A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume 1 (of 2)
by Johann Beckmann · English · Gutenberg #48151 · 1,374,587 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume 1 (of 2)
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume 1 (of 2)
Author: Johann Beckmann
Editor: William Francis
J. W. Griffith
Translator: William Johnston
Release date: February 4, 2015 [eBook #48151]
Most recently updated: October 24, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48151
Credits: Produced by Charlie Howard and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A HISTORY OF INVENTIONS, DISCOVERIES, AND ORIGINS, VOLUME 1 (OF 2) ***
BOHN’S STANDARD LIBRARY.
BECKMANN’S
HISTORY OF INVENTIONS,
DISCOVERIES, AND ORIGINS.
“Were I to pray for a taste which should stand me in stead under every
variety of circumstances, and be a source of happiness and cheerfulness
to me during life, and a shield against its ills, however things
might go amiss and the world frown upon me, it would be a taste for
reading.... Give a man this taste, and the means of gratifying it, and
you can hardly fail of making him a happy man; unless, indeed, you
put into his hands a most perverse selection of books. You place him
in contact with the best society in every period of history,--with
the wisest, the wittiest, the tenderest, the bravest, and the purest
characters who have adorned humanity. You make him a denizen of all
nations, a contemporary of all ages. The world has been created for
him.”--SIR JOHN HERSCHEL. _Address on the opening of the Eton Library_,
1833.
[Illustration:
_Lud. Schmidt._ _J. J. Hinchliff._
_John Beckmann._]
A
HISTORY
OF
INVENTIONS, DISCOVERIES,
AND ORIGINS.
BY JOHN BECKMANN,
PROFESSOR OF ŒCONOMY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GÖTTINGEN.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN,
BY WILLIAM JOHNSTON.
Fourth Edition,
CAREFULLY REVISED AND ENLARGED BY
WILLIAM FRANCIS, Ph.D., F.L.S.,
EDITOR OF THE CHEMICAL GAZETTE;
AND
J. W. GRIFFITH, M.D., F.L.S.,
LICENTIATE OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS.
VOL. I.
LONDON:
HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN.
1846.
PRINTED BY RICHARD AND JOHN E. TAYLOR,
RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.
CONTENTS.
Page
Italian Book-keeping 1
Odometer 5
Machine for noting down Music 12
Refining Gold and Silver Ore by Quicksilver 14
Cold or Dry Gilding 19
Gold Varnish 20
Tulips 22
Canary Bird 32
Archil 35
Magnetic Cures 43
Secret Poison 47
Wooden Bellows 63
Coaches 68
Water-clocks, Clepsydras 82
Tourmaline 86
Speaking-trumpet 93
Ananas.--Pine-apple 102
Sympathetic Ink 106
Diving-bell 111
Coloured Glass.--Artificial Gems 123
Sealing-wax 137
Corn-mills 147
Verdigris, or Spanish Green 171
Saffron 175
Alum 180
Falconry 198
Turf 205
Artichoke 212
Saw-mills 222
Stamped Paper 230
Insurance 234
Adulteration of Wine 245
Artificial Pearls 258
Paving of Streets 269
Collections of Natural Curiosities 282
Chimneys 295
Hungary Water 315
Cork 318
Apothecaries 326
Clocks and Watches 340
Clocks and Watches (additional) 355
Quarantine 373
Paper-hangings 379
Kermes. Cochineal 385
Writing-pens 405
Wire-drawing 414
Buck-wheat 425
Saddles 431
Stirrups 435
Horse-shoes 442
Floating of Wood 454
Lace 463
Ultramarine 467
Cobalt, Zaffer, Smalt 478
Turkeys 487
Butter 499
Aurum Fulminans 509
Garden-flowers 512
ADVERTISEMENT.
In revising Beckmann’s celebrated Work, we have endeavoured to improve
it principally by altering such names, characters, descriptions, and
opinions as have become obsolete, or are now known to be erroneous;
and by such additions as seemed necessary to bring the accounts of
the subjects treated of to the present state of knowledge. In some
cases, these additions may appear to diverge from the declared object
of the work; but in this we have only followed the example of Beckmann
himself, who frequently deviates from a strict historical path, and
we think advantageously, for the purpose of introducing curious,
instructive, or amusing information. In most cases, where the subject
under consideration is a process of manufacture, we have given a brief
outline of its practice or theory, unless this had previously been done
by the author. The translation, also, has been carefully compared with
the German, but in only a very few cases could we detect errors which
rendered the passages contradictory or unintelligible: on the whole,
it is extremely well executed; and too much praise cannot be given to
Johnston, for the judicious manner in which he has embodied in one
article, detached essays on the same subject, which Beckmann published
at different periods, as he acquired fresh information. The only
instances in which this had been omitted, are the articles on _Turf_,
_Cork_, and _Quarantine_, which were still encumbered with addenda; in
the present edition, these have been incorporated. All such quotations
from Latin and Greek authors, as might be deemed essential to the
understanding of the text, have been given in English; those of a mere
critical and philological character, it has been thought advisable to
leave untranslated. The book may be classed as a compound of learned
research and light reading, suitable both to the popular reader and the
scholar; and that character has been preserved in the present edition.
To the kindness of John Frodsham, Esq., the present proprietor of
Arnold’s Chronometer Establishment, we are indebted for much of the
interesting information added to the article on ‘Clocks and Watches;’
and we have also to return our thanks to the publisher, Mr. H. G. Bohn,
for the assistance he has constantly afforded us, as well as for his
Memoir of the author.
W. FRANCIS.
J. W. GRIFFITH.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
That the arts had their rise in the East, and that they were conveyed
thence to the Greeks, and from them to the Romans, is universally
admitted. Respecting the inventions and discoveries however of the
earliest ages, nothing certain is known. Many of those most useful in
common life must have been the production of periods when men were
little acquainted with letters, or any sure mode of transmitting an
account of their improvements to succeeding generations. The taste
which then prevailed of giving to every thing a divine origin, rendered
traditional accounts fabulous; and the exaggeration of poets tended
more and more to make such authorities less worthy of credit. A variety
of works also, which might have supplied us with information on this
subject, have been lost; and the relations of some of those preserved
are so corrupted and obscure, that the best commentators have not
been able to illustrate them. This in particular is the case with
many passages in Pliny, an author who appears to have collected with
the utmost diligence whatever he thought useful or curious, and whose
desire of communicating knowledge seems to have been equal to his
thirst for acquiring it.
Of all those nations whose history has been preserved, the most
distinguished are certainly the Greeks and the Romans; but, as far as
can be judged at this remote period, the former were superior to the
latter in point of invention. The Romans indeed seem to have known
little, except what they borrowed from the Grecians; and it is evident,
by their sending their young men of rank to finish their education
in Greece, that they considered that country as the seat of the arts
and the sciences, and as a school where genius would be excited by
the finest models, while the taste was corrected and formed. From
some hints given however by Pliny and other writers, we have reason
to conclude that the Romans possessed more knowledge of the arts than
the moderns perhaps are willing to allow, and that some inventions,
considered as new, may be only old ones revived and again rendered
useful.
When Rome, abandoned to luxury and vice, became an easy prey to those
hordes of barbarians who overran the empire, her arts shared in the
general wreck, and were either entirely lost, or for a time forgotten.
The deplorable state of ignorance in which Europe was afterwards
plunged during several centuries, retarded their revival; and it was
not till a late period, when favoured and protected by a few men of
superior genius, that they began to be again cultivated. It cannot
however be denied, that several important discoveries, altogether
unknown to the ancients, which must have had considerable influence
on the general state of society, were made in ages that can hardly be
exempted from the appellation of barbarous. As a proof of this may be
mentioned the invention of paper[1], painting in oil[2], the mariner’s
compass[3], gunpowder[4], printing[5], and engraving on copper[6].
After the invention of the compass and printing, two grand sources
were opened for the improvement of science. In proportion as navigation
was extended, new objects were discovered to awaken the curiosity and
excite the attention of the learned; and the ready means of diffusing
knowledge, afforded by the press, enabled the ingenious to make them
publicly known. Ignorance and superstition, the formidable enemies of
philosophy in every age, began soon to lose some of that power which
they had usurped; and states, forgetting their former blind policy,
adopted improvements which their prejudice had before condemned.
Though it might be expected that the great share which new inventions
and discoveries have at all times had in effecting such happy changes
among mankind would have secured them a distinguished place in the
annals of nations, we find with regret, that the pen of history
has been more employed in recording the crimes of ambition and the
ravage of conquerors, than in preserving the remembrance of those
who, by improving science and the arts, contributed to increase the
conveniences of life, and to heighten its enjoyments. So little indeed
has hitherto been done towards a history of inventions and discoveries,
that the rise and progress of part of those even of modern times is
involved in considerable darkness and obscurity: of some the names of
the inventors are not so much as known, and the honour of others is
disputed by different nations; while the evidences on both sides are so
imperfect, that it is almost impossible to determine to which the palm
is due. To Professor Beckmann, therefore, those fond of such researches
are much indebted for the pains he has been at to collect information
on this subject; and though he has perhaps not been able to clear up
every doubt respecting the objects on which he treats, he has certainly
thrown much light on many curious circumstances hitherto buried in
oblivion.
The author, with much modesty, gives to this work in the original the
title of only Collections towards a History of Inventions: but as he
has carefully traced out the rise and progress of all those objects
which form the subject of his inquiry, from the earliest periods of
their being known, as far as books supplied information, and arranged
his matter in chronological order, the original title may admit,
without being liable to much criticism, of the small variation adopted
in the translation. The author, indeed, has not in these volumes
comprehended every invention and discovery, but he has given an account
of a great many, most of them very important.
Should any one be disposed to find fault with the author for
introducing into his work some articles which on the first view may
appear trifling, his own words, taken from the short preface prefixed
to the first volume of the original, will perhaps be considered as
a better exculpation than anything the translator might advance in
his favour. “I am sensible,” says he, “that many here will find
circumstances which they may think unworthy of the labour I have
bestowed upon them; but those who know how different our judgements
are respecting utility, will not make theirs a rule for mine. Those
whose self-conceit would never allow them to be sensible of this truth,
and who reject as useless all ore in which they do not observe pure
gold, as they display very little acuteness, must be often duped by
the tinsel glare of false metal; and they give me as little uneasiness
as those who have no desire to know the origin of inventions, or how
they were brought to their present utility. If my extending the term
Invention farther than is perhaps usual, by comprehending under it
several police-establishments, be a fault, it is at any rate harmless,
and on that account may be pardoned without much apology.”
FOOTNOTES
[1] Montfaucon, notwithstanding all his researches in France and Italy,
was not able to discover any charter or diploma written on common
paper, older than the year 1270. Paper, however, made of cotton, is
said to be much older, and to have been introduced into Europe by the
Arabs. If we can believe an Arabian author, who wrote in the thirteenth
century, quoted by Casiri, in Biblioth. Arabico-Hispana, vol. ii. p.
9, paper (doubtless of cotton) was invented at Mecca by one Joseph
Amru, about the year of the Hegira 88, or of the Christian æra 706.
According to other Arabian authors, quoted by Casiri and Abulfeda, the
Arabs found a manufactory of paper at Samarcand in Bucharia, when they
conquered that country in the year of the Hegira 85, or of our æra
704. The art of making paper from silk was, as some pretend, known to
the Chinese 180 years before Jesus Christ. See a letter from Father
de Mailla to Father Etienne Souciet, in Mémoires des Inscript. et des
Belles Lettres, vol. xv. 520.
[2] The oldest picture, known at present, painted in oil-colours on
wood is preserved in the Imperial Gallery at Vienna. It was painted in
the year 1297, by a painter named Thomas de Mutina, or de Muttersdorf,
in Bohemia. Two other paintings in the same gallery are of the year
1357; one of them is by Nicholas Wurmser of Strasburg, and the other
by Thierry of Prague. It appears therefore that painting in oil was
known long before the epoch at which that invention is generally fixed;
and that it is erroneously ascribed to Hubert van Eyck and his brother
and pupil, John van Eyck, otherwise called John of Bruges, who lived
about the end of the fourteenth century, and not the beginning of the
fifteenth, as is commonly supposed. [There is evidence in the books of
the Painters’ Company, under the date of the 11th of Edward I. (1283),
that oil painting was in use at that time. See a communication from Sir
Francis Palgrave given in the new edition of Carter’s Ancient Sculpture
and Paintings in England, page 80.]
[3] The person who first speaks of the magnetic needle and its use in
navigation, is a Provençal poet, who lived in the beginning of the
thirteenth century, and who wrote a poem entitled Bible Guyot. This
work is a satire, in which the author lashes with great freedom the
vices of that age. Comparing the Pope to the polar star, he introduces
a description of the compass, such as it appears to have been in
its infancy. This invention however is claimed by the Italians, who
maintain that we are indebted for it to a citizen of Amalphi, named
Flavius Gioja, and in support of this assertion quote commonly the
following line of Panormitanus:
Prima dedit nautis usum magnetis Amalfis.
[4] Of the use of gunpowder in Europe no certain traces occur till
towards the middle of the fourteenth century. It seems pretty well
proved, that artillery was known in France after the year 1345. In
1356, the city of Nuremberg purchased the first gunpowder and cannon.
The same year the city of Louvain employed thirty cannon at the battle
of Santfliet against the Flemings. In 1361, a fire broke out at Lubec,
occasioned by the negligence of those employed in making gunpowder. In
1363, the Hans-towns used cannon for the first time, in a naval combat
which they fought against the Danes. After 1367, the use of fire-arms
became general throughout Italy, into which they had been introduced
from Germany.
[5] The invention of printing has given rise to many researches.
Meermann in his Origines Typographicæ, published in 1768, endeavours
to prove that Laurence Coster of Haarlem was the inventor, about the
year 1430. Most authors however agree that John Gutenberg was the
inventor of moveable types, but they differ respecting the place of the
invention. Some make it to be Strasburg, others Mentz, and some fix the
epoch of the invention at 1440, and others at 1450.
[6] Vasari, in Vite de’ Pittori, vol. iv. p. 264, ascribes the
invention of engraving on copper to a goldsmith of Florence, named
Maso Finiguerra, about 1460. The oldest engravers whose names and
marks are known, were Israel de Mecheln, of Bokholt, in the bishopric
of Munster; Martin Schœn, who worked at Colmar in Alsace, where he
died in 1486; and Michael Wolgemuth of Nuremberg, who was preceptor
to the famous Albert Durer, and engraved the plates in the well-known
Nuremberg Chronicle. It may be proper here to observe, that the art of
engraving on wood seems to be older than the invention of printing, to
which perhaps it gave rise. The names of the first engravers on wood
are however not known. [In the Athenæum Journal for 1845, page 965, is
given a fac-simile of a large wood-engraving, bearing the date of 1418,
which was discovered at Malines in 1844, and is now preserved in the
public library at Brussels.]
MEMOIR OF THE AUTHOR.
John Beckmann, Professor of Œconomy at Göttingen during a period of
forty-five years, was born at Hoye, a small town in the kingdom of
Hanover, in 1739. His father held the appointment of postmaster and
receiver of taxes in that place, and at the same time cultivated a
small farm, which appears to have inspired his son with a taste for
agricultural pursuits. The superintendence of his education devolved
principally on his mother, a woman of great prudence and strength
of mind, who was left a widow when young Beckmann was scarcely
seven years old. In a lonely house, amid examples of industry and
daily labour, he passed his youth in the perusal of works, which,
although of a common-place description, were not without their use,
as they led him to contract a methodical habit of mind, and afforded
considerable information on various subjects, which in the sequel
greatly assisted him in the pursuits to which he owed his celebrity. He
himself relates that, when quite a boy, he was in the habit of making
extracts of all the striking passages he met with in the course of
his reading, by which means he acquired a ready use of the pen. The
insufficient circumstances of his family prevented his education being
cultivated in the schools till nearly fifteen; at which age he was
sent to the Gymnasium of Stade, then under the direction of Gehlen,
where in a short time he highly distinguished himself in classical
literature. Intended for the clerical profession, he entered the
university of Göttingen in 1759, for the purpose of completing his
theological studies; but whether the advice of Hollmann (afterwards
his father-in-law), with whom he had formed a close intimacy, produced
a change in his plans, or that the mathematical instructions of
Professors Kaestner and Mayer were more congenial to his mind than
divinity, he abandoned the career marked out for him, and devoted
himself to the natural sciences and their application, as well as to
mathematics; whilst he cultivated philology with such zeal, that he
ultimately made himself master of ten different languages. In order
to gain greater proficiency in these pursuits, he made a journey in
1762 to the Netherlands, but returned to Hoye in the following year,
in consequence of the serious indisposition of his mother, who dying
shortly afterwards, left him destitute of guidance, and in the greatest
anxiety respecting his future prospects. At this juncture Büsching
advised him to travel to St. Petersburg, where, upon the strong
recommendations with which he was provided, he was speedily appointed
to the chair of Natural Philosophy. Shortly after, Büsching, quitting
the institution, returned to Germany, and dissensions having arisen
among the directors, Beckmann likewise resigned his office. He then
proceeded to Sweden, with the view of acquiring a detailed knowledge
of the working of the mines in that country; making his principal
sojourn at Upsal, where he became acquainted with Linnæus, and enjoyed
the friendship and hospitality, as well as the instructions, of
that eminent naturalist[7]. Leaving Sweden, he directed his course
to Denmark, visiting Copenhagen and other towns, where he examined
the various museums, libraries and manufacturing establishments. On
arriving at Altona, he found there his friend Büsching, who recommended
him to Münchhausen, curator of the Academy of Göttingen. After paying
a visit to his brother at Marburgh, he proceeded to Hanover; and being
approved of by Struve, then president of Göttingen under Münchhausen,
he was appointed, in 1766, Professor Extraordinary of Philosophy to
that university, of which he eventually became one of the brightest
ornaments.
His lectures upon œconomy had the recommendation of novelty, and
produced so much applause, that in 1770 he was made ordinary professor
of that science. They were attended by the flower of the studious
youth of all countries, Göttingen being at that period one of the most
popular universities in Europe; and many even of the distinguished
statesmen and public functionaries of Germany did not disdain to be
ranked among his auditors. He was in the habit of accompanying them
himself into the workshops, to give them a practical knowledge of the
different processes and handicrafts of which he had explained the
theory. Once a week, also, he held a _Practicum Camerale_, a scientific
meeting, at which he explained subjects of œconomy, administration, and
finance, illustrating them by readings from a great variety of sources.
He composed, to serve as a guide in this course of instruction,
treatises on rural œconomy, policy, finance, commerce, and other
departments of knowledge; which, though since carried to a higher
degree of perfection, owed to Beckmann their first systematic form. He
never entirely relinquished these public lectures, but insensibly his
private studies took a direction altogether historical, the motives for
which it may not be uninteresting to point out.
It is indispensably requisite at Göttingen that every professor should
be able to give account of the progress and existing state of the
science to which he is appointed. Any one, who two years after the
publication of a work of importance in his department should not have
read and analysed it, with a view of enriching his own observations,
would not be regarded as a worthy successor to the chair of Haller,
of Mosheim, of Gessner and Michaelis. Beckmann, who had studied at
Göttingen at a time when the example of these great men dictated the
law and gave the tone to the University, and perhaps to the literature
of Europe, was determined to keep pace with the spirit of the age, and
not to remain ignorant of the great advances then making throughout
Europe, in the numerous sciences which furnished the subjects of his
practical investigations. But this was a task of no slight magnitude:
and indeed when the immense additions to so many different sciences
are considered, can it be wondered at, that, notwithstanding his
utmost zeal and application, he found it impossible to read up all the
important works which had appeared since 1770, in chemistry, physics,
natural history and mathematics? Despairing of success in so Herculean
an undertaking, he began to entertain feelings of aversion towards
what he deemed the innovations, which were then changing the face and
enlarging the scope of science. But his course of lectures, turning
principally on practical matters, was not materially affected; he was,
however, so fearful of falling under the imputation of being behind
the progress of the age, that he devoted his mind, peculiarly fitted
for this kind of study, almost exclusively to the history of arts and
trades; employing in the illustration of his subjects, the materials
to which he had access in the very extensive library belonging to the
university; and it is to his consequent labours and researches that we
owe the “History of Inventions and Discoveries.” In this work, Beckmann
traces their first germs from the remotest periods of antiquity, and
following their gradual development, exhibits the latest improvements
among civilized nations with almost unequalled acumen and ability. It
abounds with invaluable materials respecting the general history of
the origin and progress of the mechanic arts, which are so important
a branch in civilization; and what must give it an additional value
in the eyes of all who are unwilling to place reliance on assertions
unsupported by authority, or may be anxious to investigate the subject
more deeply, the most scrupulous references to original authorities
accompany each article. Among the numerous other works of merit for
which we are indebted to the literary industry of Beckmann, are,
“A History and Analysis of early Voyages and Travels,” a highly
interesting collection, which occupied the last years of his life, and
was left unfinished at the eighth number; elaborate editions of “De
Mirabilibus Auscultationibus,” attributed to Aristotle, 1786; “Antigoni
Carystii Historiæ Mirabiles,” 1791; and “Marbodi Liber de Gemmis,”
1799; publications which required the rare combination of physical
knowledge with philological learning.
