomium, vel orphanotrophium, vel in ptochotrophium, vel in gerontocomium, vel in brephotrophium, vel in ipsos pauperes, vel in quamcunque civitatem; istæ donationes”.... The same names are repeated in the law 23 immediately following; also in Novell. Collat. 8, tit. 12, cap. 1, p. 219, and Coll. 9, tit. 3, cap. 1, p. 245. Here not only foundling hospitals, but poor-houses in particular, are mentioned. The former are named also in Cod. lib. 1, tit. 3, De Episc. et Clericis, l. 32, p. 32, and in the same l. 42, 5 and 9; likewise l. 46, 1.

[1078] The life of St. Goar is to be found in Acta Sanctorum, Jul. 2, pp. 327-346; also in Mabillon’s Acta Sanctorum Ordinis S. Benedicti, Venetiis, 1733, fol. p. 266; but at page 273 of Mabillon there is another life by Wandelbart, in which the story is fuller and more circumstantial.

[1079] Meusel’s Geschichtforscher, iv. p. 232.

[1080] Du Cange, under the word _brephotrophium_, has quoted the passage.

[1081] Muratori has printed the letter of foundation in Antiq. Ital. Medii Ævi, t. iii. p. 587.

[1082] “In quo parentibus orbati pueri pascuntur.” These orphan-houses then were expressly distinguished from the foundling hospitals.

[1083] Baluzii Capitularia Reg. Franc. i. p. 747; Capit. lib. ii. 29.

[1084] In the Capitulare, composed about the year 744, in Baluz. p. 151.

[1085] See Muratori Antiq. Ital. Medii Ævi, iii. p. 591.

[1086] See Greg. Rivii Monastica Historia Occidentis. Lips. 1737, 8vo cap. 34. The name of the author was Lauterbach.

[1087] The documents may be found in Von Murr Beschreibung der Merkw. in Nürnberg, 1801, 8vo.

[1088] Martenne, Vet. Script. amplis. Collectio. Paris, 1724, fol. iii. p. 15.

[1089] [The foundling hospital of London was founded in the year 1739, by charter of king George II., on the petition of captain Thomas Coram, and the memorial of sundry persons of quality and distinction. It maintains and educates 500 children, from extreme infancy to a period of life when they are capable of being placed out in the world. Illegitimate children are the objects of this hospital. The child must be under twelve months old when offered for admission, and the committee require to be satisfied of the previous good character and present necessity of the mother, and that the father has deserted both mother and infant; and that the reception of the infant will, in all probability, be the means of replacing the mother in the course of virtue and the way of an honest livelihood.]

[1090] [The number of illegitimate births in France is truly fearful. In 1831 there were 71,411, about 1-13th of the total number of births; in Paris the proportion is still larger, being about one in every three births!--Penny Cyclopædia.]

ORPHAN HOUSES.

As so ancient proofs are found of public attention paid to foundlings, it may be readily supposed that in well-regulated states care was employed at an early period to provide also for the maintenance and education of orphans. There is reason to believe that this was the case at Thebes, which took under its protection the children of all poor parents. Solon made a law, that children whose fathers had fallen in the defence of their country should be educated at the expense and under the inspection of government[1091]. The same thing was customary among the Iasei, who inhabited an island on the western coast of Caria[1092].

At Rome children maintained at the public expense were called _pueri alimentarii_, and _puellæ alimentariæ_[1093].

The emperor Trajan was the first who formed large establishments for this purpose; and the children maintained in them were called, from his family name, _pueri Ulpiani_. Pliny relates in his panegyric, that he had caused five thousand free-born children to be sought out and educated. It is more than probable that he suffered them to remain with their parents, and that those who were unable to educate them themselves, received a monthly or annual allowance in corn or money. Orphans perhaps were given out to board at a certain fixed sum. It deserves to be remarked, that the emperor in this manner might afford assistance, not only to such as were depressed by poverty, but also to persons of distinction who were not able, according as we say at present, to support their families in a manner suitable to their rank. To have an offspring therefore was not a misfortune, but rather a blessing. Children were begotten in order that the parents might take advantage of this beneficence, as some people build houses that they may obtain the offered premium; and the large capitals required were not taken from the public treasury, but from the emperor’s own privy purse. That these establishments might exist after his death, the money in different parts destined for their support was laid out on land, which produced a perpetual income. This is shown by a letter of foundation for the town of Veleia[1094], which is still extant.

In the year 1747, some peasants while ploughing in the neighbourhood of Placentia found, together with several other antiquities, a copper-plate five and a half feet in height and ten and a half in breadth, which weighed 600 pounds. They broke it in great haste, because they expected to find under it a treasure, and sold the pieces as old copper. One of these having fallen into the hands of the learned count Giovanni Roncovieri, he remarked that it contained a part of a public document belonging to the reign of Trajan. With much trouble and at considerable expense he at length collected all the pieces, the possessors of which, on account of the eagerness shown to obtain them, expected for them a high price, and thus was the means of saving one of the most beautiful monuments of antiquity, a complete document in regard to the imperial establishment for the community of Valeia[1095]. The inscription forms six hundred and seventy lines, and is divided into seven columns, over which stands the following title: “Obligatio. praediorum. ob. H--S. deciens. quadraginta. quatuor. milia. vt. ex. indulgentia. optimi maximique. principis. imp. caes. Nervae. Trajani. Aug. Germanici. Dacici. pueri. puellaeque. alimenta. accipiant. legitimi. n. CCXLV. in. singulos H--S. XVI. n. f. H--S XLVII. XL n. legitimae. n. XXXIV. sing. H--S. XII. n. f. H--S. IV. DCCCXCVI. spurius I. H--S. CXLIV. spuria. I. H--S. CXX. summa. H--S. LIICC. quae. sit vsura 55 5 55 sortis. supra. scriptae.”

Trajan therefore laid out a capital of 1,044,000 sesterces at five per cent. interest on forty-six farms around Valeia, which town or community was destined for this establishment. These farms formed the mortgage, and on that account are particularly named, together with the sum for which they were security. The annual interest amounted to 52,200 sesterces. Of this sum 245 boys born in wedlock received monthly sixteen sesterces each, which in a year makes 47,040; and 34 girls of the same description twelve sesterces monthly, making in a year 4896 sesterces. Besides these, one illegitimate male child received yearly 144 sesterces, and one illegitimate female child 120 sesterces. These different sums amounted exactly to the interest of the capital laid out.

It is hardly worth while to reduce these sums to our present currency. For even if we should calculate how many pounds or shillings the silver contained in 1,044,000 sesterces would make, this result would not give us the real value, because we have no standard by which the relative value can be determined; that is to say, it is not known what proportion silver and copper bore in those periods to the prices of the necessaries of life. The price of grain proposed by Unger as a standard, can be employed only for later times, when corn began to be a more general article of trade.

However, Trajan’s capital, according to our money at present, makes about 54,375 dollars, and the sum of the interest 2718 dollars; consequently a legitimate male child obtained yearly ten dollars, and a legitimate female child between seven and eight dollars. Such is the calculation made from the principles laid down in Romé de l’Isle’s Metrology by Professor Hegewisch, who has endeavoured also to compare some pieces in the time of Trajan with those at present.

It appears, therefore, that among 300 children the emperor admitted only two illegitimate; and Professor Hegewisch is inclined to believe that this was the actual proportion at that time; which indeed would induce one to form a very favourable opinion of the state of public morals, under the reign of Trajan, in the district above named.

That it was then customary to pay interest, salaries, and pensions, not annually but monthly, is known from other sources of information. The case was the same in regard to the distribution of corn (_frumentatio_), as is proved by a passage in Dionysius of Halicarnassus[1096], and when money was bequeathed in perpetuity for benevolent purposes by any person’s will[1097].

Muratori is of opinion that these pensions were paid to boys till they arrived at the age of eighteen, and to girls till they attained to that of fourteen; and for a proof he refers to an order of Adrian, confirmed by the emperor Alexander Severus[1098]. At the above age the males could become soldiers and gain their pay; and girls of fourteen were fit either to be given in marriage, or to be employed in such a way as to obtain a livelihood by their industry. That the emperor, in forming this establishment, had an eye to recruits for the army, appears probable from a passage in Pliny[1099]; and the example of Trajan induced rich private individuals during his life-time, and afterwards many of his successors, to form similar establishments for the like purpose. The same plate was destined also to eternise the bequest of one Cornelius, according to which 3600 sesterces, or about 187 dollars, being the interest of 72,000 sesterces, or 3750 dollars, were to be employed in maintaining eighteen legitimate male children, and one legitimate female child, at the rate before-mentioned. Pliny even, the panegyrist of Trajan, founded from his own property pensions for the free-born children of poor parents; a circumstance which he does not forget to mention in his letters, and the same thing is confirmed by an inscription still extant[1100]. Antoninus Pius made a similar establishment for poor girls, which after his consort were called _puellæ Faustinianæ_[1101]. The emperor Antoninus Philosophus did the same thing; and from the name of the empress the girls were called _Faustinianæ_, but by way of distinction _novæ puellæ Faustinianæ_[1102]. Alexander Severus formed an institution for the education of boys and girls, whom he caused to be named from his mother _mammæani_ and _mammæanæ_[1103].

In regard to the manner in which these establishments were managed we are entirely ignorant. It is known only, that in each of the provinces into which Italy was divided, there was a public functionary of some rank, with the title _procurator ad alimenta_, to whom, in all probability, the inspection of them was entrusted. This is known to have been an honourable office. It was held by the emperor Pertinax when a young man, in the towns and villages on the Via Ancilia, and in his old age at Rome itself[1104]. It was held also by Didius Julianus before he became emperor, after he had been prætor and consul, that is, enjoyed the highest offices next to the imperial dignity, and after he had been governor of Germany[1105]. On ancient monuments erected to the memory of persons of distinction, by their children, relations or friends, it is mentioned, that, besides filling other places of honour, they had been _procuratores ad alimenta_ in certain districts there named.

These are the oldest instances, with which I am at present acquainted, of institutions for the benefit of poor children and orphans. Orphan-houses, properly so called, in which the children were educated together, I find mentioned for the first time, under the name of _orphanotrophium_, in the laws of the emperor Justinian. At later periods they occur frequently in the decrees of the different councils, such as that of Chalcedon in the fifth century. At the court of Byzantium the office of inspector of orphans, _orphanotrophi_, was so honourable and important, that it was filled by a brother of the emperor Michael IV. (Paphlago), in the beginning of the eleventh century[1106]. But under the latter emperors this place was entirely suppressed.

At present, orphan-houses have been abolished, since it has been shown, by many years’ experience, that the children cannot be educated in them healthy and at a sufficiently cheap rate. The children are placed out to be boarded and educated by individuals, under the inspection of those who manage everything relating to the poor.

FOOTNOTES

[1091] Diogen. Laert. i. § 55, and the observation of Menage. This law is praised by Plato in Menexenus, and by Demosthenes, adversus Macartatum.

[1092] Heraclides de Politiis, added to the addition of Aristot. Politic. Heinsii, Lugd. Bat. 1621, 8vo, p. 1004.

[1093] Mention is made of them several times in the Roman code of laws, L. 8, § 9, et § 24, D. de Transact. L. pen. § 1, D. ad leg. Falcid. See also Ælii Spart. Vita Adriani, c. 7.--Æl. Capitolin. Vita Antonini. P. cap. 8.--Vita Pertin. c. 9, p. 555.--Æl. Lamprid. Vita Alexandri Severi, c. 44, p. 995.

[1094] This city was situated at no great distance from Piacenza (Placentia). It is mentioned by Horace, Pliny and Phlego Trallianus de Longævis, i. p. 114. See Cluverii Ital. p. 1259.

[1095] This remarkable inscription was first printed at Florence in 1749, by itself, with the title Exemplar Tabulæ Trajanæ pro Pueris et Puellis Alimentariis Reip. Veleiatium. Secondly, in Museum Veronense, Veronæ, 1749, fol., to which some explanations are added. Thirdly, in Histoire de la Jurisprudence Romaine, par A. Terrasson. Paris, 1750, fol. in the Appendix, pp. 27-43.

[1096] Lib. iv. p. 228.

[1097] See the proofs quoted by Brisson, under the word _Menstruum_.

[1098] Digest, 34, tit. 1. 14.

[1099] “Crescerent de tuo qui crescerent tibi, alimentisque tuis ad stipendia tua pervenirent.”

[1100] Plin. Epist. i. 8, 10, and vii. 18. Gruteri Inscript. p. MXXVIII. n. 5.

[1101] Capitolin. cap. 8.

[1102] Ib. cap. 26.

[1103] Lamprid. cap. 57.

[1104] Ælian. Spartian. cap. 1. p. 574.

[1105] Capitolin. cap. 2, p. 532; and cap. 4, p. 537.

[1106] Zonaras in the Life of that Emperor. Hist. August.

INFIRMARIES. HOSPITALS FOR INVALIDS. FIELD LAZARETTOS.

By the preceding article I am induced to give some information in regard to the history of infirmaries. To offer anything complete on this subject, it would be necessary to enter also into the history of inns established for the use of pilgrims and strangers, which in general were combined with them, and likewise into that of the different orders instituted for the like purpose, and of taverns which arose at a later period.

It is certain that ancient Rome, though a magnificent city, had no houses into which sick persons were admitted in order to be taken care of and cured. Diseased people, however, were carried to the temple of Æsculapius, but for a very different purpose. They waited there for a cure, as some Christian believers still do in churches which contain wonder-working images; but no preparations were made there for their accommodation. Those numerous benevolent institutions for the accommodation of travellers, the indigent, and the sick, which do so much honour to modern times, were first introduced by Christianity.

Bodin[1107], who could not deny this service, endeavoured to lessen it, by asserting that, on the introduction of Christianity, freedom was given to many slaves, who possessed nothing else; and who, having learned no trade or handicraft by which they could gain a living, became so burdensome to the state, that the clergy were obliged to devise some means to remove them from the public view, and to provide with the necessary support these unfortunate beings, abandoned by all mankind, whose increasing number was asserted by unbelievers to be an effect of the Christian religion.

In this representation however there is some truth. It indeed cannot be denied that our religion, as it requires humanity and compassion, though the intolerance it occasions converts the severest cruelties into good works, procures to beggars more indulgence and respect than they in general deserve, and thereby causes a continual increase of their number. But it is to be observed that Bodin, notwithstanding his acuteness and great learning, often suffers himself to be led away by the effects of his innate Jewish hatred to the Christians; and he readily embraces every opportunity of exalting his paternal religion, the Jewish, and depreciating the Christian, by which he obtained riches and honour.

The enemies of Christianity, however, during the first years of our æra, could not but observe the numerous means for alleviating human misfortunes which were introduced by the new religion. It was galling to the emperor Julian to acknowledge this superiority; and in order to banish it, he caused his priests to provide for the poor, and to establish for them inns (_Xenodochia_), into which they could be received; and he assigned to them the funds necessary for that purpose. Into these were admitted not only persons of his own religion but of every other, in imitation of the Christians, who, besides supporting their own poor, maintained those of the pagans also. How much he interested himself to weaken this means, by which the impious Galilæans procured respect, love, and attachment, may be seen by an oration wherein he inculcated the Christian morality as his own[1108]. This imitation of the new religion, which contributed more perhaps to recommend it than to bring it into discredit, is ridiculed by Gregory Nazianzenus in his third oration.

The care of providing the necessary assistance to those sick persons who can expect no help and attention from individuals, belongs to the police; and because this forms a part of government, rulers and sovereigns ought at all times to have made the establishments requisite for that purpose. But in the oldest periods, as appears, they had too much to do in administering justice, and securing the state against hostile attacks, to be able to attend to the necessary police establishments.

On the other hand, the clergy, whose first duty was to maintain good order, discipline, and virtue, however much they might often in private offend against them themselves, endeavoured to supply this want; and, on that account, among the decrees of various councils, we find a great many regulations which have not yet been sufficiently employed to illustrate the history of police. The establishment of the first houses for the reception of the sick is among the services rendered by the clergy; and to mention all the places of this kind, either founded by them or at their instigation, would form a very long list. The first, or at least one of the first houses for the reception of indigent sick was that built at Rome by Fabiola, a Roman lady, the friend of St. Jerome, consequently in the fifth century[1109].

When pilgrimages to holy places, as they were called, and often from very distant countries, came to be considered as a part of religion, the number of these houses was much increased. Taverns, in which pilgrims could procure proper care and attention for payment, were not then to be found; and most people travelled without money, in the full confidence of meeting with gratuitous assistance. When the clergy wished to maintain and increase the number of pilgrims, which their own advantage induced them to do, it was necessary that they should afford them every facility of travelling, and consequently provide for the wants of indigent pilgrims; and it was impossible that among these there should not be some sick, especially as the inconvenience, fatigue, and dangers of the journey were much increased by many things injurious to the health.

But as the principal and most dangerous pilgrimages were made to Palestine, which is situated beyond the boundaries of Europe, where no countrymen, and not even Christians, one of whose religious duties it is to be compassionate, could be expected, institutions for the reception of sound as well as of sick pilgrims were erected by the clergy at a very early period on the road thither, and also at the holy places. Thus Jerome built an hospital at Bethlem; and his friend Paula caused several to be erected on the road to that village, in order that the devout idlers, as she says, might fare better than the mother of God, who, on her necessary journey thither, could find no inn[1110]. In the like manner, the Scots and Irish erected hospitals in France for the use of their countrymen, who, on their pilgrimage to Rome, might be desirous of passing through that kingdom[1111].

But hospitals were most necessary in wild and desert parts, where human habitations were not to be expected; and particularly in woody mountainous districts, and on the banks of broad rivers, where travellers were stopped for the want of bridges, and collected together in great numbers. It is probable that many of these hospitals may have given rise to the villages which are still found in such situations.

Pope Adrian I. recommended to the notice of Charlemagne[1112] the hospitals built in the Alps; and in the year 855, the emperor Louis II. caused those situated on mountains to be visited and repaired[1113]. The ruins of many of these edifices still exist.

Towards the end of the eleventh century, brotherhoods, which undertook to provide for the wants of sick pilgrims, were formed in the Holy Land; and these became richer and more numerous as the crusades increased. It was not uncommon for opulent persons, when dying, to bequeathe their property to establishments in which they had found consolation and relief; and very often those who had experienced a cure gave their money and effects, or a considerable part of them, to some brotherhood, either in consequence of a vow, or in order to show their gratitude. On this account the hospitals in Palestine could be constructed on a larger scale, and provided with better accommodations, than any before seen in Europe. They were therefore considered as models; and princes and rich persons, on returning safe from their pilgrimages, caused similar ones to be established in their own countries. Many princes even brought with them to Europe members of these brotherhoods, which in the course of time were converted into orders of knighthood, that they might employ them in the erection of hospitals. Instances of this circumstance have been given by Möhsen, in his History of the Sciences in the Mark of Brandenburg, and these might be easily increased. In the same author may be seen an account of the establishment of houses for the reception of persons afflicted with cutaneous disorders, and of their conversion into pest-houses. I shall here only remark, that these inns and hospitals contributed, in no small degree, to facilitate the travelling of mercantile people, who in the infancy of trade, when the roads were insecure and no means of conveyance established, were obliged to accompany their merchandise themselves.

The assertion of Muratori, however, that the oldest hospitals were not properly established for sick travellers, but rather for the sound, is undoubtedly true; and it appears that hospitals, according to the meaning of the word at present, that is, such as were destined for the sick alone, were not introduced before the eleventh century. The above author quotes[1114] from the life of St. Lanfranc, who was archbishop of Canterbury in the year 1070, that he caused an hospital to be built there, and fitted up in such a manner, that one part of it was destined for sick men, and the other for sick women. It is probable, or rather almost certain, that this prelate formed the institution here mentioned after the model of those which he had seen in his native country, Italy. After this period similar establishments for the sick are mentioned in various other parts.

The first hospitals, at least in general, were built close to cathedrals or monasteries; and the bishops themselves had the inspection of them; but afterwards, either for the greater convenience or the want of leisure, when their occupations increased, they committed this charge to the deacons. In the course of time, when houses for the sick were erected by laymen, and entirely separate from monasteries, the bishops asserted their right, often confirmed to them by imperial as well as pontifical laws, of visiting these institutions. We find, however, that in later times they were deprived of this privilege by princes and sovereigns, either because they wished to omit no opportunity of lessening the power of the clergy, or because the latter had given reason to suspect that the incomes destined for the use of the hospitals were not always applied to the intended purpose. Instances are found also, where, by the letters of foundation, the whole management is consigned to the sovereign or the heirs of the founder. These institutions, however, have the appearance of ecclesiastical establishments, and still retain in many cases similar privileges. As such they are free from all taxes, are spared as much as possible in war, and enjoy the same rank as churches.

Of the internal œconomy of the oldest houses for the reception of the sick, no information, however, is to be found. It is not even known whether physicians and surgeons belonged to them, nor in what manner they were supplied with medicines. Apothecary shops were not then established; and those found in hospitals at present, are but of modern existence.

In the hospitals at Jerusalem the knights and brothers attended the sick themselves, bound up their wounds, and, in imitation of the Grecian heroes, Hercules, Achilles and others, acted as their physicians. Thus we find in Amadis, and other books of knight-errantry written in the middle ages, how much the knights exerted themselves to obtain the best balsamic mixtures, and that, in general, they dressed each other’s wounds. The well-known _baume de commendeur_ is one of the oldest compositions of this kind, belonging to the times of knighthood.

Profound or extensive knowledge of medicine could not be expected among these knights, were we even unacquainted with the account given of their skill by Guy de Chauliac. This author, who wrote his book on the healing of wounds in the year 1363, mentions the different medical sects, and among these names the German knights as the fourth sect, who, he says, cured wounds by exorcism, beverages, oil, wool, and cabbage-leaves, and trusted to the belief that God had conferred a supernatural power upon words, plants, and stones[1115].

The oldest mention of physicians and surgeons, established in houses for the sick belonging to the order of Templars, is under the government of John de Lastic, who, in 1437, undertook the office of grand-master, and defined very exactly the duty of physician and surgeon[1116]. It however appears to me, as it does to Möhsen, that the hospitals had regular and learned physicians at a period much earlier.

But, as long as this was not the case, they could afford no instruction to young physicians in the theory or practice of their art, like our hospitals at present. We, however, find a very singular account in regard to Persia, where it is said that some Nestorian priests had an hospital adjacent to their monastery, together with an institute or school for young physicians, who under certain prescribed rules were allowed to visit the sick. This establishment was in a town called Gandisapora, or, as Professor Sprengel writes it, Dschandisabor, the medical school of which is not unfrequently mentioned after the seventh century. The pupils who were desirous of attending the hospital for their improvement, were first obliged to submit to a trial, and to read the psalms of David and the New Testament. Many of those who had here studied medicine attained to high ecclesiastical dignity, which is the more surprising as the rest of the Nestorian schools in the East pay attention only to theology, and prohibit the young clergy entirely from studying medicine[1117].

Mad-houses, or houses for the reception and cure of insane persons, seem also to have been first established in the East. Zimmerman, in his work on Solitude, says that as early as the year 491 there was a house of this kind at Jerusalem, the chief object of which was to take care of such monks as became insane in the monasteries, or such hermits as were visited by the same affliction in the deserts; but, as usual, he has given no proofs. In the twelfth century, when the Jew, Benjamin of Tudela, was in Bagdad, he found many hospitals having nearly sixty shops or dispensaries belonging to them, which distributed, at the public expense, the necessary medicines. A large building called _Dal almeraphtan_, that is, the House of Grace, was destined for the reception of those who lost their reason in summer. They were kept there in chains till they were cured; and every month this house was visited by magistrates, who examined the state of the patients and suffered those who had recovered their reason to return to their relations or friends.

To those police establishments which form the subject of this article belong also hospitals for invalids. Though it may be true, that among many ancient nations the soldiers, as sailors in some privateers at present, served voluntarily and without pay, in the hope of acquiring by plunder a sufficient compensation for the expenses, labour, and dangers to which they were exposed in war, it was at any rate considered as a general duty to make such provision for the indigent, and also for those become incapable of military service, when they had no means of support, that they might not be a burthen on the public. If any one should be so devoid of feeling as to suppose that our soldiers, after enjoying years of peace without much waste of their bodily powers or laborious occupation, free from care, amidst every necessary of life, and the enjoyment of rank above those members of the state from which they were taken, ought to consider it no hardship to perform military service when war renders it necessary; it still remains a duty incumbent on the government to provide for soldiers incapable of further service, who are destitute of support; and besides, political prudence requires it, in order that others may not be deterred from defending their native country or sovereign, but rather by the confident hope of a future provision may have their courage and fidelity strengthened; which, notwithstanding the strictest subordination, and though fire-arms require less personal bravery than bows and arrows, is still indispensably necessary. This truth seems to have been fully acknowledged in the oldest periods.

Solon deducted something from the pay of soldiers, and employed it for the education of children whose fathers had fallen in battle, in order that others might be encouraged to bravery[1118]. Pisistratus, following this example, made an order that those who had lost any of their limbs in war should be maintained at the public expense. The pensions granted do not seem at all times to have been equally great, and they appear to have been even modified according to circumstances[1119].

Of the attention paid by the Romans to the care of their invalids, _milites causarii_, or soldiers become unfit for service, either by wounds or old-age, many instances may be found, some of which occur in the Justinian and several in the Theodosian code[1120]. They were not only exempted from taxes, but frequently obtained lands and cattle as well as money, and were assigned over, to be taken care of by rich families and communities[1121]. The assertion, however, that the Romans had particular houses for invalids, in which soldiers worn out by the fatigues of war were taken care of, and that the _taberna meritoria_ was a house of this kind, is one of the many errors of Peter von Andlo, canon of Colmer, who is entitled to the merit of having written in the fifteenth century, and with a great deal of freedom, the first work on the German public law[1122].

How such an idea could be conceived by this author I do not know, for the following is the only account of the _taberna meritoria_ to be found among the ancients. In the first place we are told by Valerius Maximus[1123], that a traveller was murdered in one of them in which he lodged. Judging from this circumstance, the _taberna meritoria_ appears to have been a public tavern or inn, a meaning which writers on jurisprudence seem always to have adopted[1124]. In the next place Eusebius, who died in the year 340, relates in his Chronicon[1125], that under the second or third year of the reign of Augustus, an oil issued from the earth in a _taberna meritoria_, on the other side of the Tiber, and continued flowing without interruption the whole day; but I cannot see what relation this phenomenon can have to Jesus Christ. In the third place, the same thing is related by Orosius[1126], who lived about the year 416; but he makes the time of this event much later, that is to say, in the year 730 or 731 after the building of the city, which would be about twenty years before the birth of Christ. Nevertheless, Martinus Polonus said, in the thirteenth century, that this oil appeared at the birth of Christ[1127]. Damasus (Pope Formosus? in the ninth century) added that, on this account, Pope Callistus I., so early as the third century, caused a Christian church to be built in that place; and some modern writers believe, contrary to the assertion of Platina[1128], that it is the present church of St. Mary Transtiberina, _Maria in Trastevere_; and in this church a stone is still shown with the inscription _fons olei_. To render the building of a church in the third century probable, some moderns have conjectured that this _taberna_ was the cook’s shop purchased by the Christians under the reign of Alexander Severus, who assigned it to them with the observation that “it was better that God should be served in any manner in that place, than that tavern-keepers, cooks, or perhaps the ministers of voluptuousness, _popinarii_, should there carry on their occupations[1129].” Our writers on historical criticism positively deny that Callistus I. built a church at Rome[1130]. It is to be observed also, that Donatus, who died in 1640, confidently asserts that the _taberna meritoria_ was the house where the people of Ravenna lodged when they came to Rome to see the public spectacles; but he does not tell us whence he derived this information[1131]. What I have here collected in regard to the _taberna meritoria_ may serve to correct a false and often repeated relation; but all I can prove from it is, that this _taberna_ was not an hospital for invalids.

Hardouin also was of opinion that there were hospitals for invalids at Rome, one of which was built by Metellus, the son-in-law of Pompey; but for proof he refers only to a coin with the image of Metellus, on the reverse of which is the naked figure of a man walking, who holds in his right-hand the palladium, and bears on his left shoulder a naked man, with the inscription on the face, “Q. Metellus Pius.” From this Hardouin infers that Metellus built an Hôtel des Invalides for sick or wounded soldiers, which he dedicated to Pallas, and that on this account he obtained the surname of _Pius_[1132]. It is indeed remarkable, that two coins having the same reverse, and the inscription _pietas_, occur in Patin. I shall leave to the judgement of the critics this opinion of Hardouin; but I must confess that the explanation of ambiguous figures on coins, has a resemblance to the far-fetched derivations of etymologists. Both may be learned, ingenious, and probable; but they cannot be employed alone as evidence, except to add more force to a truth already proved. These coins, perhaps, allude to some other attention paid to wounded soldiers, of which Metellus, Herennius, and Cæsar may have given examples; and the people are always weak enough to set too high a value on every mark of compassion or benevolence exhibited by their sovereigns or commanders, because it is seldom that they observe as they ought the general duties incumbent upon them.

I do not consider it a reproach to the Romans, notwithstanding their propensity to war and robbery, that they had no hospitals for invalids; because the remark already made in regard to orphan-houses is applicable also to them. Magnificent buildings, fitted up at great expense, afford a proof of the wealth and perhaps the liberality of the founder; but there can be no doubt that, with the capital employed, a greater number of invalids might be maintained, and in a manner much more beneficial to the public; that is to say, by making such arrangements that the invalids could be distributed throughout the country, and placed out at board and lodging for a certain sum. In this case many families would be glad to receive them, both on account of the money, and because these invalids could be of great assistance to them in their domestic œconomy, either by labouring themselves or overlooking others. People may praise large and expensive hospitals as much as they please; but the sight of so many men who have lost their health or limbs in war is but a melancholy spectacle, and gives too great occasion to reflect how much mankind suffer from the avarice, pride, and revenge of sovereigns, without which wars would be less frequent.

The first establishment for the reception of invalids which, as far as I know at present, occurs in history, was that formed at Constantinople by the emperor Alexius Comnenus, at the end of the eleventh century. A complete description of it may be found in the history of that prince, written by his learned daughter Anna Comnena, who says that the emperor caused a great number of buildings standing around a church to be fitted up as an hospital, which undoubtedly was never exceeded in size; though other historians relate that Alexius only revived and enlarged in an uncommon degree an old institution. It was indeed called the Orphan-house; but sick and indigent persons of both sexes and of every age, and, as the female historian expressly says, soldiers dismissed from service, were admitted into it, and provided with bed, board, and clothing[1133]. Though the emperor secured to this institution several sources of revenue, it however appears not to have long existed; at any rate, in the time of George Codinus, that is, in the fifteenth century, the high office of director or manager had long been disused.

Of the hospitals for invalids existing at present, the oldest and largest is the Hôtel des Invalides at Paris. The kings of France enjoyed from the earliest times what was called _droit d’oblat_, which consisted in the power of sending to abbeys and monasteries, in order to be maintained, officers and soldiers unfit for further service, and

## particularly such as had been wounded. Traces of this practice are

said to occur under the reign of Charles the Great; at least Seissel, in the Life of Louis XII., relates that there was an old tradition in an abbey in Languedoc, that the abbot had been punished by that prince, because he would not receive the soldiers assigned to him. It may be readily conceived how unpleasant these guests must have been to the clergy, and how little the ideas, mode of living, and manners of these two classes would accord with each other. The complaints on this subject had become so great under Henry IV., that he at length resolved to cause all invalids to be lodged and maintained together in a palace called “La Maison Royale de la Charité Chretienne.” But as the revenues destined for the support of this establishment were not sufficient, it was abolished under the same sovereign, and the invalids were again distributed among the abbeys and convents. In the course of time these houses purchased exemption from this burthen, by giving an annual pension to their guests; but they soon spent their money, and then fell into a state of the greatest poverty. On this account Louis XIII. renewed the experiment of founding an hospital for invalids, which through the want of money was never completed. At length Louis XIV., in the year 1670, began to build the Hôtel des Invalides, the extravagant magnificence of which is rather a proof and monument of the profusion and pride of that sovereign, than of his care for meritorious soldiers.

In the year 1682, the hospital for soldiers at Chelsea was founded in England by Charles II.[1134], carried on by James II., and completed by William III. But far larger and more magnificent is the hospital for seamen at Greenwich, which was first suggested by Queen Mary, the consort of King William. The building, determined on in the year 1694, was begun in 1695, and from time to time enlarged and beautified[1135]. As France was the first country in Europe that maintained a standing army of national troops, it had therefore first occasion to make provision for its native soldiers when disabled by service. As long as military men consisted chiefly of foreigners, who served during a certain period for pay and plunder, sovereigns believed that when a war was ended, they were no further indebted to these aliens; they consequently suffered them to retire wherever they thought proper, and gave themselves no further trouble respecting them.

In the last place, I shall here consider the question, Since what time have regular surgeons been appointed to armies? and lay before the reader the little I have been able to collect towards answering it. In the Trojan war they were indeed not known. At that period many of the principal heroes had acquired some knowledge of surgery, and, like the knights in the time of the crusades, undertook the office of assisting and curing the wounded[1136]. Such persons in armies were particularly honoured, and considered to be of great value, as appears from what Idomeneus, speaking of Machaon, says:

Ιητρὸς γὰρ ἀνὴρ πολλῶν ἀντάξιος ἂλλον. Medicus vir multis æquiparandus aliis[1137].

Yet the instance of Machaon shows how little care was then taken of the wounded; for Virgil makes him even, whose assistance must every moment have been necessary, mount into the wooden horse, and he was the first who came out of it[1138]. There is reason to think that the armies in Homer, and until the introduction of Christianity, and the invention of gunpowder, had in every battle but few wounded, and always a much greater proportion of killed than in modern times. Hostile bands stood nearer to each other; all came to close action; prisoners were not exchanged, but made slaves, and among the Romans sold to the infamous schools for gladiators. Wounded prisoners were a burthen to the victorious party; such as could not escape defended themselves to the last, and were put to death by the conquerors.

In Achilles Tatius[1139], who seems to have lived in the third century of the Christian æra, I find that an army-physician, _exercitus medicus_, was called in to a sick person; and one might almost believe that a regular physician appointed to attend an army is here meant, especially as Salmasius, on this passage, says that each cohort had in general a physician, and therefore the appellations _medicus cohortis_, _medicus legionis_, were found in ancient inscriptions. I will not venture to contradict so great an authority on a subject of this kind; but I am sorry that I have not been able to find any other evidence of such army-physicians.

The first traces of field-hospitals, or, as they are commonly called at present, flying-hospitals, occur perhaps in the East. At any rate, the emperor Mauricius, in the sixth century, had along with his armies _deputati_, whose duty he describes, as did also the emperor Leo VI. in the ninth century, who has copied many things verbatim from the work of that prince. These _deputati_ were distributed in the armies among the cavalry, and were obliged to carry off those wounded in battle. On this account they had on the left side of the saddle two stirrups, in order that they might more easily take up the wounded behind them; and for every person thus saved, they obtained a certain reward. They were obliged also to carry with them a bottle containing water, for the purpose of reviving those who might have fainted through the loss of blood. Leo, besides the officers necessary for each band or company of a regiment, mentions expressly not only the _deputati_, but also physicians and attendants on the sick[1140].

Though an order was made by the Convention of Ratisbon[1141] in 742, that every commander of an army should have along with him two bishops, with priests and chaplains, and that every colonel should be attended by a confessor, no mention is to be found either of field-hospitals or army-surgeons belonging to the first Christian armies in the writings of the middle ages. We read, however, in the works of Paracelsus, Thurneyser, Lottich and others, that they were present at battles and sieges; but it can be proved that they were not appointed as army-surgeons, but served merely as soldiers.

The field-surgeons, who occur as accompanying armies in the beginning of the fifteenth century, were destined rather for the use of the commanders and principal officers, than for the service of the field-hospital. Their number was too small for a whole army; and as they were authorised by their commission to receive prisoners and booty, and, like the knights, were obliged to bring with them archers, it is highly probable that to fight was a part of their duty also.

When Henry V. of England carried on war with France in 1415, he took into his service Nicholas Colnet, as field-surgeon, for a year[1142]. He was bound to carry with him three archers on horseback, and to accompany the king wherever he went. In return he was to receive yearly forty marks or pounds, to be paid at the rate of ten marks every quarter. He was allowed also twelve pennies per day as subsistence money, and each of his archers had twenty marks a year, and six pennies daily for subsistence. The chief army-surgeon, Morstede, was engaged with fifteen men, three of whom were to be archers, and the remaining twelve surgeons. He received also ten pounds quarterly as pay, and twelve pennies daily for subsistence. His archers and surgeons were placed on an equal footing; each was to receive quarterly five pounds, and six pennies daily as subsistence. Both Colnet and Morstede could receive prisoners and plunder; but when the latter amounted to more than twenty pounds in value, a third part of it was to be given to the king. Both these head-men had a quarter’s pay in advance; and, that they might always have security for the next quarter, the king engaged to put into their hands, by way of pledge, as many jewels or other articles as might be equivalent to one quarter’s pay and subsistence.

Harte, in his Life of Gustavus Adolphus, seems to believe that this prince first appointed four surgeons to each regiment, which he reduced from the number of two or three thousand, first to 1200, and afterwards to 1008; and he is of opinion that it may with certainty be believed that the imperial troops at that time had no surgeons, because Tilly himself, after the battle at Leipsic, was obliged to cause his wounds to be dressed by a surgeon established at Halle. He adds in a note, that he was told that the Austrians, till about the year 1718, had no regimental surgeons regularly appointed. However this may be, it is certain that the field-hospital establishments of the imperial army, till the beginning of the eighteenth century, were on a very bad footing. Even in the year 1718, they had no field-surgeons; but at this period the company surgeons were dismissed, and a regimental surgeon, with six assistants, was appointed to each regiment; and beside the field medicine-chest, surgical instruments were provided at the emperor’s expense[1143].

The establishment of field-hospitals in Germany is certainly much older; for Fronsperger, who wrote in the middle of the sixteenth century, does not speak of field-surgeons, army-surgeons and their servants, as if they had been then newly introduced; but in such a manner as shows that the need of them had been generally acknowledged long before that period[1144]. According to his statement, it was necessary that there should be along with the commander-in-chief, or, according to the modern phrase, the general staff, a field-surgeon-in-chief, a doctor who had the inspection of the field-surgeons, the barbers and their servants, whose duty was to drag the wounded from the heaps of slain and to convey them to the former. He was obliged to keep by him instruments and medicines, and at each mustering to examine the instruments and apparatus of the field-surgeons; he decided also, in disputed cases, how much soldiers whose wounds had been cured ought to pay to the field-surgeon. During marches he was bound to remain with the commander-in-chief. Fronsperger says also, that there ought to be with the artillery a field-surgeon of _arckelley_, and with each company a particular field-surgeon, not however a paltry beard-scraper (_bart-scherer_), but a regularly instructed, experienced and well-practised man. This person was bound always to accompany, with able servants, the ensign, and he received double pay.

[To give a description of all the hospitals, infirmaries and dispensaries in this country would fill volumes. It may be sufficient here to observe, that there are ten large hospitals in the metropolis, each of which receives a considerable number of patients into the house, and a still larger number of out-door patients are prescribed for and supplied with medicines, but attend at the establishments. In the largest of these, which is that of St. Bartholomew, the annual number of patients, both in-door and out, is about 12,000; about three-fifths of these are out-door patients. The number of beds in the hospital amounts to upwards of 550.

There are twenty-eight dispensaries; such patients as are able, attend at these establishments; those who are incapable, are visited and relieved at their own homes.

Moreover, there are in the metropolis ten midwifery establishments, three ophthalmic institutions, three public lunatic asylums, a venereal hospital, a small-pox and a fever hospital, as also one for patients suffering from consumption.

There are also ninety-seven county hospitals, infirmaries and dispensaries[1145].

Admission to the hospitals is gained by the presentation of a petition signed by a governor, on a certain day in each week; of course, out of the number of patients who apply, the worst cases have the preference. Accidents and very severe cases are admitted at any time, and without any petition or recommendation. The out-patients require no recommendation. The same general rule gains attendance at the other medical establishments.]

FOOTNOTES

[1107] J. Bodini De Republica libri vi., lib. 1. cap. 5.

[1108] The imperial order has been preserved by Sozomenus in his Ecclesiastic History, v. 16, where more information on this subject, worthy of attention, has been collected. See Juliani Opera, edit. Spanhemii, Lips. 1696, fol. p. 430.

[1109] Hieron. ep. 39.

[1110] Hieron. Epitaph. Paulæ.

[1111] Baronii Annal. ad an. 845, xxxvi. ed. Mansii. Lucæ 1743, tom. xiv. p. 325.

[1112] Muratori Antiq. Ital. Med. Ævi, iii. p. 581.

[1113] Ib. et Antiquitat. Ital. Med. Ævi, iii. p. 581.

[1114] Antiquitat. _l. c._ p. 593.

[1115] See La Grande Chirurgie de M. Guy de Chauliac, Medecin tres-fameux de l’Université de Montpelier, restituée par M. Laurens Joubert. A Rouen 1641, 8vo.

[1116] There are various editions of the statutes of this order. 1. Nova Stat. ord. S. Joannis Hierosolymitani. Madriti 1577, small folio. 2. Privilegia ordinis S. Jo. Hierosol. small folio, Romæ 1588. 3. Statuta Hospitalis, without place or date, small folio. Each copy, however, has many things which in the others are wanting. 4. Histoire de Malthe, avec les Statuts et les Ordonnances de l’Ordre. Paris, 1643, fol. 5. Codice del sacro militare ordine Gerosolimitano. In Malta 1782, fol. The words relating to this subject may be found in Titulo quarto, xi et xii.

[1117] The proofs of this singular account may be seen in Assemani Bibliotheca Orientalis, tom. iii. P. 2. pag. CMXL.

[1118] Diogen. Laert. lib. i. seg. 55. This regulation has been praised by many. Plato in Menexemo, Æschines contra Ctesiphon.

[1119] Suidas, v. αδυνατοι, Lysiæ Orat. 23, contra Pancleonem.

[1120] Cod. Theodos. lib. vii. tit. 20, 8. Brissonius v. Causarius.

[1121] Livius, ii. 47, p. 458.--Dio Cassius, lib. lv. 23, p. 793.--Sueton. Vita Jul. Cæsar. cap. 38. To this subject belong many passages in the Auctor. Rei Agrar. pp. 15, 16, 17, 205, ed. Amstelod. 1674, 4to.

[1122] De Imperio Romano, lib. ii. cap. 12. Argent. 1612, 4to.

[1123] Lib. i. cap. 7, ext. 10.

[1124] Brisson de Verbor. Signif. v. Meritorius.

[1125] p. 146.

[1126] Histor. lib. vi. cap. 20.

[1127] This I learn from Pontac’s Observations on the Chronicon of Eusebius, p. 507, Chronica trium illustrium auctorum. Burdigalæ 1604, fol.

[1128] Platina de vitis Pontificum, p. 48, 1664, 12mo.

[1129] Lamprid. vita Alex. Severi, cap. 49.

[1130] Walch’s Histor. der Päbste. Göttingen, 1758, 8vo, p. 57.

[1131] Roma Vet. et Nova. lib. iii. cap. 21.

[1132] See Hardouin’s Observations on Plin. lib. viii. seg. 74, p. 477; and the figure of the coin, plate vii.

[1133] Annæ Comnenæ Alexiados lib. xv. p. 484. The authoress says expressly, that the name ὀρφανοτροφεῖον is taken only _a parte potiori_, as it is known that at later periods not only children who had lost their parents, but others also who were entirely or in part educated at the public expense, and likewise the children of the choir, were called ὀρφανοί. See Du Cange, Gloss. Græcit. The emperor was accustomed to send orphans to the monasteries to be educated and instructed; but with this express intimation, that they were not to be treated and instructed as serfs, but as the children of freemen.--Anna Comn. p. 381.

[1134] [There is a tradition that this institution owes its rise to the patriotic exertions of Nell Gwynn, the celebrated mistress of Charles II. A paragraph in a newspaper of the day seems to give some little strength to the supposition that her family once dwelt in the vicinity; and a public-house still exists at no great distance from the hospital, having her portrait for its sign, with an inscription ascribing to her the merit of the foundation. The anonymous author also of the life of Eleanor Gwynn states, that it was at her instigation that this noble charity was established. “Another act of generosity,” he says, “which raised the character of this lady above every other courtezan of these or any other times, was her solicitude to effect the institution of Chelsea Hospital. One day, when she was rolling about town in her coach, a poor man came to the coach-door soliciting charity, who told her a story, whether true or false is immaterial, of his having been wounded in the civil wars in defence of the royal cause. This circumstance greatly affected the benevolent heart of Eleanor; she considered that (besides the hardships of their being exposed to beggary by wounds received in defence of their country) it seemed to be the most monstrous ingratitude in the government to suffer those to perish who had stood up in their defence.

“Warm with these reflections and the overflow of pity, she hurried to the king, and represented the misery in which she had found an old servant; entreated that he might suffer some scheme to be proposed to him towards supporting those unfortunate sons of valour, whose old age, wounds, or infirmities, rendered them unfit for service; so that they might not close their days with repining against fortune, and be oppressed with the misery of want.”

Another anecdote of that period states, with somewhat more probability, “That when the garrison was withdrawn from Tangiers, there was among them a considerable number of aged and decrepid persons. It was therefore proposed to build an hospital for them; and the king being applied to for a piece of ground for the site, he offered the spot on which king James’s College stood; but recollecting himself, ‘Odso,’ says he, ‘’tis true I have already given that land to Nell, here.’ She, who was one of the most generous and benevolent of human beings, immediately said, ‘Have you so, Charles? then I will return it to you again for this purpose;’ and the hospital was accordingly erected. The king however built a house for Eleanor in Pall Mall.”

It is however very probable, according to Mr. Evelyn’s Memoirs, that the design originated with Sir Stephen Fox, who for some years had been paymaster of the forces, and certainly had better opportunities of becoming acquainted with the wants and distresses of the aged and worn-out veterans, great numbers of whom had been thrown on the charity of the country at this period. The building was erected under the superintendence of Sir C. Wren, and cost £150,000. It usually contains about 500 invalids; there are also a number of out-door pensioners, amounting to about 85,000.]

[1135] An Historical Account of the Royal Hospital for Seamen at Greenwich. London, 1789, 4to. [The foundation-stone of this magnificent building was laid on June 3, 1696, and the whole of the superstructure, under the honorary superintendence of Sir Christopher Wren, was finished within two years; the hospital was opened for the reception of pensioners in 1705. In the year of the foundation an act was passed, 7 and 8 William III., cap. 21, by which sixpence a month of the wages of all seamen belonging to the royal navy is appropriated to the benefits of the institution. Since that time large sums have been bequeathed for the use of the hospital, and the buildings have been successively enlarged and improved.

The indoor pensioners, of whom there are 2700 (which number is kept up by filling the vacancies twice a month), are maintained, clothed, and lodged, having also a weekly allowance for pocket-money.

By the act, 10 Anne, cap. 27, it is enacted that the seamen of the merchant service shall contribute equally with those of the royal navy; and that such of the former as may be wounded in the defence of property belonging to Her Majesty’s subjects, or otherwise disabled while capturing vessels from an enemy, shall also be admitted to the benefits of the institution. The money received from visitors and other sources is appropriated to the support of a school, wherein upwards of 4000 boys have been (1838) educated, from the foundation of the establishment to the present time. There are also about 32,000 out-pensioners.]

[1136] Even Alexander the Great undertook this office, as Plutarch expressly says in his life.

[1137] Iliad. xi. 514.

[1138] Æneid. ii. 263.

[1139] Achil. Tat. Lugd. Batav. 1640, 12mo, pp. 243, 617.

[1140] Mauricii Ars Militaris, pp. 29, 62. Upsaliæ 1664, 8vo.--Leonis Tactica, ed. Meursii, Lugd. Batt. 1612, 4to, lib. iv. 6; xii. 51, 53, p. 150; 119, p. 128. To this subject belongs, in particular, a passage in the Tactica of the emperor Leo, p. 430, n. 62, 63, where it is recommended that medicines both for the healing of wounds and the curing of diseases should be kept in readiness in armies.

[1141] Often called _Concilium Carolomanni_. See Semleri Hist. Eccles. Selecta Capita. Halæ, 1769, 8vo, ii. p. 144.

[1142] Rymer’s Fœdera, t. iv. 2, pp. 116, 117.

[1143] See Hoyers Gesch. der Kriegskunst, 1799, 8vo, ii. p. 176.

[1144] Kriegsbuch, durch Leonhart Fronsperger. Frankfort, 1565.

[1145] The Margate sea-bathing infirmary deserves especial mention, as being the only institution of the kind in England, perhaps in Europe. Its object is to provide sea-bathing for necessitous patients suffering under scrofulous and such other diseases as are likely to yield only to sea-air and bathing. It was set on foot in 1793, and established in 1796, by a few benevolent individuals in London, under the fostering auspices of Dr. Lettsom, John Nichols, Esq. (the eminent printer), and his son-in-law, the Rev. John Pridden. Its present site, Westbrook, near Margate, was selected after much inquiry, as the most salubrious spot on the coast within a convenient distance of the metropolis. From a small beginning this excellent charity has arisen to considerable importance in the scale of those valuable institutions which are designed to lessen the amount of human suffering, and it now numbers 230 in-door and about as many out-door patients. This praiseworthy institution however is closed during six months in the year (from November to April), and the in-door patients are required to pay, either by themselves or their friends, from 5_s._ to 6_s._ per week for adults, and 4_s._ to 4_s._ 6_d._ per week for children; which, as scrofulous diseases more particularly afflict the very poorer classes, are subjects of regret.

COCK-FIGHTING.

Until a recent period the English were almost the only people among whom cock-fighting was a favourite amusement; and on that account it is considered as peculiar to them, though it was esteemed among various nations many centuries ago. It is not improbable that it was first introduced into England by the Romans. That it, however, has been constantly retained there, though the practice of inciting animals to fight has been long scouted by moral and enlightened nations, is as singular an anomaly, as that the Spaniards should still continue their bull-fights, and that princes who wish to avoid the appearance of cruelty should nevertheless pursue, with immoderate passion, the detestable and so often condemned hunting with dogs. I shall leave to others the task of moralising on these contradictions in the character of whole nations as well as individuals, and shall here only give the history of cock-fighting as far as I am acquainted with it.

This pastime is certainly very old; but I agree in opinion with Mr. Pegge[1146], that Palmerius[1147] has made it much older than can fully be proved. The latter supposes that Adrastus, the son of Midas, king of Phrygia, killed his brother in consequence of a quarrel which took place between them in regard to a battle of quails. Adrastus on account of this murder fled to Crœsus; and as that prince lived about 550 years before the Christian æra, quail-fighting, according to the opinion of Palmerius, must have been customary at that time; and in this case one might admit that cock-fighting was of the same antiquity, because the battles of the domestic cock are still more violent, and can afford more amusement. Herodotus[1148], who relates the story of Adrastus, does not mention the cause of the quarrel; but it is given by the historian Ptolemy, the son of Hephestion, called also Alexandrinus, who lived about the time of Trajan and Adrian[1149]. He however only says that the two brothers quarrelled about a quail. Did any other proofs exist that quail-fighting was common at so early a period, it would indeed be then probable that the brothers quarrelled during that pastime. But as no such proofs are to be found, many other causes of quarrelling in regard to a quail, either in catching or pursuing it, may be conceived.

It is however certain that quails, as well as the domestic cock, are exceedingly irritable and quarrelsome birds; and that, like the latter, they can be employed for fighting; but it appears that quail-fighting was first practised by the Romans, in whose writings it is frequently mentioned[1150]; whereas among the Greeks it seldom or never occurs, while cock-fighting is spoken of on many occasions. The latter however sported with quails; but their pastime with these birds seems not to have been fighting, properly so called, where the great object of contest is whose quail shall be the victor; but the information on this subject is so imperfect that it cannot be fully understood[1151]. Sometimes the parties laid bets who could kill the other’s quails, or the greatest number of them, with one blow. One placed a quail within a circle, and another endeavoured by irritating the animal to make it go beyond it. If he proved successful in this attempt, he was declared the winner. Several were often placed within a circle at the same time, and the person lost whose bird first quitted it. Kühn and others are of opinion, that each of the parties endeavoured to induce the quail of the other to leave the circle, by irritating or enticing it; but the words appear without doubt to allude to a contest of several quails with each other[1152], were it possible that the later Greeks had learned to play at this game from the contests of the Romans.

Solon, however, in Lucian[1153], speaks of cock-fights and quail-fights exhibited publicly at Athens. But Lucian lived in the second century, had travelled into Italy, was well acquainted with the Roman customs, and made Solon mention quail-fighting, which he never saw in Greece, merely because he himself had seen it in Italy. This blunder may appear too gross, perhaps, for so acute a writer as Lucian; but since he has fallen into two anachronisms in the same dialogue, as he not only makes Solon a contemporary of Lycurgus, who lived two centuries earlier, but also introduces him as speaking of public cock-fights at Athens, which were first established half a century later, that is to say, after the battle of Marathon, he may readily have been guilty of a third oversight, by transferring quail-fighting to Athens. But at any rate similar games were usual in the island of Cyprus in the sixteenth century.

It appears, however, that the Romans bred and employed partridges for fighting in the same manner as quails. Lampridius relates, that the emperor Alexander Severus was fond of seeing battles of this kind[1154]; and Ælian, who lived in Italy under Heliogabalus, in the second century[1155], says that those who kept partridges for fighting, when they pitted them against each other, placed the females close to the males, in order to render them more courageous. Without doubt he here speaks of what was then usual at Rome.

Cock-fighting was appointed at Athens to be a public or solemn pastime, in consequence of a circumstance which occurred to Themistocles. At least Ælian relates[1156] that this commander, when he led out the Greeks against the Persians, happening to see two cocks fighting, took that opportunity to rouse the courage of his soldiers, by telling them that as these animals contended with so much obstinacy, though they fought neither for their country, their families, nor their liberty, but merely for the honour of victory, it was much more incumbent on them to exert themselves with bravery, as they had all these causes of incitement. Having defeated the enemy, as a memorial of his victory and a future encouragement to bravery, it was ordered that fighting-cocks should be exhibited every year, in a public theatre, in the presence of the whole people.

Mr. Pegge and others are of opinion that the Greeks afterwards took so much pleasure in the fighting of these birds, that they were generally employed throughout all Greece for this pastime and for betting. I am ready to admit that this is probable; but the institution of Themistocles appears to me to be no proof that cock-fighting was not practised at an earlier period. Even if it had been common, the Athenians might have thought proper to establish a religious or at least solemn cock-fighting to be exhibited every year. Themistocles however is not the only person who employed the courage of game-cocks as an incitement to bravery. Socrates inspired Iphicrates with courage, by showing him with what ferocity the cock of Midas, or Meidias, and that of Callias attacked each other[1157]. What Themistocles said to his soldiers was addressed by Musonius as a philosopher to mankind, to encourage them to support labour, danger, and pain, when duty or honour require it[1158].

Many modern writers ascribe the establishment of public cock-fighting at Athens, not to Themistocles, but to his contemporary Miltiades. I have hitherto suspected that this arises merely from a confusion of names, as is certainly the case in Moses du Soul[1159], where a reference is made to Ælian, by whom however Miltiades is not mentioned. At present, I am of opinion that Philo Judæus, who wrote in the first century, gave occasion to this assertion. He relates, that when Miltiades was about to lead the Grecian troops against the Persians, he exhibited a cock-fight, in a place which had been employed for public shows, in order to inspire courage into his soldiers by this spectacle, and that the end proposed was accomplished; but nothing is said by that author in regard to the establishment of annual cock-fights[1160]. According to this account, cock-fighting seems to have been at that time not uncommon; but as it remains doubtful whether Philo speaks of the campaign before the battle of Marathon, in which Miltiades and Themistocles were both present, very little can be gathered from his relation, and it appears to me not sufficient to contradict the more circumstantial account of Ælian.

Another small mistake, which Pegge thought it worth while to notice, deserves also perhaps to be rectified. Dalechamp[1161] and Potter[1162] assert that Themistocles, while leading out his army, having heard a cock crow, declared this to be an omen of victory, and after beating the enemy he instituted cock-fighting in remembrance of that event. I shall here remark, that Dalechamp is not the first person who made this assertion. Peucer[1163], and at a period still earlier, Alexander ab Alexandro[1164] mentioned the same thing, but no one ever pointed out the passage in any ancient author upon which this assertion was founded; and I have been as unsuccessful in my endeavours to find it, as those who attempted to discover the sources from which Alexander derived his information. This author perhaps collected from manuscripts, in the fifteenth century, many things never printed, and which therefore have been lost. He may also have written many things from memory without remembering them all with accuracy.

It is indeed true, that the crowing of a cock was sometimes considered as a presage of victory. Thus Cicero quotes an instance[1165] where a Bœotian soothsayer promised victory to the Thebans from the crowing of a cock; and according to Pliny[1166], the same circumstance once served to the Bœotians as an omen of victory over the Lacedæmonians. How then could Themistocles make choice of a cock-fight to commemorate a victory announced by the crowing of a cock? Besides, Anacharsis in Lucian confirms the object of the institution assigned by Ælian. In the history of antiquity many things are often repeated, without any one taking the trouble to examine whether they can be proved by the testimony of the ancients. Those who wish to attain to truth and certainty in matters of this kind, will not consider such short examinations to be of so little importance as they may to others appear.