The Royal Society of Göttingen had, in the year 1772, admitted him one
of its members, and from that period to 1783 he continued to supply
their proceedings with interesting memoirs (all written in Latin),
among which are the following: “On the Reduction of Fossils to their
original substances;” “On the History of Alum;” “On the Sap of Madder;”
“On Meerschaum, from which are formed the heads for tobacco pipes;”
“On the History of Sugar,” &c. After this period, however, he declined
participating any longer in the labours of this learned body; owing,
probably, to a change in the objects of his own particular studies.
In 1784 he was created an aulic councillor of Hanover; in addition to
which he was elected member of the Imperial Academy of Naturalists, of
the Swedish Society of Science, of the Academies of Norway and Mayence,
of the Physiographical Society of Lund, and of almost all the learned
societies in Germany and the North of Europe.
With a copious knowledge of the principal sciences, Beckmann united
extensive reading in the works of ancient and modern writers, not only
in reference to their immediate connection with his main studies,
but in respect also to their application generally to every other
branch. Convinced that every professor ought, as much as possible, to
have thoroughly searched into all matters relating to the subject on
which he treats, he spared no expense in forming a most extensive,
as well as choice library; at the same time he did not fail to avail
himself of the rich intellectual stores contained in that belonging
to the university. His mind being wholly directed to all that is
practical in human knowledge, it was his especial endeavour to bring
it into systematic rules, based upon fundamental principles. To him
particularly is to be ascribed the merit of having been the first to
give to agriculture its scientific form, and to have separated it
more distinctly than heretofore from the administrative and financial
departments. The number of pupils indebted to him for their education,
and who, eventually,--whether filling offices of state or following his
footsteps as professors,--brought into effect the principles he had
taught them, formed a very numerous body; and whilst he was thus the
means of considerably enlarging the circle of academic subjects for
the instruction of the student, he contributed not a little towards
the prosperity of the university itself. His activity likewise as a
writer was as persevering as it was meritorious; he united an extensive
knowledge of nature, with a decided turn for applying it to practical
purposes; and he published several works in German, which show this
tendency of mind; among others, “Principles of German Agriculture,”
“Introduction to Technology,” “Introduction to the Science of
Commerce,” &c.
To assist his literary researches, he issued a periodical work called
“Physico-Œconomical Library,” in which quarterly information was
communicated respecting the newest works connected with the arts,
manufactures, and agriculture, giving short extracts of whatever was
valuable, instead of severe criticisms, of which he did not approve. It
was commenced in 1770, and continued, with some little interruption,
until 1807, forming 23 volumes.
Having said thus much respecting his abilities and genius, we will
in conclusion take a brief glance at his private character, which,
amiable and virtuous as it was, cannot fail to command the world’s
estimation. Honest and unpretending, a lover of peace and justice, he
lived quite retired, devoted to the conscientious performance of his
duties; his candour, his sincerity in friendship, his affability to
the students, have been celebrated with one accord by his coadjutors
and auditors. In the domestic relations of life, he presented an
example of the most exact system of order and œconomy, and enjoyed the
reputation of being one of the richest professors of the university;
which enabled him to exercise his ready benevolence during a period
of severe dearth and suffering. Among his colleagues, Schlœtzer,
the distinguished historian, with whom in his youth he had become
acquainted in Russia, was the one with whom he maintained the most
uninterrupted intimacy, arising, no doubt, from the congeniality of
their pursuits. Few were better qualified than Schlœtzer to appreciate
the researches of Beckmann, as he had himself insisted with so much
force on the necessity of introducing into history a simultaneous view
of the influence exercised on social institutions by the efforts of
industry, and the rise and maturity of domestic arts. Beckmann married
the daughter of Hollmann, his tutor and friend, with whom he enjoyed
a long and uninterrupted course of happiness; she survived him only
a few weeks, leaving a son and daughter who had arrived at years of
maturity. His decease took place on the 3rd of February, 1811, in the
72nd year of his age. His illustrious colleague, Heyne, pronounced an
eloquent eulogium on him before the Academy, which was published in the
Göttingen Transactions, from which we subjoin a few extracts.
“O colleagues, if we indulge in deep sorrow at this new diminution
of our fraternity by the death of one of its seniors, it must be
forgiven, as consonant to our duty and piety, as well as to the
affections of human nature. Indeed, when his death was announced,
and when I afterwards beheld the mournful pomp of his funeral, I
was afflicted with the utmost grief. Nor can this be wondered at,
when it is borne in mind that he was nearly of my own age, and
next to me the eldest of our Society; the habit, too, of friendly
intercourse enjoyed for many years, has great influence in
riveting the affections of the mind.
“There is a narrative in Herodotus, concerning Psammenitus king
of Egypt, who was conquered by Cambyses king of Persia. The city
of Memphis being taken by storm, he had fallen into the hands of
Cambyses; who, enraged at the vigorous defence he had encountered,
commanded the royal family to be brought forth and put to death.
In the first place, his daughter was paraded before him, with many
maidens of noble birth, clothed as slaves; and though the other
parents uttered piteous lamentations, yet Psammenitus kept his
eyes fixed on the ground: in like manner, when his sons, together
with two thousand of the principal youths, their necks bound with
ropes, with bridles in their mouths, were ignominiously led to
death, the king did not even utter a groan; but on seeing an aged
man approach, one of his old friends, who had formerly partaken of
the royal table, walking in the dress of a mendicant, and imploring
mercy through the different ranks of the army, then indeed the king
could restrain his emotions no longer, but broke forth into the
most bitter wailings. The cause of this strange grief it would be
foreign to our present purpose to discuss; I only wish to draw this
conclusion--that the death of an old friend and companion was alone
able to subdue his mind, even after it had supported him against
the severest calamities. For the force of habit and friendly
intercourse is most powerful: we bring to recollection many things
which prey upon our feelings; they rush upon our memory with one
impetus, and swell the rising grief; we dwell on early struggles,
on proofs of mental power, and instances of benevolence, which
formerly we had passed unheeded.
“What is known favourably of the character of him who is taken
away from us, it is our pleasing duty to bring before you; what is
otherwise, if anything exist, it is not our province to remember.
“The studies of Beckmann were applied to other branches of
learning, quite distinct from those in which I am occupied: but
it was this very circumstance which cemented our acquaintance.
His conversations on scientific subjects could not but prove
profitable; especially as he blended them with a feeling for
ancient literature. I was accustomed to consult him concerning
subjects of nature and art, which I did not sufficiently
understand; and he sometimes referred to me respecting philological
matters, of which he wished to gain further information. But
the varied talents of this illustrious man were wonderful: an
unceasing desire to search into the origin of arts and sciences,
and the history and success of inventors, was united with an
insatiable thirst for general knowledge and classical learning.
He was incessantly in our public library, eagerly investigating
and comparing rare books in pursuit of his object; seizing their
hidden treasures, and then contributing his booty to the mental
improvement of the million.”
_The remainder of this elegant oration concerns the details of his
career, which are already embodied in the preceding sketch._
H. G. B.
FOOTNOTES
[7] Heyne, in his funeral oration, says Beckmann was so struck
with admiration at the vast knowledge of Linnæus, that he became
ensnared, like the companions of Ulysses in the island of Circe, and
was disheartened from proceeding any further in his own botanical
studies. To this circumstance is attributed the coolness with which he
afterwards cultivated this department of science.
HISTORY OF INVENTIONS
AND
DISCOVERIES.
ITALIAN BOOK-KEEPING.
Those who are acquainted with the Italian method of book-keeping
must allow that it is an ingenious invention, of great utility to
men in business, and that it has contributed to extend commerce and
to facilitate its operations. It requires no less attention, care,
and accuracy, than many works which are styled learned: but it is
undoubtedly true, that most mercantile people, without knowing the
foundation of the rules on which they proceed, conduct their books in
as mechanical a manner as many of the literati do their writings.
The name, Italian book-keeping, _Doppia scrittura_, with several words
employed in this branch of science and still retained in all languages,
make it probable that it was invented by the Italians; and that other
nations borrowed it, as well as various short methods of reckoning,
from their mercantile houses, at the time when all the East-India trade
passed through Italy.
De la Porte says[8], “About the year 1495, brother Luke, an Italian,
published a treatise of it in his own language. He is the oldest
author I have seen upon the subject.” Anderson, in his Historical
and Chronological Deduction of the Origin of Commerce[9], gives the
following account: “In all probability, this art of double-entry
accounts had its rise, or at least its revival, amongst the mercantile
cities of Italy: possibly it might be first known at Venice, about the
time that numeral algebra was taught there; from the principles of
which science double-entry, or what we call merchants’ accounts, seems
to have been deduced. It is said that Lucas de Burgo, a friar, was the
first European author who published his algebraic work at Venice, anno
1494.”
This author, who was one of the greatest mathematicians of the
fifteenth century, and who is supposed to be the first person who
acquired a knowledge of algebra from the writings of the Arabians,
was called Lucas Paciolus, e Burgo S. Sepulchri. He was a Franciscan,
and so surnamed from a town in the duchy of Urbino, on the Florentine
confines, called Burgo S. Sepulchro[10].
Anderson tells us[11], that he had in his possession the oldest book
published in England in which any account is given of the method of
book-keeping by double-entry. It was printed at London, in 1569, in
folio. The author, whose name is James Peele, says, in his preface,
that he had instructed many mercantile people in this art, which had
been long practised in other countries, though in England it was then
undoubtedly new. One may readily believe that Mr. Anderson was not
ignorant of the difference between the method of book-keeping by single
and that by double-entry; but he produces nothing to induce us to
believe that Peele taught the latter and not the former; for what he
says of debit and credit is of no importance, as it may be applied also
to the method by single-entry.
Of this Peele no mention is made in Ames’s Typographical Antiquities;
but in that work (p. 410) there is an account of a still older treatise
of book-keeping, entitled A briefe instruction and manner how to keepe
bookes of accompts, after the order of debitor and creditor, and as
well for proper accompts, partible, &c. by three bookes, named the
memoriall, journall, and leager. Newly augmented and set forth by John
Mellis schole maister. London 1588, 12mo. Mellis, in his preface, says
that he is only the re-publisher of this treatise, which was before
published at London in 1543 by a schoolmaster named Hugh Oldcastle.
From the above title, and particularly from the three account books
mentioned in it, I am inclined to believe that this work contained the
true principles of book-keeping by double-entry.
The oldest German work on book-keeping by double-entry with which I am
at present acquainted, is one written by John Gotlieb, and printed at
Nuremberg, by Frederick Peypus, in 1531[12]. The author in his preface
calls himself a citizen of Nuremberg, and says that he means to give
to the public a clear and intelligible method of book-keeping, such as
was never before printed. It appears, therefore, that he considered his
book as the first of the kind ever published in Germany.
It is worthy of remark, that even at the end of the sixteenth century,
the Italian method of book-keeping began to be applied to finances and
public accounts. In the works of the celebrated Simon Stevin, published
at Leyden in Dutch, and the same year in Latin, we find a system of
book-keeping, as applied to finances, drawn up it appears for the use
of Maurice prince of Orange. To this treatise is prefixed, in Dutch
and Latin, a dedication to the duke of Sully, in which the author
says, that his reason for dedicating the work to Sully was because the
French had paid the greatest attention to improve the method of keeping
public accounts. The work begins with a conversation, which took
place between Stevin and prince Maurice, respecting the application
of book-keeping to public accounts, and in which he explains to the
prince the principles of mercantile book-keeping. This conversation
commences with explaining the nature of debit and credit, and the
principal accounts. Then follow a short journal and ledger, in which
occur only the most common transactions; and the whole concludes with
an account of the other books necessary for regular book-keeping,
and of the manner of balancing. Stevin expressly says, that prince
Maurice, in the year 1604, caused the treasury accounts to be made
out after the Italian method, by an experienced book-keeper, with the
best success; but how long this regulation continued I have not been
able to learn. Stevin supposes, in this system, three ministers, and
three different accounts: a _quæstor_, who receives the revenues of
the domains; an _acceptor_, who receives all the other revenues of
the prince; and a _thesaurarius_ (treasurer), who has the care of the
expenditure. All inferior offices for receiving or disbursing are to
send from their books monthly extracts, which are to be doubly-entered
in a principal ledger; so that it may be seen at all times how much
remains in the hands of each receiver, and how much each has to collect
from the debtors. One cannot help admiring the ingenuity of the Latin
translator[13], who has found out, or at least invented, words to
express so many new terms unknown to the ancient Romans. The learned
reader may, perhaps, not be displeased with the following specimen.
Book-keeping is called _apologistica_ or _apologismus_; a book-keeper
_apologista_; the ledger _codex accepti expensique_; the cash-book
_arcarii liber_; the expense-book _impensarum liber_; the waste-book
_liber deletitius_; accounts are called _nomina_; stock account _sors_;
profit and loss account _lucri damnique ratiocinium_, _contentio_ or
_sortium comparatio_; the final balance _epilogismus_; the chamber of
accounts, or counting-house, _logisterium_, &c.
In the end of this work Stevin endeavours to show that the Romans,
or rather the Grecians (for the former knew scarcely anything but
what the latter had discovered), were in some measure acquainted
with book-keeping, and supports his conjecture by quoting Cicero’s
oration for Roscius. I confess that the following passage in Pliny,
_Fortunæ omnia expensa, huic omnia feruntur accepta, et in tota ratione
mortalium sola utramque paginam facit_[14], as well as the terms
_tabulæ accepti et expensi_; _nomina translata in tabulas_, seem to
indicate that the Romans entered debit and credit in their books on two
different pages; but it appears to me not yet proved, and improbable,
that they were acquainted with our scientific method of book-keeping;
with the mode of opening various accounts; of comparing them together,
and of bringing them to a final balance. As bills of exchange and
insurance were not known in the commerce of the ancients, the business
of merchants was not so intricate and complex as to require such a
variety of books and accounts as is necessary in that of the moderns.
Klipstein is of opinion that attempts were made in France to apply
book-keeping, by double-entry, to the public accounts, under Henry IV.,
afterwards under Colbert, and again in the year 1716. That attempts
were made, for this purpose, under Henry IV., he concludes from a work
entitled An Inquiry into the Finances of France; but I do not know
whether what the author says be sufficient to support this opinion.
[The system of double-entry began from the commencement of the present
century to be adopted by several governments in the management of the
public accounts, among others by those of Austria, France and Holland,
with highly beneficial effects. Some attempts have been more recently
made in this country to introduce it into the government offices,
and from the great success which has attended them, this system will
probably soon be generally used.]
FOOTNOTES
[8] La science des négocians et teneurs de livres. Paris 1754.
[9] Vol. i. p. 408.
[10] Those who are desirous of further information respecting Lucas
de Borgo, may consult Scriptores ordinis Minorum, recensuit Fr. Lucas
Waddingus, Romæ 1650;--Heilbronneri Historia Matheseos universæ, Lipsiæ
1742;--Histoire des Mathématiques, par Montucla, Paris 1758.
[11] Vol. i. p. 409.
[12] The title runs thus: Ein Teutsch verstendig Buchhalten für Herren
oder Gesellschafter inhalt wellischem Process.
[13] Bayle says, that the Latin translation of Stevin’s works was
executed principally by Willebrord Snellius.
[14] Lib. ii. cap. 7.
ODOMETER.
An Odometer, Pedometer, Perambulator, or Way-measurer, is an instrument
or machine by which the steps of a person who walks, or the revolutions
made by the wheel of a carriage, can be counted, and by which the
distance that one has travelled can be ascertained. Vitruvius, in
his tenth book[15], describes a machine of this kind for a carriage,
and which, in his opinion, would answer for a ship. We are told by
Capitolinus, in the life of the emperor Pertinax, that among the
effects of the emperor Commodus exposed to sale, there were carriages
of various kinds, some of which “measured the road, and pointed out the
hours;” but whether by these words we are to understand an odometer,
cannot with certainty be determined.
That this instrument was known even in the fifteenth century, can be
proved from the carving on the ducal palace at Urbino--an edifice
erected in an uncommon style of magnificence, by duke Frederic, who
died in 1482. The ornaments here employed form, almost, a complete
representation of all the warlike apparatus used at that period, both
by sea and land; and among these is the figure of a ship, which seems
to be furnished with an odometer; but whether the wheels and springs,
carved out apart, be intended to show the construction of it, I will
not venture to decide[16].
The celebrated John Fernel, physician to Catherine of Medici, queen of
France, measured with an instrument of this kind, in 1550, a degree
of the meridian between Paris and Amiens, and found it to be 68,096
geometrical paces, or about 56,747 toises (364,960 English feet); that
is, 303 toises less than Picard found it to be; or about 300 toises
less than later measurements have made it. Picard himself, in his
mathematical measurement, assisted by the newest improvements, erred
123 toises. It is therefore very surprising that Fernel should approach
so near the truth with such an instrument. The manner of constructing
it however, as far as I know, appears to be lost[17].
Levin Hulsius, in his Treatise of mechanical instruments, published
at Frankfort in 1604, describes an odometer, but without naming the
inventor. It appears, however, that it was the production of Paul
Pfinzing, born at Nuremberg in 1554[18]; and who, besides other works,
published, in 1598, Methodus Geometrica, or a Treatise on measuring
land, and how to use proper instruments for that purpose, on foot, on
horseback, or in a carriage. This treatise, which was never sold, but
given away by the author, contains a description of the same instrument
described by Hulsius, and which, as Nicolai says, is still preserved in
the collection of curiosities at Dresden.
In the same collection is an odometer which Augustus, elector of
Saxony, who reigned between the years 1553 and 1586, employed in
measuring his territories. This instrument is mentioned by Beutel[19],
without naming the inventor; but I think it very probable that it
was made by Martin Feyhel, who was born at Naumburg, and resided at
Augsburg; as Von Stetten[20] relates, in his History of the Arts at
Augsburg, that Feyhel made a way-measurer (probably odometer) for the
elector of Saxony, and that he himself called it a new instrument never
before heard of. This artist was an intimate friend of the celebrated
Christopher Schissler, also of Augsburg, who in 1579 constructed a
quadrant, still to be found at Oxford; and in 1606 an armillary sphere,
still preserved at Augsburg.
The emperor Rudolphus II., who reigned from 1576 to 1612, and who was
fond of, and acquainted with, the mechanical arts, possessed two very
curious odometers, which not only pointed out distances, but also
marked them down on paper by the way. The description and use of one
of these is given by De Boot[21], who was that prince’s librarian; and
what he says has been copied by Kircher[22], and illustrated with a
coarse figure. It is not improbable that the before-mentioned Schissler
was the maker of this instrument, as we are informed by Stetten that
he constructed a great many machines and automata for the emperor
Rudolphus II. The other odometer, which was much more curious, appears
to have been constructed by that emperor himself[23].
About the end of the 17th century, an artist in England, named
Butterfield, invented an odometer which met with great approbation. In
the first volume of the Philosophical Transactions there are two papers
written by this ingenious man; but of his odometer I have not yet been
able to find a description.
In the beginning of the last century, Adam Frederick Zurner, to whom
we are indebted for good maps of the electorate of Saxony, invented
also an odometer, or geometrical carriage, a description and figure of
which, taken from Schramm’s Saxonia Monumentis Viarum illustrata, is
given by Nicolai. This instrument is not now to be found in the Dresden
collection.
In Bion’s Treatise on the construction of mathematical instruments,
improved by Doppelmayer, there is a description of a pedometer, and the
author praises a new invention by one Sauveur.
In the year 1724 Meynier laid before the Royal Academy of Sciences
at Paris an odometer, a short account of which, without a figure, is
given in the history of the Academy for that year. This machine was
afterwards improved by Outhier; and a description of the improvements,
but without any figure, is to be found in the history of the Academy
for 1742. A full description, together with a figure, may however
be seen in a work, entitled Machines et Inventions approuvées par
l’Académie, t. vii.