Dempster has assigned another reason for the cock-fights established by Themistocles, which, though adopted by many, is not even supported by probability. He conceives that these cock-fights were like a kind of permanent trophies or monuments of the conquered Persians, because the game-cock was indigenous in Persia, and conveyed thence to other countries[1167].

Athenæus[1168], indeed, quotes from a work of Menodotus some lines by which the latter part of this assertion is confirmed; and Aristophanes[1169] in two places calls the domestic cock a Persian bird. It is proved by more modern accounts, that this species of fowl is at present found wild in the East Indies and many neighbouring countries. Sonnerat[1170] found them in Hindostan; and they were seen by Cook and by Dampier on Pulo Condor and many islands of the South Sea. According to the testimony of Gemelli Careri, they were indigenous in the Philippine islands, and according to Morolla in the kingdom of Congo. That they are still found wild in Georgia is asserted by Reineggs[1171]. The account therefore of the Greeks, that they obtained domestic fowls from Persia, may be admitted; but as in cock-fights one Persian overcame another, how could these convey the idea of a victory of the Greeks over the Persians? Is the object, then, as stated by Lucian and Ælian not sufficient and intelligible?

That cock-fighting, in the course of time, became a favourite pastime among the people, is proved by the frequent mention which is made of it in various authors. Pliny says[1172] that it was exhibited annually at Pergamus, in the same manner as combats of gladiators. In this city, according to Petronius[1173], a boy was promised a fighting-cock; and therefore it appears that boys kept cocks there for this pastime. Æschines reproaches Timarchus with spending the whole day in gaming and cock-fighting. Plato[1174] complains, that not only boys but grown-up persons, instead of labouring, bred birds for fighting, and employed their whole time in such idle amusements.

Cock-fights were represented also by the Greeks on coins and on cut stones. That the Dardani had them on their coins we are told by Pollux[1175]; and this seems to prove that these people were as fond of that sport as their neighbours of Pergamus. Mr. Pegge caused engravings to be made of two gems in the collection of Sir William Hamilton, on one of which is seen a cock in the humble attitude of defeat, with its head hanging down, and another in the attitude of victory, with an ear of corn in its bill as the object of contest. On the other stone two cocks are fighting, while a mouse carries away the ear of corn for the possession of which they had quarrelled; a happy emblem of our law-suits, in which the greater part of the property in dispute falls to the lawyers and attorneys. Two cocks in the attitude of fighting are represented also on a lamp found in Herculaneum[1176].

That the Greeks employed various means to increase the irritability and courage of fighting-cocks is beyond all doubt. Besides the circumstance already mentioned in regard to the females, they gave them also food which produced nearly the same effect as opium does in India, and as brandy did some years ago on the European armies. Dioscorides[1177] and Pliny[1178] ascribe this effect to a plant which they call _adiantum_. The former says it was given to game-cocks and quails, and the latter that it was given to game-cocks and partridges, to incite them to fight. Garlick, _allium_, was employed also, as we are told by Xenophon, not only for game-cocks but also for horses and soldiers. That the Greeks, however, like the English at present, armed their cocks with steel spurs, in order to render their battles more bloody, is denied by Pegge; though the contrary seems to be proved by a passage in Aristophanes, now become a proverb, and the remarks of the scholiast[1179]. As the English procure the strongest and best fighting-cocks from other countries, and often from Germany, through Hamburg, the Greeks, in the like manner, obtained foreign game-cocks for the same purpose[1180].

Why the Romans showed more fondness for quail-fighting than for cock-fighting I do not know; but it is certain that they had not the latter, or at any rate only seldom and at a late period, which appears to be very singular, as they began then more and more to imitate the Greeks. Varro mentions the breeds which were chiefly sought for in Greece; but he adds, that though they might be good for fighting, they were not fit for breeding[1181]. Had the breeding of game-cocks been an employment, he would have spoken in a different manner. Columella also ridicules the breeding of these cocks, as a Grecian custom, and prefers the native race to all others. Eustathius, in the place already quoted, says expressly that the Romans preferred quails to game-cocks; yet in later times we find mention among them of cock-fighting, as has been before remarked.

There were cocks in England in the time of Julius Cæsar[1182]; but it is said that they were kept there merely for pleasure, and not used as food. The latter part of this account is not improbable. The inhabitants of the Pelew Islands, we are told, eat only the eggs of their hens, and not the flesh. But the question, how old cock-fighting is in England, cannot be determined. Pegge says, the oldest information which he found on this subject was in the Description of the City of London by William Fitz-Stephens, who lived in the reign of Henry II., and died in 1191[1183]. This writer relates that every year on Shrove Tuesday the boys at school brought their game-cocks to the master, and the whole forenoon was devoted to cock-fighting, for the amusement of the pupils. The theatre or cock-pit, therefore, was in the school-house, and the pupils seem to have had the direction of it. To this information I can add, that cock-fighting in France was forbidden by a council in 1260, on account of some mischief to which it had given rise[1184].

This pastime has been sometimes forbidden even in England, as was the case under Edward III. and Henry VIII.; also in the year 1569, and even later; but it was nevertheless retained to a late period. Even Henry VIII. himself instituted fights of this kind; and a writer worthy of credit relates, that James I. took great delight in them[1185]. In modern times this cruel amusement has been carried beyond all bounds; so that the cock-fights in China[1186], Persia[1187], Malacca[1188], and America[1189], are nothing in comparison of those called the _battle-royal_ and the _Welsh main_. In the former a certain number of cocks are let loose to fight, and when they have destroyed each other, the survivor is accounted the victor, and obtains the prize. In the latter kind of battle, sixteen pair of cocks, for example, being pitted against each other, the sixteen conquerors are made to fight again; the eight of these which are victors, must fight a third time; and the four remaining a fourth time, till at length the two last conquerors terminate, by a fifth contest, this murderous game, after thirty-one cocks have successively butchered each other amidst the noisy exultation of the spectators, who however make a pretence to the character of magnanimity.

[Cock-fighting is one of the chief amusements throughout the East Indies and China, and it is a fashionable pastime for ladies in Peru. The spot on which the cock-pit Royal, which was built in the reign of Charles II., existed, is now used for the meetings of the members of Her Majesty’s Privy Council. The custom of cock-throwing, that is, of throwing sticks at a cock exposed at a stake and which was practised in this country at Shrovetide, is supposed to have originated during the war with France in the reign of Edward III., and to have been considered a mark of hatred and contempt for the French people, of whom that bird was the national emblem; but the conjecture rests upon no solid authority and must be regarded as mere legend.

Cock-fighting is now forbidden and punishable by law in Great Britain, and every attempt is made to prevent this and other similar barbarous sports and to convict the offenders, by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.]

FOOTNOTES

[1146] Archæologia, vol. iii. p. 132. A Memoir on Cock-fighting, by Samuel Pegge, M.A., Rector of Wittington. As this learned antiquary made use of what was collected by others on this subject, I have taken the same liberty with his paper; but have rectified some mistakes and made new additions.

[1147] Palmerii Exercit. in Auct. Græcos. Ultraj. 1694, 4to, p. 3.

[1148] Lib. i. cap. 35 et 45.

[1149] See Vossius de Historicis Græcis, lib. ii. cap. 10. Extracts from this book of Ptolemy may be found in Photii Bibliotheca, 1612, fol. p. 472.

[1150] The passages which indisputably relate to quail-fighting, as far as I know, are as follows: Plutarch. Apophthegm. p. 207, ed. Francofurt, 1620, fol. Cæsar Augustus caused a person to be punished for having purchased and used as food a quail which had always been victorious; and in Vita Antonini, p. 930, it is said that Antoninus often had the satisfaction of seeing his game-cocks and quails victorious. M. Antoninus de Se-ipso, i. § 6, declares that he never took pleasure in keeping quails for fighting. Herodian, iii. 10, 4, says that the son of Septimus Severus always got into quarrels at quail- and cock-fighting.

[1151] This account is given by Jul. Pollux, lib. ix. cap. 7, § 102 et 108.--Suidas, v. ὀρτυγοκόπος, ed. Kusteri, ii. p. 717.--Meursius de Ludis Græcorum, in Gronovii Thes. Græc. Antiq. vii. p. 979.

[1152] Pollux, p. 1095.

[1153] De Gymnasiis, cap. 37.

[1154] Cap. 41, p. 985.

[1155] Histor. Anim. iv. 1.

[1156] Var. Histor. ii. 28. Kühn quotes from Eustathius’s commentary on the Iliad, p. 740, a passage which contains a new proof that the Romans had quail-fighting rather than cock-fighting. The words of Ælian are admitted by Petit among the Attic laws. See his Leges Atticæ, p. 156.

[1157] Diogen. Laert. ii. 30. p. 98.

[1158] Stobæi Eclog. ed. Gesneri. Tiguri 1543, fol. p. 298. Cœlius Rhodiginus Lection. Antiq. xvi. 13, and after him Delechamp, Kühn, Pegge, and others say, that the philosopher Chrysippus extols the game-cock also on account of its courage; but none of these writers has told us where this fragment of the lost works of that polygraph is to be found. I met with it in Plutarchi lib. de Stoicorum repugnantiis, p. 1049.

[1159] Solanus ad Luciani lib. c.

[1160] The passage occurs in the treatise, Liber quisquis virtuti studet, in op. ed. Mangey, ii. p. 466.

[1161] In his observations on Pliny, lib. x. 21, sect. 34.

[1162] Antiq. of Greece.

[1163] De Divinationum Generibus, 1591, 8vo, 232, b.

[1164] Geniales Dies, v. 13.

[1165] De Divinatione, i. cap. 34.

[1166] Plin. x. 21, sect. 34.

[1167] In his Annotations on Rosini Antiquit. Rom. iii. cap. 10. See Hyde de Religione Persarum, p. 163.

[1168] Lib. xiv. cap. 20.

[1169] Aves, 484, 707. Beck, in his edition of this comedy, Lips. 1782, 8vo, p. 50, thinks that the ancients themselves did not know whence this appellation arose. He refers therefore to the scholiasts, and to Suidas, v. Περσικός ὄρνις, p. 102, whose words have been copied by Phavorinus into his dictionary, p. 598; and he supposes, with Suidas, that the similarity of the cock’s comb to the Persian covering for the head gave occasion to the name. But the passage quoted from Athenæus assigns a much more probable reason.

[1170] Voy. aux Indes Or. ii. p. 117, where there is also a figure of the wild fowls.

[1171] Reineggs Beschreibung des Kaukasus, 1797, 8vo, p. 69.

[1172] Lib. x. c. 7.

[1173] Cap. 86.

[1174] De Legibus, l. vii.

[1175] Onomast. ix. 84.

[1176] Antich. di Ercolano, tom. viii. Lucerne, p. 63. More engravings of coins with similar impressions may be found in Haym. Thes. Brit. i. pp. 213, 234, in Agostini Gem. P. i. p. 199, and in Gorleus, P. i. 51, and 114, also P. ii. 246. Frölich Notit. Numism. p. 81. A single cock may often have been the emblem of vigilance.

[1177] Lib. iv. cap. 36.

[1178] Lib. xxii. cap. 21, sect. 30: “perdices et gallinaceos pugnaciores fieri putant, in cibum eorum additis.” This affords a further proof that partridges also were made to fight.

[1179] Aves, 760: αἶρε πλῆκτρον εἰ μάχει: tolle calcar si pugnas. See what has been said in regard to this proverb by Suidas, and by Erasmus in his Adagia.

[1180] The most celebrated breeds are mentioned by Columella, viii. 2.--Plin. x. 21.--Geopon. xvi. 3, 30.

[1181] Varro, iii. 9.

[1182] De Bello Gallico, lib. v. 12.

[1183] “Præterea quotannis die, quæ dicitur carnivale (ut a puerorum ludis incipiamus, omnes enim pueri fuimus) scholarum singuli pueri suos apportant magistro suo gallos gallinaceos pugnatores, et totum illud antemeridanum datur ludo puerorum vacantium spectare in scholis suorum pugnas gallorum.” I have transcribed these words from the first edition of this old topography, which is entitled A Survey of London, written in the year 1598, by John Stow ... with an appendix containing Libellum de situ et nobilitate Londini, written by William Fitzstephen. Lond. 1599, 4to, p. 480. Stow translates the word _Carnivale_ by _Shrove Tuesday_.

[1184] Du Cange, Glossarium. This council, as I conjecture, was held in the town of Copriniacum in diocesi Burdegalensi, which, as some think, was Cognac.

[1185] See Maitland’s London, and Stow’s Survey, by Strype, i. p. 302. edit. 1754.

[1186] Bell’s Travels, p. 303.

[1187] Tavernier.

[1188] Dampier. Also the Gentleman’s Mag. 1770, p. 564.

[1189] Wafer, p. 118.

SALTPETRE. GUNPOWDER. AQUAFORTIS.

In examining the question, whether Theophrastus, Pliny, and in general the ancient Greeks and Romans, were acquainted with our saltpetre, or at what period it became known, I shall perhaps meet with as little success as those who have preceded me in the same research[1190]. I shall therefore be satisfied if competent judges allow that I have contributed anything new that can tend to illustrate the subject.

Our saltpetre, which is commonly called _nitrum_, and sometimes, though more rarely, _sal nitræ_, is a neutral salt composed of a peculiar acid, named the acid of saltpetre or nitric acid, and that alkali called potash. The characters by which it is most readily distinguished from other salts are its cooling taste, its fusibility when exposed to a small degree of heat, and in particular its so-called deflagration; that is, the property it has when placed in the fire, or on an ignited body, or when melted in a crucible, with a combustible substance, of suddenly bursting into a very bright flame, by which it loses its acid, and nothing remains but a carbonate of potash. The principal use of it is in making gunpowder, and for the preparation of that acid known under the name of aquafortis[1191], which is employed in various ways.

Native saltpetre is so rare, that Cronstedt was not acquainted with it. At present, however, it is known to occur in the East Indies, in the lower part of Italy, also in Portugal[1192], Spain, America, and some other countries[1193]. But almost all the saltpetre obtained in Europe is produced partly by nature and partly by art. The putrefaction of organic bodies gives rise, under certain circumstances, to nitric acid, which in general combines with calcareous earth wherever it finds it, and forms the so-called earthy saltpetre. This is decomposed by potash, and the latter uniting with the acid forms common saltpetre. Sometimes also it is found that the nitric acid, instead of being united with calcareous earth, is combined with soda, which produces the so-called cubic saltpeter[1194]. Both these saline substances, but the earthy more frequently than the cubic, are often found on effloresced walls; and both are then comprehended under the common names of _Mauersalz_ or _Mauerbeschlag_, _sal murale_.

This efflorescence on walls was observed, in all probability, at a very early period, especially as it is produced in many parts in great abundance, and as it makes itself perceptible by the decay of walls, which it seems to corrode. It is the plague or leprosy of houses mentioned in the Mosaic code of laws. As the ancients were so much inclined to expect medicinal virtue in all natural bodies, there is reason to think that they soon collected and made trial of this saline incrustation. That this indeed was actually the case, and that they gave the name of _nitrum_ to this saline mass, may be proved from their writings. Their _nitrum_, however, must have been exceedingly various in its properties. For this incrustation is not always calcareous saltpetre; it is often soda[1195], mixed with more or less calcareous earth; and sometimes it consists of salts of sulphuric acid. In modern times, on closer examination, other salts of nitric acid have been found in the incrustation of walls, such as flaming saltpetre or nitrate of ammonia, bitter saltpetre or nitrate of magnesia; but of these no mention can be expected in the works of the ancients.

Substances so different ought not indeed to have been all named _nitrum_; but before natural history began to be formed into a regular system, mankind in general fell into an error directly contrary to that committed at present. Objects essentially different were comprehended under one name, if they any how corresponded with each other even in things accidental. Whereas at present every variety, however small, obtains a distinct appellation; because many wish to have the pleasure, if not of forming new species, at any rate of giving new names. The elephant and rhinoceros were formerly called oxen; the sable and ermine were named mice, and the ostrich was distinguished by the appellation of sparrow. In the like manner, calcareous saltpetre and alkali might be called _nitrum_. The ancients, however, gave to their _nitrum_ some epithets, but they seem to have been used only to denote uncommon varieties.

Now, as the ancients were not acquainted with any accurate method of separating and distinguishing salts, it needs excite no wonder that they should ascribe to their _nitrum_ properties which could not possibly be united in a salt, and much less exist in our saltpetre. But as they were neither acquainted with aquafortis nor manufactured gunpowder, and as no particular use of calcareous saltpetre was known, the _nitrum_ most valuable to them must have been that which consisted chiefly of soda, and which consequently could be employed in washing, in painting, and in glass-making.

It is well known that in warm countries this alkali effloresces here and there from the earth, particularly in a dry soil, and even in such quantity as to be employed in commerce. Hence it may be readily comprehended why this effloresced salt, which is very often mixed with common salt, obtained the name of _nitrum_.

The important discovery, that a similar salt, having the like properties, and applicable to the same uses, named at present soda, may be obtained from the ashes of certain plants, was first made, in my opinion, by the ancient Egyptians or Arabians[1196]. This salt also, at least by the Greeks, was named _nitrum_, or considered as a species of it. By the incineration of the plants this salt was rendered slightly caustic; and it then became moist in the air, and deliquesced when not preserved in very close vessels. It was therefore like those salts which are obtained, in the same manner, from the ashes of all other plants; though the latter are essentially different from the former, and in the course of time obtained the peculiar appellation of potash or pearlash. One can hardly be surprised that the ancients were not able to distinguish soda from potash, especially as they were both obtained from vegetable ashes.

But were the ancients, under the ambiguous name of _nitrum_, acquainted with our saltpetre? There is certainly reason to think that it became known to them by lixiviating earths impregnated with salts. There are, as already said, not only in India but also in Africa, and particularly in Egypt, earths which, without the addition of ashes or potash, give real saltpetre, like that of the rubbish-hills on the road from new to old Cairo[1197], and like the earth in some parts of Spain. It is a knowledge only of this natural kind of saltpetre, which required no artificial composition, that can be allowed to the ancients, as it does not appear by their writings that they were sufficiently versed in chemistry to prepare the artificial kind used at present.

But even admitting that they had our saltpetre, where and by what means can we be convinced of it? Is it to be expected that any of the before-mentioned characters or properties of this salt should occur in their writings? They neither made aquafortis nor gunpowder; and they seem scarcely to have had any occasion or opportunity to discover its deflagration and the carbonization thereby effected, or, when observed, to examine and describe it. No other use of our saltpetre which could properly announce this phenomenon has yet been known. How then can it be ascertained that under the term _nitrum_ they sometimes meant our saltpetre?

Those inclined to believe too little rather than too much, who cannot be satisfied with mere conjectures or probabilities, but always require full proof, will acknowledge with me, that the first certain accounts of our saltpetre cannot be expected much before the invention of aquafortis and gunpowder. It deserves also to be remarked, that the real saltpetre, as soon as it became known, was named also _nitrum_; but, by way of distinction, either _sal nitrum_, or _sal nitri_, or _sal petræ_. The first appellation, from which our ancestors made _salniter_, was occasioned by an unintelligible passage of Pliny, which I shall afterwards point out. The two other names signify, like _sal tartari_, _sal succini_, a salt which was not _nitrum_ but obtained from _nitrum_. _Sal-nitri_, therefore, or _salniter_, was that salt which, according to the representation of the ancients, was separated by art from _nitrum_, yet was essentially different from the _nitrum_ or soda commonly in use. Biringoccio says expressly, that the artificial _nitrum_, for the sake of distinction, was named, not _nitrum_, but _sal nitrum_.

The name _nitrum_ is of great antiquity, and seems to have been conveyed from Egypt and Palestine to Greece, and thence to Italy and every part of Europe. For it is evidently the _neter_ mentioned by the prophet Jeremiah, chap. ii. ver. 22; and which occurs also in the Proverbs of Solomon, chap. xxv. ver. 20. But whether the name _nitrum_, as Jerome says[1198], be derived from the Egyptian province _Nitria_, whence it was exported in great abundance, or the name of the province was derived from _nitrum_, is a question of little importance in regard to this research. _Nitron_ is mentioned by Herodotus, where he describes the Egyptian method of embalming dead bodies[1199]; by some of the Greeks the word was written and pronounced _litron_. In the same manner people say _nympha_ and _lympha_. In order to avoid confusion, I shall here call the _nitrum_ of the ancients nitrum, and the _nitrum_ of the mineralogists saltpetre.

In the course of time men became acquainted with the purer, more useful, and cheaper mineral alkali which was furnished, under the name of soda, by the Moors and inhabitants of the southern countries, who had learned the method of preparing it. The vegetable alkali also was always more and more manufactured in woody districts, as an article in great request, and sold under the name of potash, _cineres clavellati_. All knowledge of the impure alkali from the incrustation of walls was then lost; and as there was no further need of guarding against confusion, it was not longer thought worth while to name saltpetre _sal nitri_: it was called _nitrum_; and the oldest signification of this word being forgotten, it was admitted without further examination, that the _nitrum_ of the ancients was nothing else than our saltpetre.

In the sixteenth century some learned Europeans, while travelling through the East, heard the name _natrum_ given to the mineral alkali which was then exported as an article of commerce, and introduced in their works this transformation of the ancient word _nitrum_. This appellation was employed by the systematic mineralogists, who, giving themselves little trouble about the original meaning of words, and taking care only to avoid confusion, called the mineral alkali also _natrum_, and applied the name of _nitrum_ to saltpetre. As far as I know at present, it was first stated by Peter Bellon and Prosper Alpinus[1200], that the mineral alkali was in the East called _natrum_. The former returned in 1549, and the latter was still in Cairo in 1580.

This word was adopted in mineralogy by Linnæus, in the year 1736, as the name of a species, in which he comprehended for the first time the alkaline incrustation found on walls. In this he is followed by Wallerius, who includes also the mineral alkali from the East. Afterwards the word _natrum_ was employed in the same sense by all mineralogists.

It deserves here to be remarked, that Boyle had even examined and determined the difference between the fixed and volatile alkalies; but that mineralogists and chemists, till the latest periods, believed that all fixed alkali arose, or at least was obtained, by the incineration of plants. The difference between the mineral and vegetable alkalies was first defined, in a proper manner, by the exertion of the German chemists Pott, Model and Marggraf[1201]; especially after the last had proved, in the year 1758, that the basis of common salt was not, as had before been generally believed, an alkaline earth, but a fixed alkali, to which, because it was in many of its properties different from the fixed vegetable alkali, he gave the name of fixed mineral alkali. Soon after this substance was discovered in mineral springs; and Model and others have shown that it is not essentially different from that which in the East is called _natrum_.

It is singular, and yet may be accounted for, that since that time many have spoken of the _nitrum_ and _natrum_ of the ancients, though they are only different pronunciations of the same word; and _natrum_ is never found in the works of the Greeks or the Romans, and not even in writings of the middle ages.

But if the greater part of what I have here said should be considered only as conjecture, it must nevertheless be acknowledged that it is deduced from the nature of the thing; and when impartially compared with what we read in the ancients, the latter I hope will be better understood than it hitherto has been; the impropriety of many readings will become apparent, and the truth of this conjecture be admitted.

Were I here to relate everything that we read of _nitrum_, in order to compare it with nature and to examine it thoroughly, I should be obliged to extend this article to a greater length than might be agreeable to the reader. I shall therefore give only the principal proofs of my assertion, premising, that doubts which might be excited by single passages not here mentioned, will, on a closer comparison, vanish without my assistance. But I maintain that those who wish to explain the old names of natural objects must relate everything said of them, and not that alone which is favourable to their opinion, and which may be often contradicted by what was purposely or accidentally concealed. The first part of such an examination is always a careful collection from the writings of the ancients of all the predicates of the natural object, the systematic name of which one is endeavouring to prove.

There is reason however to conjecture, that the ancients, in the history of their impure nitre, the manner of obtaining which the Romans at least had no opportunity themselves of seeing, for Pliny says expressly that it was not procured in Italy, fell into many errors and mistakes, which at present cannot all be explained.

Hence it happened that the ancients did not understand the art of purifying the salt which they obtained from minerals; and therefore they were obliged to use it in the same impure state in which they found it. On this account they considered each natural mixture as a peculiar kind; gave to the greater part of them, or those most useful,

## particular names; and of these recommended for different purposes those

which, according to their purity or mixture, or according to other circumstances, were the most convenient. It is not probable that all these varieties could be again found out or defined; and it seems to be of little importance, when it is known that the names denote nothing more than the varieties of a mineral.

In this examination it is to be regretted that the book of Theophrastus, in which he expressly treated of _nitrum_, has not been preserved. But it may be believed, even without the testimony of Pliny, that he was one of the most accurate and acute naturalists among the ancients, and that he gave the best account of this substance[1202]. It must, however, be admitted that Pliny thoroughly understood this author, and gave a correct extract from him, and that the transcriber fell into no mistake.

That the _nitrum_ of the ancients was an alkali more or less impure, but not saltpetre, has been long admitted by those who had the least knowledge of mineralogy, as well as by the most sagacious physicians. The grounds for this opinion, as far as I have yet learned, are as follows: more indeed might be found, but these are sufficient to afford a complete proof. Galen, a cautious writer, says that _nitrum_ was in general burnt, by which means its effects were strengthened[1203]. Had it been saltpetre, it is impossible that the ancients should not in burning it have observed its deflagration, and this property is too remarkable not to have been mentioned. But nothing is to be found that can with any probability be supposed to allude to it.

But should it be admitted without any grounds that it was not an alkali but saltpetre which they burnt, it must certainly have been carbonized; for a burning body may easily have fallen into the crucible, and in general _nitrum_ seems to have been burnt in an open fire, like our lime, because Pliny, speaking of the Egyptian, considers the contrary as somewhat uncommon. Physicians then, at any rate, must have observed, that a body very different both in its appearance and effects was produced from saltpetre by burning, but which could not be used for any other purpose than that salt. Of this however we do not find the least intimation.

But _nitrum_ was undoubtedly soda, and on that account when burnt must have become more caustic as well as stronger in most of its effects, and in this respect similar to potash, since [owing to impurities] it in the same manner became moist and deliquesced in the air. What Pliny relates of the Egyptian _nitrum_ becomes then intelligible. The latter, he says, was transported in pitched vessels, because it would otherwise have deliquesced; and he afterwards adds, that it was burnt before it was sent off. Had he known that the latter was the cause and the former the effect, he would have mentioned the latter first; but his whole extract, in regard to nitre, is written in general without order. The vessels, no doubt, were of clay; but whether he means in what he adds that they were not burnt but only baked in the sun, or that before they were filled they were completely dried in the sun, has been determined by no commentator. To me the latter is the more probable. Pliny also mentions another circumstance in regard to the burning of the Egyptian _nitrum_; namely, that it must be done in a close vessel, otherwise it would decrepitate or fly off. This is perfectly intelligible, when it is considered that it contained a great deal of common salt, which alone possessed the property of decrepitating; and it is well known in mineralogy that native soda, and even that which in modern times has been introduced into our collections from Tripoli, and of which I have in my possession a specimen, contains common salt[1204], and often in cubic crystals. Pliny had just reason to add, that _nitrum_ otherwise does not properly decrepitate. The ancients were well acquainted with the resemblance of their _nitrum_ to lime, and especially of that which was burnt. On this account, because the Egyptian was exported after it had been burnt, it could easily be mixed with quicklime, or, as Pliny says, be adulterated. But the proof which he gives he does not seem to have thoroughly understood. The Egyptian must at all times have been caustic (_pungens_) even without lime; but that which was mixed with lime could not so speedily or completely dissolve on the tongue as that which was pure, and left behind it more earth. What he says of a test by the smell, I cannot understand in any other manner than that burnt lime, when moistened with water, diffused that disagreeable vapour observed in apartments the walls of which have been newly plastered; though when the quantity is small this is hardly perceptible.

If I understand Theophrastus[1205] properly, he seems to say, that if _nitrum_ be burnt as soon as it is dug up, it communicates heat to water in the same manner as lime. It may here be seen how great a resemblance the ancients found between their _nitrum_, alkaline earth and lime.

The similarity of wood-ashes to the _nitrum_ of the ancients, which they acknowledged, proves also that it was in reality an alkaline salt. We are told by Theophrastus[1206] that _nitrum_ was said to be produced from oak-ashes; and Pliny[1207], who borrowed from this writer, remarks that it was certain the ashes of that wood were nitrous. He ascribes also to burnt wine-lees the nature and properties of _nitrum_[1208]. Nay he considers as a kind of _nitrum_ those saline ashes which, in many countries destitute of salt, were used for seasoning food, and which were prepared by pouring sea-water or salt brine over burning piles of wood, gradually and in small quantities, so that the fire was not extinguished, by which means the water evaporated, leaving the salt behind, but mixed indeed with charcoal, ashes, earth, and alkaline salts; consequently it must have been moist, or at any rate nauseous, if not refined by a new solution. This method of preparing or boiling salt, which perhaps is the oldest, has been mentioned by various writers; but many of them, through ignorance or neglect, have not told us that sea-water or brine was employed, as they speak in such a manner as if any kind and even fresh water had been used for that purpose.

Varro relates that he saw this process employed on the Rhine[1209]. Pliny says[1210] that oak timber had before been burnt for that purpose. In another place he mentions a similar process among the Gauls and the Germans[1211], as Tacitus does among the Hermanduri and the Catti[1212]. The former also states, on the authority of Theophrastus, that the Umbri burnt salt in the like manner[1213]. It is however certain that Pliny and other ancient writers often quote from Theophrastus what, at present, is not to be found in the works of that naturalist, but in those of his preceptor Aristotle[1214].

Pliny adds, that this paltry method of obtaining salt had been long given up; and this indeed was the natural consequence of increased civilization. It is however certain that it was long continued in many countries, and in some still exists.

About two centuries ago the inhabitants of the province of Zeeland, descendants perhaps of the Catti, used no other salt than what they obtained in the like manner, from mud thrown up by the sea, which they burned and moistened with sea-water, as we are told by Lemnius, who was himself a native of that country. Boxhorn says, in his annotations on the above-quoted passage of Tacitus, that he saw a painting at Zirkzee, in which the whole process was represented. It is probable that salt was boiled exactly in the same manner as at some of the Sleswic islands, described by Denkwerth[1215], from whose account it is seen that the _glebæ marinæ_, of which Lemnius speaks, consisted of mud mixed with roots growing in them; and that the salt when afterwards refined was called there Frisic, in all probability because the inhabitants had learned to make it from their ancestors the Frieslanders. I remember somewhere to have read that salt was made for a long time in this manner by the so-called Wurst-Frieslanders, in the country of Wurst, belonging to the duchy of Bremen. The inhabitants also of the Austrian part of Moldavia, or Buccowina as it is called, still use a salt, which they do not boil, but burn with their superfluous wood, in the like manner from the brine of a saline spring. A member of the former Academy of Brussels[1216] took the trouble to examine the process as described by the ancients, and obtained, as might certainly have been expected, a highly alkaline kind of common salt, similar to that which Pliny, not without reason, considered as a sort of _nitrum_, because undoubtedly it may oftener have been an alkaline carbonate than common salt.

Boerhaave[1217], in quoting the passages of the ancients, did not reflect that, during the incineration of the wood, salt water was poured over it. He considered the whole process as a burning of potash, and thought that the salt obtained was fit for use only because it was made according to the manner of Tachenius. That indeed gives a carbonated salt, which is almost saponaceous, and so mixed with various parts of the burnt plants that it is much milder, consequently fitter for use than common soda or pearlash can be; but that salt was not so much of the Tachenian kind as a species of common salt superabundant in alkali.

If the _nitrum_ was carbonated alkali, there is reason to suppose that the ancients must have occasionally mentioned in their writings that it effervesced with acids. With the mineral acids indeed they were not acquainted; but they had vinegar, and that _nitrum_ produced with this an effervescence had been known in the oldest times. A very clear allusion to this circumstance is found in the book of Proverbs, chap. xxv. ver. 20; where Luther however translates the word by _chalk_. Jerome, whose explanation I have already quoted, was in some degree acquainted with this phænomenon; and therefore to him the comparison of Solomon was intelligible[1218]. But at present I can produce no proofs from Greek writers; though they might have occurred during the use of _nitrum_ in medicine, in consequence of which it was often put into vinegar.

We shall be further convinced what _nitrum_ really was, when the uses to which it was applied, as mentioned in the works of the ancients, are considered. The most common, as soap was not then known, appears to have been in washing, a purpose for which our saltpetre would not be fit; besides, it is at all times too scarce and too dear. I shall not here adduce any proofs of its being employed in this manner, as they often occur, and as several have been already given in the preceding volume[1219]. Many salves and cosmetics were prepared with _nitrum_; and in all probability articles of this kind, used chiefly among the women, are to be understood by the term _nitron parthenicon_, which occurs in Nicholas Myrepsius, in the beginning of the fourteenth century; _matronicon_, mentioned by the same, and by Alexander of Tralles, about the year 565; and the _nitrum matronale_ of Marcellus Empiricus, in the fifth century. That the use of it for washing still continues in the East, is confirmed in various books of travels.

The oldest glass, of the preparation of which any account is to be found in history, was made by means of _nitrum_ or mineral alkali. For though I doubt that it could have been produced on the sandy banks of the Belus, where some merchants, when cooking, supported their pots with lumps of _nitrum_[1220], because sand is not so easily brought to a state of fusion; it at any rate remains certain, that this supposed fusion with our saltpetre is altogether impossible.

The use of _nitrum_ for painting announces, without doubt, an alkaline carbonate, and not saltpetre[1221]; and the case is the same with the various uses in the cookery of the ancients, many of which we have still retained. It was added to bread in baking, according to Pliny[1222], in the stead of salt, but probably to promote its rising, for which purpose it is still employed by the Egyptians, as potash was by our bakers. For this use the mineral alkali was formerly brought from the Levant to France, till it was declared by the physicians to be injurious to the health[1223].

When meat which was too fresh was to be dressed, it was put into _nitrum_[1224], in order to make it tender; and, according to Forskäl and others, this is still practised in the East. Our cooks also know that smoked meat, fish and other dried provisions become more tender when placed in a ley of potash, or when a little potash is added while they are boiling.

_Nitrum_, however, was employed for curing articles of food which people wished to preserve. This appears to contradict what has been mentioned above; but in all probability a caustic sort was used for the former purpose; but for the latter a mild kind, mixed with a great deal of common salt. There were so many species, that some of them might have been applied to quite contrary purposes.

As I conjecture, the use of _nitrum_ for causing chestnuts and other husky fruits to boil soft, was also known: to produce the same effect, potash is at present thrown among boiling lentils and peas. I am inclined to think that for this reason Apicius caused chestnuts to be boiled with nitre.

It is highly probable that this effect of alkaline carbonates induced agriculturists to believe that beans, peas, lentils and other leguminous fruits, if steeped, before they were sown, in water in which nitre had been dissolved, or if the dung spread over the earth had been mixed with nitre, the future product could be more easily boiled soft[1225]. However useful this addition may be in cookery, it would produce little effect on seed; and it appears to me that the old agriculturists placed little confidence in the last-mentioned use, because they were not agreed in regard to the result. Virgil and others seem to expect from it an increase of the fruit[1226]; but others, security against beetles, which eat the fruit and leave the husks empty[1227]. When cabbages were transplanted they were strewed over with nitre, and by these means were said to come sooner to maturity[1228]. Radishes also were treated in the same manner, or besprinkled with nitrous water, in order to make them more tender[1229].

A common method employed by the ancient cooks to give a beautiful green colour to pickled or boiled vegetables, was to add _nitrum_ to them while boiling; but this effect could be produced by _natrum_, and not by the _nitrum_ of the moderns, or that neutral salt called saltpetre[1230].

Among the oldest accounts of _nitrum_ is that where it is mentioned as being employed for embalming dead bodies. It would be tiresome to read over and examine everything written on that subject by the learned; but this much I think is clear, that either the flesh, and in general the softer parts of the body could be corroded in the course of seventy days by the Egyptian nitrum[1231], which, as above shown, was burnt, and in general mixed with unslaked lime, and consequently caustic[1232]; or that the moist parts could be desiccated by carbonate alkali, in the same manner as the manufacturers of parchment purify and dry their skins by the application of chalk. That saltpetre in no case could be useful for this purpose needs hardly be mentioned.

The ancient physicians, who were unacquainted with our numerous class of salts, employed their _nitrum_ in many ways, and for a great variety of mixtures; but no writer, as far as I know, ever took the trouble to examine these recipes, though it has long since been declared that _nitrum_ must have been potash or salt of tartar. Matthioli[1233] asserted, that those physicians would act very improperly who should prescribe our saltpetre where the ancients employed their _nitrum_; and indeed those in the least acquainted with the effects of salts must know, that all those extolled by the ancients announce carbonated alkalies. Thus burnt _nitrum_ was employed for cleaning black teeth, as at present many use tobacco ashes instead of tooth-powder. It is seen by the works of Aretæus and others, that burnt _nitrum_ was used as a caustic, till people learned in modern times to prepare the more active _causticum potentiale_, or _sal causticum_.

What the ancients say of the taste of their _nitrum_ seems, however, not entirely applicable to pure carbonated alkali; and much less, or not at all, to our saltpetre. Had they meant the latter, they would certainly not have failed to mention the sensation of coolness which it occasions when applied to the tongue. Galen and Aetius say, that _nitrum_ is as bitter as gall; but Serapio ascribes to it a saline taste, with a small degree of bitterness; as does also Pliny, only that for bitterness he substitutes the word sharpness. The names of tastes, however, are as uncertain as the names of the colours which occur in the works of the ancients. Both certainly deserve to be more accurately examined, and to be defined by comparing the things to which these names are given. Prosper Alpinus, however, is of opinion that what the ancients called _amarum_, is not inapplicable to the taste of _natrum_.

The ancients mention various springs and streams which contained what they called _nitrum_[1234]; but nitrous water, according to the present acceptation of the word, that is, water which contains saltpetre, does not exist; and if credit is to be given to Marggraf and others, that they observed traces of saltpetre in some kinds of water, the instances must have been so rare that mention of them could not be expected among the ancients. Their nitrous water was undoubtedly alkaline, and this indeed is not scarce. Such water was recommended by the ancient physicians, both for bathing and drinking[1235]; and Pliny says, it was singular that the salt of such water would not shoot into crystals, like common salt, which is undoubtedly true[1236].

Alkaline water of this kind, such as that of Armenia, was used for washing, and also by fullers. In Egypt, at present, people wash in the same manner with _nitrum_.

It appears to me that many kinds of water, which were only impure and not potable on account of their nauseous taste, were considered by the ancients as nitrous. This seems to be proved by the means which they propose for rendering nitrous water fit to be drunk; that is, by throwing into it clay, or some grains of barley[1237]. In the like manner, I saw the brewers at Amsterdam improve their dirty water, in some degree, by putting into it kneaded clay, and allowing it to sink to the bottom.

One foundation more for my assertion may be found, I think, in the name _borax_. The ancient _nitrum_ by the Arabians was called _Bauracon_ or _Baurach_. When that salt, which at present is everywhere called borax, became known to the Arabians, it was at first generally considered as a kind of nitre, and on that account called _Baurach_, because in most of its properties it approached near to the _nitrum_ of the ancients, that is, the _natrum_ of the present day. But afterwards, when the difference became known, our borax, at least in Europe, retained exclusively the general name of _Baurach_, from which at length was formed the present word _borax_. My conclusion therefore is, that the _nitrum_ of the ancients must have been mineral alkali; otherwise it is impossible that our borax, which till modern times was reckoned to be mineral alkali, should have been considered as a _nitrum_.

For many centuries past, the people in Africa and Asia, and also in Spain and Sicily, have cultivated some kinds of plants, which they dry and then burn to ashes. By regulating the fire in a particular manner, they cause these ashes to assume a certain degree of concretion, or vitrification, by which means they are formed into solid cakes of a grey colour, interspersed with many white and black spots. This substance, which in consequence of the vitrification does not become moist in the air, is broken into fragments, and sent to every part of Europe under the name of _soda_, for the use of the glass-houses, soap-boilers, dyers, and for other purposes.

These plants were undoubtedly first cultivated and employed in Europe by the Arabians, who made known the use of them. Those first or chiefly employed were named by them _axnan_, _usnan_, _usnen_, or _uscnanon_; and also _Hasciscio alcali_, that is, _herba kali_, the plant or herb kali, because the name _kali_, or, with the article prefixed, _al kali_, was not given to the plant but to the half-vitrified ashes _kali_. Hence the chemists call salts obtained from the ashes of plants, alkaline salts. I do not know how old this appellation may be; but it is to be found in Vincent Bellovacensis and in the interpolated writings of Geber and Avicenna, and particularly in a passage quoted by the former from an old alchemist named Jahie, where it is called _sal alchali_[1238]. All these salts formerly were considered as nitrous salts, or a kind of _nitrum_. It was indeed soon observed that soda and wood-ashes, which from the earliest periods had been burnt in woody districts, and which are now called potash, were not all of the same nature; but when the difference between the mineral and vegetable alkalies began to be studied, it was then known that soda contains the former, that is, our _natrum_, and potash the latter, but both indeed often rendered impure by earthy and foreign saline particles; and that there are many plants from the ashes of which mineral and not vegetable alkali is obtained. A question now arises, How old in the Levant is the method of preparing this _natrum_ from the ashes of plants?

Michaelis is of opinion that it is mentioned in Malachi, chap. iii. ver. 2; which passage I shall give according to Luther’s translation: “Who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like the fire of the goldsmith, and the soap of the scourer. He will sit and melt and purify the silver, and make pure like gold and silver.” This learned man here seems to think that the sacred writer alludes to refining the noble metals, and that the word _borith_ means soda, which indeed may serve as a flux in the purification of them. I at first considered this meaning as true; but, on closer examination, I am fully convinced that we have both erred.

Those who read without prejudice the above passage of Malachi, must remark, that a double comparison or double image is employed. The messenger there promised was to separate the good from the bad, the clean from the unclean. The first occupation is compared with the labour of the gold-refiner; the other, with that of the scourer of clothes. The first image is afterwards heightened, because the poet, in all probability, was desirous of applying the separation of the ignoble parts, such as slag, by means of fire, as being the stronger image which denotes punishment, in a closer manner to the Levites and priests. At the time of the poet, before the invention of soap, people employed for washing either nitre or the saponaceous juice of certain plants, which I have already endeavoured to determine. The _borith_ of the washer there expressly named, was undoubtedly one of these soap plants, and not the half-vitrified ashes either of soda or potash.

This passage of Malachi was so understood in the oldest times. Professor Tychsen, a true pupil and intimate friend of Michaelis, to whose opinion I subjected my doubts, assured me that Michaelis was never able to convince him of the justness of his exposition; especially as Jerome[1239], without the least hesitation, understood _borith_ to be a plant growing in Palestine, and used there for washing; and as the Greek translators, who were much nearer to the period of the poet, and could not be unacquainted with a thing so much used, have translated _borith_ by the word ποα, a plant.

In Jeremiah, chap. ii. ver. 22[1240], both the substances formerly used for washing, _nitrum_ and the soap-plant, are so clearly named, that Michaelis was obliged to admit that we cannot understand there soda or potash, but a ley or soap, the last of which however was not at that time known. But, to speak the truth, potash and soda would not be altogether unfit for washing; at any rate, not less fit than the _nether_ or _nitrum_ there named. What may serve, however, to refute entirely the opinion of Michaelis is, that no proof has yet been found that soda is of so great antiquity. For my part, I am acquainted with no older mention of it than that which occurs in the works of the more modern Arabian physicians, Avicenna, Serapio, and others[1241].

All these grounds afford sufficient proof that the _nitrum_ of the ancients was our _natrum_, and not our saltpetre. But still, in the account given by the ancients of that salt, there remain many things inexplicable. Thus, for example, no one can accurately define the epithets, _chalastricum_, _halmirhaga_, _agrium_, _spuma nitri_, _aphronitrum_, and others, because they do not indicate different kinds, as already said, but accidental properties of the same salt. Without enlarging further on this subject, I shall only remark that Pliny admits a natural and an artificial kind of _nitrum_, and this division is adopted by Serapio; but the latter term has not the meaning which we affix to it at present. The ancients were acquainted with no other than native _nitrum_, which they called artificial only when it required a little more trouble and art to obtain it.

Most of the physicians recommend red _nitrum_, which is mentioned also by many of the modern travellers. When Prosper Alpinus was in Egypt the rose-red _nitrum_ cost twice as much as the white. The red colour, in all probability, arises from a metallic admixture; yet the red _nitrum_ may be purer than the other, as red or violet rock-salt is often clearer and purer than that which is colourless.

One of the darkest parts in the history of _nitrum_ is the following passage of Pliny: “Faciunt ex his vasa, nec non frequenter liquatum cum sulphure, coquentes in carbonibus.” The latter words he seems soon after to repeat: “Sal nitrum sulphuri concoctum in lapidem vertitur.” From these words J. Rhodius[1242] concludes that _nitrum fixum_ was at that time known, because he considered _nitrum_ to be saltpetre; but in that case with the sulphur, Glaser’s sal polychrest must properly have been produced. This, however, was not the case, because _nitrum_ was fixed alkali. The ancients therefore, when they placed it with sulphur in a crucible upon burning coals must have obtained liver of sulphur, which when it cools is hard, but soon becomes moist when exposed to the air. But I will not venture to determine whether anything of this kind is to be supposed in Pliny, who did not himself fully understand the subject on which he touches.

The account of vessels made of _nitrum_ is still more singular. Michaelis conjectured[1243] that articles of various kinds were cut out of this substance, not for real use but merely for ornament, in the same manner as similar things are cut out of rock-salt in Transylvania, many specimens of which I have in my collection[1244]. But even if _nitrum_ had been compact and strong enough for this purpose, there could not be the same inducement to employ it as rock-salt, which, in consequence of its solidity, transparency, brightness and smoothness, appears to be capable of furnishing vessels equal to those made of the most beautiful crystal. Dalechamp seems to explain the whole as applicable to glazing; but in this case _nitrum_ could serve only as a flux.

Though it can be certainly proved that the _nitrum_ of the ancients was an alkaline salt, it is difficult to determine the time when our saltpetre was discovered or made known. As many have conjectured that it was a component part of the Greek fire, invented about the year 678, which, in all probability, gave rise to the invention of gunpowder, I examined the prescriptions for the preparation of it. The oldest, and perhaps the most certain, is that given by the princess Anna Comnena; in which however I find only resin, sulphur and oil, but not saltpetre. Klingenstierna[1245] therefore judged very properly, that all recipes in which saltpetre occurs are either forged or of modern invention. Of this kind are those which Scaliger, at least according to his own account, found in Arabic works, and in which mention is made of _oleum de nitro_ and _sal petræ_[1246]. But it does not occur in that prescription given by Marcus Græcus, and copied by Albertus Magnus, who died in 1280[1247].

I must still believe that the first certain mention of saltpetre will be found in the oldest account of the preparation of gunpowder, which, in my opinion, became known in Europe in the thirteenth century, about the same time that the use of the Greek fire, of which there were many kinds, began to be lost. Among the oldest information on this subject is that found in the above-quoted work of Albertus Magnus, and the writings of Roger Bacon, who died in 1278. It is doubted whether the first-mentioned treatise belongs to Albertus; but it is certain that the author, whoever he may have been, and also Bacon, both derived their information from the same source.

When M. von Arretin lately announced that he was about to publish a manuscript preserved in the electoral library at Munich, which contained the true recipe for making the Greek fire and the oldest for gunpowder, the same writing, as appears, was printed from two manuscripts in the library at Paris. I have now before me a copy of it, which was transmitted to the library of our university by M. Laporte Dutheil, conservateur des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque[1248].

It contains many recipes, but only with a few variations, as in Albertus Magnus; and it may be evidently seen that Roger Bacon employed this writing, which is mentioned by Jebb in the preface to his edition, from a copy preserved in the library of Dr. Mead. Of this Marcus Græcus nothing at present is known. According to some, he lived in the ninth century; but others, with more probability, place him in the thirteenth. Of his work, perhaps, we have only a translation; for, from the surname Græcus, there is reason to think that the original was written in the Greek language. I must, however, remark that Cardan, where he gives directions for making a fire which can be kindled by water, names Marcus Gracchus, but not Græcus. Scaliger, who, as is very probable, had this writing also, makes no mention of it or its author.

This Marcus speaks of saltpetre three times; first under the name of _sal petrosum_, which occurs also in the same prescription in Albertus Magnus; but the addition, which Albertus does not repeat, is very remarkable. In my opinion, _scrophulæ contra lapides_ means the incrustation found on walls, which was represented as a kind of leprosy. The addition of ashes, or alkaline salts, the author either forgot or omitted, because perhaps he did not consider it as indispensably necessary. In another place it is said, _Lapis qui dicitur petra solis_, or, as it is in other manuscripts, _salis_; but whether saltpetre is here understood I will not venture to determine. In a third passage we find the words _de sale petroso_, or _de salepetro_.

In the works of Bacon the term _sal petræ_ occurs at least three times. According to Casiri, the term _pulvis nitratus_ is to be found in an Arabic manuscript, the author of which lived about the year 1249[1249]. If the work of Geber, already quoted, be genuine, and if this writer lived, as some think, in the eighth century, it would be the oldest where saltpetre is mentioned, in a prescription for an _aqua solutiva_ or _dissolutiva_, which almost seems to be aqua regia. I have not observed the name _sal petræ_ in the works of Vincent Bellovacensis, who lived in the thirteenth century.

In a word, I am more than ever inclined to accede to the opinion of those who believe that gunpowder was invented in India, and brought by the Saracens from Africa to the Europeans, who however improved the preparation of it, and found out different ways of employing it in war, as well as small arms and cannon[1250]. In no country could saltpetre, and the various uses of it, be more easily discovered than in India, where the soil is so rich in nitrous particles that nothing is necessary but to lixiviate it in order to obtain saltpetre; and where this substance is so abundant, that almost all the gunpowder used in the different wars with which the sovereigns of Europe have tormented mankind was made from Indian saltpetre[1251]. If it be true that saltpetre was not known in Europe till the thirteenth century, neither gunpowder nor aquafortis could have been made before that time; for the former cannot be prepared without saltpetre, nor the latter without nitre. But if it be true that this salt was known at a much earlier period in India, it is not improbable that both gunpowder and aquafortis were used by the Indians and the Arabians before they were employed by the Europeans, especially as the former were the first teachers of chemistry to the latter. In my opinion, what I have already related proves this in regard to gunpowder; and what I shall here add will afford an equal proof in regard to aquafortis.

It is difficult to discover the first mention of mineral acids in the writings of the ancient chemists. In the course of their numerous experiments they obtained indeed, at an early period, acids, the utility of which they extol; but each concealed the process by which they were made; and as they had no method of obtaining them pure, they were for a long time unacquainted with the difference between the kinds. Their prescriptions, when they are found, are so contradictory and so carelessly written, that it is almost impossible to conjecture which of the known acids forms the principal component parts in their recipes or mixtures.

It appears to me, that the first intelligible account of aquafortis occurs in the writings of the Arabians, or of the pupils of Arabian chemists. At present I am acquainted with none older than that to be found in the works of Geber. For though I do not believe that those of which we have Latin translations belong to a Geber of the eighth or ninth century, I am ready to admit that they may be, at any rate, of the twelfth. This appears probable, because about that period aquafortis and various arts are oftener mentioned, and in a much clearer manner, in these writings.

It is to be regretted in the history of chemistry, that it is impossible to determine the period of the Greek chemist or alchemist known under the name of Synesius; but it cannot be doubted that he borrowed a great deal from the works of the Arabians. This Synesius, among the chemical solvents, mentions water of saltpetre, which might be considered as aquafortis[1252]. But, as he mentions at the same time _aqua fæcis_, he appears to me to allude to the _nitrum_ of the ancients, not to our saltpetre, and in general to strong alkaline leys, which indeed are capable of dissolving many bodies.

The monk Theophilus, of whom I have already spoken, and who in all probability lived in the twelfth century, appears also to have been acquainted with aquafortis; for in some of the passages quoted from his works by Raspe[1253], he speaks of an acid which dissolved all metals. In the writings of Vincent Bellovacensis, in the thirteenth century, some traces, but very doubtful, are found of aquafortis. Where he mentions the different sorts of gold he speaks of dissolving it, but by this expression he does not allude to its treatment with fire, which he speaks of separately[1254]. In another place he mentions the different solvents, and among these names vegetable acids, a water of sal-ammoniac, and a water obtained from alum by distillation. He here means undoubtedly a mineral acid[1255]. Michael Meier, the most learned chemist of the seventeenth century, says that Vincentius speaks of aquafortis as of a secret; but the passage I have not yet been able to find[1256].

Spielman states that Lullius, who died in 1315, in the eightieth year of his age, gave an account of his obtaining aquafortis from saltpetre by the addition of vitriol, and that Basilius Valentin was acquainted with the use of clay for the same purpose. Picus Mirandula however declares it to be uncertain whether Arnoldus de Villa Nova was acquainted with the acid of saltpetre in the fourteenth century.

It appears to be an old tradition that this acid was first employed at Venice, by some Germans, for separating the noble metals, and conveyed thence as an article of merchandize to every part of Europe. The persons who prepared it were there narrowly watched, in order that the process might not become known. They were employed chiefly for separating the gold from the Spanish silver, and by these means acquired great riches. Hence arose the report that the people of Venice understood the art of making gold; and it is certain that in many countries the gold refiners were for a long time considered as gold makers; but in no period were there more gold makers than in that when separation in the moist way became known. I can however give less account of this art of the Venetians than of the introduction of it into France in the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth century.

William Budæus, who was born in 1467, and died in 1540, speaks of it in his book, printed for the first time in 1516, as a thing entirely new at that period[1257]. A man of low extraction, named Le Cointe, first undertook to separate gold from silver at Paris, by means of a water which Budæus calls _aqua chrysulca_. It is very remarkable, that by means of this water he could separate the smallest particle of gold from silver, and from every other metal; nay, he could even take from vessels their gilding without altering their form. By this art he acquired great wealth; which together with his secret descended to his son, who at the time was the only gold refiner at Paris.

He adds, that the art was exceedingly dangerous as well as unhealthy, and required great precaution. The possessor of it, when he became rich, left the execution of the work to a servant, whom he directed at a distance, that he might not expose himself to the pernicious fumes of the effervescing liquor. The fumes of the acid derived from saltpetre are indeed prejudicial to the health; but the danger has been much exaggerated, and no doubt with a view to deter people from attempting to discover the art, and to furnish a pretence for raising the price of the production[1258].

Budæus relates also, that the gold was left behind undissolved. The silver only was dissolved, and by another art was separated from the water and washed. It may here be easily perceived that Le Cointe employed aquafortis; but if he was able to loosen the gold from gilt vessels without destroying them, he must have used aqua regia, which consequently was not then unknown.

From other information, it appears that the mint at Paris purchased the art from Le Cointe’s son, but still kept it a secret. On this account Francis I., by a decree issued at Blois on the 19th of March 1540, authorized the raising the value of coin, in order to defray the expense of fuel and assaying-water. In the middle of the seventeenth century, the preparation of aquafortis and the process of assaying in the moist way were fully known in France. At any rate, in the month of January 1637, the distillers obtained a guild letter, in which aquafortis is mentioned among the articles sold by them.

When saltpetre became necessary to governments for the manufacture of gunpowder, they endeavoured to obtain it at as cheap a rate as possible. No one before suspected that rulers would be justified in exclusively carrying away the incrustation of walls from private houses, which, when it could be used, became _accessorium fundi_. But the idea of regalia, so often abused, was extended so wide under various pretences, that the saltpetre regale and the letting of it was one of the severest oppressions to which the people were exposed by their rulers, and which occasioned almost as bitter complaints as the hunting regale, founded on no better grounds. I shall not here attempt to delineate the sufferings which were thus occasioned in many countries; they are still fresh in remembrance.

The oldest mention of this hated regale which I myself have found is of the year 1419. At that time, Gunther, archbishop of Magdeburg, granted to some person the right of searching out saltpetre and boiling it, during a year, in the district of Gibichenstein, for which he was to pay a barrel of saltpetre, and deliver to the archbishop the remainder at the rate of five cross-groschens per pound. The succeeding archbishop, Frederick, let in the year 1460, to a burgher of Halle, all the earth and the saltpetre that could be collected from it in the bailiwick of Gibichenstein, for four years, at the annual rent of a barrel of good refined saltpetre. On the same conditions, bishop Ernest, in 1477, let to some one for his lifetime the collection of the saltpetre. In 1544, a certain person obtained the collection of saltpetre from two heaps of rubbish before the gates at Halle. The magistrates of Halle also in 1545 had a saltpetre-work and a powder-mill. In the year 1560, John VI., archbishop of Triers, gave to some one permission to search for and dig up saltpetre. In 1583, the saltpetre regale was confirmed by a Brandenburg decree as a thing long known, and the case was the same with a Hessian of the year 1589.