Perhaps the most perfect machine of this kind was that made at Berlin
by an artist named Hohlfeld, a short account of which may be found
in the ninth volume of the Hamburg Magazine. A complete description
I have not seen; but I learn from Professor Bernoulli’s Tour through
Brandenburg, Pomerania, &c., that a model of it is preserved in the
excellent collection of Count de Podewils at Gusow[24]. The inventor
of it was a man of such rare talents, and rendered such benefit to
the public, that the following anecdotes of his life may prove not
unacceptable to many readers. It was written by Professor Muller at
Berlin, and transmitted to me by Dr. Bloch.
Hohlfeld was born of poor parents at Hennerndorf in the mountains of
Saxony, in 1711. He learned the trade of lace-making at Dresden, and
early discovered a turn for mechanics by constructing various kinds of
clocks. From Dresden he removed to Berlin to follow his occupation.
As he was an excellent workman, and invented several machines for
shortening his labour, he found sufficient time to indulge his
inclination for mechanics; and he made there, at the same time that he
pursued his usual business, air-guns and clocks.
In the year 1748 he became acquainted with the celebrated Sulzer, at
whose desire he undertook the construction of a machine for noting down
any piece of music when played on a harpsichord. A machine of this
kind had been before invented by Von Unger; but Hohlfeld, from a very
imperfect description, completed one without any other assistance than
that of his own genius. Of this machine, now in the possession of the
Academy of Sciences at Berlin, Sulzer gave a figure, from which it was
afterwards constructed in England. This ingenious piece of mechanism
was universally approved, though several things may be wanting to
render it complete; but no one was so generous as to indemnify the
artist for his expenses, or to reward him for his labour.
About the year 1756, the Prussian minister, Count de Podewils, took him
into his service, chiefly for the purpose of constructing water-works
in his magnificent gardens at Gusow. There he invented his well-known
thrashing machine, and another for chopping straw more expeditiously.
He also displayed his talent for invention by constructing an
apparatus, which, being fastened to a carriage, indicates the
revolutions made by the wheels. Such machines had been made before, but
his far exceeded every thing of the kind. Having lost this machine by a
fire, he invented another still simpler, which was so contrived as to
be buckled between the spokes of the wheel. This piece of mechanism was
in the possession of Sulzer, who used it on his tour, and found that it
answered the intended purpose.
In the year 1765, when the duke of Courland, then hereditary prince,
resided at Berlin, he paid a visit to Hohlfeld, and endeavoured
to prevail on him to go to Courland, by offering him a pension of
800 rix-dollars; but this ingenious man was so contented with his
condition, and so attached to his friends, that he would not, merely
for self-interest, quit Berlin. His refusal, however, obtained for him
a pension of 150 dollars from the king.
Besides the before-mentioned machines, he constructed, occasionally,
several useful models. Among these were a loom for weaving figured
stuffs, so contrived that the weaver had no need of anything to
shoot through the woof[25]; a pedometer for putting in the pocket;
a convenient and simple bed for a sick person, which was of such a
nature, that the patient, with the least effort, could at any time
raise or lower the breast, and when necessary convert the bed into a
stool; and a carriage so formed, that if the horses took fright or ran
away, the person in it could, by a single push, loosen the pole and set
them at liberty. The two last models have been lost.
Every machine that this singular man saw, he altered and improved in
the simplest manner. All his own instruments he made himself, and
repaired them when damaged. But as he was fonder of inventing than of
following the plans of others, he made them in such a manner that no
one except himself could use them. Several of his improvements were,
however, imitated by common workmen, though in a very clumsy manner.
It is worthy of remark, that he never bestowed study upon anything;
but when he had once conceived an idea, he immediately executed it.
He comprehended in a moment whatever was proposed, and at the same
time saw how it was to be accomplished. He could therefore tell in an
instant whether a thing was practicable; if he thought it was not, no
persuasion or offer of money could induce him to attempt it. He never
pursued chimæras like those mechanics who have not had the benefit
of education or instruction; and though this may be ascribed to the
intercourse he had with great mathematicians and philosophers, there
is every reason to believe that he would have equally guarded against
them, even if he had not enjoyed that advantage. The same quickness of
apprehension which he manifested in mechanics he showed also in other
things. His observations on most subjects were judicious, and peculiar
to himself; so that it may be said, without exaggeration, that he was
born with a philosophical mind.
A little before his death he had the pleasure of seeing a curious
harpsichord he had made, which was purchased by his Prussian Majesty,
and placed in an elegant apartment in the new palace at Potsdam. As he
had for some time neglected this instrument, the too great attention
which he bestowed on putting it in order contributed not a little to
bring on that disease which at last proved fatal to him. His clock
having become deranged during his illness, he could not be prevented,
notwithstanding the admonition of his friend and physician Dr. Stahls,
from repairing it. Close application occasioned some obstructions which
were not observed till too late; and an inflammation taking place, he
died in 1771, at the house of Count de Podewils, in the 60th year of
his age.
[The instrument now generally used in this country for measuring the
distance gone over, is that invented by Mr. Payne, watchmaker, of
Bond-street. In this ingenious contrivance motion is communicated
from the traveller to the machinery of the pedometer, by means of a
horizontal lever, which is furnished with a weight at one end and a
pivot or axis at the other; under the lever is a spring, which keeps
the lever when at rest close up to a regulating screw; the spring is so
arranged as to be only just sufficiently strong to overcome the weight
of the lever and to prevent its falling downwards.
When the body of the traveller is raised in progression, the lever
is impelled downwards by the jerk, and immediately returned to its
place by the spring, and so long as the motion is continued the lever
is constantly in a state of vibration. A small ratchet-wheel is
fixed to the axis of the lever, and beneath it is another and larger
ratchet-wheel which fits on the same axis, but is not attached to it.
These two wheels are connected by a ratchet or pale in such a manner,
that when the lever falls, both wheels are moved forward one or more
teeth, but when the lever rises again from the force of the spring, the
larger ratchet-wheel is held stationary by a ratchet. The larger wheel
is connected with a series of toothed wheels and pinions, by means of
a pinion fixed on its under-surface. The centre wheel carries an index
or hand, which points to figures on the dial-plate. The whole apparatus
packs into the case of a watch[26].]
FOOTNOTES
[15] C. 14. Nicolai, in the first part of his Travels, has translated
this description of an odometer, and illustrated it with a figure by H.
Catel.
[16] This palace, with its ornaments, is described in the Memorie
concernenti la citta di Urbino. Roma, 1724. fol. The figure to which I
allude is in plate 53. Bernardino Baldi, the author of the descriptive
part, considers it as an odometer.
[17] In Joannis Fernelii Ambianatis Cosmotheoria, Parisiis 1528, we
find only the following passage respecting this invention:--“Nec vulgi
supputatione satiatus, vehiculum, quod Parisios recta via petebat,
conscendi, in eoque residens tota via 17024 fere rotæ circumvolutiones
collegi, vallibus et montibus ad equalitatem, quoad facultas nostra
ferebat, redactis. Erat autem rotæ diameter.” In Almagesti novi parte
posteriori, tomi primi, Bononiæ 1651. fol. the author, Riccioli,
says that Fernel contrived his carriage in such a manner, that the
revolutions of the wheels were shown by a hammer striking on a bell.
Where that jesuit discovered this I cannot learn.
[18] Doppelmayer, Nachricht von Nurnberg Künstlern, p. 82. Will,
Nurnbergisches Gelehrten-Lexicon, iii. p. 156.
[19] Cimelium Geographicum Tripartitum. Dresden, 1680.
[20] Kunstgeschichte von Augsburg, p. 167.
[21] Gemmarum et Lapidum Historia. Lugd. Bat. 1647, 8vo, p. 468.
[22] Magnes, sive De arte magnetica. Coloniæ, 1643, 4to, p. 221.
[23] Boot. Hist. Gemmarum, p. 473.
[24] This machine was used by Sulzer during his tour. See his Journal,
published at Leipsic, 1780, 8vo, p. 3. It has been since improved by
Schumacher, a clergyman at Elbing, by Klindworth, Catel at Berlin, and
by an anonymous clergyman in the Schwabisches Magazin, 1777, p. 306.
[25] This model is preserved in the collection of the Academy.
[26] There is a figure of it in the Penny Cyclopædia, vol. xvii. p. 367.
MACHINE FOR NOTING DOWN MUSIC.
As I have occasionally mentioned in the preceding article, a machine
for noting down any piece of music played on a harpsichord or other
musical instrument, I shall here add a short history of the invention
of it, as far as I know; and with the greater pleasure, as another
nation has laid claim to it, though it belongs to my countrymen.
It appears incontestable, that a proposal for inventing such a machine
was first made known by an Englishman. In the month of March 1747,
John Freke transmitted to the Royal Society a paper written by a
clergyman of the name of Creed, which was printed in the Philosophical
Transactions under the following title:--A Demonstration of the
possibility of making a machine that shall write extempore voluntaries,
or other pieces of music, as fast as any master shall be able to play
them upon an organ, harpsichord, &c.; and that in a character more
natural and more intelligible, and more expressive of all the varieties
those instruments are capable of exhibiting, than the character now in
use[27]. The author of this paper however points out the possibility
only of making such a machine, without giving directions how to
construct it.
In the year 1745, John Frederic Unger, then land-bailiff and
burgomaster of Einbec, and who is known by several learned works, fell
upon the same invention without the smallest knowledge of the idea
published in England. This invention however, owing to the variety of
his occupations, he did not make known till the year 1752, when he
transmitted a short account of it, accompanied with figures, to the
Academy of Sciences at Berlin. The Academy highly approved of it, and
it was soon celebrated in several gazettes, but a description of it was
never printed.
A few days after Euler had read this paper of Unger’s before the
Academy, M. Sulzer informed Hohlfeld of the invention, and advised him
to exert his ingenuity in constructing such a machine. In two weeks
this untaught mechanic, without having read Unger’s paper, and even
without inspecting the figures, completed the machine, which Unger
himself had not been able to execute through want of an artist capable
of following his ideas.
Unger’s own description of his invention was printed, with
copper-plates, at Brunswick, in the year 1774, together with the
correspondence between him and Euler, and other documents. A
description of Hohlfeld’s machine, illustrated with figures, was
published after his death by Sulzer, in the new memoirs of the Academy
of Berlin, 1771, under the title of ‘Description of a machine for
noting down pieces of music as fast as they are played upon the
harpsichord.’ Sulzer there remarks, that Hohlfeld had not followed
the plan sketched out by Unger, and that the two machines differed in
this--that Unger’s formed one piece with the harpsichord, while that of
Hohlfeld could be applied to any harpsichord whatever.
When Dr. Burney visited Berlin, he was made acquainted with Hohlfeld’s
machine by M. Marpurg; and has been so ungenerous, or rather unjust,
as to say in his Musical Travels, that it is an English invention,
and that it had been before fully described in the Philosophical
Transactions. This falsehood M. Unger has sufficiently refuted. Without
repeating his proofs, I shall here content myself with quoting his
own words, in the following passage:--“How can Burney wish to deprive
our ingenious Hohlfeld of the honour of being the sole author of that
invention, and to make an Englishman share it with him, because our
German happened to execute successfully what his countryman Creed only
suggested? Such an attempt is as unjust in its consequences as it is
dishonourable to the English nation and the English artists. When we
reflect on the high estimation in which music is held in England, the
liberality of the English nobility, and their readiness to spare no
expenses in bringing forward any useful invention, a property peculiar
to the English, it affords just matter of surprise that the English
artists should have suffered themselves to be anticipated by a German
journeyman lace-maker. To our Hohlfeld, therefore, will incontestably
remain the lasting honour of having executed a German invention; and
the Germans may contentedly wait to see whether Burney will find
an English mechanic capable of constructing this machine, from the
information given by his countryman Creed.”
FOOTNOTES
[27] Phil. Trans. vol. xliv. p. ii. No. 483, p. 446.
REFINING GOLD AND SILVER ORE BY QUICKSILVER.
AMALGAMATION.
It is well known that quicksilver unites very readily with almost all
metals, and when added in a considerable quantity forms with them a
paste which can be kneaded, and which is called amalgam. On the other
hand, as it does not unite with the earths, being a metallic substance,
it furnishes an excellent medium for separating gold and silver from
the substances with which they are found. The amalgam is squeezed
through a piece of leather, in which these precious metals remain with
a certain portion of the quicksilver; and the former are freed from the
latter by means of fire, which volatilizes the mercury. This amalgam
made with gold serves also for gilding metals (water-gilding)[28], if
it be rubbed over them, and afterwards heated till the quicksilver be
driven off.
The first use of quicksilver is commonly reckoned a Spanish invention,
discovered about the middle of the sixteenth century; but it appears
from Pliny, that the ancients were acquainted with amalgam and its use,
not only for separating gold and silver from earthy particles, but also
for gilding[29]. Vitruvius describes the manner of recovering gold from
cloth in which it has been interwoven. The cloth, he says, is to be put
into an earthen vessel, and placed over the fire, in order that it may
be burnt. The ashes are to be thrown into water, and quicksilver added
to them. The latter attracts the particles of the gold, and unites with
them. The water is then to be poured off, and the residue put into a
piece of cloth; which being squeezed with the hands, the quicksilver,
on account of its fluidity, oozes through the pores, and the gold is
left pure in a compressed mass[30]. Isidore of Seville says also, that
quicksilver is best preserved in vessels of glass, as it penetrates
all other substances; and that without it neither silver nor brass can
be gilded[31]. Modern mineralogists however have this advantage over
the ancient, that they know how to separate the quicksilver from gold
and silver without losing it. Instead of exposing the amalgam to an
open fire, as formerly, and driving off the volatile metal, it is now
put into a retort, and the quicksilver is collected in a receiver for
further use.
Those also who wash gold from the sand found near rivers, use
quicksilver before their work is completed; and I am strongly inclined
to believe that this method prevailed in Germany long before the
discovery of the mines in America. In the year 1582, John Michael
Heberer described the washing of gold as he saw it practised at
Selz, not far from Strasburg; and at that time quicksilver had been
long employed for that purpose. In Treitlinger’s Dissertation, also,
concerning the collecting of gold, and particularly in the Rhine, there
is a description of the manner in which gold sand is washed by means of
quicksilver, but no date is mentioned[32].
The history of employing mercury in procuring the American silver is,
as far as I know, most fully given by the Jesuit Acosta[33], whose
relation of the Indies abounds with curious and useful information.
The quicksilver mines of Peru are situated in an extensive ridge of
mountains near Guamanga, on the south side of Lima, and at no great
distance from it. They are called Guancabelica, or Guancavilia. The
mines were discovered about the year 1566 or 1567, when Castro was
viceroy of Peru, by Henry Garces, or Graces, as he is called by the
Portuguese. This man was a native of Porto, went to Peru in the Spanish
service, and after the death of his wife became canon of the cathedral
of Mexico. He translated the Lusiad of Camoens from the Portuguese
into Spanish, and this has procured him a place in Professor Dieze’s
translation of Velasquez’s History of Spanish Poetry. He caused a law
to be enacted that no silver bullion should be suffered to circulate
in Peru; but his greatest service was the discovery of the quicksilver
mines. As he was one day examining the red earth, which the Indians use
for paint, and call _limpi_, he observed that it was native cinnabar;
and as he knew that quicksilver was extracted from it in Europe, he
went to the place where it was dug up, made some experiments, and thus
laid a foundation for the most important works. No one however thought
of employing this metal in the silver mines till the year 1571, when
Francis de Toledo being viceroy, one Pero Fernandes de Velasco came
to Peru, and offered to refine the silver by mercury, as he had learnt
at the smelting-houses in Mexico. His proposal being accepted, and
his attempts proving successful, the old methods were abandoned, and
that of amalgamation was adopted in its stead[34]. From this account
it appears that Garces was not the inventor of amalgamation, that it
was introduced into Peru in the year 1571, and that it had been long
before practised in Mexico; but at what period it was first used there
I have not been able to learn. The abbé Raynal says, that quicksilver
was a free article of trade till the year 1571, when it was declared
to belong exclusively to the crown; and this regulation was made in
consequence of its being employed in refining. Robertson, in his
History of America, tells us that the mines of Guanacabelica were
discovered in 1563, and that amalgamation was introduced in 1574.
Anderson says, in his History of Commerce[35], that in the second
volume of Hakluyt there is a letter which shows the use of quicksilver
to have been a new invention in the year 1572. This letter I
found, not in the second, but in the third and last volume of the
Voyages collected by Hakluyt[36]. It was written in the above year
by a merchant named Henry Hawks, and contains only the following
information: “A good owner of mines must have much quicksilver; and as
for this charge of quicksilver, it is a new invention, which they find
more profitable than to fine their ore with lead.”
Gobet, in a work entitled The Ancient Mineralogists of France, accuses
Alphonso Barba of asserting that he found out amalgamation in the
year 1609. To examine this charge, it will be necessary to give some
account of the metallurgic works of that Spaniard, which, perhaps,
may not prove unacceptable to those who are fond of metallurgy and
mineralogy. Alvaro Alphonso Barba was born at Lepe, a small town in
Andalusia, and officiated many years as clergyman of the church of St.
Bernard, at Potosi. The first edition of this work was printed in
quarto, at Madrid, in 1640, in the Spanish language, and illustrated
with cuts. This book the Spaniards for a long time concealed, because
they considered it as containing all their metallurgic secrets; though
at that time there were much better works of the kind in Germany, and
though amalgamation had been long known and practised. Edward earl of
Sandwich, being ambassador to Spain, found however an opportunity of
procuring a copy of it, as a great rarity; and he began a translation
of it into English, but translated only the first two books. This
translation was published at London in octavo, in 1674, after the
earl’s death, and entitled The First Book of the Art of Metals, in
which is declared the manner of their generation, and the concomitants
of them. Written in Spanish by Albaro Alonso Barba, translated by the
earl of Sandwich. From this English edition several German translations
have been made, of which I am acquainted with the following: two
at Hamburg, one printed in 1676, and the other in 1696; and two at
Frankfort, one in 1726, and another in 1739. In the year 1749 a new
edition appeared at Vienna. This edition, which is very different from
any of the former, was translated from the French by one Godar, who was
not a German, and who on that account apologises in the preface for the
badness of his style. All these editions however are imperfect; for the
original contains five books, as we learn from Leibnitz, who caused
them to be transcribed. In the year 1751 a new translation came out
at Paris, entitled Metallurgy, or the art of extracting and purifying
metals, translated from the Spanish of Alphonso Barba, by M. Gosfort,
with the most curious dissertations on mines and metallic operations;
of this translation the celebrated abbé Lenglet de Fresnoy is said to
have been the editor[37].
To judge by two of the German editions, Gobet has done Barba an
injustice. In that of 1676, I find Barba expressly says he does not
believe the ancients were acquainted with the art of extracting silver
from pounded ore by the means of quicksilver. This certainly does not
indicate that he laid claim to the invention; besides, he everywhere
speaks of amalgamation as an art long used in America, but complains
of the negligence with which it was practised. In a passage however
in the Vienna edition, and which has probably been added by Gobet, we
are told that in the year 1609, Barba attempted to fix quicksilver,
and with that view bethought himself of mixing it with finely pounded
silver ore; that he at first imagined, with surprise, that he had
obtained a mass of silver, but that he soon perceived that the mercury
was not changed into silver, but had only attracted the particles of
that metal. “I was,” adds Barba, “highly pleased with my new discovery
of managing ore, of extracting its contents, and of refining it; and
this method I continued to practise.” I imagine that Barba was still in
Europe in 1609, and made that experiment before he was acquainted with
the smelting-works in America. I am however of opinion, that one will
see by the original that Barba did not wish to claim the invention of
amalgamation as practised in the mines of America.
FOOTNOTES
[28] [Among the improvements of recent date there are perhaps none
of greater importance than those of electro-gilding and gilding by
immersion, which have almost entirely superseded the process of gilding
by an amalgam of mercury and gold, so fatal to the workmen exposed
to the deleterious effects of the mercurial vapours. It is not our
intention to enter at present into a history of the invention of these
processes; they will more properly be reserved for a future volume,
in which the discoveries of the present century will be treated of.
The following short outline may however not prove uninteresting to the
reader:--It had long been known to experimentalists on the chemical
action of voltaic electricity, that solutions of several metallic
salts were decomposed by its agency, and the metal produced in its
free state. The precipitation of copper by the voltaic current was
noticed by Mr. Nicholson[a] in a paper entitled ‘Account of the new
Electrical Apparatus of Sig. Alex. Volta, and experiments performed
with the same;’ but the earliest recorded process in electro-gilding is
probably that contained in a letter from Brugnatelli to Van Mons[b],
in which he states that he had deposited a film of gold on ten silver
medals by bringing them into communication by means of a steel wire
with the negative pole of a voltaic pile, and keeping them one after
the other immersed in ammoniuret of gold newly made and well-saturated.
This announcement of a process identical with those now extensively
used, attracted no attention at the time it was made, and no further
experiments on the application of electricity to the deposition of
metals for the purposes of the arts were published until the year
1830, when Mr. E. Davy read a paper before the Royal Society, in
which he distinctly states that he had gilded, silvered, coppered
and tinned various metals by the voltaic battery[c]. The experiments
of Brugnatelli and Davy were however completely lost sight of, and
the art may be said to date its origin from the period when the late
Professor Daniell described his constant battery. Since that time the
art has continued to advance most rapidly, either in the perfecting of
the apparatus or in the pointing out of more suitable salts of gold
and silver, from which the metals might be precipitated. Among those
who have contributed to its advancement we may particularly instance
the names of our countrymen, Woolrich, Spencer, Jordan, Mason, Murray,
Smee, Elkington, Fox Talbot, and Tuck. Nearly all the gilt articles
manufactured at Birmingham are now gilded by the process patented by
Mr. Elkington, in which, after the articles have been cleansed by
a weak acid, they are placed in a hot solution of nitro-muriate of
gold, to which a considerable excess of bicarbonate of potash has been
added; in the course of a few seconds they thus receive a beautiful and
permanent coating of gold.]
[a] Nicholson’s Journal, July 1800, p. 179.
[b] Philosophical Magazine, 1805.
[c] Phil. Trans. 1831, p. 147.
[29] Lib. xxxiii. cap. 6.
[30] Vit. lib. vii. c. 8.
[31] In Origin. lib. xvi. c. 18.
[32] De Aurilegio, præcipue in Rheno. Argent. 1776.
[33] Historia naturale e morale delle Indie. Venetia, 1596.
[34] The same account as that given by Acosta may be seen in Garcilasso
de la Vega, Commentarios reales; Lisboa 1609, p. 225; in Rycaut’s
English translation, London 1688, fol. i. p. 347; and in De Laet, Novus
Orbis, Lugd. Bat. 1633, fol. p. 447.
[35] Vol. i. p. 414.
[36] Hakluyt’s Collection of Voyages. London, 1600, fol. vol. iii. p.
466.
[37] See La France littéraire. Paris, 1769, 2 vols. 8vo, vol. ii. p.
410.
COLD OR DRY GILDING.
Dry gilding, as it is called by some workmen, is a light method of
gilding, by steeping linen rags in a solution of gold, then burning
them; and with a piece of cloth dipped in salt water, rubbing the ashes
over silver intended to be gilt. This method requires neither much
labour nor much gold, and may be employed with advantage for carved
work and ornaments. It is however not durable.
I am of opinion that this manner of gilding is a German invention, and
that foreigners, at least the English, were first made acquainted with
it about the end of the last century; for Robert Southwell describes it
in the Philosophical Transactions for the year 1698, and says that it
was known to very few goldsmiths in Germany.
GOLD VARNISH.
As mankind could not have everything that they wished for of gold,
they were contented with incrusting many articles with this precious
metal. For that purpose the gold was beat into plates, with which the
walls of apartments, dishes, and other vessels were covered. In early
ages these plates were thick, so that gilding in this manner was very
expensive[38]; but in process of time the expense was much lessened,
because the art was discovered of making these gold plates thinner,
and of laying them on with a size. Articles however ornamented in this
manner were still costly, and the valuable metal was always lost.
Yellow golden colours of all kinds were then tried; but these did
not fully produce the required effect, as they wanted that splendour
peculiar to metals, and appeared always languid and dull. It was not
till modern times that artists conceived the idea of overlaying with
silver, or some cheaper white metal, such things as they wished to
have the appearance of gold, and then daubing them over with a yellow
transparent varnish, in order to give to the white metal the colour
of gold, and to the colour the splendour of metal. “When we cover
our houses with gold,” says Seneca, “do we not show that we delight
in deception? for we know that coarse wood is concealed under that
gold[39].”
This ingenious process, which at present is employed all over Europe
in gilding wooden frames, coaches, and various articles, and which
was formerly used in the preparation of the now old-fashioned leather
tapestry, was invented towards the end of the 17th century. Anderson,
in his Historical and chronological deduction of the Origin of
Commerce, says that it was introduced into England by one Evelyn in the
year 1633; and quotes, in support of this assertion, The Present State
of England, printed in 1683.
This invention, however, does not belong to the English, but to the
Italians, and properly to the Sicilians. Antonino Cento, an artist of
Palermo, found out the gold varnish, and in the year 1680 published
there an account of the method of preparing it. That work I have never
seen; but I found this information in a book printed at Palermo in
1704, and entitled The Inventions of the Sicilians[40]. Among the few
important things contained in this book, the greater part of which is
compiled from old Latin writers, there is, in the additions, a receipt
how to prepare the gold varnish (_vernice d’oro_). The whole account I
shall transcribe, as the authors of the French Journal of Agriculture,
Commerce, and the Arts, thought it worth their trouble to make it known
in that work in 1778.
“Take shell-lac, and having freed it from the filth and bits of wood
with which it is mixed, put it into a small linen bag, and wash it in
pure water, till the water no longer becomes red; then take it from the
bag and suffer it to dry. When it is perfectly dry, pound it very fine;
because the finer it is pounded the more readily will it dissolve. Then
take four parts of spirit of wine, and one of the lac, reduced, as
before directed, to an impalpable powder, so that for every four pounds
of spirit you may have one of lac: mix these together, and, having put
them into an alembic, graduate the fire so that the lac may dissolve in
the spirit. When dissolved, strain the whole through a strong piece of
linen cloth; throw away what remains in the cloth, as of no use, and
preserve the liquor in a glass bottle closely corked. This is the gold
varnish which may be employed for gilding any kind of wood.
“When you wish to use it, you must, in order that the work may be done
with more smoothness, employ a brush made of the tail of a certain
quadruped called the vari, well-known to those who sell colours for
painting; and with this instrument dipped in the liquor wash gently
over, three times, the wood which has been silvered. You must, however,
remember every time you pass the brush over the wood to let it dry; and
thus your work will be extremely beautiful, and have a resemblance to
the finest gold.”
After this invention was made known, it was not difficult to vary,
by several methods, the manner of preparing it. Different receipts,
therefore, have for that purpose been given in a number of books, such
as Croker’s Painter, and others: and, on this account, young artists
are frequently at a loss which to choose; and when a receipt is found
better than another, experienced artists keep it always secret.
With the preparation of that varnish used for gilding leather tapestry
Reaumur was acquainted, and from his papers it was made known by
Fougeroux de Bondaroy. The method of making the English varnish was
communicated by Scarlet to Hellot, in the year 1720; and by Graham
to Du Fay, in 1738. In the year 1761, Hellot gave the receipt to the
Academy of Sciences at Paris, who published it in their memoirs for
that year.
If it be true, as Fougeroux says, that gilded tapestry was made above
two hundred years ago, it might be worth the little trouble that such
an examination would require to investigate the method used to gild it.
FOOTNOTES
[38] One may see in Homer’s Odyssey, book iii. v. 432, the process
employed for gilding in this manner, the horns of the cow brought by
Nestor as an offering to Minerva.
[39] Epist. 115.
[40] La Sicilia inventrice. Palermo, 1704, 4to.
TULIPS.
The greater part of the flowers which adorn our gardens have been
brought to us from the Levant. A few have been procured from other
parts of the world; and some of our own indigenous plants, that grow
wild, have, by care and cultivation, been so much improved as to merit
a place in our parterres. Our ancestors, perhaps, some centuries
ago paid attention to flowers; but it appears that the Orientals,
and particularly the Turks, who in other respects are not very
susceptible of the inanimate beauties of nature, were the first people
who cultivated a variety of them in their gardens for ornament and
pleasure. From their gardens, therefore, have been procured the most of
those which decorate ours; and amongst these is the tulip.
Few plants acquire through accident, weakness, or disease, so many
tints, variegations, and figures, as the tulip. When uncultivated, and
in its natural state, it is almost of one colour, has large leaves,
and an extraordinary long stem. When it has been weakened by culture,
it becomes more agreeable in the eyes of the florist. The petals are
then paler, more variegated, and smaller; the leaves assume a fainter
or softer green colour: and this masterpiece of culture, the more
beautiful it turns, grows so much the weaker; so that, with the most
careful skill and attention, it can with difficulty be transplanted,
and even scarcely kept alive.
That the tulip grows wild in the Levant, and was thence brought to
us, may be proved by the testimony of many writers. Busbequius found
it on the road between Adrianople and Constantinople[41]; Shaw found
it in Syria, in the plains between Jaffa and Rama; and Chardin on the
northern confines of Arabia. The early-blowing kinds, it appears, were
brought to Constantinople from Cavala, and the late-blowing from Caffa;
and on this account the former are called by the Turks _Cavalá lalé_,
and the latter _Café lalé_. Caval is a town on the eastern coast of
Macedonia, of which Paul Lucas gives some account; and Caffa is a town
in the Crimea, or peninsula of Gazaria, as it was called, in the middle
ages, from the Gazares, a people very little known[42].
Though florists have published numerous catalogues of the species of
the tulip, botanists are acquainted only with two, or at most three,
of which scarcely one is indigenous in Europe[43]. All those found
in our gardens have been propagated from the species named after that
learned man, to whom natural history is so much indebted, the Linnæus
of the sixteenth century, Conrad Gesner, who first made the tulip known
by a botanical description and a figure. In his additions to the works
of Valerius Cordus, he tells us that he saw the first in the beginning
of April 1559, at Augsburg, in the garden of the learned and ingenious
counsellor John Henry Herwart. The seeds had been brought from
Constantinople, or, according to others, from Cappadocia. This flower
was then known in Italy under the name of tulipa, or tulip, which is
said to be of Turkish extraction, and given to it on account of its
resembling a turban[44].
Balbinus asserts that Busbequius brought the first tulip-roots to
Prague, from which they were afterwards spread all over Germany[45].
This is not improbable; for Busbequius says, in a letter written in
1554, that this flower was then new to him; and it is known that
besides coins and manuscripts he collected also natural curiosities,
and brought them with him from the Levant. Nay, he tells us that he
paid very dear to the Turks for these tulips; but I do not find he
anywhere says that he was the first who brought them from the East.
In the year 1565 there were tulips in the garden of M. Fugger, from
whom Gesner wished to procure some[46]. They first appeared in
Provence, in France, in the garden of the celebrated Peyresc, in the
year 1611[47].
After the tulip was known, Dutch merchants, and rich people at Vienna,
who were fond of flowers, sent at different times to Constantinople for
various kinds. The first roots planted in England were sent thither
from Vienna, about the end of the sixteenth century, according to
Hakluyt[48]; who is, however, wrong in ascribing to Clusius the honour
of having first introduced them into Europe; for that naturalist only
collected and described all the then known species.
These flowers, which are of no further use than to ornament gardens,
which are exceeded in beauty by many other plants, and whose duration
is short and very precarious, became, in the middle of the 17th
century, the object of a trade such as is not to be met with in the
history of commerce, and by which their price rose above that of the
most precious metals. An account of this trade has been given by many
authors; but by all late ones it has been misrepresented. People laugh
at the Tulipomania[49], because they believe that the beauty and rarity
of the flowers induced florists to give such extravagant prices: they
imagine that the tulips were purchased so excessively dear in order
to ornament gardens; but this supposition is false, as I shall show
hereafter.
This trade was not carried on throughout all Europe, but in some cities
of the Netherlands, particularly Amsterdam, Haarlem, Utrecht, Alkmaar,
Leyden, Rotterdam, Hoorn, Enkhuysen, and Meedenblick; and rose to the
greatest height in the years 1634-37[50]. Munting has given, from some
of the books kept during that trade, a few of the prices then paid, of
which I shall present the reader with the following. For a root of
that species called the Viceroy the after-mentioned articles, valued as
below expressed, were agreed to be delivered:--
Florins.
2 lasts of wheat 448
4 ditto rye 558
4 fat oxen 480
3 fat swine 240
12 fat sheep 120
2 hogsheads of wine 70
4 tons of beer 32
2 ditto butter 192
1000 pounds of cheese 120
a complete bed 100
a suit of clothes 80
a silver beaker 60
----
Sum 2500
These tulips afterwards were sold according to the weight of the roots.
Four hundred perits[51] of Admiral Leifken cost 4400 florins; 446 ditto
of Admiral Von der Eyk, 1620 florins; 106 perits Schilder cost 1615
florins; 200 ditto Semper Augustus, 5500 florins; 410 ditto Viceroy,
3000 florins, &c. The species Semper Augustus has been often sold for
2000 florins; and it once happened that there were only two roots of
it to be had, the one at Amsterdam and the other at Haarlem. For a
root of this species, one agreed to give 4600 florins, together with a
new carriage, two gray horses, and a complete harness. Another agreed
to give for a root twelve acres of land; for those who had not ready
money, promised their moveable and immoveable goods, houses and lands,
cattle and clothes. A man whose name Munting once knew, but could not
recollect, won by this trade more than 60,000 florins in the course of
four months. It was followed not only by mercantile people, but also by
the first noblemen, citizens of every description, mechanics, seamen,
farmers, turf-diggers, chimney-sweeps, footmen, maid-servants and old
clothes-women, &c. At first, every one won and no one lost. Some of
the poorest people gained in a few months houses, coaches and horses,
and figured away like the first characters in the land. In every town
some tavern was selected which served as a ’Change, where high and low
traded in flowers, and confirmed their bargains with the most sumptuous
entertainments. They formed laws for themselves, and had their notaries
and clerks.
When the nature of this trade is considered, it will readily be
perceived, that to get possession of these flowers was not the real
object of it, though many have represented it in that light. The price
of tulips rose always higher from the year 1634 to the year 1637; but
had the object of the purchaser been to get possession of the flowers,
the price in such a length of time must have fallen instead of risen.
“Raise the prices of the productions of agriculture, when you wish
to reduce them,” says Young; and in this he is undoubtedly right,
for a great consumption causes a greater reproduction. This has been
sufficiently proved by the price of asparagus at Göttingen. As it
was much sought after, and large prices paid for it, more of it was
planted, and the price has fallen. In like manner plantations of tulips
would have in a short time been formed in Holland, and florists would
have been able to purchase flowers at a much lower price. But this was
not done; and the chimney-sweeper, who threw aside his besom, did not
become a gardener, though he was a dealer in flowers. Roots would have
been imported from distant countries, as asparagus was from Hanover
and Brunswick to Göttingen; the high price would have induced people
to go to Constantinople to purchase roots, as the Europeans travel to
Golconda and Visapour to procure precious stones; but the dealers in
tulips confined themselves to their own country, without thinking of
long journeys. I will allow that a flower might have become scarce, and
consequently dearer; but it would have been impossible for the price
to rise to a great height, and continue so for a year. How ridiculous
would it have been to purchase useless roots with their weight of gold,
if the possession of the flower had been the only object! Great is the
folly of mankind; but they are not fools without a cause, as they would
have been under such circumstances.
During the time of the Tulipomania, a speculator often offered and
paid large sums for a root which he never received, and never wished
to receive. Another sold roots which he never possessed or delivered.
Oft did a nobleman purchase of a chimney-sweep tulips to the amount of
2000 florins, and sell them at the same time to a farmer; and neither
the nobleman, chimney-sweep or farmer had roots in their possession, or
wished to possess them. Before the tulip season was over, more roots
were sold and purchased, bespoke and promised to be delivered, than in
all probability were to be found in the gardens of Holland; and when
Semper Augustus was not to be had, which happened twice, no species
perhaps was oftener purchased and sold. In the space of three years, as
Munting tells us, more than ten millions were expended in this trade in
only one town of Holland.
To understand this gambling traffic, it may be necessary to make the
following supposition. A nobleman bespoke of a merchant a tulip-root,
to be delivered in six months, at the price of 1000 florins. During
these six months the price of that species of tulip must have risen or
fallen, or remained as it was. We shall suppose that at the expiration
of that time the price was 1500 florins; in that case the nobleman did
not wish to have the tulip, and the merchant paid him 500 florins,
which the latter lost and the former won. If the price was fallen
when the six months were expired, so that a root could be purchased
for 800 florins, the nobleman then paid to the merchant 200 florins,
which he received as so much gain; but if the price continued the
same, that is 1000 florins, neither party gained or lost. In all these
circumstances, however, no one ever thought of delivering the roots
or of receiving them. Henry Munting, in 1636, sold to a merchant at
Alkmaar, a tulip-root for 7000 florins, to be delivered in six months;
but as the price during that time had fallen, the merchant paid,
according to agreement, only ten per cent. “So that my father,” says
the son, “received 700 florins for nothing; but he would much rather
have delivered the root itself for 7000.” The term of these contracts
was often much shorter, and on that account the trade became brisker.
In proportion as more gained by this traffic, more engaged in it;
and those who had money to pay to one, had soon money to receive of
another; as at faro, one loses upon one card, and at the same time
wins on another. The tulip-dealers often discounted sums also, and
transferred their debts to one another; so that large sums were paid
without cash, without bills, and without goods, as by the _Virements_
at Lyons. The whole of this trade was a game at hazard, as the
Mississippi trade was afterwards, and as stock-jobbing is at present.
The only difference between the tulip-trade and stock-jobbing is, that
at the end of the contract the price in the latter is determined by
the Stock-exchange; whereas in the former it was determined by that at
which most bargains were made. High- and low-priced kinds of tulips
were procured, in order that both the rich and the poor might gamble
with them; and the roots were weighed by perits, that an imagined
whole might be divided, and that people might not only have whole,
but half and quarter lots. Whoever is surprised that such a traffic
should become general, needs only to reflect upon what is done where
lotteries are established, by which trades are often neglected, and
even abandoned, because a speedier mode of getting fortunes is pointed
out to the lower classes. In short, the tulip-trade may very well serve
to explain stock-jobbing, of which so much is written in gazettes,
and of which so many talk in company without understanding it; and I
hope, on that account, I shall be forgiven for employing so much time
in illustrating what I should otherwise have considered as below my
notice[52].
At length, however, this trade fell all of a sudden. Among such a
number of contracts many were broken; many had engaged to pay more than
they were able; the whole stock of the adventurers was consumed by the
extravagance of the winners; new adventurers no more engaged in it; and
many, becoming sensible of the odious traffic in which they had been
concerned, returned to their former occupations. By these means, as
the value of tulips still fell, and never rose, the sellers wished to
deliver the roots _in natura_ to the purchasers at the prices agreed
on; but as the latter had no desire for tulips at even such a low rate,
they refused to take them or to pay for them. To end this dispute, the
tulip-dealers of Alkmaar sent in the year 1637 deputies to Amsterdam;
and a resolution was passed on the 24th of February, that all contracts
made prior to the last of November 1636 should be null and void; and
that, in those made after that date, purchasers should be free on
paying ten per cent. to the vender.
The more people became disgusted with this trade, the more did
complaints increase to the magistrates of the different towns; but
as the courts there would take no cognizance of it, the complainants
applied to the states of Holland and West Friesland. These referred the
business to the determination of the provincial council at the Hague,
which on the 27th of April 1637 declared that it would not deliver its
opinion on this traffic until it had received more information on the
subject; that in the mean time every vender should offer his tulips
to the purchaser; and, in case he refused to receive them, the vender
should either keep them, or sell them to another, and have recourse on
the purchaser for any loss he might sustain. It was ordered also, that
all contracts should remain in force till further inquiry was made. But
as no one could foresee what judgement would be given respecting the
validity of each contract, the buyers were more obstinate in refusing
payment than before; and venders, thinking it much safer to accommodate
matters amicably, were at length satisfied with a small profit instead
of exorbitant gain; and thus ended this extraordinary traffic, or
rather gambling.
It is however certain, that persons fond of flowers, particularly in
Holland, have paid, and still pay, very high prices for tulips, as
the catalogues of florists show[53]. This may be called the lesser
Tulipomania, which has given occasion to many laughable circumstances.
When John Balthasar Schuppe was in Holland, a merchant gave a herring
to a sailor who had brought him some goods. The sailor, seeing
some valuable tulip-roots lying about, which he considered as of
little consequence, thinking them to be onions, took some of them
unperceived, and ate them with his herring. Through this mistake the
sailor’s breakfast cost the merchant a much greater sum than if he
had treated the prince of Orange. No less laughable is the anecdote
of an Englishman who travelled with Matthews. Being in a Dutchman’s
garden, he pulled a couple of tulips, on which he wished to make
some botanical observations, and put them in his pocket; but he was
apprehended as a thief, and obliged to pay a considerable sum before he
could obtain his liberty[54].