It is very probable that this example was soon followed by most sovereigns; but even if they had collected and scraped together the nitrous incrustation of all the walls in Europe, they certainly would not have found a quantity of saltpetre sufficient for the gunpowder used in the numerous wars which took place, had not a much greater supply been obtained from India, and particularly from Patna. I do not know whether the Portuguese brought this article to Europe; but that it was imported at a very early period by the Dutch is proved by the oldest ladings of their return ships; and they at length found means to appropriate this branch of trade so entirely to themselves, that the other Europeans for a long time could not obtain any saltpetre in India.

In the seventeenth century, when chemistry began to be studied with more care and attention in Europe, and particularly in Germany, and the component parts and production of saltpetre became better known, many conceived the idea of improving the methods of obtaining it in Europe so much, that it might be possible to dispense with the Indian saltpetre, and flattered themselves with the hopes of thence deriving great advantages. Some proposed to fill tubes with putrifiable substances and earth capable of fixing of the nitric acid; others preferred building vaults of these substances, and Glauber recommended the filling of pits with them. The proposal, however, which met with the greatest approbation was that of building walls of them. Through a confidence in this idea, towns and villages were compelled to erect and maintain a certain number of saltpetre walls, under the most gracious promise that the collectors of saltpetre should no longer be allowed to spoil private dwellings, or render them unhealthful.

But experience has shown that all the means and coercive measures hitherto employed have rendered the European saltpetre much dearer than that obtained by commerce from Bengal. This will be readily comprehended, when it is known that earth richly impregnated with saltpetre abounds in India, and that it may be extracted by lixiviation without any addition, and brought to crystallize in that warm climate without the aid of fire; that the price of labour there is exceedingly low; that this salt is brought from India instead of ballast by all the commercial nations of Europe, where the competition of the sellers prevents the price from ever being extravagantly high, while the preparation of it in Europe, in consequence of the still increasing price of labour, fuel and ashes, is always becoming dearer. This regale will at length be everywhere scouted. In the duchy of Wurtemberg and the Prussian states, where it was most rigidly enforced, in consequence of an urgent representation from the States it was abolished in 1798; but in both countries an indemnification was given to government for the loss. The case also has been the same in Sweden[1259]. In the duchy of Brunswick it was soon suffered to drop; but in the electoral dominions it never was introduced.

[The greater part of our nitre is derived from Bengal, where, as in Egypt, Persia, Spain, &c., it exists in the soil. It is separated by lixiviation and crystallization. In France, Sweden and some other countries it is prepared artificially in nitre-beds. These are formed of various animal matters, mixed with lime or mortar-rubbish; the mixture is watered and stirred occasionally, and allowed to remain for a considerable time. The whole is then lixiviated and decomposed by carbonate of potash. The nitre is then separated and purified by crystallization. In some cases wood-ashes are mixed with the animal matters; the decomposition with potash is then unnecessary.

It is a question whether the nitric acid in the nitre arises from the nitrogen of the atmosphere or that in the animal matters. Dr. Davy has found nitre in a cave at Ceylon, where no nitrogenous matter was present; and in some parts of India, Spain, and some other countries, at a distance from all habitations, immense quantities of nitre are reproduced in soils which have been washed the year before. Nitre is directly brought into this country from Calcutta and Madras, in bags containing from 150 lbs. to 175 lbs. each. From 200,000 cwts. to 260,000 cwts. are annually imported into the United Kingdom.

In making gunpowder, the components, the sulphur, nitre, and charcoal should be as pure as possible, and reduced to the finest possible powder; they are sifted and mixed in the proper proportions. The mixture is then made into a cake with water, and ground between calcareous millstones. It is then granulated through sieves in another mill, and again sifted. It is then polished and hardened by revolving rapidly in a cask, and finally dried. The proportions of the constituents vary in different countries; at Waltham Abbey they are seventy-five nitre, fifteen charcoal and ten sulphur. The quantity of gunpowder consumed in this country is enormous; moreover, 4,000,000 lbs. are annually exported, the greater part of which is sent to the western coast of Africa.

The force of the explosion of gunpowder is owing to the sudden disengagement of gaseous products; these consist of nitrogen, carbonic oxide, carbonic acid, and sulphurous acid gases; and their volume has been calculated to amount to 2000 times the bulk of the powder.]

FOOTNOTES

[1190] To this subject belong the following works:--Ars Magna Artilleriæ, Auct. Cas. Siomienowicz. Amst. 1650, fol. p. 61. The author thinks that the nitrum of the ancients is not at present known.

Natural History of Nitre, by W. Clarke. Lond. 1670, 8vo. It is here said that the nitrum of the ancients was impure saltpetre, and that the latter is produced from the former by purification.

G. C. Schelhameri de Nitro, cum veterum, tum nostro commentatio, Amst. 1709, 8vo, contains good philological observations, particularly in regard to the period, but leaves the question undetermined.

Saggi sul ristabilimento dell’ antica arte de’ Greci e Romani pittori, del Sig. Doct. Vin. Requeno. Parma, 1787, 2 tomi in 8vo, ii. pp. 95, 131: a learned but diffuse work. He thinks that the _nitrum_ of the ancients was our saltpetre; and what others consider as proofs of its being mineralized alkali, he understands as indicating alkalized saltpetre. I am not, however, convinced. Before I ascribe to the ancients a knowledge of our saltpetre, I must be shown in their writings properties of their _nitrum_ sufficient to satisfy me that it was the same substance.

Commentat. de nitro Plinii, in J. D. Michaelis commentationes. Bremæ 1784, 4to. The author only illustrates the account of Pliny, and states what, according to his opinion, we are to understand in it in regard to alkali, and what in regard to our saltpetre.

[1191] [Since the discovery of the immense deposits of nitrate of soda in Peru, this salt, from its being much cheaper, has replaced the nitrate of potash in the manufacture of aquafortis, but it is not adapted to the making of gunpowder owing to its deliquescent property.]

[1192] I found the account of the Portuguese saltpetre in Mémoires Instructifs pour un Voyageur. The author of this work was the well-known Theodore king of Corsica.

[1193] More accounts of native saltpetre may be found in Recueil de Mémoires sur la Formation du Salpetre. Par les Commissaires de l’Academie. Paris, 1776, 8vo. Del Nitro Minerale Memoria dell’ ab. Fortis, 1787, 8vo.

[1194] The first, or one of the first, who was acquainted with and made known the cubic saltpetre, was professor John Bohn of Leipsic, in the Acta Eruditorum, 1683, p. 410; but with more precision in his Dissertat. Chymico-Physicæ, Lips. 1696, 8vo, p. 36.

[1195] [It is scarcely necessary to inform the reader that the author understands the soda of commerce, which is a carbonate of soda, and not the hydrated or caustic soda of chemists.]

[1196] [Crude soda or _kelp_ was formerly manufactured to a very large extent in the Highlands, by burning the sea-weed, but since the tax has been taken off salt, most of the soda of British commerce is made by decomposing this with chalk and some carbonaceous matter.]

[1197] In like manner, a heap of dung covered with earth is lixiviated, and the result, without the addition of ashes, used as saltpetre.

[1198] The passage of Jerome relating to Proverbs, xxv. 20, I here insert entire, because I shall often have occasion to employ it:--“Nitrum a Nitria provincia, ubi maxime nasci solet, nomen accepit. Nee multum a salis Ammoniaci specie distat. Nam sicut salem in litore maris fervor solis conficit, durando in petram aquas marinas, quas major vis ventorum, vel ipsius maris fervor in litoris ulteriora projecerit; ita in Nitria, ubi æstate pluviæ prolixiores tellurem infundunt, adest ardor sideris tantus, quod ipsas aquas pluviales per latitudinem arenarum concoquat in petram; salis quidem vel glaciei aspectui simillimam; sed nil gelidi rigoris, nil salsi saporis habentem, quæ tamen, juxta naturam salis, in caumate durare, et in nubilos, aere fluere ac liquefieri solet. Hanc indigenæ sumentes servant, et ubi opus extiterit, pro lomento utuntur. Unde Judæo peccanti dicit propheta Jeremias: Si laveris te nitro, et multiplicaveris tibi herbam borith, maculata es in iniquitate tua, dicit Dominus Deus. Crepitat autem in aqua quomodo calx viva; et ipsum quidem disperit, sed aquam lavationi habilem reddit; cujus natura cui sit apta figuræ, cernens Solomon ait: Acetum in nitro, qui cantat carmina cordi pessimo. Acetum quippe si mittatur in nitrum, protinus ebullit.”

[1199] Herodot. ii. cap. 86 et 87.

[1200] Histor. Ægypti Naturalis iii. 2. See also Forskäl Flora Ægyptiaco-Arabica, p. xlv.

[1201] [Duhamel proved soda to be distinct from potash in 1736, Marggraf _confirmed_ it in 1758.]

[1202] Lib. xxxi. cap. 10.

[1203] De Simplic. Med. Facult. ix. Dioscorides also, v. 131, speaks as if it had been well known that _nitrum_ was commonly burnt.

[1204] Phil. Transactions, 1771, vol. lxi. p. 567.

[1205] De Igne, p. 435, ed. Heinsii, where he speaks of the heat produced in lime by slaking it. Aristotle also mentions together κονία and νίτρον, on account of similar properties. Problemat. i. 39. ed. Septalii, p. 71.

[1206] Hist. Plant. iii. 9, p. 50.

[1207] xxvi. 8.

[1208] xiv. 20.

[1209] De Re Rustica, lib. i. c. 7. Little, however, depended on the wood; the principal thing was the sprinkling with water.

[1210] xxxi. 10.

[1211] xxxi. 7. Here express mention is made of brine.

[1212] Taciti Annal. xiii. 57.

[1213] Lib. xxx. 7.

[1214] This is particularly the case in regard to Aristot. Auscult. Mirab., as I have remarked in the preface to my edition.

[1215] In the island of Dagebull, and also in Faretoft and Galmesbull, Frisio salt is made in the following manner. The inhabitants proceed along the coast in small vessels, and at low water go on shore on the mud, which they dig up till they come to a kind of earth called _torricht_; it is of a turfy nature, and interwoven with roots. This earth they convey to the islands, where they spread it out in the sun and leave it to dry, after which it is formed into a heap and burnt to ashes. What remains is again spread out, moistened and trod upon with the naked feet; the small stones and other useless parts are picked out, and being again dried and besprinkled with water, the ley is put into salt-pans and boiled into salt.

[1216] Mémoires de l’Acad. de Bruxelles, 1777, i. p. 345.

[1217] Elementa Chemiæ. Lugd. Bat. 1732, 4to, i. p. 767.

[1218] Boyle considered the words of Solomon as a proof that _nether_ must be fixed alkali; and he was the more convinced of it when he saw nitre obtained from Egypt effervesce with acids.

[1219] See the History of Soap in vol. i.

[1220] Plin. xxxvi. 26, § 65. The use of nitrum in making glass is often mentioned.

[1221] Plin. xxxi. 10.

[1222] Lib. xxx. 10.

[1223] Forskäl Flora, p. xlvi.

[1224] Plutarchi Sympos. lib. vi. at the end.

[1225] Theophrasti Histor. Plant. ii. 5.--Geopon. ii. 35, 2; and ii. 41.--Palladius, xii. tit. i. 3, p. 996.

[1226] Virg. Georg. i. 193.--Plin. xviii. 7. 845.--Geopon. ii. 36, p. 184.

[1227] Columella, ii. 10, 11.

[1228] Plin. xix. 8, § 41.--Pallad. iii. 24, 6.--Geopon. xii. 17, 1.--Theophrast. de Causa Plant. vi. 14.

[1229] Plin. xxxi. 10; and xix. 5, § 26, 10.

[1230] Apicius, iii. 1, p. 70.--Martial, lib. xiii. ep. 17.--Plin. xix. 8, §41, 3; xxx. 10.--Columella, xi. 3, 23. [Carbonate of soda, as is well known, is still frequently used for this purpose in culinary operations.]

[1231] Herodot. ii. 87.

[1232] Our tanners use unslaked lime for a similar purpose.

[1233] Annot. to Dioscorides, v. 89, p. 951.

[1234] A catalogue of such waters may be found in Baccii Liber de Thermis. Patavii, 1711, fol. v. 5, 6, 7, p. 160. [Carbonate of soda occurs for instance in the celebrated mineral waters of Seltzer and Carlsbad, and also in the volcanic springs of Iceland, especially the Geyser.]

[1235] Plin. xxxi. 6, § 32, p. 556. Vitruv. viii. 3, p. 158.

[1236] xxxi. 10.

[1237] Plin. xxiv. 1; xxxi. 3, § 22. Geopon. ii. 5, 14, p. 85.

[1238] Speculum Naturæ, vii. 87, p. 480.

[1239] Hieronym. ad Jerem. ii. 22.

[1240] “For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord God.”

[1241] In regard to the two plants _usnee_, _asne_, and _usnem_, _assuan_, see Avicennæ Canon. Medic. Venet. 1608, fol. pp. 338, 406, 407. Serapio de Temperam. Simplic. p. 164. In Du Cange’s Gloss. Gr. p. 12, _addend._ ἀλκαλη, and in Gloss. Lat. v. the word _alcali_ is quoted only from modern writers. That _kali_, however, does not mean the plant, but the concrete ashes, is proved by the explanation in Castelli’s Lexicon.

[1242] In the annotations to Scribonius Largus, p. 228.

[1243] Commentationes, p. 145. Recueil des Questions, &c., p. 231.

[1244] Such things were known to Aristotle. See Mirab. Ausc. c. 146.

[1245] Dissertat. de Igne Græco. Upsaliæ, 1752.

[1246] De Subtilitate, xiii. 3. p. 71. ed. Francof. 1612, 8vo.

[1247] De Mirabilibus Mundi, p. 201; at the end of the book De Secretis Mulierum. Amst. 1702, 12mo.

[1248] Liber Ignium ad Comburendos Hostes, auctore Marco Græco; ou, Traité des Feux propres à détruire les Ennemies, composé par Marcus le Grec. Publié d’après deux manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale. Paris, 1804, three sheets in quarto.

[1249] Biblioth. Arab. Hisp. Escurial, ii.

[1250] See the works quoted in Fabricii Bibliograph. Antiquar. p. 978. In the year 1798, M. Langles proved, in a paper read in the French National Institute, that the Arabians obtained a knowledge of gunpowder from the Indians, who had been acquainted with it in the earliest periods. The use of it in war was forbidden in their sacred books, the Veidam or Vede. It was employed in 690 at the battle of Mecca.

[1251] The following may be advantageously consulted:--Archæologia, v. p. 148; Henry’s Hist. of Great Britain, vol. iv.; Muratori Antiq. Italiæ Medii Ævi, ii. p. 514; Watson’s Chemical Essays, i. pp. 284, 327; Histoire de France, par Velly, xvi. p. 330; Dow’s Hist. of Hindostan, vol. ii.; Erdbeschreibung der entferntesten Welttheile, ii. p. 159; Stettler Schweitzer Chronik. p. 109. The inhabitants of Berne purchased the first gunpowder from the people of Nuremberg in 1413.

[1252] A fragment from the writings of Synesius was printed, for the first time, in Frabricii Bibliotheca Græca, viii. p. 236, where the words occur.

[1253] Raspe on Oil-painting. London, 1781, 4to, p. 145.

[1254] Speculum Naturale, vii. cap. 13, p. 432.

[1255] Lib. vii. cap. 88, p. 480.

[1256] Symbola Aureæ Mensæ. Francof. 1617, 4to, lib. vii. p. 335.

[1257] De Asse, 1556, fol. lib. iii. p. 101.

[1258] Les Anciens-Minéralogistes de France, par Gobet. Paris, 1779, 2 vols. 8vo, i. p. xxxiv. i. p. 51, 284; ii. p. 847.

[1259] [The celebrated chemist Baron Berzelius, professor at Stockholm, states in his Manual of Chemistry (edit. 1835, vol. iv. p. 86), that every possessor of land in Sweden is still compelled to deliver a certain quantity of saltpetre yearly to the state, and gives directions for testing its goodness.]

BOOK-CENSORS.

“On account of the great ease,” says M. Putter, “with which, after the invention of printing, copies of books could be multiplied and dispersed, it was necessary that some means should be devised to prevent a bad use from being made of this art, and to guard against its being employed to the prejudice of either religion or good morals, or to the injury of states. For this reason it was everywhere laid down as a general maxim, that no one should be allowed to establish a printing office at pleasure, but by the permission and under the inspection of government; and that no work should be suffered to go to press until it had been examined by a censor appointed for that purpose, or declared by a particular order to be of a harmless nature[1260].”

Many centuries however before the invention of printing, books were forbidden by different governments, and even condemned to the flames. A variety of proofs can be produced that this was the case among both the ancient Greeks and Romans. At Athens the works of Protagoras were prohibited; and all the copies of them which could be collected were burnt by the public crier[1261]. At Rome the writings of Numa, which had been found in his grave, were, by order of the senate, condemned to the fire, because they were contrary to the religion which he had introduced[1262]. As the populace at Rome were, in times of public calamity, more addicted to superstition than seemed proper to the government, an order was issued that all superstitious and astrological books should be delivered into the hands of the prætor. This order was often repeated; and the emperor Augustus caused more than two thousand of these books to be burnt at one time[1263]. Under the same emperor the satirical works of Labienus were condemned to the fire, which was the first instance of this nature; and it is related as something singular, that a few years after the writings of the person who had been the cause of the order for that purpose shared the like fate, and were also publicly burnt[1264]. (In a manner somewhat similar the works of Ben. Arias Montanus, who assisted to make the first catalogue of prohibited books in the Netherlands, were afterwards inserted in a catalogue of the same kind). The burning of these works having induced Cassius Severus to say, in a sneering manner, that it would be necessary to burn him alive, as he had got by heart the writings of his friend Labienus, this expression gave rise to a law of Augustus against abusive writings[1265]. When Cremutius Cordus, in his History, called C. Cassius the last of the Romans, the senate, in order to flatter Tiberius, caused the book to be burnt; but a number of copies were saved by being concealed[1266]. Antiochus Epiphanes caused the books of the Jews to be burnt[1267]; and in the first centuries of our æra the books of the Christians were treated with equal severity, of which Arnobius bitterly complains[1268]. We are told by Eusebius, that Diocletian caused the sacred Scriptures to be burnt[1269]. After the spreading of the Christian religion the clergy exercised against books that were either unfavourable or disagreeable to them, the same severity which they had censured in the heathens as foolish and prejudicial to their own cause. Thus were the writings of Arius condemned to the flames at the council of Nice; and Constantine threatened with the punishment of death those who should conceal them[1270]. The clergy assembled at the council of Ephesus requested the emperor Theodosius II. to cause the works of Nestorius to be burnt; and this desire was complied with[1271]. The writings of Eutyches shared the like fate at the council of Chalcedon; and it would not be difficult to collect examples of the same kind from each of the following centuries.

We have instances also that, many centuries prior to the invention of printing, authors submitted their works, before they were published, to the judgement of their superiors. This was done principally by the clergy; partly to secure themselves from censure or punishment, and

## partly to show their respect to the pope or to bishops. It however does

not appear that this was a duty, but a voluntary act. In the year 768, Ambrosius Autpert, a Benedictine monk, sent his Exposition of the book of Revelation to Pope Stephen III., and begged that he would publish the work and make it known. On this occasion he says expressly, that he is the first writer who ever requested such a favour; that liberty to write belongs to every one who does not wish to depart from the doctrine of the fathers of the church; and he hopes that this freedom will not be lessened on account of his voluntary submission[1272].

Soon after the invention of printing, laws began to be made for subjecting books to examination; a regulation proposed even by Plato, and which has been wished for by many since. It is very probable that the fear under which the clergy were, lest publications should get abroad prejudicial to religion, and consequently to their power, contributed not a little to hasten the establishment of book-censors. The earliest instance of a book printed with a permission from government, is commonly supposed to occur in the year 1480; and Dom Liron, a Benedictine monk, is perhaps the first person who made that remark. He is the author of a work called Singularités Historiques et Litteraires[1273]; in the last part of which, where he speaks of the Heidelberg edition of the book Nosce te ipsum, in 1480, he says, “This is the first publication I found accompanied with several solemn approbations and attestations in its favour.” The same thing is said by J. N. Weislinger, one of the most illiberal defenders of the Catholic church, in whose work, entitled Armamentarium Catholicum[1274], there is an account of that book. He there tells us in Latin, without mentioning Liron, “This is the first book which I have seen, subjected to the examination, reading, and approbation of the clergy;” and in the opinion of Mercier, it really is the oldest. It has four approbations (in Latin); the first and last of which I shall here insert (in English), as they will serve to show the foolish pride of the clergy at that period:--“I Philip Rota, doctor of laws, _though the least of all_, have read over carefully, and diligently examined, this small work, Nosce te; and as I have found it not only composed devoutly and catholically, but abounding also with matter of wonderful utility, I do not hesitate, in testimony of the above, to subscribe my name.... I Mapheus Girardo, by the divine mercy patriarch of Venice and primate of Dalmatia, confiding in the fidelity of the above gentlemen, who have examined and approved the above-mentioned book, do testify that it is a devout and orthodox work.” There were, therefore, censors at this early period who gave their opinion of books without reading them.

I should have considered these instances as the oldest information respecting book-censors, had I not been induced by M. Eccard, the learned amanuensis belonging to our library, to look into the Literary Weekly Journal of Cologne, for the year 1778. In that work I found an ingenious account, by an anonymous author, of the early state of printing in that city, and of two books printed almost a year sooner than 1479, with the approbation of the public censor. The first is Wilhelmi episcopi Lugdunensis Summa de Virtutibus; at the end of which are the following words:--“Benedictus sit dominus virtutum, qui hoc opus earundem felici consummatione terminari dedit in laudabili civitate Coloniensi, temptatum, _admissumque et approbatum ab alma universitate studii_ civitatis praedictae, _de consensu et voluntate_ spectabilis et egregii viri pro tempore recteris ejusdem, impressum per Henr. Quentel.” The other book is a Bible, with the following conclusion:--“Anno incarnationis dominice millesimo quadringentesimo LXXIX ipsa vigilia Matthaei apostoli. Quando insigne veteris novique testamenti opus cum canonibus evangelistarum et eorum concordantiis in laudem et gloriam sancte et individue trinitatis intemerateque virginis Marie impressum in Civitate Coloniensi per Conradum de Homborch, _admissum_, _approbatum_ ab alma universitate Coloniensi.”

The oldest mandate for appointing a book-censor is, as far as I know at present, that issued by Berthold, archbishop of Mentz, in the year 1486, and which may be found in the fourth volume of Guden’s Codex Diplomaticus[1275].

In the year 1501, pope Alexander VI. published a bull, the first part of which may form an excellent companion to the mandate of the archbishop of Mentz[1276]. After some complaints against the devil, who sows tares among the wheat, his holiness proceeds thus: “Having been informed, that by means of the said art many books and treatises containing various errors and pernicious doctrines, even hostile to the holy Christian religion, have been printed, and are still printed in various parts of the world, particularly in the provinces of Cologne, Mentz, Triers, and Magdeburg; and being desirous, without further delay, to put a stop to this detestable evil ... we, by these presents, and by authority of the Apostolic chamber, strictly forbid all printers, their servants, and those exercising the art of printing under them, in any manner whatsoever, in the abovesaid provinces, under pain of excommunication, and a pecuniary fine, to be imposed and exacted by our venerable brethren the archbishops of Cologne, Mentz, Triers, and Magdeburg, and their vicars-general or official in spirituals, according to the pleasure of each in his own province, to print hereafter any books, treatises, or writings, until they have consulted on this subject the archbishops, vicars, or officials above-mentioned, and obtained their special and express licence, to be granted free of all expense, whose consciences we charge, that before they grant any licence of this kind, they will carefully examine, or cause to be examined, by able and catholic persons, the works to be printed; and that they will take the utmost care that nothing may be printed wicked and scandalous, or contrary to the orthodox faith.” The rest of the bull contains regulations to prevent works already printed from doing mischief. All catalogues and books printed before that period were to be examined, and those which contained anything prejudicial to the Catholic religion were to be burned.

In the beginning of the sixteenth century, it was ordered by the well-known council of the Lateran, held at Rome in the year 1515, that in future no books should be printed but such as had been inspected by ecclesiastical censors.

In France, the faculty of Theology usurped, as some say, the right of censuring books; but in the year 1650, when public censors, whom the faculty opposed, were appointed without their consent, they stated the antiquity of their right to be two hundred years. For they said, “It is above two hundred years since the doctors of Paris have had a right to approve books without being subjected but to their own faculty, to which they assert they are alone responsible for their decisions[1277].”

[In no country of Europe does the liberty of the press prevail to such an extent as with us, the only vestige of censorship being the censor for the drama. In Rome the same strictness prevails as ever, but a brighter day seems dawning. In Germany the censorship is excessively severe, especially in Austria, Bavaria, and Prussia. However, most of the prohibited works are printed in Switzerland, Hamburg, or Leipsig, and there being a very large demand for such works, they may be had of almost any bookseller in every principal town. To put a stop to this, the present monarch of Prussia, _professedly_ a liberal, placed under ban all the works issued by the firm of Hoffmann and Campe of Hamburg, because they published the political poems of Hoffmann von Fallersleben. Caricatures are, as the reader may suppose, subject to as strict a law, and no H.B. could be tolerated there.]

FOOTNOTES

[1260] Der Büchernachdruck nach ächten Grundsätzen des Rechts geprüft. 1774, 4to.

[1261] Diogenes Laert. lib. ix. 52.--Cicero de Nat. Deor. lib. i. cap. 23.--Lactantius De Ira, ix. 2.--Eusebius De Præparatione Evang. xiv. p. 19.--Minucius Felix, viii. 13.

[1262] Livius, lib. xl. c. 29.--Plin. xiii. 13.--Plutarchus in Vita Numæ.--Lactantius de Falsa Relig. i. 25, 5.--Valer. Max. i. cap. 1, 12.

[1263] Sueton. lib. ii. cap. 31.

[1264] The whole circumstance is related by Seneca the rhetorician, in the introduction to the fifth, or, as others reckon, the tenth book of his Controversiæ.

[1265] Taciti Annal. lib. i. c. 72. Bayle, in his Dictionary, has endeavoured to clear up some doubts respecting the history of Cassius and Labienus. See the article Cassius.

[1266] Tacit. Annal. lib. iv. cap. 35.

[1267] Maccab. ii.

[1268] Adversus Gentes, lib. iii.

[1269] Hist. Eccles. 1. viii. cap. 2. Suidas says the same.

[1270] Socrates, lib. i. cap. 6.

[1271] Digestor, lib. x. tit. 2, 4, 1.

[1272] Baillet, Jugemens des Sçavans, 4to, i. p. 26.

[1273] Paris, 1738-40, 4to, vol. viii.

[1274] Argentinæ 1749, fol.

[1275] Codex Diplomaticus. Franc. 1758, 4to, iv. p. 460. An account of the establishment of a book-censor at Mentz may be found also in G. C. Johannis Rerum Mogunt. i. p. 798.

[1276] The whole bull may be seen in Baronii Annales Ecclesiastici tom. xix. Colon. 1691, p. 514.

[1277] Baillet, Jugemens des Sçavans, i. p. 19.

EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGE FOR PRINTING BOOKS.

I do not mean in this article to give a complete catalogue of all the books printed under a privilege in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, for such a list would be attended with very little utility. All I wish is to contribute something towards answering the question, What are the oldest privileges granted to books?

The oldest known at present is that granted in the year 1490, by Henry bishop of Bamberg, to the following book: Liber Missalis secundum ordinem ecclesiæ Bambergensis--Anno incarnationis dominice MCCCCXC. nono vero kal. April.--In civitate Babenbergn. per magistrum Johannem Sensenschmidt, prefate civitatis incolam, et Heinr. Petzensteiner. This privilege was first noticed by Panzer, in his History of the Nuremberg editions of the Bible, and afterwards by Mr. Am Ende, in Meusel’s Collection for enlarging Historical Knowledge. The latter says, “One may readily believe that this bishop was not the inventor of such privileges, and that they are consequently of much greater antiquity than has hitherto been supposed.” Mr. Am Ende mentions also a privilege of the year 1491, to a work called Hortus Sanitatis, typis Iacobi Meydenbach.... Impressum autem est hoc ipsum in incl. civ. Moguntina ... sub Archipraesulatu rever. et benigniss. principis et D. D. Bertholdi, archiep. Moguntinensis ac princ. elector. cujus felicissimo auspicio graditur, recipitur et auctorisatur. This, says Mr. Am Ende, may allude to a privilege, and perhaps not. For my part, I conjecture that it refers only to a permission to print, granted in consequence of the institution of book-censors by the archbishop Berthold, in the year 1486.