Reimman and others accuse Just. Lipsius of the Tulipomania[55]; but
if by this word we understand that gambling traffic which I have
described, the accusation is unfounded. Lipsius was fond of scarce and
beautiful flowers, which he endeavoured to procure by the assistance
of his friends, and which he cultivated himself with great care in
his garden; but this taste can by no means be called a mania[56].
Other learned men of the same age were fond of flowers, such as John
Barclay[57], Pompeius de Angelis, and others, who would probably have
been so, even though the cultivation of flowers had not been the
prevailing taste. It however cannot be denied, that learned men may be
infected with epidemical follies. In the present age, many have become
physiognomists because physiognomy is in fashion; and even animal
magnetism has met with partisans to support it.
FOOTNOTES
[41] “As we passed, we saw everywhere abundance of flowers, such as the
narcissus, hyacinth, and those called by the Turks tulipan, not without
great astonishment, on account of the time of the year, as it was then
the middle of winter, a season unfriendly to flowers. Greece abounds
with narcissuses and hyacinths, which have a remarkably fragrant smell:
it is, indeed, so strong as to hurt those who are not accustomed to
it. The tulipan, however, have little or no smell, but are admired for
their beauty and variety of their colour. The Turks pay great attention
to the cultivation of flowers; nor do they hesitate, though by no
means extravagant, to expend several aspers for one that is beautiful.
I received several presents of these flowers, which cost me not a
little.”--_Busbequii Ep._, Basiliæ, 1740, 8vo, p. 36.
[42] See some account of them in Memoriæ populorum ad Danubium by
Stritter.
[43] The _Tulipa sylvestris_, Linn. grows wild in the southern parts of
France. Dodonæus says, in his Florum coronariarum herbarum historia,
Antverpiæ 1569, 8vo, p. 204, “In Thracia et Cappadocia tulipa exit;
Italiæ et Belgio peregrinus est flos. Minores alicubi in Gallia
Narbonensi nasci feruntur.” Linnæus reckons it among the Swedish
plants, and Haller names it among those of Switzerland, but says,
afterwards, I do not believe it to be indigenous, though it is found
here and there in the meads.--_Hist. Stirp._ ii. p. 115. It appears
that this species is earlier than the common _Tulipa Gesneriana_,
though propagated from it. The useless roots thrown perhaps from
Gesner’s garden have grown up in a wild state, and become naturalized,
as the European cattle have in America. See Miller’s Gardener’s
Dictionary, iv. p. 518.
[44] See Martini Lexicon Philologicum, and Megiseri Diction.
Turcico-Lat., where the word _tulbent_, a turban, is derived from the
Chaldaic.
[45] Balbini Miscellanea Bohemiæ, p. 100.
[46] Gesneri Epistolæ Medicinales. Tiguri, 1577, 8vo, p. 79 and 80.
[47] Vita Peirescii, auctore Gassendo. 1655, 4to, p. 80.
[48] Hakluyt says, “And now within these four years there have been
brought into England from Vienna in Austria, divers kind of flowers
called tulipas, and those and others procured thither a little
before, from Constantinople, by an excellent man, Carolus Clusius.”
See Biographia Britannica, ii. p. 164. [Gerarde in his Herbal, 1597,
speaks of the Tulip in the following manner:--“My loving friend Mr.
James Garret, a curious searcher of simples, and learned apothecary in
London, hath undertaken to find out, if it were possible, the infinite
sorts by diligent sowing of their seeds, and by planting those of his
own propagation, and by others received from his friends beyond the
seas for the space of twenty years, not being yet able to attain to the
end of his travail, for that each new year bringeth forth new plants of
sundry colours not before seen; all of which, to describe particularly,
were to roll Sisyphus’ stone, or number the sands.”]
[49] This word was coined by Menage.
[50] The principal works in which an account of this Tulipomania is to
be found are,--Eerste Tzamenspraak tuschen Waermondt en Gaargoed nopens
deopkomst en ondergang van Flora. Amsterdam, 1643, 12mo.--Meterani
Novi, or New History of the Netherlands, part fourth. Amsterdam, 1640,
folio, p. 518, from which Marquard, De Jure Mercatorum, p. 181, has
taken his information.--Naauwkeurige beschryving der Aardgewassen, door
Abraham Munting. Leyden en Utrecht, 1696, folio, p. 907.--De Koophandel
van Amsterdam, door Le Long, ii. p. 307.--Le Negoce d’Amsterdam, par
J. P. Ricard. A Rouen, 1723, 4to, p. 11.--Breslauer Samlung von Natur-
und Kunst-Geschichten, 1721, May, p. 521.--Francisci Schaubühne, vol.
ii. p. 639.--Tenzel, Monatliche Unterredungen, 1690, November, p.
1039.--Année Littéraire, 1773, xv. p. 16.--Martini Zeiler Miscellanea,
p. 29.--Christ. Funcii Orbis Politicus, p. 879.
[51] A perit is a small weight less than a grain.--TRANS.
[52] [How well the author’s remarks apply to the recent mania in
railway scrip!]
[53] In the year 1769, the dearest kinds in England were _Don Quevedo_
and _Valentinier_; the former cost 2_l._ 2_s._ and the latter 2_l._
12_s._ 6_d._ See Weston’s Botanicus Universalis, part 2. In the German
catalogues none of the prices are so high. The name _Semper Augustus_
is not once to be found in new catalogues. [They still remain flowers
of considerable value among florists; for, according to Mr. Hogg, a
moderate collection of choice bulbs cannot now be purchased for a sum
much less than 1000_l._, at the usual prices.--See Chambers’ Journal,
March 15, 1845.]
[54] Blainville’s Travels.
[55] Introd. in Hist. Lit. iii. 3, p. 92.
[56] That he might relax and refresh his mind, worn out by study, he
amused himself with the cultivation of his garden and of flowers, and
particularly of tulips, the roots of which he was at great pains to
procure from all parts of the world, by means of Dodonæus, Clusius,
and Boisotus, men singularly well-skilled in horticulture, and by
others of his friends. Here, at a distance from civil tumult, with a
cheerful countenance and placid eye, he sauntered through his plants
and flowers, contemplating sometimes one declining, sometimes another
springing up, and forgetting all his cares amidst the pleasure which
these objects afforded him. See the Life of Lipsius, prefixed to the
edition of his works printed at Antwerp in 1637. This is confirmed
by what Lipsius says himself in his book De Constantia, ii. 2, 3, in
praise of gardening.
[57] He rented a house near to the Vatican, with a garden, in which
he had planted the choicest flowers, and those chiefly which are not
propagated from seeds or roots, but from bulbs. These flowers were
not known about thirty years before, nor had they been ever seen at
Rome, but lay neglected in the Alps.--Of these flowers, which have no
smell, but are esteemed only on account of their colours, Barclay was
remarkably fond, and purchased their bulbs at a great price. Erythræi
Pinacotheca. Lips. 1712, 8vo, iii. 17, p. 623. See also Freheri
Theatrum, p. 1515.
CANARY BIRD.
This little bird, highly esteemed for its song, which is reared with
so much care, particularly by the fair sex, and which affords an
innocent amusement to those who are fond of the wild notes of nature,
is a native of those islands from which it takes its name. As it was
not known in Europe till the fifteenth century, no account of it is
to be met with in any of the works of the old ornithologists. Bellon,
who about the year 1555 described all the birds then known, does not
so much as mention it. At that period it was brought from the Canary
Islands. It was therefore so dear that it could be procured only by
people of fortune, and those who purchased were even often imposed
on[58]. It was called the sugar-bird, because it was said to be fond
of the sugar-cane, and that it could eat sugar in great abundance.
This circumstance seems to be very singular; for that substance is to
many birds a poison. Experiments have shown, that a pigeon to which
four drachms of sugar were given died in four hours, and that a duck
which had swallowed five drachms did not live seven hours after. It is
certain, therefore, that the power of poison is relative.
The first figure of this bird is given by Aldrovandus, but it is small
and inaccurate. That naturalist reckons the Canary bird among the
number of those which were scarce and expensive, as it was brought from
a distant country with great care and attention. The first good figure
of it is to be found in Olina[59]: it has been copied by both Johnston
and Willughby.
In the middle of the seventeenth century these birds began to be bred
in Europe, and to this the following circumstance, related by Olina,
seems to have given occasion. A vessel, which, among other commodities,
was carrying a number of Canary birds to Leghorn, was wrecked on the
coast of Italy; and these birds, being thus set at liberty, flew to
the nearest land, which was the Island of Elba, where they found the
climate so favourable, that they multiplied, and perhaps would have
become domesticated, had they not been caught in snares; for it appears
that the breed of them there has been long since destroyed. Olina says
that the breed soon degenerated; but it is probable that these Canary
birds, which were perhaps all males, did at the Island of Elba what the
European sailors do in India. By coupling with the birds of the island,
they may have produced mules. Such hybrids are described by Gesner and
other naturalists[60].
The breeding of these birds was at first attended with great
difficulty; partly because the treatment and attention they required
were not known, and partly because males chiefly, and few females, were
brought to Europe. We are told that the Spaniards once forbade the
exportation of males, that they might secure to themselves the trade
carried on in these birds, and that they ordered the bird-catchers
either to strangle the females or to set them at liberty[61]. But this
order seems to have been unnecessary; for, as the females commonly do
not sing, or are much inferior in the strength of their notes to the
males, the latter only were sought after as objects of trade. In the
like manner, as the male parrots are much superior in colour to the
females, the males are more esteemed, and more of them are brought
to Europe than of the females. It is probable, therefore, that in
our system of ornithology, many female parrots belonging to species
already well-known are considered as distinct species. It was at first
believed that those Canary birds bred in the Canary Islands were much
better singers than those reared in Europe; but this at present is
doubted[62]. In latter times various treatises have been published in
different languages, on the manner of breeding these birds, and many
people have made it a trade, by which they have acquired considerable
gain. It does no discredit to the industry of the Tyrolese that they
have carried it to the greatest extent. At Ymst there is a company
who, after the breeding season is over, send out persons to different
parts of Germany and Switzerland to purchase birds from those who breed
them. Each person brings with him commonly from three to four hundred,
which are afterwards carried for sale, not only through every part of
Germany, but also to England, Russia, and even Constantinople. About
sixteen hundred are brought every year to England; where the dealers
in them, notwithstanding the considerable expense they are at, and
after carrying them about on their backs, perhaps a hundred miles, sell
them for five shillings apiece. This trade, hitherto neglected, is now
carried on in Schwarzwalde; and at present there is a citizen here at
Göttingen, who takes with him every year to England several Canary
birds and bullfinches (_Loxia pyrrhula_), with the produce of which he
purchases such small wares as he has occasion for.
The principal food of these birds is the Canary seed, which, as is
commonly affirmed, and not improbably, was first brought, for this
purpose, from the Canary Islands to Spain, and thence dispersed all
over Europe. Most of the old botanists, however, are of opinion that
the plant which produces it is the same as that called _Phalaris_ by
Dioscorides[63]. Should this be true, it will follow that this kind
of grass must have grown wild in other places besides the island it
takes its name from; which is not improbable. But those who read the
different descriptions which the ancients have given of _Phalaris_,
will, in my opinion, observe that they may be equally applied to more
plants; and Pliny seems to have used this name for more than one
species of grass[64].
However this may be, it is certain that this seed, when it was used
as food for these birds, began to be cultivated first in Spain,
and afterwards in the southern parts of France. At present it is
cultivated in various parts, and forms no inconsiderable branch of
trade, particularly in the island of Sicily, where the plant is called
_Scagliuola_, or _Scaghiola_. The seed is sold principally to the
French and the Genoese. In England, the industrious inhabitants of the
Isle of Thanet, particularly those around Margate and Sandwich, gain
considerably by this article, as they can easily transport it to London
by water.
That this plant might be cultivated with little trouble in Germany, is
shown by the yearly experience of those who raise it in their gardens,
and by its having become so naturalized in some parts of Hesse, that it
propagates by seed of itself in the fields. The use of the seed might
also be extended, for it yields a good meal; but the grains are not
easily freed from the husks.
I shall here take occasion to remark, that Savary[65] has been guilty
of an error, when he says that archil is cultivated in the Canary
Islands in order to be sold as food for Canary birds. One may easily
perceive that this mistake has arisen from his confounding that
lichen used for dyeing with this kind of grass; and I should not have
considered it worth notice, had it not been copied into Ludovici’s
Dictionary of Trade, from which, perhaps, it may be copied into the
works of others.
FOOTNOTES
[58] Gesneri Historiæ Animalium, liber tertius. Tiguri, 1555, fol. p.
234.
[59] Uccelliera, overo Discorso della natura di diversi Uccelli. Roma,
1622, 4to.
[60] Gesneri redivivi, aucti et emendati, tomus ii. Franc. 1669, fol.
p. 62. More information respecting hybrids may be found in Brisson,
Ornithologie, t. iii. p. 187; and Frisch, Vorstellung der Vögel in
Teutschland, the twelfth plate of which contains several good figures.
[61] Coleri Œconomia ruralis et domestica. Franc. 1680, folio.
[62] Barrington’s paper in the Phil. Trans. vol. lxiii. p. 249.
[63] _Phalaris Canariensis._ The best figure and description of it are
to be found in Schreber’s Beschreibung der Gräser, ii. p. 83, tab. x. 2.
[64] Lib. iii. c. 159, and lib. xxvii. c. 12.
[65] Dictionnaire de Commerce, t. v. 1765, fol. p. 1149.
ARCHIL.
Under the names Orseille, Orceille, Orsolle, Ursolle, Orcheil, Orchel,
in Italian Oricello[66], Orcella, Roccella, in Dutch Orchillie, and in
English Archil, Canary weed or Orchilla weed, is understood a lichen
used for dyeing, and from which a kind of paint is also prepared. This
species of lichen, of which the best figure and a full description may
be seen in Dillenius[67], is by Linnæus called _Lichen roccella_. It
is found in abundance in some of the islands near the African coast,
particularly in the Canaries, and in several of the islands in the
Archipelago. It grows upright, partly in single partly in double stems,
which are about two inches in height. When it is old these stems are
crowned with a button, sometimes round and sometimes of a flat form,
which Tournefort very properly compares to the excrescences on the
arms of the Sepia. Its colour is sometimes a light, and sometimes a
dark gray. Of this lichen with lime, urine, ammoniacal salts, or a
solution of ammonia prepared by distillation, is formed a dark red
paste, which in commerce has the same name, and which is much used in
dyeing. That well-known substance called litmus is also made of it.
Theophrastus[68], Dioscorides[69], and their transcriber Pliny[70],
give the name of _Phycos thalassion_ or _pontion_ to a plant which,
notwithstanding its name, is not a sea-weed but a lichen, as it grew
on the rocks of different islands, and particularly on those of Crete
or Candia. It had in their time been long used for dyeing wool, and
the colour it gave when fresh was so beautiful, that it excelled the
ancient purple, which was not red, as many suppose, but violet. Pliny
tells us, that with this lichen dyers gave the ground or first tint
to those cloths which they intended to dye with the costly purple. At
least I so understand, with Hardouin and others, the words _conchyliis
substernitur_, which the French dyers express by the phrase _donner le
pied_.
Though several kinds of lichen produce a similar red dye, I agree in
opinion with Dillenius, that _Phycos thalassion_ is our archil; for at
present no species is known which communicates so excellent a colour,
and which corresponds so nearly with the description of Theophrastus.
Besides, it is still collected in the Grecian islands, and it appears
that it has been used there since the earliest ages[71].
Tournefort[72] found this lichen in the island Amorgos, which lies on
the eastern side of Naxos, and which at present is called Morgo. In
his time it was sent to England and Alexandria, at the rate of ten
rix-dollars per hundred weight; and he says expressly that it was
common in the other islands. He shows from Suidas, Julius Pollux[73],
and other ancient writers, that this island was once celebrated for a
kind of red linen cloth, which in commerce had the name of the island;
and he conjectures, not without probability, that it might have been
dyed with this lichen.
Imperati[74] says, that the _roccella_, of which he gives a figure, was
procured from the Levant. This naturalist gives the figure also of a
lichen from Candia, used for dyeing, which was then called _rubicula_,
and which, as may be seen in Bauhinus[75], is comprehended under the
name of Roccella. Dillenius and Linnæus, however, make it a distinct
species; and the latter names it _Lichen fuciformis_. This distinction
is, perhaps, not improper: for the _rubicula_ does not grow like a
shrub or bush, as the _roccella_, but belongs rather to the foliaceous
lichens. Be this as it may, it is certain, as Dillenius has remarked,
and as I know from my own observation, that _L. fuciformis_ is often
mixed with the real roccella, and particularly with that brought from
the Canary Islands; but whether it be equally good, experience has not
yet taught us.
From what has been said, I think I may venture to conclude that our
archil was not unknown to the ancient Grecians. But when was it first
employed as a dye by the moderns, and introduced into our commerce?
Some writers are of opinion that this drug was first found in the
Canary Islands, and afterwards in the Levant. The use of it, therefore,
is not older than the last discovery of that island. That this opinion
is false, will appear from what follows.
Among the oldest and principal Florentine families is that known under
the name of the Oricellarii or Rucellarii, Ruscellai or Rucellai,
several of whom have distinguished themselves as statesmen and men of
letters. This family are descended from a German nobleman named Ferro
or Frederigo, who lived in the beginning of the twelfth century[76].
One of his descendants in the year 1300 carried on a great trade in
the Levant, by which he acquired considerable riches, and returning at
length to Florence with his fortune, first made known in Europe the
art of dyeing with archil. It is said that a little before his return
from the Levant, happening to make water on a rock covered with this
lichen, he observed that the plant, which was there called _respio_ or
_respo_, and in Spain _orciglia_, acquired by the urine a purple, or,
as others say, a red colour. He therefore tried several experiments;
and when he had brought to perfection the art of dyeing wool with this
plant, he made it known at Florence, where he alone practised it for a
considerable time, to the great benefit of the state. From this useful
invention the family received the name of Oricellarii, from which at
last was formed Rucellai[77].
As several documents, still preserved among the Florentine archives,
confirm the above account of the origin of this family name, from the
discovery of dyeing with oricello[78], we may, in my opinion, consider
it as certain that the Europeans, and first the Florentines, were made
acquainted with this dye-stuff and its use in the beginning of the
fourteenth century. At that time the Italians brought from the East the
seeds of many arts and sciences, which, afterwards sown and nurtured
in Europe, produced the richest harvests; and nothing is more certain
than that the art of dyeing was brought to us from the East by the
Italians. I do not believe that the merit of having discovered this
dye by the above-mentioned accident is due to that Florentine; but I
am of opinion that he learnt the art in the Levant, and on his return
taught it to his countrymen, which was doing them no small service[79].
After that period the Italians long procured archil from the Levant
for themselves, and afterwards for all Europe. I say for a long time,
because since the discovery of the Canary Islands the greater part of
that substance has been procured from them.
These islands, after being a considerable time lost and forgotten,
were again discovered about the end of the fourteenth or the beginning
of the fifteenth century, and since that time they have been much
frequented by the Europeans. One of the first who endeavoured to
obtain an establishment there, was John de Betancourt, a gentleman
of Normandy, who in 1400, or, as others say, in 1417, landed on
Lancerotta. Amongst the principal commodities which this gentleman and
other Europeans brought back with them was archil, which was found
there more beautiful and in greater abundance than anywhere else; and
Betancourt enjoyed in idea the great profit which he hoped to derive
from this article in commerce. Glass is surprised that the Europeans,
immediately upon their arrival, sought after this lichen with as much
eagerness and skill as they did after gold in America, though they
were not so well acquainted with the former as the latter before the
discovery of these new lands[80]. But as this is not true, the wonder
will cease.
According to information procured in the year 1731, the island of
Teneriffe produced annually five hundred quintals of this moss; Canary,
four hundred; Forteventura, Lancerotta, and Gomera, three hundred
each; and Fero, eight hundred; making in all two thousand six hundred
quintals. In the islands of Canary, Teneriffe and Palma, the moss
belongs to the crown; and in the year 1730 it was let by the king of
Spain for one thousand five hundred piastres. The farmers paid then for
collecting it from fifteen to twenty rials per hundred weight[81]. In
the rest of the islands it belongs to private proprietors, who cause
it to be collected on their own account. In the beginning of the last
century a hundred weight, delivered on board at Santa Cruz, the capital
of Teneriffe, was worth from only three to four piastres; but since
1725 it has cost labour amounting to ten piastres, because it has been
in great request at London, Amsterdam, Marseilles, and throughout all
Italy[82]. In the year 1726 this lichen cost at London eighty pounds
sterling per ton, as we are told by Dillenius, and in 1730 it bore the
same price.