The oldest Venetian privilege at present known, is of the year 1491, found by M. Pütter to the following work: Foenix Magistri Petri memoriae Ravennatis. The Colophon is Bernardinus de Choris de Cremona impressor delectus impressit. Venetias die X Ianuarii MCCCCXCI. The

## book is in quarto, and has the privilege on both the last pages. There

is a Venetian privilege also of the year 1492, to Senecæ Tragediæ cum commento.... Cum privilegio ne quis audeat hoc opus cum hoc commento imprimere, sub pena in eo contenta, Venetiis per Lazarum Issarda de Saliviano 1492, die XII. Decembris.

The oldest Papal privilege hitherto known is of the year 1505, to Hervei Britonis in IV Petri Lombardi Sententiarum volumina, scripta subtilissima.

In the year 1495, Aldus published the works of Aristotle, at the end of the first part of which we find the following notice: “Concessum est eidem Aldo inventori ab illustrissimo senatu Veneto, ne quis queat imprimere neque hunc librum, neque caeteros quos is ipse impresserit; neque ejus uti invento.” The last words allude to the Greek types which were employed in printing the Aldine editions of the Greek classics.

The following among other early privileges are quoted by Pütter[1278] and Hoffmann[1279]--

1495. A Milanese, by duke Louis Sforza, to Michael Ferner and Eustachius Silber for I. A. Campani Opera.

1501. Privilegium sodalitatis Celticæ a senatu Romani imperii impetratum, to Conrade Celtes’ edition of the works of Hroswitha.

1506. A papal, of pope Julius II., to Evangelista Tosino the bookseller, for Ptolomaei Geographia.

1507. A French, of Louis XII. to Antoine Verard.

1510. The first Imperial, to Lectura aurea semper Domini abbatis antiqui.

1512. An Imperial, to Rosslin’s Swangere Frauwen Rosegarten.

1527. A privilege from the duke of Saxony to the edition of the New Testament by Emser.

Anderson remarks on the year 1590, that the first exclusive patent, for printing a book in England, which occurs in Rymer’s Fœdera[1280], was granted in the above year by queen Elizabeth, to Richard Weight of Oxford, for a Translation of Tacitus. I am much astonished that Anderson, who was so often obliged to use Rymer’s Fœdera, and who seems indeed to have consulted it with attention, should have overlooked the oldest patents which are to be found in that collection. In that laborious work, so important to those who wish to be acquainted with the history of British literature, Ames’ Typographical Antiquities, there are privileges of still greater antiquity. The oldest which I observed in this work are the following:--

1510. The history of king Boccus ... printed at London by Thomas Godfry. Cum privilegio regali.

1518. Oratio Richardi Pacei ... Impressa per Richardum Pynson, regium impressorem, cum privilegio a rege indulto, ne quis hanc orationem intra biennium in regno Angliæ imprimat, aut alibi impressam et importatam in eodem regno Angliæ vendat.

Other works printed _cum gratia et privilegio_ occur 1520, 1521, 1525, 1528, 1530, &c.

In the year 1483, when the well-known act was made against foreign merchants, foreigners however were permitted to import books and manuscripts, and also to print them in the kingdom; but this liberty was afterwards revoked by Henry VIII., in the year 1533, by an order which may be found in Ames. In 1538, Henry issued an order respecting the printing of bibles; and in 1542, he gave a bookseller an exclusive privilege during four years for that purpose[1281].

With a view of finding the oldest Spanish privilege, I consulted a variety of works, and among others Specimen Bibliothecae Hispano-Majansianae, but I met with none older than that to the following book: Aelii Antonii Nebrissensis Introductiones in Latinam Grammaticen. Logronii Cantabrorum Vasconum urbe nobilissima; anno salutis millesimo quingentesimo decimo. fol. That privileges to books were usual in Poland, has been shown by Am Ende, in Meusel’s Collections before-mentioned.

FOOTNOTES

[1278] Der Büchernachdruck nach ächten Grundsätzen des Rechts geprüft.

[1279] Von denen altesten kayserlichen und landesherrlichen Bücherdruck-oder Verlag-privilegien, 1777, 8vo.

[1280] Vol. xvi. p. 96.

[1281] [Exclusive privileges for printing the English Bible and Prayer have been granted by the Crown at different periods up to the present time, with the exception of the period of the Commonwealth, during which they were abolished. In the 27th year of Charles II. a Royal patent was granted to Thomas Newcomb and Henry Hills. In the 12th of Anne to Benjamin Tooke and John Barber; in the 22nd of George I. to John Basket. Then came John Reeves, who received his patent from George III. in the 39th year of his reign, and in association with George Eyre and Andrew Strahan, printed the many editions of the Bible and Prayer described as Reeves’ editions. The present patent was conferred by George IV. upon Andrew Strahan, George Eyre, and Andrew Spottiswoode, for a term of thirty years, which commenced January 21, 1830, and consequently ceases in 1860. By this last patent every one but the patentees is prohibited from printing in England any Bible or New Testament in the English tongue, of any translation, with or without notes; or any Prayers, Rites, or Ceremonies of the United Church of England and Ireland; or any books commanded to be used by the Crown; nor can either of the above be imported from abroad, if printed in English, or in English mixed with any other tongue. The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge also enjoy the right of printing Bibles, &c., in common with the patentees; but in their case it is a simple affair of permission, they having no power to prohibit or prosecute. The present patentees, it may be here observed, have not of late years attempted to enforce their rights, and Bibles are now printed almost _ad libitum_.

In Scotland, prior to 1700, various persons held concurrent licenses, consequently it is very difficult to say who were king’s printers and who were not. On July 6, 1716, George I. granted a patent to John Basket, the English patentee, and Agnes Campbell, jointly for forty-one years. To them succeeded Alexander Kincaird, whose patent dates from June 21, 1749; and then James Hunter Blair and John Bruce, whose patent commenced in 1798 and expired in the hands of their heirs, Sir D. H. Blair and Miss Bruce. In 1833 the patent ceased, and has never been renewed. Unlike either England or Ireland, the four Scotch Universities have never participated in this monopoly.

In Ireland, George III. in 1766 granted a Bible patent to Boulter Grierson for forty years. He was succeeded by his son George Grierson, who, in 1811, obtained a renewal, and is still with Mr. Keene, the Irish patentee. Trinity College, Dublin, has also a concurrent right, but both Oxford and Cambridge are, by the Irish printers’ own patent, permitted to import their Bibles into Ireland.--_Dr. Campbell’s Letters on the Bible Monopoly._]

CATALOGUES OF BOOKS.

The first printers printed books at their own expense, and sold them themselves. It was necessary therefore that they should have large capitals. Paper and all other materials, as well as labour, were in the infancy of the art exceedingly dear for those periods; and on the other hand the purchasers of books were few, partly because the price of them was too high, and partly because, knowledge being less widely diffused, they were not so generally read as at present. For these reasons many of the principal printers, notwithstanding their learning and ingenuity, became poor[1282]. In this manner my countrymen Conrade Sweynheim and Arnold Pannarz, who were the first, and for a long time the only printers at Rome, a city which on many accounts,

## particularly in the sixteenth century, might be called the first in

Christendom, were obliged, after the number of the volumes in their warehouses amounted to 12,475, to solicit support from the pope[1283]. In the course of time this profession was divided, and there arose booksellers. It appears that the printers themselves first gave up the bookselling part of the business, and retained only that of printing; at least this is said to have been the case with that well-known bookseller John Rainmann, who was born at Oehringen, and resided at Augsburg[1284]. He was at first a printer and letter-founder, and from him Aldus purchased his types. Books of his printing may be found from the year 1508 to 1524; and in many he is styled the celebrated German bookseller. About the same period lived the booksellers Jos. Burglin and George Diemar. Sometimes there were rich people of all conditions,

## particularly eminent merchants, who caused books which they sold to be

printed at their own expense. In this manner that learned man Henry Stephens was printer at Paris to Ulric Fugger at Augsburg, from whom he received a salary for printing the many manuscripts which he purchased. In some editions, from the year 1558 to 1567, he subscribes himself Henricus Stephanus, illustris viri Hulderici Fuggeri typographus. In the like manner also, in the beginning of the seventeenth century, a society of learned and rich citizens of Augsburg, at the head of whom was Marx Welser, the city-steward, printed a great number of books, which had commonly at the end these words, _ad insigne pinus_. Printing therefore thus gave rise to a new and important branch of trade, that of bookselling, which was established in Germany, chiefly at Frankfort on the Maine, where, particularly at the time of the fairs, there were several large bookseller’s shops in that street which still retains the name of _Book-street_.

George Willer, whom some improperly call Viller, and others Walter, a bookseller at Augsburg, who kept a very large shop, and frequented the Frankfort fairs, first fell upon the plan of publishing every fair a catalogue of all the new books, adding the size, and publishing names. Le Mire, better known under the name of Miræus[1285], says, that catalogues were first printed in the year 1554; but Labbe[1286], Reimann[1287], and Heumann[1288], who took their information from Le Mire, make the year, perhaps erroneously, to be 1564. Willer’s catalogues were printed till the year 1592, by Nicol. Bassæus, printer at Frankfort. Other booksellers however must have soon published catalogues of the like kind, though that of Willer continued a long time to be the principal[1289].

In all these catalogues, which are in quarto, and not paged, the following order is observed. The Latin books occupy the first place, beginning with the Protestant theological works, perhaps because Willer was a Lutheran; then come the Catholic; and after these, books of jurisprudence, medicine, philosophy, poetry, and music. The second place is assigned to German books, which are arranged in the same manner.

In the year 1604, the general Easter Catalogue was printed with a permission from government.

After this the Leipsic booksellers began not only to reprint the Frankfort catalogues, but to enlarge them with many books which had not been brought to the fairs in that city. I have, dated 1600, a catalogue of all the books on sale in Book-street, Frankfort, and also of the books published at Leipsic, which have not been brought to Frankfort; with the permission of his highness the elector of Saxony to those new works which have appeared at Leipsic. Printed at Leipsic, by Abraham Lamberg; and to be had at his shop. On the September catalogue of the same year, it is said that it is printed from the Frankfort copy, with additions. I find an imperial privilege, for the first time, on the Frankfort September catalogue of 1616. Some imperial permissions however may be of an earlier date; for I have not seen a complete series of these catalogues.

Reimmann says that, after Willer’s death, the catalogue was published by the Leipsic bookseller Henning Grosse, and by his son and grandson. The council of Frankfort caused several regulations to be issued respecting catalogues, an account of which may be seen in Orth’s work on the Imperial Fairs at Frankfort[1290]. After the business of bookselling was drawn from Frankfort to Leipsic, occasioned principally by the restrictions to which it was subjected at the former by the censors, no more catalogues were printed there; and the shops in Book-street were gradually converted into taverns.

In perusing these old catalogues one cannot help being astonished at the sudden and great increase of books; and when one reflects that a great many of them no longer exist, this perishableness of human labours will excite the same sensations as those which arise in the mind when one reads in a church-yard the names and titles of persons long since mouldered into dust. In the sixteenth century there were few libraries; and these, which did not contain many books, were in monasteries, and consisted principally of theological, philosophical and historical works, with a few however on jurisprudence and medicine; while those which treated of agriculture, manufactures and trade, were thought unworthy of the notice of the learned, and of being preserved in large collections. The number of these works was, nevertheless, far from being inconsiderable; and at any rate many of them would have been of great use, as they would have served to illustrate the instructive history of the arts. Catalogues which might have given occasion to inquiries after books, that may be still somewhere preserved, have suffered the fate of tombstones, which, being wasted and crumbled to pieces by the destroying hand of time, become no longer legible. A complete series of them, perhaps, is nowhere to be found.

This loss might in some measure be supplied by two works, were they not now exceedingly scarce. I mean those of Cless and Draudius, who, by the desire of some booksellers, collected together, as Georg[1291] did at a later period, all the catalogues published at the different fairs in different years. The work of Cless has the following title:--Unius sæculi ejusque virorum litteratorum monumentis tum florentissimi, tum fertilissimi, ab anno 1500 ad 1602 nundinarum autumnalium inclusive, elenchus consummatissimus--desumtus partim ex singularum nundinarum catalogis, partim ex bibliothecis. Auctore, Joanne Clessio, Wineccensi, Hannoio, philosopho ac medico[1292]. By the editor’s preface it appears that the first edition was published in 1592. The order is almost the same as that observed by Willer in his catalogues.

The work of Draudius, which was printed in several quarto volumes, for the first time, in 1611, and afterwards in 1625, is far larger, more complete, and more methodical. I have never seen a perfect copy of either edition; but perhaps the following information may afford some satisfaction to those who are fond of bibliography. One part, which I consider as the first, has the title of Bibliotheca Classica, sive Catalogus officinalis, in quo singuli singularum facultatum ac professionum libri, qui in quavis fere lingua extant, recensentur; usque ad annum 1624 inclusive. Auctore M. Georgio Draudio. It contains Latin works on theology, jurisprudence, medicine, history, geography and politics. The copy in the library of our university ends at page 1304, which has however a catchword that seems to indicate a deficiency. The second part is entitled Bibliotheca Classica, sive Catalogus officinalis, in quo philosophici artiumque adeo humaniorum, poetici etiam et musici libri usque ad annum 1624 continentur.

This part, containing Latin books also, begins at page 1298, and ends with page 1654, which is followed by an index of all the authors mentioned. A smaller volume of 302 pages, without an index, has for title, Bibliotheca Exotica, sive Catalogus officinalis librorum peregrinis linguis usualibus scriptorum; and a fourth part, forming 759 pages besides an index of the authors, is called, Bibliotheca Librorum Germanicorum Classica; that is, A Catalogue of all the books printed in the German language till the year 1625. By the indices, and the proper arrangement of the matter, the use of this work is much facilitated. I must however observe that the oldest catalogues had the same faults as those of the present time, and that these have been copied by Draudius. Many books are mentioned which were never printed, and many titles, names and dates, are given incorrectly; but Draudius, nevertheless, is well worth the attention of any one who may be inclined to employ his time and ingenuity on the history of literature.

[Towards the end of the seventeenth and especially during the eighteenth century, book-catalogues of every description multiplied rapidly. Their progress is copiously treated of in Nichols’s Literary Anecdotes, vol. iii. pp. 608-693, to which the reader is referred. Perhaps the most remarkable bookseller’s-catalogue ever printed is Mr. Henry Bohn’s so-called Guinea Catalogue, which is upwards of six inches thick, and contains, in about 2000 pages, merely the details of his own stock.]

FOOTNOTES

[1282] Several of them were editors, printers, and proprietors of the books which they sold.

[1283] Their lamentable petition of the year 1472 has been inserted by Fabricius in his Bibliotheca Latina. Hamburghi, 1772, 8vo, iii. p. 898. See also Pütter von Büchernachdruck, p. 29.

[1284] Von Stetten, Kunst-geschichte von Augsburg, p. 43.

[1285] Le Mire, a Catholic clergyman, who was born in 1598, and died in 1640, wrote a work De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Sæculi xvi., which is printed in Fabricii Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica, Hamburgi 1718, fol. The passage to which I allude may be found p. 232; but perhaps 1564 has been given in Fabricius instead of 1554 by an error of the press.

[1286] Labbe Bibliotheca Bibliothecarum, Lips. 1682, 12mo, p. 112.

[1287] Hist. Lit. i. p. 203.

[1288] Conspectus Reip. Litter, c. vi. § 2, p. 316.

[1289] [The earliest known catalogue of English printed books on sale by a London bookseller, was published in 1595, by Andrew Maunsell, in folio. It was classed and consisted of two parts; the first containing _Divinity_, the second the _Arts and Sciences_; a third, containing History and Polite Literature, was intended but never published.]

[1290] Frankf. 1765, 4to, p. 500.

[1291] [Bücher Lexicon; a Catalogue of books printed in Europe, to 1750; with supplements to 1758, 8 parts in 4 vols. folio. A very elaborate compilation, in which the title, place of publication, name of publisher, date, size, number of sheets, and publication price, of all the books known at the time, are given, including even those printed as early as 1462. It mentions however a great many books which never existed.]

[1292] Francofurti, ex offic. Joannis Saurii, impensis Petri Kopffii, 1602, 4to. The first part contains 563 pages, and the second 292.

RIBBON-LOOM.

Among the inventions, which, by lessening labour, render a great number of workmen unnecessary, and consequently deprive many of bread, and which, with whatever ingenuity they may be contrived, have been considered as hurtful, and were for a long time suppressed by governments, may be reckoned the ribbon-loom. In its general construction, this machine approaches very near to that of the common weaving loom; but the workman, instead of weaving one piece, or one ribbon, as is the case when the latter is used, can, on the former when it has all the necessary apparatus, weave sixteen or twenty pieces at the same time, and even of different patterns. Such a loom is so made, that the workman can move the batten as in the common loom, towards him and from him, and also to the right and left, with all the shuttles it contains; or, it is furnished with certain machinery below, which can be moved by a boy unacquainted with the art of weaving, and which keeps the whole loom with all its shuttles in motion. Looms of the former kind are certainly much simpler than those of the latter, and in all probability are older. To the first kind belongs the loom at Erfurt, and that which was lately brought thence to Göttingen. Of the other kind there are two at Berlin; and some of them may be seen in many other places. The art has been discovered also of causing such looms to be driven by water; and an instance of this may be found, as I have been told, in the neighbourhood of Iserlohe[1293]. The proprietors however in most places keep the construction of their looms a secret, and, as far as appears, no complete description or figure of them has ever been published. There is reason to believe that this invention is as yet little used in France; no mention at least is made of it in the Encyclopedie, where, however, the common loom of the ribbon-weavers and lace-weavers is fully represented with all its parts in ten copper-plates.

Attempts were made in Europe to suppress this invention, as was the case with printing in Turkey. But without here inquiring whether inventions may not save too much labour, and be therefore hurtful, as Montesquieu affirms, or whether it would be possible to suppress them throughout all Europe, I shall restrict myself to the history of the ribbon-loom as far as information is to be collected on the subject.

We are told by M. Jacobson, that it is believed the Swiss invented such looms above a hundred years ago; but I do not know any grounds upon which this conjecture can be supported. To me it appears much more probable that this invention had its rise in the Netherlands or Germany, either about the end of the sixteenth or beginning of the seventeenth century. The oldest account with which I am acquainted seems to be in favour of Germany and the sixteenth century. Lancellotti, in a work[1294] published at Venice in 1636, says “Anthony Moller of Dantzic relates, that he saw in that city about fifty years before a very ingenious machine, on which, from four to six pieces could be wove at the same time; but as the council were afraid that by this invention a great many workmen might be reduced to beggary, they suppressed it and caused the inventor to be privately strangled or drowned.” Who this Anthony Moller was I do not know; but that he saw a ribbon-loom at Dantzic is beyond all doubt. If the date of the printing of the book be taken as the time in which Lancellotti wrote, there is reason to believe that there was a ribbon-loom at Dantzic about the year 1586; but it appears to me that the book was written in 1629, which would bring us to the year 1579.

The next oldest information with which I am acquainted, is that given by Boxhorn, who says, “About twenty years ago some persons in this city (Leyden) invented a weaving-machine on which one workman could with ease make more cloth than several others in the same space of time. This gave rise to rioting among the weavers, and to such loud complaints, that the use of this machine was at length prohibited by the magistrates.” According to this account, Leyden was the place of the invention; but, in order to determine the time, it will be necessary to attend to the following circumstances. Boxhorn’s Institutiones Politicæ have been often printed, as for example, at Amsterdam 1663, in 12mo. Boxhorn read lectures on the Institutiones Politicæ, and gave verbal illustrations of them to his scholars, one of whom, in the year 1641, carried a fairly written copy of the latter to Germany, and gave them to Professor C. F. Franckenstein, who caused them to be printed for the first time at Leipsic in 1658, and again in 1665, 12mo. The passage above-quoted is to be found in the illustrations which are appended. Hence there is reason to conclude that the ribbon-loom was known in Holland about the year 1621.

It is some confirmation of Boxhorn’s account, that the States-General, as early as the 11th of August 1623, if they did not totally prohibit the use of the ribbon-loom, as commonly asserted, at any rate greatly circumscribed it. The proclamation for that purpose may be found in the Groot Placaet-Boeck[1295], a valuable collection published at the Hague in seven large folio volumes, between the years 1658 and 1746. Nothing further however is found there respecting the history of ribbon-looms, which are called _Lint-molens_, than that they had been in use for several years to the great injury and even total ruin of many thousands of workmen, who were accustomed to weave ribbons on the common loom. This prohibition was renewed on the 14th of March 1639, and again on the 17th of September 1648, as appears by the same work[1296]. On the 5th of December 1661, the use of them was extended a little longer, and defined with more precision[1297]; but as far as I have been able to find, no other regulations were made respecting these machines in the Netherlands.

The council of Nuremberg, it is said, prohibited the use of them in 1664, as is mentioned in the Hanau work, which I shall soon have occasion to quote.

On the 24th of December, the same year, ribbon-looms were prohibited in the Spanish Netherlands. In the proclamation for that purpose, it is stated that a great number of articles manufactured on these looms were privately imported from Viane and Culenburg.

In the year 1665, there was to be seen at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, a loom which of itself wove all kinds of lace, tape, &c., provided the silk or yarn was properly arranged in the usual manner; but if a thread happened to break, it was necessary that some one should again join it by means of a knot[1298]. The year following, some person in that city applied not only to the council, but even to the emperor, for permission to establish such a loom, but was not able to obtain it.

In 1676 the ribbon-loom was prohibited at Cologne, and the same year some disturbance took place in consequence of its being introduced into England[1299]. It is probable that Anderson[1300] alludes to this loom when he says, speaking of the above year, “As was also brought from Holland to London, the weavers’ loom-engine, then called the Dutch loom-engine.” He however praises the machine without describing it; nor does he mention that it occasioned any commotion.

The lace-weavers in Germany, but in particular the councils of Augsburg and Cologne, applied to Frederick Casimir, count of Hanau, who had great influence in the empire, and requested that he would endeavour to procure a general prohibition of ribbon-looms throughout all Germany; and the count accordingly presented a representation on this subject to the electors and states.

On the 8th of January 1681, it was declared by Imperial authority that a prohibition of ribbon-looms was both useful and necessary. This was followed by an imperial decree, dated January the 5th, 1685, and on the first of September following it was strengthened by a _conclusum in senatu_ of the council of Frankfort.

The council of Hamburg, it is said, ordered a loom to be publicly burnt; and the emperor Charles VI. caused the prohibition of 1685 to be renewed on the 19th of February 1719; though some mercantile people made considerable opposition to this measure. A general prohibition was likewise issued in the electorate of Saxony, on the 29th of July 1720. All these coercive means however were ineffectual; and the ribbon-loom, being found useful, has now become common.

In the year 1718, the first loom of this kind was brought from Holland to Charlottenburg on the Spree; but Nicolai, in his Description of Berlin, says that this circumstance took place in the year 1728. The workmen were then engaged from foreign countries; and the loom was supported at the king’s expense. The electorate of Saxony also, in the year 1765, revoked its prohibition, and permitted such looms to be publicly used. In the rescript dated March the 20th, it is said, that as things were much changed, and as other German states had annulled the prohibitions against ribbon-looms, it was induced to grant full liberty to the lace-weavers to employ freely and publicly in future, ribbon and lace-looms, and to manufacture all kinds of ribbons and other articles of the like kind that could be wove on them. It stated further, that the lace-weavers should give notice whether any of them wished to establish ribbon-looms, and how soon they could get them ready for work; that such of them as did not choose to be at the expense, should for every loom constructed receive a certain sum, besides being admitted a member of the company; and that three months after the publication of this order, fifty rix-dollars would be given, by way of premium, for every loom on which from twelve to fifteen pieces of silk-ribbon could be wove; and thirty rix-dollars for every loom employed to weave ferret and articles of woollen[1301].

[The profitable application of steam-power to silk weaving was long considered to be almost impossible; so much time being consumed in the handling and trimming of the silk, in proportion to the time that the loom is in motion, there was consequently a waste of power. A small factory was built in 1831, for the purpose of making the experiment on ribbons. It was, however, burnt during a disturbance relating to prices; and though the act was disclaimed by weavers in general, the feeling amongst them was so strong against the employment of inanimate labour whilst their own was superabundant, that the scheme was given up. Within a few years there were numerous steam-factories at work at Congleton, Leek, Derby and other places, which made large quantities of plain ribbons, chiefly black sarsenets. The Coventry manufacturers, alarmed for the interests of their trade, formed in 1836 a steam-company, and erected a large factory, but difficulties arose as to the apportionment of the power among the different parties, and it has never yet been fitted up for its original purpose. Another large factory was soon after built, and applied to the making of figured ribbons, but owing to the failure of the parties, the experiment was not in this instance fairly tested. One experiment on a smaller scale had some success. The factories of the North and of Derby have proved the advantage of steam-power as applied to plain ribbons. At Congleton there were in 1838, 254 power-looms engaged in the manufacture of plain silk, a few black satin and some plain coloured ribbons; at Leek there were 100 employed in the same way, and at Derby 233. In these, each loom is tended by one pair of hands, which pick up and keep the machinery in order: the gain consists, not in a more rapid motion of the shuttles, the delicacy of the materials not allowing of this; but in the shooting down being seldom interrupted during the picking up, as in hand-loom weaving; in the greater regularity of the fabric, and also in the addition of from one-fifth to one-third more shuttles, for which one workman suffices, the loom being so constructed as to enable him to reach from the front over the batten to the warps behind. But when two pairs of hands are required for one loom, as is the case with the Jacquard loom, one before to tend the work and one behind to pick up, the advantage is much lessened. Steam-loom weaving is undoubtedly making great progress notwithstanding all disadvantages: in 1840, the steam-factory at Coventry, which formerly failed, was again at work under fresh parties, who were making both plain and fancy ribbons with a strong probability of ultimate success. The fine factory belonging to the Steam Company, which is now occupied by broad silk steam-looms, has one ribbon-loom at work; and in one other instance, in Coventry, Jacquard steam-looms are employed in making light figured ribbons with great beauty and precision, and in this case it is found that one man is able to tend the front and another the back of two looms. There can be little doubt that the time is approaching when steam will be the chief motive-power of the ribbon as of other manufacturing districts, and that the strength of English machinery will be called for to enter into competition with French taste.

Coventry is the great city for the manufacture of ribbons in England; in 1838, the number of persons employed there was 6000 or 7000, and in the rural parishes, 10,000 or 11,000[1302].]

FOOTNOTES

[1293] Looms of the first kind are seldom capable of weaving above sixteen pieces at one time: and very rarely eighteen, because the breadth necessary for that purpose would render them highly inconvenient. At a ribbon manufactory in the Milanese, there were some years ago, thirty looms of an excellent construction, each of which could weave twenty-four pieces together, so that sixty dozen of pieces were wove by the whole at the same time. See Voyage d’un François par Italie, i. p. 387. M. Escher, at Zurich, is said to have had a large ribbon-loom which was driven by water; but the traveller who saw the work, assured me that it was a machine for winding silk; and this seems to be probable, from the short account given of it by M. Andreæ, in his Briefen aus der Schweitz, pp. 49, 50.

[1294] L’Hoggidi overo gl’ingegni non inferiori a’ passati.

[1295] Page 7.

[1296] Page 1191.

[1297] Ibid. p. 2762.

[1298] Von Lersner, Chronica der Stadt Frankfurt, ii. p. 566.

[1299] Relatio Historica semestralis vernalis 1776, Art. 10.

[1300] Hist. of Commerce.

[1301] See this rescript in the Leipsiger Intelligenz-Blattern, 1765, p. 119.

[1302] Penny Cyclopædia.

GUNS. GUN-LOCKS.

The first portable fire-arms were discharged by means of a match, which in the course of time was fastened to a cock, for the greater security of the hand while shooting. Afterwards a fire-stone was screwed into the cock, and a steel plate or small wheel, which could be cocked or wound up by a particular kind of key, was applied to the barrel. This fire-stone was not at first of a siliceous nature, like that used at present for striking fire, but a compact pyrites or marcasite, which was long distinguished by that name. But as an instrument of this kind often missed fire, a match till a late period was retained along with the wheel; and it was not till a considerable time after, that instead of a friable pyrites, so much exposed to decay, a siliceous stone came into use with the improved cock or present lock. On each new improvement, the piece, the caliber and length of which were sometimes enlarged and sometimes lessened, obtained various new names; such, for example, as _Büchse_, _Hakenbüchse_, _Arquebuse_; Matchlock, Musket, Pistol, _Flinte_, &c. But I shall leave it to those who are versed in matters of artillery to determine the difference between these kinds, and shall here add only what follows.