Towards the end of the year 1730, the captain of an English vessel,
which came from the Cape de Verde islands, brought a bag of archil to
Santa Cruz by way of trial. He discovered his secret to some Spanish
and Genoese merchants, who, in the month of July 1731, resolved to
send a ship to these islands. They landed on that of St. Anthony and
St. Vincent, where in a few days they obtained five hundred quintals
of this lichen, which they found in such abundance, that it cost
them nothing more than a piastre per cent. by way of present to the
governor. The archil of the Cape de Verde islands appears larger,
richer, and longer than that of the Canaries, and this, perhaps, is
owing to its not being collected every year[83]. Adanson, in 1749,
found also the greater part of the rocks in Magdalen island, near
Senegal, covered with this lichen. Though the greater part of our
archil is at present procured from the Canary and Cape de Verde
islands, a considerable quantity is procured also from the Levant, from
Sicily, as Glass says, and from the coast of Barbary; and some years
ago the English merchants at Leghorn caused this lichen to be collected
in the island of Elba, and paid a high price for it[84].
Our dyers do not purchase raw archil, but a paste made of it, which
the French call _orseille en pâte_. The preparation of it was for a
long time kept a secret by the Florentines. The person who, as far
as I know, made it first known was Rosetti; who, as he himself tells
us, carried on the trade of a dyer at Florence. Some information was
afterwards published concerning it by Imperati[85] and Micheli the
botanist[86]. In later times this art has been much practised in
France, England, and Holland. Many druggists, instead of keeping this
paste in a moist state with urine, as they ought, suffer it to dry, in
order to save a little dirty work. It then has the appearance of a dark
violet-coloured earth, with here and there some white spots in it.
The Dutch, who have found out better methods than other nations of
manufacturing many commodities, so as to render them cheaper, and
thereby to hurt the trade of their neighbours, are the inventors also
of lacmus[87], a preparation of archil called _orseille en pierre_,
which has greatly lessened the use of that _en pâte_, as it is more
easily transported and preserved, and fitter for use; and as it is
besides, if not cheaper, at least not dearer. This art consists,
undoubtedly, in mixing with that commodity some less valuable
substance, which either improves or does not much impair its quality,
and which at the same time increases its weight[88]. Thus they pound
cinnabar and smalt finer than other nations, and yet sell both these
articles cheaper. In like manner they sift cochineal, and sell it at a
less price than what is unsifted.
It was for a long time believed that the Dutch prepared their lacmus
from those linen rags which in the south of France are dipped in the
juice of the _Croton tinctorium_[89]; and this idea appeared the more
probable, as most of this _tournesol en drapeaux_ was bought up by
the Hollanders: but, as they are the greatest adulterators of wine
in Europe, they may perhaps have used these rags to colour Pontack
and other wines. It is however not improbable that they at first made
lacmus of them, as their dye approaches very near to that of archil.
At present it is almost certainly known that _orseille en pâte_ is the
principal ingredient in _orseille en pierre_, that is in lacmus[90]:
and for this curious information we are indebted to Ferber[91]. But
whence arises the smell of the lacmus, which appears to me like that
of the Florentine iris? Some of the latter may, perhaps, be mixed
with it; for I think I have observed in it small insoluble particles,
which may have been pieces of the roots. The addition of this substance
can be of no use to improve the dye; but it may increase the weight,
and give the lac more body; and perhaps it may be employed to render
imperceptible some unpleasant smell, for which purpose the roots of
that plant are used on many other occasions.
Another kind of lichen, different from the roccella, which in commerce
is known by the names _orseille de terre_, _orseille d’Auvergne_,
is used also for the like purpose; but it contains fewer and weaker
colouring particles. This species, in botany, is called _Lichen
Parellus_ (_Lecanora Parella_), and is distinguished from the roccella
by its figure, as it grows only in a thin rind on the rocks. It is
collected in Auvergne, on rocks of granite and volcanic productions,
and in some parts of Languedoc; the greater part of it is brought from
St. Flour. Its name, _perelle_, comes from an old Languedocian word
_pére_ (_pierre_, a rock); as _roccella_, afterwards transformed into
_orseille_, is derived from _rocca_. The use of _perelle_ is very
trifling: the Dutch purchase it to make lacmus, perhaps on account of
its low price. This lichen has been found also in Northumberland[92]
and other mountainous districts of Great Britain, but it is not
collected there for any purpose.
FOOTNOTES
[66] In the Dictionary of the Academy della Crusca the word _oricello_
is thus explained: Tintura colla quale si tingono i panni, che si fa
con orina d’uomo, e con altri ingredienti.
[67] Historia Muscorum, Ox. 1741, 4to, p. 120.
[68] Hist. Plant. iv. c. 7.
[69] Lib. iv. c. 95.
[70] Lib. xxvi. c. 10; xxxii. c. 6.
[71] Hardouin quotes Aristot. Hist. Animal. vi. c. 9. But that
naturalist speaks of a sea-weed which was cast on shore by the
Hellespont. A dye or paint was made of it, and the people in the
neighbourhood imagined that the purple of this sea-weed, which served
as food to certain shell-fish, communicated to them their beautiful
dye. A proof that sea-weeds (_fuci_) can communicate a red colour may
be found in the Transactions of the Swedish Academy, iv. p. 29.
[72] Voyage du Levant. Amsterd. 1718, 4to, i. p. 89.
[73] “Præterea Amorgina, optima quidem in Amorgo fiunt, sed et
hæc e lino esse asserunt. Tunica autem Amorgina etiam amorgis
nuncupatur.”--Onomasticon, vii. c. 16.
[74] Histor. Nat. lib. xxvii. c. 11.
[75] Pinax Plant. p. 365. Hist. Plant. iii. 2. p. 796.
[76] Other accounts say that he was an Englishman; but the name
Frederigo confirms his German extraction.
[77] Giornale de’ Letterati d’ Italia, t. xxxiii. parte i. p. 231.
[78] These documents from the Florentine records may be found in
Dominici Mariæ Manni de Florentinis Inventis Commentarium. Ferrariæ,
1731, p. 37, from which I have extracted the following:--“One of this
family resided formerly a long time in the Levant, where he carried
on trade, according to the custom of the Florentine nation. Being one
day in the fields, and happening to make water on a plant, of which
there was great abundance, he observed that it immediately became
extraordinarily red. Like a prudent man, therefore, he resolved to
make use of this secret of nature, which till that time had lain
hid; and having made several experiments on that herb, and finding
it proper to dye cloth, he sent some of it to Florence, where, being
mixed with human urine and other things, it has always been employed
to dye cloth purple. This plant, which is called _respo_, is in Spain
named _orciglia_, and by botanists commonly _corallina_. The mixture
made with it is called _oricello_, and has been of great utility and
advantage to the woollen manufacture, which is carried on to greater
extent in Florence than in any other city. From this circumstance the
individuals of that family, by being the inventors of oricello, have
been called Oricellai, and have been beloved by the people for having
procured to them this particular benefit. Thus has written John di
Paolo Rucellai (_Manni says that this learned and opulent man wrote
in the year 1451_); and the same account is still given by dyers
in our city, who relate and affirm that their ancestors have for a
century exercised the art of dyeing, and that they know the above from
tradition.”
This is confirmed by another passage:--“One of this family, on account
of the trade carried on faithfully and honestly by the Florentines,
travelled to the Levant, and brought thence to Florence the art, or
rather secret, of dyeing in oricello.”
[79] In the genealogical history of the noble families of Tuscany and
Umbria, written by P. D. Eugenio Gamurrini, and published at Florence
1668-1673, 3 vols. in folio, is the following account, vol. i. p. 274,
of the origin of this family:--“This family acquired their name from a
secret brought by one of them from the Levant, which was that of dyeing
in oricello, never before used in this country. On that account they
were afterwards called Oricellari, as appears from several records
among the archives of Florence, and then by corruption Rucellari and
Rucellai. Of their origin many speak, and all agree that they came into
Tuscany from Britain.”
[80] The History of the Discovery and Conquest of the Canary Islands,
by George Glass. London, 1764, 4to.
[81] [Dr. Ure copies this information in his Dictionary, but gives it
as the return of an official report for the year 1831!]
[82] This information is to be found in Hellot’s Art of Dyeing, into
which it has been copied, as appears by the Dictionnaire d’Histoire
Naturelle, par Valmont de Bomare, from an account written by M.
Porlier, who was consul at Teneriffe in 1731.
[83] As the archil grows in the African islands, and on the coast
of Africa, Glass supposes that the Getulian purple of the ancients
was dyed with it; but this opinion is improbable, for Horace praises
“Gætula _murice_ tinctas vestes.”
[84] Lettres sur l’Histoire Naturelle de l’Isle d’Elbe, par Koestlin.
Vienne, 1780, 8vo, p. 100.
[85] Lib. xxvii. c. 9.
[86] Nova Plantarum Genera. Flor. 1729.
[87] Some translate this word _lacca musica_, _musiva_.
[88] [According to Dr. Ure, the Dutch first reduce the lichen to a fine
powder by means of a mill, then mix a certain proportion of potash with
it. The mixture is watered with urine and allowed to undergo a species
of fermentation. When this has arrived at a certain degree, carbonate
of lime in powder is added to give consistence and weight to the paste,
which is afterwards reduced into small parallelopipeds, which are
carefully dried.]
[89] This plant grows in the neighbourhood of Montpelier, and above
all, in the flats of Languedoc. In harvest, the time when it is
collected, the peasants assemble from the distance of fifteen or twenty
leagues around, and each gathers on his own account. It is bruised in
a mill, and the juice must be immediately used; some mix with it a
thirtieth part of urine. It is poured over pieces of canvas, which they
take care to provide, and which they rub between their hands. These
rags are dried in the sun, and then exposed, above a stone stove, to
the vapour of urine mixed with quick-lime or alum. After they have
imbibed the juice of the plant, the same operations are repeated till
the pieces of cloth appear of a deep blue colour. They are called in
commerce _tournesol en drapeaux_. Large quantities of them are bought
up by the Dutch, who make use of them to colour wines and the rinds of
their cheese.--TRANS.
[90] [Lacmus or litmus is now prepared from _Lecanora tartarea_, the
famous _Cudbear_, so called after a Mr. Cuthbert, who first brought
it into use. It is imported largely from Norway, where it grows
more abundantly than with us; yet in the Highland districts many an
industrious peasant gets a living by scraping off this lichen with an
iron hoop, and sending it to the Glasgow market.]
[91] Linn. Mantissa Plantarum, i. p. 132.
[92] See Wallis’s Natural History and Antiquities of Northumberland,
1769, 2 vols. 4to, i. p. 279.
MAGNETIC CURES.
The external use of the magnet, to cure the tooth-ache and other
disorders, is a remedy brought into fashion in modern times, but
not a new discovery, as supposed by Lessing, who ascribes it to
Paracelsus[93]. It was known to Aëtius, who lived so early as the year
500. That author says, “We are assured that those who are troubled
with the gout in their hands or their feet, or with convulsions, find
relief when they hold a magnet in their hand[94].” He does not however
give any proof of this from his own experience: and perhaps he doubted
the truth of it. The above passage contains the oldest account known at
present respecting this virtue; for the more ancient writers speak only
of the internal use of the magnet.
It is evident therefore that this cure has not been discovered in later
times, but that it has been preserved by the old physicians copying
it from each other into their works. In like manner, many things are
mentioned in the Materia Medica which were used or proposed by the
ancients, but into the properties of which they never made sufficient
inquiry.
Paracelsus recommended the magnet in a number of diseases, as fluxes,
hæmorrhages, &c. Marcellus, who lived in the fifteenth century, assures
us that it cures the tooth-ache[95]. The same virtue is ascribed to
it by Leonard Camillus[96], who lived in the sixteenth century: and
Wecker[97], who was nearly co-temporary, says that the magnet when
applied to the head, cures the head-ache; and adds that Holler had
taken this cure from the works of the ancients[98]. We read also
in Porta[99], that it was recommended for the head-ache; and in
Kircher[100], that it was worn about the neck as a preventive against
convulsions, and affections of the nerves. About the end of the 17th
century magnetic tooth-picks and ear-pickers were made, and extolled as
a secret preventive against pains in the teeth, eyes and ears[101].
[In addition to these external uses of the magnet, in which it was
supposed to act by a peculiar power over the nervous system, it
has been employed on account of its true magnetic properties. Thus
Kirkringius, Fabricius Hildanus, and subsequently Morgagni, have used
it to remove particles of iron which had accidentally fallen into
the eyes. Kircher employed it also to cure hernia. The patient took
iron-filings internally; and the loadstone in the state of powder mixed
with some vegetable substance, thus forming a magnetic plaster, was
applied to the hernia. Even Ambrose Paré states on the authority of a
surgeon, that several patients had been thus cured.
About the 16th and early in the 17th century, two cases occurred,
one near Prague in Bohemia, the other in Prussia, in which a knife
was swallowed, but it unfortunately got too far and passed into the
stomach. By the application of these magnetic plasters, the point
became attracted towards the surface, so that it could be removed by
incision[102].
In the 18th century, after the properties of magnets had begun to be
scientifically investigated, they were made of various forms and their
effects studied in numerous parts of Europe, and many treatises were
published on their supposed properties. Perhaps the most important
and best authenticated, are those of MM. Audry and Thouret. These
experimenters believed that they were effective agents.
Since that time, the use of magnets as remedial agents has been almost
entirely laid aside and forgotten, it having been found that no
constancy was exhibited in the results of their application, and that
their occasional supposed efficacy depended upon other circumstances,
which were overlooked from the sufferers’ attention being engrossed by
the magnet. The application of the magnet to remove small particles of
iron or steel which have accidentally fallen into the eyes, has been
lately revived. In some manufactories, where these minute particles
are constantly thrown off in the grinding of hardware and driven into
the eyes, large magnets are kept fixed at a proper height, so that the
workmen can resort to them immediately. Such is the case for instance
at Fairbairne in Belgium, and we believe the same has been adopted in
some of our own manufactories to catch the floating particles, and
thus to prevent their being drawn into the lungs during respiration.
The reader may form some idea of the effective manner in which magnets
can be applied, from the following incident which occurred to Prof.
Faraday, whilst experimenting with a powerful (electro-) magnet; an
iron candlestick which happened to be standing near its poles on the
table at which he was at work flew to them, attracted with such
violence as to displace or break everything in its way.
In the 18th century, a new supposed magnetic power was discovered,
and with various success has continued to be applied to the delusion
of the public. About 1770, Father Hehl, a jesuit, the Professor of
Astronomy at Vienna, who had great faith in the influence of the
loadstone on human diseases, and had invented steel plates of a
peculiar form, which he impregnated with magnetic virtues and applied
to the cure of diseases, communicated his discoveries to Anton Mesmer,
who subsequently invented animal magnetism or mesmerism. Mesmer made
use of his friend Hehl’s plates to employ the magnet according to
certain notions of his own. In his subsequent experiments magnets were
gradually dispensed with, and as practised in modern times, they have
been found unnecessary. Hence mesmerism or animal magnetism has no
relation to the magnetism of the magnet, and may therefore form the
subject of a future article.
About the year 1798, a man named Perkins invented a method of treating
various diseases with metallic bars called tractors; these were applied
to and drawn over various parts of the body, and were supposed to cure
numerous maladies, such as ulcers, head-aches, &c. These instruments
were patented. A few years afterwards, Dr. Falconer had wooden tractors
made so exactly to resemble those of Perkins, that they could not be
distinguished by the eye; on employing these on a large scale at the
Bath hospital, he found that exactly the same effects and cures were
produced by one as the other. Since that time these tractors have
hardly been heard of, and are now forgotten.
Quite recently, a new means has been contrived in England for deluding
the public, in the form of rings, which are to be worn upon the fingers
or toes, and are said to prevent the occurrence of, and cure various
diseases. They are called galvanic rings. But this invention may be
with propriety classed with the real magnet, animal magnetism and
tractation.
What has been stated relative to the metallic tractors, equally
applies to the magnetic rings; for although by the contact of the two
metals of which they are composed an infinitesimally minute current
of electricity, hence also of magnetism, is generated, still from the
absurd manner in which the pieces of metal composing the ring are
arranged, and which displays the most profound ignorance of the laws of
electricity and magnetism, no trace of the minute current traverses the
finger or toe on which the ring is worn; so that a wooden, any other
ring, or none at all, would have exactly the same effect, as regards
the magnetism or galvanism.]
FOOTNOTES
[93] In his Kollektaneen. Berlin, 1790, ii. p. 117.
[94] Aëtii Op. 1. ii. c. 25.
[95] In Stephani Artis Med. Princip. ii. p. 253.
[96] De Lapidibus, lib. ii. p. 131.
[97] J. J. Wecker, De Secretis.
[98] I took the trouble to search for this passage in Jac. Hollerii
lib. de morbis internis, Parisiis 1711, 4to, but I could not find it,
though the beginning of the book treats expressly of head-aches.
[99] Magia Naturalis, lib. vii.
[100] Kircheri Magnes, sive De Arte Magnetica, lib. iii. c. i.
[101] P. Borrelli, Hist. et Observ. Medico-physic. cent. 4. obs. 75.
[102] Observations sur l’usage de l’aimant en médecine, par MM. Audry
et Thouret.
SECRET POISON.
Under this name are generally understood all poisons which can be
administered imperceptibly, and which gradually shorten the life of
man, like a lingering disease. They were not first discovered in the
17th century in France and Italy as many believe, but were known to
the ancient Greeks and Romans, by whom they were used. I must however
allow, that they were never prepared with more art at any period, or
in any country, or employed oftener and with more success, than they
were in these countries, and at that time. If it be true that they
can be prepared in such a manner as to occasion death at a certain
period previously determined, or that the person to whom they are given
will die within a certain time limited, it must be confessed that
the ancient poisoners have been far exceeded by the modern. But this
advantage will be considered as scarcely possible, when one reflects
upon the many variable circumstances which have an influence on the
operation of medicines and poisons; and it has often happened that a
company have swallowed the same poison, at the same time, and in the
same quantity, some of whom have died sooner and some later, while
some have survived. Thus died Pope Alexander VI. in the year 1503,
and Cæsar Borgia recovered without any loss of health, though, by the
bottles being changed through mistake, he drank of the poison that
had been prepared for the other guests alone. At any rate, I am of
opinion that the celebrated Tophania, when she engaged to free wives
from disagreeable husbands within stated weeks and days, must have had
certain and very accurate information respecting their constitution and
manner of living, or, as the physicians say, their idiosyncrasy.
Some physicians have doubted respecting secret poison[103]; and others
have only denied that its effects can with certainty be regulated to
a fixed time[104]. I agree in opinion with the latter; but the former
can be confuted by many examples both of ancient and modern times; for
that the ancients were acquainted with this kind of poison, can be
proved by the testimony of Plutarch, Quintilian, and other respectable
authors. We are told by Plutarch, that a slow poison, which occasioned
heat, a cough, spitting of blood, consumption, and a weakness of
intellect, was administered to Aratus of Sicyon[105]; and Quintilian
in his Declamations, speaks of this poison in such a manner as proves
that it must then have been well known[106]. It cannot be said that
such an invention was too great for that period, or that it required
more knowledge of chemistry than any one possessed; for the Indians in
America are acquainted with a most perfect poison of this kind, and
can employ it with so much skill, that the person to whom it is given
cannot guard against the treachery, even with the utmost precaution,
but infallibly dies, though in a lingering manner, often after the
expiration of some years[107].
Theophrastus speaks of a poison which could be moderated in such a
manner as to have effect in two or three months, or at the end of a
year, or two years; and he remarks that the death, the more lingering
it was, became the more miserable. This poison was prepared from
aconitum, a plant which, on that account, people were forbidden to have
in their possession, under pain of capital punishment[108]. He relates
also, that Thrasyas had discovered a method of preparing from other
plants a poison which, given in small doses of a drachm, occasioned an
easy but certain death, without any pain, and which could be kept back
for a long time without causing weakness or corruption. This Thrasyas,
whose scholar Alexias carried the art still further, was a native of
Mantinea, a city in Arcadia, and is celebrated by Theophrastus on
account of his abilities, and particularly his knowledge of botany; but
those are mistaken who ascribe to him the discovery of secret poison.