The first name undoubtedly arose from the oldest portable kind of fire-arms having some similarity to a box. There were long and short _büchse_, the latter of which, as Hortleder says, were peculiar to the cavalry. The long kind also, on account of their similarity to a pipe, were called _rohr_. Large pieces, which were conveyed on cars or carriages, were called _karrenbüchse_, but soon after also _canna_, cannon. Instead of artillery-man, artillery and arsenal, people used the terms _büchsenmeister_, _büchsenmeistery_, _büchsenhaus_, &c. The _hakenbüchsen_ were so large and heavy that they could not be carried in the hand; it was necessary therefore to support them with a prop, called _bock_, because it had two horns, between which the piece was fixed with a hook that projected from the stock[1303]. Hence arose the name _hakenbüchse_, _hakenbüsse_, which the French and different nations, along with many other German words, adopted, and corrupted till they at length became _arquebuse_, _archibugio_, _archibuso_, &c. From the passages of ancient writers collected by Daniel, it may be concluded that these _hakenbüchsen_ with a wheel were invented in Germany, in the beginning of the sixteenth century; and this is confirmed by the testimony of Martin Bellay. Speaking of the league formed between the emperor Charles V. and pope Leo X. against France, and the siege of Parma undertaken in the year 1521, he says, “De ceste heure là furent inventées les harcquebouzes qu’on tiroit sur une fourchette.”

Pistols also, which at first had a wheel, seem to have been used at an earlier period by the Germans than by the French. Bellay mentions them in the year 1544, in the time of Francis I., and under Henry II. the German horsemen, _des reiters_, were called _pistoliers_. De la Noue, who served under both these kings, says, in his Discours Politiques et Militaires, that the Germans first employed pistols. I know no probable derivation of this term. Frisch conjectures that it may have arisen from _Pistillo_ or _Stiopo_, because pistols used to have large knobs on the handle. Daniel and others think that the name comes from Pistoia in Tuscany, because they were there first made. He says he saw an old pistol, which, except the ramrod, was entirely of iron.

Muskets received their name from the French _mouchet_, or the Latin _muschetus_, which signifies a male sparrow-hawk. This derivation is the less improbable, as it is certain that various kinds of fire-arms were named after ravenous animals, such, for example, as _falconet_. Daniel proves that they were known in France as early as the time of Francis I. Brantome however asserts, that they were first introduced by the duke of Alva, in the year 1567, when he exercised his cruelty in the Netherlands, in order to overawe and keep in subjection the people of that country; and that they were not then known in France. In another place he says that they were first made general in France by M. de Strozzi, under Charles IX.[1304]

That the lock was invented in Germany, and in the city of Nuremberg, in 1517, has been asserted by many, and not without probability; but I do not know whether it can be proved that we are here to understand a lock of the present construction. In my opinion, the principal proof rests on a passage made known by Wagenseil[1305], from an unprinted Nuremberg Chronicle, the antiquity of which he has not determined. The same year is given by J. Guler von Weineck[1306], Walser[1307], M. von Murr and others. It is also certain that in the sixteenth century there were very expert makers of muskets and fire-locks; for example, George Kühfuss, who died in 1600, and also others, whose names may be seen in Doppelmayer. I must not omit here to remark, that many call the fire-lock the French lock, and ascribe the invention to these people; yet as, according even to Daniel’s account, the far more inconvenient wheels on pistols were used in France in 1658, it is probable that our neighbours, as is commonly the case, may have made some improvement in the German invention. In the history of the Brunswick regiments, it is stated that the soldiers of that duchy first obtained, in 1687, flint-locks instead of match-locks. It has often been asserted, that fire-tubes, which took fire of themselves, were forbidden first in Bohemia and Moravia, and afterwards in the whole German empire, under a severe penalty, by the emperor Maximilian I.; but I have not found any allusion to this circumstance in the different police laws of that emperor.

That the first fire-stones were pyrites, appears from various accounts; and as a siliceous kind of stone was introduced in its stead, this circumstance gave often rise to confusion, some instances of which are related by Henkel, so that many applied to the stone what was related by our forefathers of pyrites. In the greater part of Europe[1308] people use at present that _hornstein_ called by Wallerius _Silex igniarius_, and by Linnæus _S. cretaceus_. In Germany it was formerly called _Flins_ or _Vlins_, which some consider as more proper; and in the Swedish, Danish and English, _Flinta_ and _Flint_. This appellation is of great antiquity; for the Wends had a pagan deity of that name, which they erected on a stone called _Flynstein_[1309]. In some districts of Germany this word has been still retained; for example, white or grey ferruginous spar, _Minera ferri alba_, is called in Styria _Flins_, or, as it is often improperly written, _Pflinz_; and in Bayreuth that fire-stone is still called flint-stone[1310]. In our neighbourhood the same name is still used by the stone-cutters. It cannot be doubted that the weapon which is fired by the help of this stone, obtained from it, in German, the names of _Flintgewehr_, _Flint_, or _Flinte_; but since the old name of the stone has been forgotten, it is in general named from the weapon flint-stone. Those acquainted with the German and northern antiquities, know that the knives employed at the ancient sacrifices, and other articles, were made of this kind of stone, as appears by the remains still found in old barrows and between urns[1311]. This proves that these stones were much used by the ancients. In England and France old buildings constructed of them are still to be seen, and the stones appear to have been cut with the greatest care[1312]. The above articles, which have lain in the earth more than a thousand years, and these edifices, among which some at Norwich were inhabited in 1403, show the wonderful durability of this kind of stone. Some imagine that the art of working it has been lost; but though our artists prefer employing their talents and dexterity on stones which have a more beautiful appearance and less brittleness, they are able to cut also the flint-stone. Enamel painters, for the most part, rub their glass enamel on plates made of it; but they are obliged to purchase them at a very dear rate[1313].

Many of my readers will perhaps be desirous to know in what manner our gun-flints are prepared. Considering the great use made of them, it will hardly be believed how much trouble I had to obtain information on this subject. One would laugh were I to repeat the various answers which I obtained to my inquiries. Many thought that the stones were cut down by grinding them; some conceived that they were formed by means of red-hot pincers; and many asserted that they were made in mills. On the least reflection it may be readily conjectured, that the double cuneiform shape is given to these stones without much labour, because they are so cheap; and as every country, at all times, with whatever other it may be engaged in war, can obtain them in sufficient quantity, no nation can have an exclusive trade in them. It is nevertheless difficult to discover the places whence they are procured; and in works which give an account of the different articles of merchandise they are not named. The best account with which I am acquainted, is that collected by my brother, and published in the Hanoverian Magazine for the year 1772. Shepherds, and other persons who gain little by their service, break the flint-stone merely by manual labour, and chiefly in Champagne and Picardy. Some years ago, Gilbert de Montmeau, a merchant at Troye, carried on the greatest trade with them, and sold them at the rate of five livres six sous per thousand. The Dutch always buy up large quantities of them, which they keep in reserve, in order to sell them when the exportation of them is forbidden by France, in the time of war. Savary, however, relates that the largest quantity and best stones come from Berry, and particularly the neighbourhood of St. Agnau and Meusne. I know also that a great many are made at Stevensklint in Zeeland[1314], and exported from that country. In the year 1727, the chancery of war at Hanover sent some persons to learn the art of breaking flints; but after their return, it was given out that our horn-stone was unfit for that purpose. It is possible that those stones which occur in continued veins may be split easier in any required direction than those found in single pieces, as it appears to me that the latter are harder and more compact than the former. Perhaps the case is the same with flints as with vermilion, the preparation of which we endeavoured to learn from the English and Dutch, though from the earliest periods it had been made better in the very centre of Germany than anywhere else.

That stones were used at least in the middle of the sixteenth century, is confirmed by the account of an ingenious Italian, named Francis Angelerius. This artist had constructed a short piece of wood, to which he applied a wheel, and instead of a cock substituted a dog, which held the stone in its mouth, the whole so ingeniously made, that a person who appeared with it at a masquerade was arrested by the guard, because it was considered to be a real pistol[1315]. I have thought it proper to mention this circumstance, because it proves that the wheel was then invented and known under the appellation of pistol. In old arsenals and armouries, large collections of arms with the wheel are still to be seen. I have inspected those preserved in the arsenal at Hanover. What I consider to be the oldest, have on the barrel the figure of a hen with a musket in its mouth, because perhaps they were made at Henneberg. A pistol of this kind was entirely of brass without any part of wood, and therefore exceedingly heavy. On the lower part of the handle were the letters J. H. Z. S. perhaps John duke of Saxony. A piece with a wheel, which seemed to be one of the most modern, had on the barrel the date 1606.

Together with fire-stones, properly so called, pyrites, which is sometimes named fire-stone, continued long in use. In the year 1586, under duke Julius of Brunswick, when abundance of sulphureous pyrites was found near Seefen, the duke caused it to be collected, and formed it himself into the necessary shape, though in doing so he often bruised his fingers, and was advised by the physicians not to expose himself to the sulphureous vapour emitted by that substance.

[The use of flint-locks to guns has, within the last few years, been almost entirely laid aside in this country; the percussion- or detonating-lock being substituted for it. The certainty and rapidity with which the discharge takes place, gives them a very great superiority. This ingenious invention belongs to a Scottish clergyman, the Rev. Mr. Forsyth, minister of Belhelvie in Aberdeenshire, but it has since received some great improvements, especially in the application of the copper cap, to which indeed may be attributed all its superiority.--_Brande._]

FOOTNOTES

[1303] A figure and description of the _Hakenbüchse_, the _bock_, the wheels and key, may be found in Daniel Histoire de la Milice Francaise. Amst. 1724, 2 vols. 4to, i. p. 334. At Dresden there is still preserved an old _Büchse_, on which, instead of a lock, there is a cock with a flint-stone placed opposite to the touch-hole, and this flint was rubbed with a file till it emitted a spark.

[1304] [The musquet or musket is said to be a Spanish invention, and to have been first used at the battle of Pavia. They were so long and heavy as to require the support of a rest. In the time of Elizabeth and long after, the English musqueteer was very different from one at the present day. In addition to the musquet itself, he had to carry a flask of coarse powder for loading, and a touch-box of fine powder for priming; the bullets were contained in a leathern bag, the strings of which he had to draw to get at them; while in his hand was his burning match and musquet-rest.]

[1305] De Civitate Noribergensi Commentat. 1697, 4to, p. 150: In chronico quodam MS. legitur: the fire-locks belonging to the shooting tubes were first found out at Nuremberg in 1517.

[1306] Raetia das ist Beschreibung, &c. Zurich, 1616, fol. p. 152.

[1307] Appenzeller Chronik. St. Gall, 1740, 8vo, p. 194.

[1308] This kind of stone is not everywhere used for this purpose. In the Tyrol, for example, the hardest ferruginous granite, which consists of corneous, partly irregular and partly polyedral, pieces, is employed as flints, which therefore are called Tyrol flints. In other places, jasper, such as that found in great abundance in Turkey, is formed by grinding, and used in the same manner.

[1309] Of this deity an account may be found in Schedii Syntagma de Diis Germanis. Halæ, 1728, 8vo, p. 726.

[1310] Esper Nachricht von neu entdeckten Zoolithen, Nurnberg, 1774, fol. Mr. Esper says, those fire-stones only which contain fossils or petrifactions are called _flins_, flint; and it is possible that the singular formation may be the cause why they have retained longest the name of the pagan deity.

[1311] Figures of such instruments may be found in the fifth volume of the Archæologia Britannica.

[1312] Philosophical Transactions, No. 474.

[1313] A polished plate a foot square is sold at the Vienna porcelain manufactory for five hundred florins.

[1314] Chemnitz regrets that the largest and most beautiful pieces are broken in many thousand fragments, and afterwards sold for a trifle as gun-flints.--Berliner Beschäftigungen, p. 213.

[1315] Hippolytus Angelerius, in a work entitled De Antiquitate Atestinæ, p. 14, in vol. vii. of Thes. Antiquit. Italiæ.

FINIS.

INDEX.

Adulteration of wine, i. 245; ancients clarified their wine with gypsum, i. 250; potters-earth used for clarifying wine, _ib._; Jacob Ehrni beheaded for adulterating wine, i. 253; arsenical liver of sulphur used for detecting metal in wine, _ib._; fumigating with sulphur, i. 255; adulteration with milk, i. 256; adulteration of wine in England, _ib._

Air-chamber, when first applied to the fire-engine, ii. 252.

Alum, i. 180; alum of the ancients was vitriol, _ib._; places where they procured it, i. 182; use of the ancient alum to secure buildings from fire, i. 184; invention of the modern alum, i. 185; _alumen roccæ_, i. 186; the oldest alum-works in the Levant, i. 187; the oldest in Europe on the island of Ænaria, i. 188; origin of those at Tolfa or Civita Vecchia, i. 190; at Volterra, i. 193; Popes’ exclusive trade in alum, i. 194; oldest alum-work in Germany, i. 195; the first in England, i. 196.

Apothecaries, i. 326; Greek and Roman physicians prepared their own medicines, i. 327; their employment in the 13th and 14th centuries, i. 329; pharmacy first separated from medicine by the Arabian physicians, _ib._; medical establishments in Europe formed after that at Salerno, i. 331; English apothecaries, i. 333; French, _ib._; German, i. 333-338; portable apothecary’s shop at the Byzantine court, i. 339; first dispensatory, _ib._

Aquafortis, first intelligible account of, i. 506.

Archil, i. 35; known to the ancients, i. 36; art of dyeing with, brought, in 1300, from the Levant, i. 38; account of the family of the Oricellarii or Rucellai, who made that art known in Italy, _ib._; trade of the Canary islands with, i. 39; of the Cape de Verde islands, i. 40; invention of Lacmus, 41.

Artichoke, i. 212; _cinara_ of the ancients the same with the _carduus_, i. 213; _Scolymus_ described, i. 215; not our artichoke, i. 216; _Cactus_, what parts of it were eaten, i. 219; our artichoke known in the fifteenth century, i. 220; origin of the name, _ib._, opinions respecting the country from which it was first brought, i. 221.

Artificial ice, ii. 142; preserving snow for cooling liquors, known to the ancients, _ib._; ice preserved for the same use, ii. 143; Nero’s method of cooling water, _ib._; how cooled in Egypt, ii. 144; water made to freeze in summer, ii. 146; art of making ice at Calcutta, _ib._; method of cooling water mentioned by Plutarch, ii. 147; earthen vessels used in Portugal for cooling water, _ib._; use of snow known at the French court under Henry III., ii. 149; trade carried on with snow and ice in France, ii. 150; cooling property of saltpetre, when discovered, ii. 151; drinking-cups of ice used in France, ii. 155; ice extensively used for œconomical purposes, ii. 158; machinery employed for cutting it, ii. 159.

_Aurum fulminans_, i. 509; of what composed, _ib._; invention of it obscure, _ib._; said to have been discovered by a German monk, i. 510; Valentin’s receipt for preparing it, _ib._; deprived of its power by means of vinegar, i. 511.

Bankers, the oldest at Rome, ii. 5.

Bellows, wooden, i. 63; whether first invented by Anacharsis, i. 64; bellows at the oldest melting-houses driven by men, _ib._; leather and wooden bellows compared, _ib._; description of the latter, i. 65; advantages of them, i. 66; invented in Germany, _ib._; the inventor supposed to be Hans Lobsinger, Shellhorn a miller, or a bishop of Bamberg, i. 66, 67; introduction of them at the mines of the Harz Forest, i. 67.

Bills of exchange, ii. 203; account of the oldest, _ib._; ordinance issued at Barcelona respecting them, ii. 204.

Black lead, ii. 388; names by which it is known, _ib._; ancient manuscripts ruled with lead, ii. 389; plumbago, by whom first mentioned, ii. 390; black lead pits in Cumberland, ii. 392; in commerce, called _potloth_, ii. 393; first pencils used for drawing, _ib._; black and red chalk, ii. 394.

Bologna stone, ii. 429; description of, ii. 429-430; how rendered capable of shining in the dark, ii. 431; discovery of this, by whom made, _ib._; preparation of the stone concealed by the Italian chemists, ii. 432; taught by Poterius, a French chemist, _ib._; luminous stone from India mentioned by De Thou, ii. 433; other kinds of pyrophori, ii. 434.

Book-censors, ii. 512; reason of their being established, _ib._; books forbidden and burnt before the invention of printing, ii. 513; books of the Jews and Christians burnt, ii. 514; works of Arius and Nestorius burnt, _ib._; earliest instance of books published by permission of government, _ib._; mandate respecting book-censors, ii. 516; bull of Alexander VI. prohibiting books unless previously examined, ii. 517; book-censors established in France, _ib._

Book-keeping, history of, i. 1.

Buckingham, duke of, the first person in England who used six horses to his carriage, i. 76.

Buck-wheat, i. 425; not known to the ancients, i. 426; introduced into Europe the beginning of the 16th century, _ib._; said to have been brought from Asia, _ib._; conjectures respecting other names given to it, i. 428; when cultivated in England, _ib._; account of a new species, _ib._; sows itself in Siberia, i. 429; difficult to be cultivated, i. 430.

Butter, i. 499; whether known to the Hebrews, i. 500; passage in Proverbs respecting it wrongly translated, _ib._; oldest mention of it in Greek writers, _ib._; known to the Scythians, _ib._; used by the Lusitanians instead of oil, _ib._; elephants drank it, _ib._; anecdote related by Plutarch, i. 503; invention of butter ascribed by Pliny to the Germans, i. 504; uses to which butter was applied by the ancients, i. 506, 507; butter of the ancients was fluid, _ib._; scarce in Norway during the ages of paganism, i. 508.

Camp-mills, ii. 55; invention ascribed to the Germans, ii. 56.

Canary-birds, i. 32; when known in Europe, _ib._; flew from a ship wrecked on the roast of Italy to Elba, where they multiplied, _ib._; trade with them, i. 33; Canary seed, where first cultivated, i. 34; use of, might be extended, i. 35.

Carp, history of, ii. 46; Cassiodorus the oldest author who uses the term _carpa_, ii. 51; origin of the name, ii. 52; carp supposed to have been first found in the southern parts of Europe, _ib._; known in England, ii. 53.

Catalogues of books, ii. 522; first printers printed books at their own expense, _ib._; when bookselling became a distinct business, _ib._; catalogues first printed, ii. 523; account of some of the earliest, ii. 524; rapid increase of catalogues, ii. 527; Bohn’s guinea catalogue, _ib._

Cauliflower, brought from the Levant to Italy, ii. 345.

Cheese known earlier than butter, i. 502.

Chemical names of metals, ii. 23; given first to the heavenly bodies, _ib._; nomination of metals after the heathen deities, ii. 24; astrological nomination known to the Brahmans in India, ii. 26; origin of the characters by which the planets are expressed, ii. 27; those by which the metals are signified, ii. 28; list of metals known at the present day, ii. 31.

Chimneys, i. 295; no traces of at Herculaneum, i. 296; principal writers on their antiquity, i. 296, 297; passages in Greek authors supposed to allude to them, i. 297-299; in Roman authors, i. 299-301; houses of the ancients had no chimneys, _ib._; in what manner they warmed their apartments, i. 305; description of the stoves used in Persia, _ib._; derivation of the word chimney, i. 308; houses of the ancients kept warm by pipes, i. 309; Winkelmann’s description of stoves found in a ruined villa, _ib._; no chimneys in the 10th, 12th and 13th centuries, i. 312; oldest account of chimneys in an inscription at Venice, i. 313; first chimney-sweepers in Germany came from Savoy and Piedmont, i. 314; chimney-sweeps at Paris Savoyards, _ib._

Clocks and watches, history of, i. 340; clocks known in the eleventh century, i. 346; first public clock at Padua, i. 351; when in use among private persons, i. 354; first mention of watches, _ib._; history of clocks and watches, by Barrington, i. 355; Queen Mary’s watch, i. 362; Sir Richard Burton’s, _ib._; letter on the watch said to have belonged to Robert Bruce, i. 364; Harrison’s invention, i. 368; Arnold’s chronometer, i. 370.

Coaches, i. 68; covered carriages at Rome, _ib._; women only rode in carriages at the beginning of the 16th century, i. 70; use of covered carriages forbidden, _ib._; order of Julius duke of Brunswick, forbidding his vassals to ride in carriages, i. 72; French monarchs rode on horseback in the 14th, 15th and 16th centuries, i. 74; citizens’ wives at Paris forbidden to use carriages, _ib._; Henry IV. had only one coach, i. 75; whirlicotes, the oldest carriages used by the English ladies, _ib._; coaches first known in England, i. 76; when introduced into Italy, Spain, Sweden, and Russia, _ib._; origin of the word coach, i. 77; berline, invention of, i. 78; first coaches let out for hire at Paris, i. 79; hackney-coaches first established at London, i. 81; number of coaches in some of the principal cities of Europe, _ib._

Cobalt, i. 478; is melted with siliceous earth and potashes to a blue glass called smalt, _ib._; ground smalt, or powder-blue, _ib._; cobalt not known to the ancients, _ib._; reason why Lehmann and others think that the ancients used smalt, i. 481; Gmelin’s experiments on the blue of the ancients, _ib._; origin of the name cobalt, i. 483; first colour-mills in Germany for grinding smalt, i. 484; smalt not mentioned in books till a later period, i. 486; the oldest description found in the works of Biringoccio, _ib._

Cock-fighting, ii. 473; reflections on, _ib._; antiquity of, _ib._; quail-fighting among the Romans, ii. 474; cock-fights and quail-fights mentioned by Solon, ii. 475; Romans employed partridges for fighting, _ib._; cock-fighting instituted by Themistocles, _ib._; ascribed to Miltiades, ii. 476; mentioned by ancient authors, ii. 477-479; oldest information about cock-fighting in England, ii. 481; this pastime forbidden, _ib._

Cork, i. 318; properties of, _ib._; account of the cork-tree, i. 319; known to the Greeks and Romans, _ib._; cork used by the ancient fishermen as floats to their nets, i. 321; anchor-buoys made of it, _ib._; Romans made soles of it, i. 322; cork jackets, antiquity of, _ib._; ancient methods of closing up wine-casks and other vessels, i. 323; cork stoppers, i. 324; various substitutes for corks, i. 325, 326.

Corn-mills, i. 147; earliest methods of grinding corn, _ib._; the oldest hand-mills, _ib._; cattle-mills, i. 148; water-mills, i. 151; mills constructed at Rome by Belisarius, i. 154; invention of floating-mills, i. 155; of wind-mills, i. 158; difference between German and Dutch wind-mills, i. 160; bolting-machinery, when invented, i. 161; bolting-cloth, i. 162; invention of barley-mills, i. 168; anecdote of a feudal lord, i. 170.

Cryptography, when invented, i. 106.

Diamond, when first used for writing on glass, ii. 87.

Diving-bell, i. 111; ancient divers, _ib._; principles explained, i. 113; earliest use in Europe, _ib._; described by Lord Bacon, i. 115; cannon fished up by it from the wreck of the Spanish Armada, _ib._; old inventions, i. 117; Dr. Halley’s diving-bell, i. 118; Triewald’s improvement, i. 119; when employed in civil engineering, i. 121; apparatus for walking at the bottom of the sea, i. 122.

Embroidery, antiquity of, i. 415.

Enamel, i. 132.

Etching on glass discovered by Henry Schwanhard, ii. 88; process which he employed, ii. 89.

Etruscan vases, colours of, produced by calx of iron, ii. 239.

Exclusive privilege for printing books, ii. 518; oldest privilege known, granted in 1490, _ib._; account of some granted in different countries, ii. 519, 520; privileges granted in England, ii. 520; in Spain, ii. 521.

Falconry, i. 198; not a modern invention, i. 199; birds of prey used in India and Thrace, i. 201; employed also in Italy, _ib._; forbidden to the clergy in the sixth century, i. 203; ancients bred other rapacious animals besides hawks, _ib._; falconry common in the twelfth century, _ib._; Frederick II. wrote a book upon it, _ib._; ladies formerly fond of falconry, i. 204; oldest writers on this art, _ib._

Fire-engines, ii. 245; idea borrowed from the common pump, _ib._; _sipho_ mentioned by Pliny, a fire-engine, ii. 246; fire-engines at Rome, ii. 247; in the East, engines employed to produce fires, ii. 249; Greek fire, _ib._; fire-engines introduced into Germany uncertain, ii. 250; first mentioned in the building accounts of Augsburg, _ib._; fire-engines at Nuremberg, ii. 251; fire-engines very imperfect in the seventeenth century, ii. 252; air-chamber, when added, _ib._; improved engines made by Leupold, ii. 253; Dutch improvements, ii. 255-256; pipes for conveying water not unknown to the ancients, ii. 256; fire-engines, when introduced at Constantinople, ii. 257.

Floating of wood, i. 454; what gave rise to this invention, i. 455; wood floated by Solomon for the temple at Jerusalem, i. 456; wood transported on water by the Romans, _ib._; earliest account of floating wood in Germany, i. 458; in France, i. 459, 460.

Forks, ii. 407; Greeks and Romans had no name for them, ii. 408; Romans often used _ligulæ_ instead, ii. 409; forks not employed by the ancients, _ib._; meat cut by a carver, ii. 410; forks not in use among the Chinese, _ib._; forks supposed to be found among the ruins of a Roman town, ii. 411; when first known in Italy, _ib._; forks and spoons still rarities in some parts of Spain, ii. 413; table knives, when introduced among the Highlanders, _ib._; English, Dutch, and French have adopted the Italian names _forca_ and _forchetta_, _ib._; German word _gabel_ of great antiquity, ii. 414.

Foundling hospitals, ii. 434; reflections on child-murder, _ib._; no law against it formerly in Christian states, ii. 436; children exposed by the ancients, ii. 437; permitted in Greece but not at Thebes, ii. 438; when prohibited by the Romans, ii. 439; humane decrees of Constantine the Great, ii. 440; public orphan-houses at Athens and Rome, _ib._; foundlings declared to be free by Justinian, ii. 441; oldest establishments for orphans in Germany, ii. 442; similar establishments in France, ii. 444, 445; one of the same kind at Einbeck, ii. 445; hospital at Nuremberg, ii. 446; institution for foundlings at Venice, _ib._; foundling hospital in England, _ib._; inefficiency of such institutions, ii. 448.

Fowls said to thrive near smoke, i. 303.

Fur dresses, ii. 296; raw skins first used for clothing, ii. 297; fur clothing little used by the Romans, _ib._; introduced by their northern invaders, ii. 301; seal-skins, ii. 302; rein-deer skins, used by the ancient Germans, _ib._; furs, considered by the Getæ objects of magnificence, ii. 304; forbidden by Honorius, _ib._; Gothic breeches adopted by the Romans, ii. 305; furs employed by the Persians instead of mattresses and bolsters, ii. 308; origin of the fur trade to the southern parts of Europe, ii. 309; riches of the northern nations consisted in furs, ii. 310; skins counted by _decuriæ_ or _decher_, ii. 311; skins of the Pontic mouse, ii. 312; ermine, various names of, ii. 315; the sable, _ib._; marten, ii. 316; _grauwerk_, meaning of, ii. 317; cats’ and rabbits’ skins, _ib._; beaver skins, ii. 318; furs, when they began to be dyed, ii. 319; Charlemagne, anecdote respecting his dress of sheep’s skin, _ib._; fur gloves, ii. 320; use of furs forbidden, ii. 321, 322; not used at the court of Byzantium, ii. 322; fur trade in modern times, ii. 323.

Garden-flowers, history of, i. 512; modern taste came from Persia and Constantinople, _ib._; tuberose, when first brought to Europe, _ib._; auricula carried to Brussels, i. 513; ranunculus brought from the Levant, i. 516; fondness of Mahomet IV. for this flower, _ib._; favourite flowers of the present day, i. 517.

Gilding, ii. 290; mentioned in the books of the Old Testament, _ib._; art of gold-beating at Rome in the time of Pliny, ii. 291; process of gold-beating in the twelfth century, _ib._; pellicle first used by the German gold-beaters, ii. 292; art of gilding facilitated by the invention of oil-painting, ii. 294; gold-leaf affixed to metals by quicksilver in the time of Pliny, ii. 295; false gilding, _ib._; gilding leather, ii. 296.

Glass-cutting, ii. 84; known to the ancients, _ib._; revived by Caspar Lehmann, ii. 85; figures engraved on glass with a diamond, ii. 86; etching on glass, ii. 88; history of sparry fluor, ii. 90; its property of emitting light discovered, _ib._; ornaments of, made in Derbyshire, ii. 92.

Guns, gun-locks, ii. 533; first portable fire-arms discharged by a match, _ib._; when flints were used, ii. 534; pistols, when brought into use, ii. 535; derivation of the word, _ib._; muskets, whence they received their name, _ib._; gun-lock, when invented, _ib._; how gun-flints are prepared, ii. 538.

Honey used by the ancients for preserving natural curiosities, i. 286.

Hops, ii. 376; whether known to the ancients, ii. 377; known in the time of the Carolingian dynasty, ii. 380; in Egypt bitter things added to beer, ii. 382; when hops were used in the Netherlands, _ib._; when in England, ii. 384; sweet gale employed for beer in Sweden, ii. 385; Chinese hops, how prepared, ii. 387; cultivation of hops in England, _ib._

Horse, burnt as being possessed by the devil, ii. 118.