This poison was much used at Rome about two hundred years before the
Christian æra. As several persons of distinction died the same year at
that period, and of the like distemper, an inquiry being made into the
cause, a maid-servant gave evidence against some ladies of the first
families, who, she said, prepared and distributed poison; and above a
hundred and fifty of them were convicted and punished[109]. As so many
had learnt this destructive art, it could not be suppressed; and we
find sufficient proofs in the Roman history that it was continually
preserved. Sejanus caused such a secret poison to be administered
by an eunuch to Drusus, who gradually declined afterwards, as by
a consumptive disorder, and at length died[110]. Agrippina, being
desirous of getting rid of Claudius, but not daring to despatch him
suddenly, and yet wishing not to leave him sufficient time to make new
regulations respecting the succession to the throne, made choice of a
poison which should deprive him of his reason, and gradually consume
him. This she caused to be prepared by an expert poisoner, named
Locusta, who had been condemned to death for her infamous actions,
but saved that she might be employed as a state engine. The poison
was given to the emperor in a dish of mushrooms; but as, on account
of his irregular manner of living, it did not produce the desired
effect, it was assisted by some of a stronger nature[111]. This Locusta
prepared also the poison with which Nero despatched Britannicus, the
son of Agrippina, whom his father Claudius wished to succeed him on
the throne. As this poison occasioned only a dysentery, and was too
slow in its operation, the emperor compelled Locusta by blows, and
by threatening her with death, to prepare in his presence one more
powerful. It was first tried on a kid; but as the animal did not die
till the end of five hours, she boiled it a little longer, until it
instantaneously killed a pig to which it had been given, and this
poison despatched Britannicus as soon as he had tasted it[112]. For
this service the emperor pardoned Locusta, rewarded her liberally, and
gave her pupils whom she was to instruct in her art, in order that it
might not be lost.
The art of preparing this poison must have been well understood also
at Carthage. When M. Attilius Regulus, the Roman general, who had been
taken by the Carthaginians, was sent to Rome to propose to the senate
that the Carthaginian prisoners might be restored in exchange for him,
he prevented this negotiation, because he knew that a poison had been
administered to him, by which the state would soon be deprived of his
services. He returned, therefore, to Carthage, in compliance with the
promise he had made to the enemy, who put him to death with the most
exquisite torture[113].
All these poisons were prepared from plants, particularly aconite,
hemlock and poppy, or extracted from animal substances. Among those
made from the latter, none is more remarkable than that supplied by
the sea-hare, _lepus marinus_, with which, as Philostratus says[114],
Titus was despatched by Domitian. Without here attempting to define
the substances employed by the ancients to compose their poisons, I
shall only observe, that the _lepus marinus_, the terrible effects of
which are expressly mentioned by Dioscorides, Galen, Nicander, Aëtius,
Ælian[115], Pliny[116], and others, is that animal called at present in
the Linnæan system _Aplysia depilans_[117], as Rondelet conjectured,
and has been since fully proved by Bohadsch[118]. This animal poison
however seems to have been seldom used, as it easily betrays itself by
some peculiar symptoms. It appears that it was not known to Aristotle,
at least he makes no mention of it[119]. With the far stronger, and
now common mineral poisons the ancients were not acquainted; for their
arsenic was what we call orpiment, and not that pernicious metallic
oxide which formed the principal ingredient of those secret poisons
which in latter times were in France and Italy brought to a diabolical
perfection[120].
No one was ever more infamous by this art than Tophania, or Toffana, a
woman who resided first at Palermo, and afterwards at Naples. She sold
those drops, which from her acquired the name of _aqua Tophania_, _aqua
della Toffana_, and which were called also _acquetta di Napoli_, or
only _acquetta_; but she distributed her preparation by way of charity
to such wives as wished to have other husbands. From four to six drops
were sufficient to destroy a man; and it was asserted that the dose
could be so proportioned as to operate in a certain time. As she was
watched by the government, she fled to an ecclesiastical asylum; and
when Keysler was at Naples in 1730, she was then still living, because
no one could, or was willing to take away her life, while under that
protection. At that time she was visited by many strangers out of
curiosity.
In Labat’s Travels through Italy[121] we also find some information
which may serve still further to illustrate the history of Tophania.
She distributed her poison in small glass phials, with this
inscription, _Manna of St. Nicholas of Bari_, and ornamented with the
image of the saint. A miraculous oil, employed by folly in the cure of
many diseases, drops from the tomb of that saint which is shown at Bari
in the kingdom of Naples; and on this account it is dispersed in great
abundance under the like name. It was therefore the best appellation
which Tophania could give to her poison, because the reputed sanctity
of it prevented the custom-house officers from examining it too
closely. When the viceroy was informed of this, which I think was in
1709, Tophania fled from one convent to another, but was at length
seized and thrown into prison. The clergy raised a loud outcry on
account of this violation of ecclesiastical freedom, and endeavoured
to excite the people to insurrection. But they were soon appeased on a
report being spread that Tophania had confessed she had poisoned all
the springs in the city. Being put to the rack, she acknowledged her
wickedness, and confessed to having caused the death of not less than
600 persons; named those who had protected her, who were immediately
dragged from churches and monasteries; and declared that the day before
she had absconded, she had sent two boxes of her manna to Rome, where
it was found in the custom-house, but she did not accuse any one of
having ordered it. She was afterwards strangled, and to mitigate the
archbishop, her body was thrown at night into the area of the convent
from which she had been taken. Tophania however was not the only person
at Naples who understood the making of this poison; for Keysler says
that at the time he was there it was still secretly prepared and much
employed.
In the year 1659, under the government of Pope Alexander VII., it was
observed at Rome that many young married women were left widows, and
that many husbands died when they became disagreeable to their wives.
Several of the clergy declared also, that for some time past various
persons had acknowledged at confession that they had been guilty of
poisoning. As the government employed the utmost vigilance to discover
these poisoners, suspicion fell upon a society of young married women,
whose president appeared to be an old woman who pretended to foretell
future events, and who had often predicted very exactly many deaths
to persons who had cause to wish for them. To ascertain the truth, a
crafty female, given out to be a person of considerable distinction,
was sent to this old woman, pretending that she wished to obtain her
confidence, and to procure some of her drops for a cruel and tyrannical
husband. The whole society were by this stratagem arrested; and all
of them, except the fortune-teller, whose name was Hieronyma Spara,
confessed before they were put to the torture.--“Where now,” cried she,
“are the Roman princes, knights and barons, who on so many occasions
promised me their protection! Where are the ladies who assured me
of their friendship! Where are my children whom I have placed in so
distinguished situations!” In order to deter others from committing the
like crime, one Gratiosa, Spara’s assistant, three other women, and
the obstinate Spara herself, who still entertained hopes of assistance
till the last moment, were hanged in the presence of innumerable
spectators. Some months after, several more women were executed in
the same manner; some were whipt, and others were banished from the
country. Notwithstanding these punishments, the effects of this
inveterate wickedness have been from time to time remarked. Le Bret,
to whom we are indebted for the above account, says[122] that Spara
was a Sicilian, and acquired her knowledge from Tophania at Palermo. If
that be true, the latter must have been early initiated in villany, and
must have become when very young a teacher of her infamous art. Keysler
calls her a little old woman.
The art of poisoning never excited more attention than it did in
France about the year 1670[123]. Mary Margaret d’Aubray, daughter of
the lieutenant-civil Dreux d’Aubray, was in the year 1651 married to
the Marquis de Brinvillier, son of Gobelin president of the Chamber
of Accounts, who had a yearly income of thirty thousand livres,
and to whom she brought a portion of two hundred thousand. He was
mestre-de-camp of the regiment of Normandy, and during the course of
his campaigns became acquainted with one Godin de Sainte Croix, a young
man of a distinguished family, who served as a captain of cavalry
in the regiment of Trassy. This young officer, who was then a needy
adventurer, became a constant visitor of the marquis, and in a short
time paid his addresses to the marchioness, who lost her husband after
she had helped to dissipate his large fortune, and was thus enabled to
enjoy her amours in greater freedom. Her indecent conduct, however,
gave so much uneasiness to her father, that he procured a lettre de
cachet, had Sainte Croix arrested while in a carriage by her side,
and thrown into the Bastille[124]. Sainte Croix there got acquainted
with an Italian named Exili, who understood the art of preparing
poison, and from whom he learnt it. As they were both set at liberty
after a year’s imprisonment, Sainte Croix kept Exili with him until he
became perfectly master of the art, in which he afterwards instructed
the marchioness, in order that she might employ it in bettering the
circumstances of both. When she had acquired the principles of the
art, she assumed the appearance of a nun, distributed food to the
poor, nursed the sick in the Hôtel-Dieu, and gave them medicines, but
only for the purpose of trying the strength of her poison undetected
on these helpless wretches[125]. It was said in Paris, by way of
satire, that no young physician, in introducing himself to practice,
had ever so speedily filled a churchyard as Brinvillier. By the
force of money, she prevailed on Sainte Croix’s servant, called La
Chaussée, to administer poison to her father, into whose service she
got him introduced, and also to her brother, who was a counsellor of
the parliament, and resided at his father’s house. To the former the
poison was given ten times before he died; the son died sooner; but
the daughter, Mademoiselle d’Aubray, the marchioness could not poison,
because perhaps she was too much on her guard; for a suspicion soon
arose that the father and son had been poisoned, and the bodies were
opened. She would however have escaped, had not Providence brought to
light the villany.
Sainte Croix, when preparing poison, was accustomed to wear a glass
mask; but as this once happened to drop off by accident, he was
suffocated, and found dead in his laboratory. Government caused the
effects of this man, who had no family, to be examined, and a list of
them to be made out. On searching them, there was found a small box, to
which Sainte Croix had affixed a written request, that after his death
it might be delivered to the Marchioness de Brinvillier, or in case she
should not be living, that it might be burnt[126]. Nothing could be a
greater inducement to have it opened than this singular petition; and
that being done, there was found in it a great abundance of poisons of
every kind, with labels on which their effects, proved by experiments
made on animals, were marked. When the marchioness heard of the death
of her lover and instructor, she was desirous to have the casket,
and endeavoured to get possession of it, by bribing the officers
of justice; but as she failed in this, she quitted the kingdom. La
Chaussée, however, continued at Paris, laid claim to the property of
Sainte Croix, was seized and imprisoned, confessed more acts of villany
than were suspected, and was in consequence broke alive on the wheel in
1673.
A very active officer of justice, named Desgrais, was despatched in
search of the Marchioness de Brinvillier, who was found in a convent
at Liège, to which she had fled from England. To entice her from this
privileged place, which folly had consecrated for the protection
of vice, Desgrais assumed the dress of an abbé, found means to get
acquainted with her, acted the part of a lover, and, having engaged
her to go out on an excursion of pleasure, arrested her. Among her
effects at the convent, there was found a confession, written by her
own hand, which contained a complete catalogue of her crimes. She
there acknowledged that she had set fire to houses, and that she had
occasioned the death of more persons than any one ever suspected. She
remarked also, that she had continued a virgin only till the seventh
year of her age. Notwithstanding all the craft which she employed
to escape, she was conveyed to Paris, where she at first denied
everything; and, when in prison, she played picquet to pass away
the time. She was however convicted, brought to a confession of her
enormities, became a convert, as her confessor termed it, and went with
much firmness to the place of execution, on the 16th of July, 1676;
where, when she beheld the multitude of the spectators, she exclaimed
in a contemptuous manner, “You have come to see a fine spectacle!” She
was beheaded and afterwards burnt; a punishment too mild for such an
offender[127]. As she had been amused with some hopes of a pardon, on
account of her relations, when she mounted the scaffold, she cried out,
“_C’est donc tout de bon!_[128]”
Among a number of persons suspected of being concerned in this affair,
was a German apothecary, named Glaser, who on account of his knowledge
in chemistry, was intimate with Exili and Sainte Croix. From him they
had both procured the materials which they used, and he was some
years confined in the Bastille; but the charge against him being more
minutely investigated, he was declared innocent, and set at liberty. He
was the author of a Treatise on Chemistry, printed at Paris in 1667,
and reprinted afterwards at Brussels in 1676, and at Lyons in 1679.
By the execution of this French Medea, the practice of poisoning
was not suppressed; many persons died from time to time under very
suspicious circumstances; and the archbishop was informed from
different parishes that this crime was still confessed, and that traces
of it were remarked both in high and in low families. For watching,
searching after, and punishing poisoners, a particular court, called
the _Chambre de Poison_ or _Chambre ardente_, was at length established
in 1679. This court, besides other persons, detected two women named
La Vigoreux and La Voisin[129], who carried on a great traffic in
poisons. The latter was a midwife. Both of them pretended to foretell
future events, to call up ghosts, and to teach the art of finding
hidden treasures, and of recovering lost or stolen goods. They also
distributed philtres, and sold secret poison to such persons as they
knew they could depend upon, and who wished to employ them either to
get rid of bad husbands, or recover lost lovers. Female curiosity
induced several ladies of the first rank, and even some belonging
to the court, to visit these women, particularly La Voisin; and who,
without thinking of poison, only wished to know how soon a husband,
a lover, the king or his mistress, would die. In the possession of
La Voisin was found a list of all those who had become dupes to her
imposture. They were arrested and carried before the above-mentioned
court, which, without following the usual course of justice, detected
secret crimes by means of spies, instituted private trials, and began
to imitate the proceedings of the holy inquisition. In this list were
found the distinguished names of the Countess de Soissons, her sister
the Duchess de Bouillon, and Marshal de Luxembourg. The first fled
to Flanders to avoid the severity and disgrace of imprisonment; the
second saved herself by the help of her friends; and the last, after
he had been some months in the Bastille, and had undergone a strict
examination, by which he almost lost his reputation, was set at liberty
as innocent. Thus did the cruel Louvois the war minister, and the
Marchioness de Montespan, ruin those who opposed their measures. La
Vigoreux and La Voisin were burnt alive on the 22nd of February 1680,
after their hands had been bored through with a red-hot iron and cut
off. Several persons of ordinary rank were punished by the common
hangman; those of higher rank, after they had been declared by this
tribunal not guilty, were set at liberty; and in 1680 an end was put to
the _Chambre ardente_, which in reality was a political inquisition.
It is certain that notwithstanding such punishments, like crimes have
given occasion to unjust succession both in Italy and in France, and
that attempts have been made for the same purpose even in the northern
kingdoms. It is known that in Denmark Count Corfitz de Ulfeld was
guilty, though it was not proved, of having intended to give the king
a poison, which should gradually destroy him like a lethargy[130].
Charles XI. also, king of Sweden, died by the effects of such a
poison. Having ruined several noble families by seizing on their
property, and having after that made a journey to Torneo, he fell into
a consumptive disorder which no medicine could cure. One day he asked
his physician in a very earnest manner, what was the cause of his
illness? The physician replied, “Your majesty has been loaded with too
many maledictions.” “Yes,” returned the king, “I wish to God that the
reduction of the nobility’s estates had not taken place, and that I had
never undertaken a journey to Torneo!” After his death his intestines
were found to be full of small ulcers[131].
The oftener poisoning in this manner happens, the more it is to be
wished that preventives and antidotes were found out, and that the
symptoms were ascertained; but this is hardly possible as long as it is
not known of what the poison properly consists. Governments, however,
have wisely endeavoured to conceal the recipes, by suppressing the
criminal procedures. Pope Alexander VII. caused them to be shut up
in the castle of St. Angelo; in France, it is said, they were burnt
together with the criminals; in Naples only the same precaution was
not taken. I do not know that observations on the bodies of persons
destroyed by slow poison have been ever published; for what Pitaval
says on that subject is not sufficient[132]. People talk of powders
and pills, but the greater part of this kind of poison appears to be a
clear insipid water, and that prepared by Tophania never once betrayed
itself by any particular effects on the body. The sale of aqua-fortis
was a long time forbidden at Rome, because it was considered as the
principal ingredient; but this is very improbable. At Paris it was
once believed that succession powder consisted of diamond dust pounded
exceedingly fine. Without assenting to this idea, one may contradict
Voltaire, who conceives that diamond dust is not more prejudicial than
powder of coral. It may be rather compared to that fine sand which is
rubbed off from our mill-stones, and which we should consider and
guard against as a secret poison, were we not highly negligent and
careless of our health in the use of food[133]. In the casket of Sainte
Croix were found corrosive sublimate, opium, regulus of antimony,
vitriol, and a large quantity of poison ready prepared, the principal
ingredients of which the physicians were not able to distinguish.
Many have affirmed that sugar of lead was the chief ingredient[134];
but the consequences of the poison did not seem to indicate the use
of that metal. For some years past a harmless plant, which is only
somewhat bitter and astringent, the ivy-leaved Toadflax (_Linaria
Cymbalaria_), that grows on old walls, has been loaded with the
opprobrium of producing this slow poison, while at the same time it
has been celebrated by others on account of its medicinal properties;
but it is perhaps not powerful enough to do either mischief or good;
and it is probable that it has been added to poisons either through
ignorance, or to conceal other ingredients; for the emperor Charles
VI., who was king of the Two Sicilies at the time when Tophania was
arrested, told his physician Garelli, who communicated the same in
a letter[135] to the celebrated Hoffmann, in 1718 or 1719, that the
poison of that Italian Circe was composed of an arsenical oxide,
dissolved in _aqua cymbalariæ_, and which I suppose was rendered
stronger and more difficult to be detected by a salt that may be
readily guessed. It is dreadful to think that this secret poison is
administered as a febrifuge by ignorant or unprincipled physicians,
quacks, and old women. It drives off obstinate fevers, it is true; but
it is equally certain that it hastens death: it is therefore a cure,
which is far worse than the disease, and against which governments and
physicians cannot exclaim too severely. It was remarked at Rome, by
accident, that lemon juice and the acid of lemons are, in some measure,
counter-poisons; and a physician named Paul Branchaletti, respecting
whom I can find no information, wrote a book expressly on this antidote
to these drops, according to the account of Keysler, who however adds,
“Everything hitherto found out, supposes that one has taken the drops
only for a short time, or that one has had an opportunity to be upon
one’s guard when suspicious circumstances occurred, and to discover the
threatened danger.”
It seems to be almost certain that the poisons prepared by Tophania
and Brinvillier were arsenical mixtures, or, as Dr. Hahneman[136]
rightly conjectures, neutral salts of arsenic. Loss of appetite,
faintness, gnawing pains in the stomach, loss of strength without
any visible cause, a continual indisposition, followed by a wasting
of the viscera, a slow fever, &c., are all symptoms which seem to
announce that dangerous metallic oxide. The opinion, however, that it
was composed of opium and cantharides has, in latter times, received
so many confirmations, that one is almost induced to believe that
there are more kinds than one of this Stygian water. The information
given by the abbé Gagliani, seems to carry too much weight with it
to be denied[137]. It is confirmed also by M. Archenholz[138]; but
what he says of the use made of Spanish flies, by the Chinese, to
invigorate the sixth sense, gives reason to suspect that his voucher
is _L’Espion Dévalisé_, to whom the abbé Gagliani ascribes the same
words. It appears to me, however, if I may be allowed to judge from
probabilities, that the poison known in the East Indies under the
name of _powst_ is also water which has stood a night over the juice
of poppies. It is given in the morning fasting to those persons, and
particularly princes, whom people wish to despatch privately, and
without much violence. It consumes them slowly, so that they at length
lose all their strength and understanding, and in the end die torpid
and insensible[139].
[Chemical science has made such rapid progress of late years, that
there are but few, if any, poisonous substances which cannot be
detected with certainty. The improved state of our medical knowledge,
and the institution of coroners’ inquests in all cases where any
suspicion of the cause of death occurs, fortunately renders secret
poisoning almost, if not quite impossible, at least in this country.]
FOOTNOTES
[103] Heberden in the Neue Hamburg. Mag. xvii. p. 219. I am convinced
that many of the accounts we have of the extraordinary effects of
poison are fabricated, like those mentioned in Frid. Hoffmanni Dissert.
de Læsionibus externis, abortivis Venenis ac Philtris. Francof. 1729,
et recusa Lips. 1755. That author, however, denies some which are true.
It is, for example, certain that camphor and rue do not produce the
effects ascribed to them by Dioscorides, Paulus Ægineta, and others;
but there are without doubt other substances which will produce these
effects.
[104] Sennerti Instit. Med. ii. 2, 12.
[105] He gave to Aratus a poison, not speedy and violent, but of
that kind which at first occasions a slow heat in the body, with a
slight cough, and then gradually brings on a consumption. One time,
when Aratus spat up blood, he said, “This is the effect of royal
friendship.” See Plutarch, Vit. Arati.
[106] Quint. Declamat. xvii. 11.
[107] With the poison of the Indians, however, the ancients could not
be acquainted, as it is prepared from a plant unknown in Europe before
the discovery of America. Kalm, in his Travels, does not name it,
and in that he has done right; for, as the plant is now to be found
everywhere, no government could guard against a misapplication of it,
were it publicly known.
[108] They say a poison can be prepared from aconite so as to occasion
death within a certain period, such as two, three, or six months,
a year, and even sometimes two years. Those, we are told, whose
constitutions are able to hold out longest, die in the greatest misery;
for the body is gradually consumed, and must perish by continual
wasting. Those die easiest who die speedily. No remedy has been found
out for this poison.--Theophr. Hist. Plant. ix. c. 16.
[109] Livius, lib. viii. c. 18.
[110] Taciti Annal. lib. iv. c. 8.
[111] The account given by Tacitus deserves to be read; see lib. xii.
c. 66.
[112] The history of this horrid affair may be found both in Tacitus,
Annal. xiii. c. 15 and 16, and in Suetonius, vi. cap. 33. Respecting
Locusta, see also Juvenal, sat. i. 71.
[113] This account is given by Aulus Gellius from the now lost works
of Tuditanus.--Noct. At. lib. vi. cap. 4. Cicero often speaks of the
magnanimity of Regulus; as, for example, in his Oration against Piso,
and in his Offices, book iii. chap. 27; but he makes no mention of his
having been poisoned. Valerius Maximus also, book i. chap. i. 14, says
nothing of poison.
[114] Apollonii Vit. lib. vi. c. 14.
[115] Histor. Animal. lib. ii. c. 45.
[116] Lib. ix. c. 48, and lib. xxxii. c. 1.
[117] In Linnæi Systema Nat., through an error of the press, stands
_Laplysia_, which word has since become common. Ἀπλυσία signifies an
uncleanness which cannot be washed off; and in Aristotle’s History of
Animals, b. v. ch. 15, and Pliny, b. ix. ch. 45, it is the name of a
zoophyte. In the like manner other errors in the System of Linnæus have
been copied into the works of others, such as _Dytiscus_ instead of
_Dyticus_, &c.
[118] J. B. Bohadsch De quibusdam animalibus marinis. Dresdæ, 1761,
4to, p. 1-53. In this work there is a full description, with a figure
of this animal, under the name of _Lernæa_, which was used in the first
editions of Linnæus.
[119] The accounts given by the ancients of the sea-hare have been
collected in Grevini Lib. de Venenis, Antverpiæ 1571, p. 209. In the
Annals of Glycas, iii. (_Script. Byz._), it is said that Titus was
despatched by this poison; and in the first book, b. 27, he says the
sea-hare occasions speedy and inevitable destruction to man.
[120] See Stenzelii Diss. de venenis terminatis et temporaneis,
quæ Galli _les poudres de succession_ vocant; resp. J. G. Arnold.
Vitebergæ, 1730. This tract contains several historical relations; but
the reader is often referred to authors who either do not say that
for which they were quoted, or who must relate the same thing in a
different manner in some other place. As for example, Galen in b. ii.
c. 7, De Antidotis, speaks of poisons without mentioning secret poison
in particular. Avicenna is made to say, in his book De Viribus Cordis,
that the Egyptian kings often employed this poison; but if by that
quotation we are to understand Fen. undecima de dispositionibus cordis,
I have sought for this information in vain. In lib. iv. fen. 6. tract.
2. c. 14, it is said “Fel canis aquatici interficit post hebdomadam.”
Rhodiginus also does not relate that for which he is quoted by Stenzel.
p. 7.
[121] Vol. iv. p. 33.
[122] J. F. le Bret, Magazin zum Gebrauche der Staaten
und-Kirchen-Geschichte, part iv. Francf. and Leips. 1774, 8vo, p.
131-141.
[123] The following account is collected from Causes celèbres, par
M. Guyot de Pitaval, tome i.--Lettres de Mad. de Sevigné, tome
iv.--Histoire du Règne de Louis XIV., par M. de Reboulet. Avignon,
1746, v. p. 159.--Histoire de Louis XIV., par M. B. de la Martinière,
1740, iv. p. 229.--Le Siècle de Louis XIV., par Voltaire, etc.
[124] Voltaire says that the father did not get Sainte Croix thrown
into the Bastille, but sent to his regiment. This however is not the
case, for this reprobate was at that time not in the army.
[125] This circumstance is denied by Voltaire, but only, as appears, to
contradict Pitaval, whom he calls _un avocat sans cause_.
[126] This request was as follows:--“I humbly beg that those into whose
hands this box may fall, will do me the favour to deliver it into the
hands only of the Marchioness de Brinvillier, who resides in the Rue
Neuve Saint Paul, as everything it contains concerns her, and belongs
to her alone; and as, besides, there is nothing in it that can be of
use to any persons except her; and in case she shall be dead before me,
to burn it, and everything it contains, without opening or altering
anything; and in order that no one may plead ignorance, I swear by
the God whom I adore, and by all that is most sacred, that I advance
nothing but what is true. And if my intentions, just and reasonable as
they are, be thwarted in this point, I charge their consciences with
it, both in this world and the next, in order that I may unload mine,
protesting that this is my last will. Done at Paris this 25th of May in
the afternoon, 1672.
“DE SAINTE CROIX.”
[127] Martinière says that she was burnt alive, together with all the
papers respecting her trial. The latter is improbable, and the former
certainly false, notwithstanding the account given in the Encyclopédie.
[128] The following description of Brinvillier may perhaps be of use
to our physiognomists:--“In order to satisfy the curiosity of those
who may be desirous of knowing if such a celebrated criminal partook
of the beauties of her sex, I shall observe that nature had not been
sparing of them to the marchioness; her features were exceedingly
regular, and the form of her face, which was round, was very graceful.
This beautiful outside concealed a heart extremely black. Nothing
proves more that _metoposcopy_, or the science of physiognomy, is
false; for this lady had that serene and tranquil air which announces
virtue.”--Pitaval, p. 269.
[129] Some information respecting La Voisin may be found in Lettres
Historiques et Galantes par Madame de C----. A Cologne, 1709-1711, 4
vols. 12mo, ii. p. 101, and iv. p. 376. The authoress of these letters
was Mad. du Noyer.
[130] Leben des Grafen von Ulfeld, von H. P. aus dem Dänischen
übersetzt. Copenhagen und Leipzig, 1775, 8vo, p. 200.
[131] This anecdote was told to me by the celebrated Linnæus. An
account of what appeared on opening the body of this prince may be seen
in Baldinger’s Neues Magazin für Aerzte, vol. i. p. 91.
[132] “The lieutenant-civil continued still to grow worse. After having
languished a long time, being seized with a loathing of every kind of
food presented to him, his vomitings still continuing, and nature being
at length exhausted, he expired without any fever. The three last days
he had wasted very much; he was become extremely shrunk, and he felt
a great heat in his stomach. When opened, that part and the duodenum
were found to be black, and sloughing off in pieces; the liver was
mortified, and as it were burnt. The counsellor was ill three months,
had the like symptoms as the lieutenant-civil, and died in the same
manner. When opened, his stomach and liver were found in a similar
state.”--pp. 274, 275.
[133] In one year a ton of sand, at least, which is baked with the
flour, is rubbed off from a pair of mill-stones. If a mill grinds only
4385 bushels annually, and one allows no more than twelve bushels to
one man, a person swallows in a year above six pounds, and in a month
half a pound of pulverized sandstone, which, in the course of a long
life, will amount to upwards of three hundred weight. Is not this
sufficient to make governments more attentive to this circumstance?
[Although not very agreeable to the reader to learn that he swallows
above six pounds of mill-stone powder in the course of the year, it
may perhaps ease his mind to know that the learned author is entirely
mistaken in regarding it as a poison. The inhabitants of the northern
countries of Europe frequently mix quartz powder with their heavy food
to assist in its digestion; and we are informed by Professor Ehrenberg,
that in times of scarcity, the inhabitants of Lapland mix the siliceous
shells of some species of fossil Infusoria with the ground bark
of trees for food. It is probably from this circumstance that the
infusorial deposit derives its name of _Berg-mehl_, or _Mountain-meal_.]
[134] For the following important information I am indebted to
Professor Baldinger:--“There is no doubt that the slow poison of the
French and Italians, commonly called succession powder (_poudre de
la succession_), owes its origin to sugar of lead. I know a chemist
who superintends the laboratory of a certain prince on the confines
of Bohemia, and who by the orders (perhaps not very laudable) of his
patron, has spent much time and labour in strengthening and moderating
poisons. He has often declared, that of sugar of lead, with the
addition of some more volatile corrosive, a very slow poison could
be prepared; which, if swallowed by a dog or other animal, would
insensibly destroy it, without any violent symptoms, in the course of
some weeks or months.”
[135] Garelli, the emperor’s principal physician, lately wrote to
me something remarkable in the following words:--“Your elegant
dissertation on the errors respecting poisons brought to my
recollection a certain slow poison, which that infamous poisoner,
still alive in prison at Naples, employed to the destruction of
upwards of six hundred persons. It was nothing else than crystallised
arsenic, dissolved in a large quantity of water by decoction, with the
addition, but for what purpose I know not, of the herb cymbalaria. This
was communicated to me by his imperial majesty himself, to whom the
judicial procedure, confirmed by the confession of the criminal, was
transmitted. This water, in the Neapolitan dialect, is called _aqua del
Toffnina_. It is certain death, and many have fallen a sacrifice to
it.”--Hoffmanni Med. Rationalis System., p. ii. c. 2. § 19.
[136] Ueber die Arsenikvergiftung. Leips. 1786, 8vo, p. 35.
[137] On the 20th of December, 1765, died the dauphin, father of Louis
XVI., and in 1767 died the dauphiness. It was a public report that
they were both despatched by secret poison: and the gradual decline of
their health, the other circumstances which accompanied their illness,
and the cabals which then existed at court, make this at least not
improbable. Many private anecdotes respecting these events may be found
in a book entitled L’Espion Dévalisé. Feliciter audax. London, 1782. In
page 61 it is said, that on account of the suspicions then entertained,
it was wished that information might be procured respecting secret
poison, and the methods of preparing it; and that the abbé Gagliani,
well known as a writer, has given the following:--“It is certain that
in Europe the preparation of these drugs renders them pernicious and
mortal. For example, at Naples the mixture of opium and cantharides,
in known doses, is a slow poison; the surest of all, and the more
infallible as one cannot mistrust it. At first it is given in small
doses, that its effects may be insensible. In Italy we call it _aqua
di Tufania_, Tufania water. No one can avoid its attacks, because the
liquor obtained from that composition is as limpid as rock water, and
without taste. Its effects are slow and almost imperceptible: a few
drops of it only are poured into tea, chocolate, or soup, &c. There is
not a lady at Naples who has not some of it lying carelessly on her
toilette with her smelling-bottles. She alone knows the phial, and can
distinguish it. Even the waiting-woman, who is her confidant, is not in
the secret, and takes this phial for distilled water, or water obtained
by precipitation, which is the purest, and which is used to moderate
perfumes when they are too strong.
“The effects of this poison are very simple. A general indisposition
is at first felt in the whole frame. The physician examines you,
and perceiving no symptoms of disease, either external or internal,
no obstructions, no collection of humours, no inflammations,
orders detergents, regimen, and evacuation. The dose of poison is
then doubled, and the same indisposition continues without being
more characterized. The physician, who can see in this nothing
extraordinary, ascribes the state of the patient to viscous and peccant
humours, which have not been sufficiently carried off by the first
evacuation. He orders a second--a third dose--a third evacuation--a
fourth dose. The physician then sees that the disease has escaped him;
that he has mistaken it, and that the cause of it cannot be discovered
but by changing the regimen. He orders the waters, &c. In a word, the
noble parts lose their tone, become relaxed and affected, and the
lungs particularly, as the most delicate of all, and one of those most
employed in the functions of the animal œconomy. The first illness
then carries you off; because the critical accumulation settles always
on the weak part, and consequently on the lobes of the lungs; the pus
there fixes itself, and the disease becomes incurable. By this method
they follow one as long as they choose for months, and for years.
Robust constitutions resist a long time. In short, it is not the liquor
alone that kills, it is rather the different remedies, which alter
and then destroy the temperament, exhaust the strength, extenuate and
render one incapable of supporting the first indisposition that comes.”
[138] England und Italien, ii. p. 354.
[139] Universal History, xxiii. p. 299-323.--The information contained
there is taken from Fraser’s History of Nadir Shah. Aurengzebe also
caused one of his sons to be put to death by this poison.
WOODEN BELLOWS.
After the discovery of fire, the first instrument employed to blow
it and strengthen it, has undoubtedly been a hollow reed, until the
art was found out of forming a stick into a pipe by boring it. Our
common bellows, which consist of two boards joined together by a piece
of leather, and which probably are an imitation of the lungs, appear
to have been early known to the Greeks. I have, however, met with no
passage in any ancient author from which I could learn the oldest
construction of this machine, which in latter times has received many
improvements. Had I found such information, I should have endeavoured
to explain it, as it would have contributed to enlarge the knowledge we
have of the metallurgy of the ancients.
It may be remarked on the following lines of Virgil,
... Alii taurinis follibus auras
Accipiunt redduntque[140]....
that bull’s leather is unfit for bellows, and that ox or cow leather
only can be used for that purpose; but accuracy is not to be expected
in a poet; and besides, Virgil is not the only author who employs the
expression _folles taurinos_; for Plautus says also, “Quam folles
taurini habent, cum liquescunt petræ, ferrum ubi fit.”
Strabo[141] tells us, from an old historian, that Anacharsis, the
Scythian philosopher, who lived in the time of Solon, invented the
bellows, the anchor, and the potter’s wheel: but this account is very
doubtful, as Pliny, Seneca[142], Diogenes Laërtius[143], and Suidas,
who likewise speak of the inventions ascribed to that philosopher,
mention only the last two, and not the bellows: besides, Strabo himself
remarks that the potter’s wheel is noticed in Homer, and this poet is
certainly older than Anacharsis. The latter, perhaps, became acquainted
with that useful instrument during the course of his travels, and on
his return, made his countrymen first acquainted with it. However this
may be, it is well known that the person who introduces a foreign
invention among a people, is often considered as the author of it.
In the oldest smelting-houses the bellows were worked by men. Refuse,
therefore, and other remains of metal, are often found in places where
until a recent period no works could be erected, on account of the want
of water.
Bellows made with leather, of which I have hitherto spoken, are
attended with many inconveniences. They require careful management; are
expensive in their repairs; and besides last often not more than six or
seven years. If thin leather is employed, it suffers a great deal of
the air to escape through it; an evil which must be guarded against by
continually besmearing it with train-oil, or other fat substances; and
this is even necessary when thick leather is used, to prevent it from
cracking in the folds. Damage by fire and water must also be avoided;
and every time they are repaired, the leather must be again softened
with oil, which occasions a considerable loss of time.
In wooden bellows these inconveniences are partly lessened, and partly
remedied. As these bellows, except the pipe, consist entirely of
wood, many, who are not acquainted with the construction of them, can
hardly conceive the possibility of making such a machine. Though they
cannot be properly described without a figure, I shall endeavour to
give the reader some idea of them by the following short sketch. The
whole machine consists of two boxes placed the one upon the other, the
uppermost of which can be moved up and down upon the lower one, in
the same manner as the lid of a snuff-box, which has a hinge, moves
up and down when it is opened or shut; but the sides of the uppermost
box are so broad as to contain the lower one between them, when it is
raised to its utmost extent. Both boxes are bound together, at the
smallest end, where the pipe is, by a strong iron bolt. It may be
readily comprehended, that when both boxes fit each other exactly, and
the upper one is raised over the under one, which is in a state of
rest, the space contained by both will be increased; and consequently
more air will rush in through the valve in the bottom of the lower
one; and when the upper box is again forced down, this air will be
expelled through the pipe. The only difficulty is to prevent the air,
which forces its way in, from escaping anywhere else than through the
pipe; for it is not to be expected that the boxes will fit each other
so closely as to prevent entirely the air from making its way between
them. This difficulty, however, is obviated by the following simple and
ingenious method. On the inner sides of the uppermost box there are
placed moveable slips of wood, which, by means of metal springs, are
pressed to the sides of the other box, and fill up the space between
them. As these long slips of wood might not be sufficiently pliable to
suffer themselves to be pressed close enough, and as, though planed
perfectly straight at first, they would in time become warped in
various directions, incisions are made in them across through their
whole length, at the distance of from fifteen to eighteen inches from
each other, so as to leave only a small space in their thickness, by
which means they acquire sufficient pliability to be everywhere pressed
close enough to the sides[144].
The advantages of these wooden bellows are very great. When made of
clean fir-wood without knots, they will last thirty or forty years, and
even longer, though continually kept in action forty-six or forty-eight
weeks every year: nay, Polhem assures us, that, when properly made,
they will last a century. The effect produced by them is stronger, as
well as more uniform, and can be moderated according to circumstances.
They are worked also with greater facility. The slips of wood on their
sides are apt to become damaged; but they can soon and easily be
repaired. Every three or four months, however, the outer sides only of
the inner box, and the bolt which keeps the boxes together, must be
smeared with oil. If we reckon up the price of such bellows, and the
yearly expense, they will, according to Grignon’s account, be only a
fifth part of those of the old leather bellows.
That the invention of these wooden bellows belongs to the Germans,
is certain. Grignon[145] expressly affirms so; and in Becher’s[146]
time they were to be found in Germany, but not in England. Genssane,
who ascribes the invention to the Swiss, is certainly mistaken; and
perhaps he was led into this error, because these bellows were first
made known in France by a Swiss. I cannot, however, ascertain the name
of the real inventor. In the middle of the sixteenth century lived at
Nuremberg an artist called Hans Lobsinger, who, in the year 1550, gave
to the magistrates of that city a catalogue of his machines. From this
catalogue Doppelmayer concludes that he understood the art of making
small and large bellows without leather, and entirely of wood, which
could be used in smelting-houses and for organs, and likewise copper
bellows that always emitted a like degree of wind. As Lobsinger made
organs, he, perhaps, fell upon this invention; but in what it actually
consisted, or whether it might not have died with him, I have not been
able to learn. Agricola, who died in the year 1555, makes no mention of
wooden bellows.
Samuel Reyher, formerly professor at Kiel, in a dissertation on
air[147], printed there in 1669, tells us, that about forty years
before that period, two brothers, Martin and Nicholas Schelhorn,
millers at the village of Schmalebuche in Coburg, first invented
wooden bellows. Both the brothers, he says, kept the invention secret,
though he thinks they did not conceal it so closely as to prevent its
being guessed at; and he relates also how he himself formed an idea of
it[148].
To these bellows Schluter has assigned a much nobler inventor, who,
perhaps, was the first person who made them known by a description. He
says expressly that they were invented by a bishop of Bamberg[149]: but
of this I have been able to find no confirmation; and I am inclined to
ascribe that service rather to an organ-builder, or a miller, than to
a bishop. According to Schluter’s account, these bellows were employed
so early as the year 1620, in the Harz forest, to which they were
first brought by some people from Bamberg. What Calvor says respecting
the introduction of these bellows into the Harz forest is much more
probable; that in the year 1621 Lewis Pfannenschmid, from Thuringia,
settled at Ostfeld near Goslar, and began to make wooden bellows. The
bellows-makers of that place conspired therefore against him, and swore
they would put him to death; but he was protected by the government.
He would disclose his art to no one but his son, who, as well as his
grandson a few years ago, had the making of all the bellows in the
forest.
We are told by French authors, that the art of making these bellows was
introduced into France, particularly into Berry, Nivernois, and Franche
Comté, by a German.
FOOTNOTES
[140] Georg. iv. 171.
[141] Lib. vii.
[142] Epist. 90.
[143] Lib. i. 8.
[144] A complete description and a figure of these bellows may be found
in Schluter’s Unterricht von Hütten-werken. Brunswick, 1738.--Traité de
la fonte des mines par le feu du charbon de terre; par M. de Genssane.
Paris, 1770, 2 vols. 4to. [Ure’s Dictionary, p. 1128, also contains an
excellent figure of these wooden bellows.]
[145] “Germany is the country of machines. In general the Germans
lessen manual labour considerably by machines adapted to every kind
of movement; not that we are destitute of able mechanics; we have
the talent of bringing to perfection the machines invented by our
neighbours.”--P. 200. [This remark of Grignon will sound rather odd to
English ears.]
[146] Becher’s Narrische Weisheit und weise Narrheit. Frankfort, 1683,
12mo, p. 113.
[147] In this dissertation, the time of the invention is stated to
be about forty years before, which would be the year 1629 or 1630;
but in an improved edition, printed with additions at Hamburg, in
1725, a different period is given. “About eighty years ago,” says
the author, “a new kind of bellows, which ought rather to be called
the pneumatic chests, was invented in the village of Schmalebuche,
in the principality of Coburg, in Franconia. Two brothers, millers
in that village, Martin and Nicholas Schelhorn, by means of some box
made by them, the lid of which fitted very exactly, found out thes
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/48151