Horse-shoes, i. 442; writers on their antiquity, i. 443; methods employed by the ancients to preserve the feet of cattle, _ib._; mules shod with silver and gold, i. 444; hoofs of the ancient cavalry soon worn out, i. 446; ancients unacquainted with horse-shoes such as ours, _ib._; horses not shod in Ethiopia, Japan and Tartary, i. 449; horse-shoe said to have been found in the grave of Childeric, i. 451; first mentioned in the ninth century, i. 452; mentioned by Italian, English and French writers of the same century, i. 453; shoeing horses, when introduced into England, i. 454.

Hungary water, i. 315; method of preparing it, _ib._; fabulous origin of the name, _ib._; receipt for making it first mentioned in a small book by John Prevot, i. 316; copy of the receipt, _ib._

Hydrometer, ii. 161; earliest mention of it occurs in the fifth century, _ib._; description of the hydrometer by Synesius, ii. 163; Hypatia not the inventress of the hydrometer, ii. 168; revived in the sixteenth century, ii. 169; improvements in, ii. 171.

Indigo, ii. 258; brought first from the East Indies, _ib._; medicinal properties of, ii. 261; cultivated in Malta in the seventeenth century, ii. 262; the _Indicum nigrum_ of the ancients was China ink, ii. 264; authors in which this term occurs, ii. 267; indigo, as well as Indian ink, procured from India, and named _indicum_, ii. 270; indigo mentioned by Arabian physicians, _ib._; indigo substituted in dyeing for woad, ii. 273; when introduced into Germany, ii. 274; great importation into Holland, _ib._; American indigo, _ib._; indigo prohibited in Germany, ii. 277; dyers obliged to take an oath not to use it, ii. 278; first mention of it in the English laws, ii. 279.

Infirmaries, hospitals, lazarettos, ii. 454; no hospitals for sick at Rome, _ib._; pilgrimages gave rise to their erection, ii. 456; brotherhoods established to provide for sick pilgrims, ii. 457; first hospitals built close to cathedrals, ii. 458; mad-houses, where first established, ii. 461; attention paid by the Romans to their invalids, ii. 462; first establishment for invalids at Constantinople, ii. 465; _Hôtel des Invalides_, at Paris, _ib._; regular surgeons, when appointed to armies, ii. 468-471; establishment of field hospitals in Germany, ii. 471.

Ink, sympathetic, history of, i. 106.

Ink, in what manner it acquires a superior quality, ii. 266.

Insurance, i. 234; not known to the Romans, _ib._; Puffendorf and others endeavour to prove the contrary, _ib._; does not occur in the Hanseatic maritime laws, _ib._; policies drawn up in 1523, still used in Leghorn, i. 237; insurance-laws of the 16th and 17th centuries, i. 238; invention of insurance against fire, i. 240; insurance companies in England, i. 242-244.

Jackets, cork, of the ancients, i. 322.

Jugglers, ii. 115; who comprehended under that title, _ib._; observations on their employment, ii. 115-119; breathing out flames very ancient, ii. 119; how performed, _ib._; deceptions with naphtha, ii. 120; feats of Richardson with burning coals and melted lead, ii. 121; feat with melted copper, ii. 122; ancient Hirpi could walk through burning coals, ii. 123; ordeal, a juggling trick of the priests, _ib._; secret of it disclosed, ii. 124; exhibition with balls and cups mentioned by the ancients, _ib._; Von Eckeberg suffered large stones to be broken on his breast, ii. 126; ancient rope-dancers, _ib._; feats of horsemanship came from the East, ii. 128; performers at the Byzantine court, _ib._; Romans taught elephants to walk on a rope, ii. 129; Sybarites taught horses to dance, ii. 130; Wildman’s exhibition with bees, _ib._; puppets, ii. 132; antiquity of automata, ii. 133; tripods of Vulcan, ii. 134; moving statues of Dædalus, _ib._; pigeon of Archytas, ii. 135; wooden eagle and iron fly of Regiomontanus, _ib._; automata of Vaucanson and Du Moulin, ii. 136, 137; of De Gennes, ii. 137; speaking machines, ii. 138-141; Chinese shadows, ii. 141.

Kermes and cochineal, i. 385; belong to the same genus, i. 386; three kinds described, _ib._; places where the ancients collected them, i. 387; still found in the Levant, i. 388; French and Spanish kermes, _ib._; name given to them in the middle ages, i. 390; how preserved at those periods, _ib._; when this dye was known in Germany, i. 391; origin of the name _kermes_, i. 392; discovery of American cochineal, i. 396; disputes whether cochineal was insects or berries, i. 398; real cochineal brought to St. Domingo, i. 399; kermes early employed in the East to dye red, _ib._; derivation of the word _scarlet_, i. 400; Drebbel discovered that a solution of tin produced with cochineal a beautiful scarlet colour, i. 402; Gobelin improved the art of dyeing scarlet in France, i. 403; first dye-house for scarlet in England established by a Fleming, _ib._; three kinds of cochineal in the English market, i. 404.

Kitchen vegetables, ii. 336; bulbous roots, favourite dishes among the ancients, ii. 338; some vegetables, formerly cultivated, now little esteemed, _ib._; borage not known to the ancients, ii. 339; spinage, no traces of in the works of the ancients, ii. 340; its native country unknown, _ib._; broccoli, known to the ancients, ii. 342; species of the cabbage according to Linnæan system, ii. 343-348; whether the Greeks and Romans were acquainted with our carrots, ii. 349-351; shallots brought from Ascalon in Palestine, ii. 353; our shallots obtained only by the bulbs, _ib._; potatoes, when introduced into Europe, ii. 354.

Kircher, whether the inventor of the speaking-trumpet, i. 97; read the litany through one to a congregation from two to five Italian miles off, i. 99.

Knitting, stocking-loom, ii. 355; fishing and hunting-nets mentioned in the Scriptures, ii. 357; nets, in modern times found among very rude nations, ii. 358; mantles of the clergy in the middle ages covered with silk nets, ii. 359; stocking-knitting, when invented, ii. 360; when known in England, ii. 361; breeches and hose, when worn in Scotland, ii. 362; stockings of cloth, in the time of Queen Mary, ii. 364; knitting, when common throughout England, ii. 365; art of knitting stockings in Germany, _ib._; terms which relate to knitting older than the art itself, ii. 366; wire-screens of curious workmanship, ii. 367; stocking-loom, invention of, ii. 368-373; stocking-looms at Venice, ii. 373; invention claimed by the French, _ib._; brought to Germany, ii. 375; present state of the hosiery manufacture, _ib._

Lace, i. 463; method of making it, _ib._; not known to the ancients, i. 464; lace among old church furniture, i. 465; establishment of the lace manufacture in France, _ib._; lace a German invention, _ib._; application of machinery to the manufacture of lace, i. 466.

Lapidary’s wheel known to the ancients, ii. 84.

Lead, sugar of, when invented, i. 250; whether used for secret poison, i. 60.

Leaf-skeletons, ii. 195; first made by Severin, ii. 197; also by Gabriel Clauder, _ib._; insects employed for this purpose by Ruysch, ii. 198; leaf-skeletons by Seligmann, ii. 200; art of raising trees from leaves, ii. 201.

Lending-houses, history of, ii. 1; ancient princes lent money to the poor without interest, ii. 2; their example followed in modern Italy, ii. 3; _Tabernæ argentariæ_ of the Romans different from lending-houses, ii. 5; public loans in the fourteenth century, _ib._; lending-houses opposed by the Dominicans, ii. 7; Tomitano preached in favour of them, ii. 9; established in different parts of Italy, ii. 10-12; dispute respecting their legality, ii. 12; confirmed at the council of the Lateran, ii. 13; _Banco de’ poveri_ at Naples, _ib._; origin of the name _Mons pietatis_, ii. 15; account of the oldest public loans, ii. 16; first lending-house in Germany, ii. 17; Lombards in the Netherlands, ii. 18; _Mont de piété_ at Paris, ii. 20; account of pawnbroking in England, ii. 21.

Lighting of streets, ii. 172; Rome not lighted, _ib._; contrary opinion of Meursius, _ib._; streets of Antioch lighted, ii. 173; Cæsarea not lighted, _ib._; antiquity of illuminations, ii. 174; Paris lighted, ii. 175; reverberating lamps invented, ii. 177; first account of lighting London, ii. 178; Amsterdam, the Hague, and Copenhagen, ii. 180; streets of Rome have no lights but those before the images of saints, _ib._; lighting at Philadelphia, Hamburg, Berlin, ii. 181; at Vienna and other cities, ii. 181, 182; introduction of gas, ii. 182-185.

Lottery, ii. 414; two kinds in Europe, _ib._; _Congiaria_ of the Romans resembled our lotteries, _ib._; shopkeepers in the middle ages sold wares in the manner of a lottery, ii. 416; established at Florence, ii. 417; brought from Italy to France, ii. 418; lottery for giving portions to young women, ii. 419; others for similar purposes, _ib._; lotteries, properly so called, when established, ii. 420; lottery proposed by Tonti, _ib._; French lotteries, ii. 421; origin of the name, ii. 422; first in England, ii. 423; at Amsterdam, ii. 425; in Germany, _ib._; Genoese lottery, ii. 426; Art-Unions, the only lottery existing in England, ii. 428.

Machine for noting down music, i. 12; one invented in Germany by Unger, _ib._; another, constructed by Hohlfeld, _ib._; Dr. Burney ascribes this invention to the English, i. 13.

Madder, ii. 108; known to the ancients, ii. 110; in the middle ages, ii. 111; its property of colouring the bones, _ib._; cultivation of, ii. 113, 114.

Mad-houses, where first established, ii. 461.

Magnetic cures, i. 43; external use of the magnet in curing the tooth-ache, known in the 6th century, i. 44; mentioned by writers in the 15th and 16th centuries, _ib._; effect of on the bodies of animals, _ib._; properties of, i. 45.

Maize brought from America, i. 497.

Manganese, ii. 235; employed in glass-making, _ib._; frees glass from dirt, ii. 236; use of it retained, ii. 239; brought from Piedmont and Perigord, in France, ii. 240.

Mantles of the knights bordered with furs, ii. 319.

Mantles of the clergy covered with silk nets, ii. 359.

Manuscripts, ancient, ruled with lead, ii. 389.

Mills, history of, i. 147; East Indian oil-mills, i. 148; philosophical mill, by whom invented, i. 150; water-mills, when invented, i. 151; floating mills, i. 155; wind-mills, i. 158.

Mirrors, ii. 56; the oldest of metal, ii. 57; known in the time of Moses, _ib._; ancient mirrors of silver, _ib._; of copper, brass, and gold, ii. 62; how cleaned, ii. 63; chemical examination of the metal, _ib._; mirrors made of stones, ii. 65; mirrors of the native Americans, ii. 68; mirrors of glass made at Sidon, ii. 69; mirrors in the twelfth century, ii. 75; first certain mention in the thirteenth century, ii. 76; manner in which the oldest were made, _ib._; process for silvering them described, ii. 79; Venetian mirrors esteemed till the seventeenth century, _ib._; establishment of glass-houses in France, _ib._; invention of casting glass plates for mirrors, ii. 80; advantage and disadvantage of this, ii. 81; abandoned for the old method of blowing, ii. 82; ingenious process for silvering glass, ii. 83.

Mosaic work, i. 130.

Natural curiosities, collections of, i. 282; deposited by the ancients in their temples, i. 283; an account of different articles of this kind, and where kept, i. 283-284; collection formed by Augustus, i. 285; natural bodies preserved in ancient times by means of salt, _ib._; dead bodies among the Scythians, Assyrians and Persians covered with wax, i. 287; fish and apples transported in wax, i. 288; origin of wrapping up dead bodies in wax cloth, _ib._; books found in the grave of Numa, how preserved, i. 289; where collections were first formed by private persons, i. 290; first private collections in the 16th century, _ib._; oldest catalogues of such collections, i. 291; collections in England, i. 293.

Night-watch, ii. 185; among the ancients, _ib._; when calling the hours began to be practised, ii. 186; rich people kept servants to announce certain periods of the day, _ib._; methods of watching in time of war, ii. 187; ancient watchmen carried bells, ii. 188; night-watching established early at Paris, _ib._; at Berlin, ii. 189; in Germany, ii. 190; watchmen stationed on steeples and towers, _ib._; watchmen posted on towers among the Chinese, ii. 192; watchmen in times of feudal alarm, ii. 193; modern system of, ii. 194.

Ordeal, account of, ii. 123.

Odometer, i. 5; supposed to be mentioned by Capitolinus, _ib._; figure of one on the ducal palace of Urbino erected in 1482, _ib._; one made by Paul Pfinzing, _ib._; odometer with which Augustus elector of Saxony measured his territories, i. 7; odometers of Rodolphus II., _ib._; Butterfield’s odometer, _ib._; Meynier’s, i. 8; Hohlfeld’s, _ib._; Payne’s, i. 11.

Orphan-houses, ii. 449; first formed by Trajan, _ib._; inspector of orphans, an office at the court of Byzantium, ii. 454.

Painters, ancient, often poor slaves, ii. 261.

Paper-hangings, i. 379; velvet paper, how prepared, i. 380; invented by Jerome Lanyer, _ib._; called at first Londrindiana, i. 381; Audran, his invention, i. 382; art of imprinting gold and silver figures on paper invented by Eccard, _ib._; oldest account of such hangings in Germany, _ib._; new improvement in, i. 383; metallic dust invented at Nuremberg, _ib._; silver-coloured glimmer, i. 384.

Paving of streets, i. 269; first by the Carthaginians, i. 270; Thebes paved, _ib._; whether Jerusalem was paved not known, _ib._; when Rome began to be paved uncertain, i. 271; information by Livy, _ib._; pavement of Herculaneum and Pompeii, i. 272; Cordova paved in the ninth century, _ib._; Paris not paved in the twelfth century, _ib._; cause of its being paved, _ib._; London not paved in the eleventh century, i. 273; Smithfield-market, when paved, i. 274; German cities, when paved, _ib._; citizens of Paris obliged in 1285 to repair and clean the streets, i. 275; reason why no swine were suffered about the streets, i. 276; privies erected in France by an order from government, i. 278; earlier in Germany than Paris, i. 279; wooden pavement, i. 281.

Pearls, artificial, i. 258; art of forcing shell-fish to produce, known to the ancients, i. 260; how the Chinese cause mussels to produce pearls, _ib._; invention of Linnæus for the same purpose, i. 261; how pearl-fishers know shells which contain pearls, i. 263; different kinds of artificial pearls, i. 264; invention of Jaquin for preparing them, i. 265.

Pilgrimages, the cause of hospitals, ii. 456.

Plague, origin of, i. 374.

Poison, secret, i. 47; mentioned by Plutarch and Quintilian, i. 48; dreadful poison of the Indians, _ib._; secret poison known to Theophrastus, i. 49; invention of it falsely ascribed to Thrasyas, _ib._; when known at Rome, _ib._; employed by Sejanus and Agrippina, _ib._; secret poison, supposed to have been given to Regulus, _ib._; ancients unacquainted with mineral poisons, i. 51; Toffania invented a kind of secret poison, i. 51, 52; detected and strangled, i. 53; Marchioness de Brinvillier’s poisonings, i. 55; seized and beheaded, i. 56; _chambre de poison_ established at Paris, i. 57; Count Corfitz de Ulfeld intended to poison the king of Denmark, _ib._; Charles XI., king of Sweden, poisoned, _ib._; ingredients of, i. 60, 61; antidote, i. 61; powst, a kind of secret poison used in the East Indies, i. 63.

Prince Rupert’s drops, ii. 241; not known till the seventeenth century, ii. 242; first experiments with, _ib._; brought to England by prince Rupert, ii. 244.

Pumps, by whom invented, ii. 245.

Quarantine, i. 373; origin of, obscure, _ib._; said to have been established by the Venetians, _ib._; account by Le Bret, i. 376; institution of the council of health, i. 377; when letters of health were first written, _ib._

Quicksilver used for purifying gold ore, i. 14; how recovered afterwards, i. 15.

Quills for writing, antiquity of, i. 405; scarcity of, i. 413.

Ribbon-loom, ii. 527; construction of it, _ib._; attempts made to suppress it, ii. 528; such looms invented by the Swiss, _ib._; loom seen by Anthony Moller at Dantzic, _ib._; inventor of it put to death, ii. 529; weaving machine mentioned by Boxhorn, _ib._; ribbon-looms prohibited in Holland, ii. 530; prohibited also in the Spanish Netherlands and at Cologne, _ib._; prohibited by imperial authority, ii. 531; loom burnt publicly at Hamburg, _ib._; prohibition of this kind annulled in Germany, _ib._

Rubies, artificial, how to make, i. 125.

Saddles, i. 431; coverings, when introduced, _ib._; order of Theodosius a proof of their antiquity, i. 433; prohibition of Leo I. that no one should ornament them with precious stones, i. 434; conjecture that they were invented by the Salii, _ib._; invented by the Persians, i. 435.

Saffron, i. 175; medicinal use of, i. 176; employed by the Romans for perfuming apartments, _ib._; scented salves made with it, _ib._; used by the ancients for seasoning dishes, _ib._; introduced into Spain by the Arabs, i. 178; by whom brought to France, i. 179; introduced into England in the reign of Edward III., _ib._; when cultivated in Austria, _ib._; an important article in husbandry in the fifteenth century, _ib._; adulteration of it, i. 180.

Sal-ammoniac, ii. 396; whether known to the ancients, ii. 397; first traces in the works of the Arabians, ii. 402; recipe for its preparation, ii. 404; invention of aqua regia, ii. 405; obtained from Egypt, _ib._; brought also from the East Indies, ii. 406; first works for making it in Europe, _ib._

Saltpetre, gunpowder, aquafortis, ii. 482; saltpetre, properties of, ii. 483; native saltpetre, where found, ii. 484; name _nitrum_, of great antiquity, ii. 487; difference between mineral alkalies, when defined, ii. 489; _nitrum_ of the ancients an impure alkali, but not saltpetre, ii. 491; was a real lixivious salt, ii. 492; red _nitrum_, ii. 502; saltpetre, when first mentioned, ii. 503; gunpowder invented in India, ii. 505; used by Indians and Arabians before Europeans, ii. 506; first account of aquafortis, _ib._; said to have been employed at Venice for separating the noble metals, ii. 508; saltpetre regale, ii. 509; when abolished, ii. 511.

Saw-mills, i. 222; ancient method of making boards, _ib._; our saw not known to the Americans, _ib._; by whom invented, i. 223; bone of the saw-fish used by the old inhabitants of Madeira, i. 224; ancient saws, i. 224, 225; invention of saw-mills, i. 225; the first saw-mills in Norway, i. 228; first saw-mill in Holland, _ib._; the first in England erected by a Dutchman, i. 229; saw-mill at Limehouse destroyed by the mob, _ib._; saw-mill at Leith in Scotland, i. 230.

Sealing-wax, i. 137; substances used by the ancients, _ib._; wax employed in the earliest ages, i. 140; red, green, and black sealing-wax, _ib._; impressions made on paste, i. 141; how public acts have been forged, i. 143; East Indian and Turkish sealing-wax, _ib._; oldest known seal on a letter written from London, i. 144; oldest printed receipt for making sealing-wax, i. 145; Spanish wax, i. 146; antiquity of wafers, _ib._

Ships at first were a kind of rafts, i. 455.

Sowing-machines, ii. 230; Locatelli considered as the inventor, ii. 231; his machine described by Evelyn, ii. 232; honour of this invention disputed by the Italians, ii. 233.

Snow, used by the ancients for cooling liquors, ii. 142.

Soap, ii. 92; invented by the Gauls, _ib._; used at Rome as a pomade, ii. 93; Germans dyed their hair with it, _ib._; oldest method of washing, ii. 95; alkaline water in Armenia, _ib._; urine employed for washing, ii. 97; tax upon it, ii. 98; saponaceous plants, ii. 98-102; bran, ii. 102; fullers-earth, _ib._; manufactory in England, ii. 107, 108.

Spangles, how made, and when invented, i. 423.

Speaking-trumpet, i. 93; speaking-trumpet of Alexander the Great, i. 94; ear-trumpet older than the speaking-trumpet, i. 96; invention of the latter disputed by Sir S. Morland and Kircher, _ib._; ear of Dionysius described, i. 97; Kircher constructed an ear-trumpet in the Jesuits’ College at Rome, i. 99.

Stamped paper, i. 230; whether introduced by Justinian, _ib._; Romans marked their runaway slaves, i. 231; stamped paper invented in Holland, i. 233; introduced into Saxony, _ib._; used in Denmark and other countries, _ib._

Stamping works, ii. 333; ancients acquainted with the art of stamping ores, _ib._; remains of mills used for that purpose, _ib._; modern stamping-mills, ii. 334; invention of, _ib._; process of sifting and wet stamping, ii. 335; wet stamping said to have been invented in 1505, ii. 336.

Steel, ii. 324; its properties, _ib._; invention very old, ii. 325; two methods of making, ii. 327; art of hardening it, ii. 328; supposed hardening water, ii. 329; invention of converting bar-iron into steel, ii. 330; three kinds of steel now principally manufactured, ii. 333.

Stirrups, i. 435; no traces of any such invention in ancient works, i. 436; no term for them in Greek or Latin, i. 437; warriors had a projection on their spears for resting the foot, while getting on horseback, i. 439; first certain account of stirrups, i. 440; Isidore in the seventh century speaks of them, i. 441; appear in a piece of tapestry of the 11th century, i. 442; pride of the clergy in causing kings to hold their stirrups, _ib._

Surgeons, in the time of the Trojan war, unknown, 491.

Telescope, invention of it made metal mirrors necessary, ii. 60.

Tin, ii. 206; employed in the time of Homer and Moses, _ib._; oldest mention in the Scriptures, ii. 207; _stannum_ of the ancients not our tin, ii. 209; as an article of commerce, ii. 212; tin of the ancients mixed with lead, ii. 220; names of such mixtures, _ib._; tinning seldom employed by the Romans, ii. 221; according to Pliny, invented by the Gauls, ii. 222; ancient vessels of cast tin dug up in England, ii. 223; tin, where procured by the ancients, ii. 223, 224; tin mines in Germany, ii. 226; invention of tinning plate iron, ii. 227; East Indian tin, ii. 228; produce of the Cornish mines, ii. 229.

Tourmaline, i. 86; supposed to be the _lyncurium_ of the ancients, _ib._; probably belongs to the carbuncles, i. 88; tourmaline brought from Ceylon about the end of the last century, i. 89; first described in Germany, _ib._; its electrical properties first known to Linnæus, i. 92; investigated by Æpinus, _ib._; Huygens’ discovery, _ib._

Trees, how raised from leaves, ii. 200.

Tulips, i. 22; came from Turkey, _ib._; effects produced by cultivation, _ib._; how called by the Turks, i. 23; first described by Gesner, i. 24; origin of the name, _ib._; first introduced into England, _ib._; tulipomania, i. 25; the tulip-trade and stock-jobbing compared, i. 29; lesser tulipomania, i. 30; anecdotes, _ib._

Turf, i. 205; use of, discovered by the earth catching fire, _ib._; known to the Chauci, i. 206; whether known to the Dutch in the thirteenth century, _ib._; invention ascribed to Erasmus, i. 207; Williams’ patent, i. 211.

Turkeys, i. 487; not known in Europe before the discovery of America, i. 490; first mentioned by Oviedo, _ib._; called by Lopez de Gomara _galloparones_, i. 491; still found wild in America, _ib._; earliest account of Turkeys in Italy, i. 492; in England, i. 493; in France, _ib._; in Germany, &c., i. 495; in Asia and Africa, i. 496.

Ultramarine, i. 467; how prepared from lapis lazuli, _ib._; price of ultramarine, i. 469; origin of the name, i. 473; oldest mention of, _ib._; preparation of it found out in England, i. 476; artificial method of making, i. 477.

Vanes, weathercocks, ii. 281; the oldest nations distinguished the four principal winds only, _ib._; Æolus first made navigators acquainted with the winds, ii. 282; names given by Charles the Great, _ib._; means for indicating the winds invented early, ii. 283; Varro’s apparatus, ii. 285; similar apparatus at Constantinople, _ib._; when constructed, ii. 286; wind-indicator at Emessa, ii. 287; weathercocks in the ninth century, _ib._; in France, in the twelfth century, none but noblemen allowed to have vanes on their houses, ii. 288; flags or vanes on ships, _ib._; Norman fleet had vanes at the tops of the masts, ii. 289; anemoscopes and anemometers described, _ib._

Verdigris, method of making, i. 171; used in early periods for plasters, i. 172; made formerly in Cyprus and Rhodes, i. 174; why called Spanish green, _ib._

Vitriol, white, when first known, ii. 38.

Water-clocks, i. 82; invention ascribed to Ctesibius of Alexandria, i. 83; Clepsydræ, when introduced at Rome, _ib._; modern water-clock described, _ib._; by whom invented, i. 84; latest improvements, i. 85.

Wheat, attempts to plant it in the time of Sir F. Bacon, ii. 234.

Windows in Russia, how cleaned when frozen, ii. 154.

Wire-drawing, i. 414; earliest use of gold threads for dresses, _ib._; cloth of Attalus embroidered with the needle, i. 415; wire-drawing not known in Italy in the time of Charlemagne, i. 416; brought to great perfection at Nuremberg, i. 420; art of wire-making, when known in England, i. 422; in France, _ib._; filigrane work, antiquity of, i. 423.

Writing-pens, i. 405; instruments used by the ancients, _ib._; still in Persia for writing, i. 406; use of quills said to be as old as the 5th century, i. 409; oldest certain account of them, _ib._; mentioned by Alcuin, i. 410; used in the 9th, 11th and 12th centuries, _ib._; substitution of steel pens, i. 413.

Zinc, ii. 32; unknown to the ancients, _ib._; furnace-calamine, ii. 34; use of in making brass, known to Albertus Magnus, ii. 36; first brought in use at the furnaces of Rammelsberg, ii. 37; the name _zinc_ occurs first in Paracelsus, ii. 40; procured from calamine, ii. 42; imported from the East Indies, ii. 43; origin of its different names, ii. 44; zinc works in England, ii. 45.

Printed by Richard and John E. Taylor, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street.

Transcribers’ Notes

Text contains Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and astronomical symbols. Equipment that cannot display these characters may substitute question marks or other placeholders.

Punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed. Words spelled differently in quoted text than elsewhere were not changed.

Simple typographical errors were silently corrected, except as noted below; ambiguous unbalanced quotation marks and hyphens at the ends of lines were retained.

Text often uses periods where commas might be expected. As the author’s intent is unknown, all of them have been retained.

In some cases, it was not possible to distinguish between the letter “l.” and the number “1.”, usually in footnotes, and usually followed by a period.

The spelling and accent marks of non-English words have been retained as printed in the original book; some possible or likely errors are noted below, but not comprehensively.

Footnotes, originally at the bottom of the page, have been renumbered and moved to the end of each chapter. The footnotes to a footnote retain their original letter-identifications.

Index references not checked for accuracy.

Text uses both “lye” and “ley”; both retained.

Text uses both “Duhamel” and “Du Hamel”; both retained.

Frontispiece: The artist’s initials actually were “J. J.”

Page 19: “give then in return” was printed that way.

Footnote 67, referenced on page 26: contains an extra closing quotation mark or is missing an opening one.

Page 35: “βοτρυίτις” is a typographical error for “βοτρυΐτις”.

Footnote 119, referenced on page 50: “Greek names” was misprinted as “games”; changed here.

Page 57: “interpretators” was printed that way.

Page 196: “one of the principle is the art” was printed that way.

Page 300: “אדות שכער” is a typographical error for “אדרת שנער”.

Page 300: “אדרת שעו” probably is a typographical error for “אדרת שער”.

Page 317: One “_vech_” in “_vech_, _veh_, _vech_,” probably is a misprint for “_veeh_”.

Page 353: “μόνα γἀρ” is a typographical error for “μόνα γὰρ”.

Page 423: “January 1569” was printed as “January 1659” and has been changed here, based on the dates earlier in the same sentence.

Page 448: “scarcely ten” and “54½ died” were printed that way.

Page 451: Some of the Roman Numerals were overlined in the original, but not here. In the same paragraph, “55 5 55” was printed with the digits sideways.

Page 468: “ἂλλον” is a typographical error for “ἄλλον”.

Page 478: “Περσικός” is a typographical error for “Περσικὸς”.

Footnote 1219, referenced on page 495, references “Soap” in vol. i., but it's actually in this volume.

Volume I of this set is available at no charge from Project Gutenberg, www.gutenberg.org, eBook number 48151.