Chapter XIII: Part 13
I can however produce from a contemporary writer, a strong proof that Pliny alluded here to a fire-engine, and I do not find that the passage has been before quoted. Apollodorus, the architect, who was employed by the emperor Trajan in constructing the celebrated bridge over the Danube, and erecting some large works at Rome, and who was put to death by his successor Adrian, out of revenge for a jeering answer which he received from him, as we are told by Dio Cassius, describes in the fragment of his book on warlike machines, how assistance may be given when the upper part of a building is on fire, and the machine called _sipho_ is not at hand. In this case leathern bags filled with water are to be fastened to long pipes in such a manner, that by pressing the bags the water may be forced through the pipes to the place which is in flames[587]. The _sipho_, therefore, was a machine by which water might be easily projected to a considerable height, to extinguish a place on fire that could not be reached by any other means.
That in the fourth century at least a fire-engine, properly so called, was understood under the term _sipho_, is fully proved by Hesychius, and also by Isidorus, who lived in the beginning of the seventh century[588]. As the latter remarks that such engines were employed in the East for extinguishing fires, there is reason to conclude that they were not then used in the west.
The question still remains, at what time this apparatus for extinguishing fires was introduced at Rome. From the numerous ordinances for preventing accidents by fire, and in regard to extinguishing fires, which occur in the Roman laws[589], there is reason to conjecture that this capital was not unprovided with those useful implements and machines, of the want of which in a provincial town Pliny complains, and which he himself had supplied. This conjecture, however, I am not able to prove; and instances both in ancient and modern times show that the good police establishments of small towns are not always to be found in capitals. Antioch and several other towns were provided with lanterns, which were wanting even in the proud Rome. But what excites some doubt is, that fire-engines are never mentioned in the numerous accounts given of the fires which took place in that city. At present it is impossible to speak of a misfortune of this kind without stating whether a sufficient number of engines were assembled, and what they effected, as Pliny has not failed to do in his short account of the fire at Nicomedia.
One passage, however, in Ulpian is commonly quoted as a proof that in his time there were fire-engines at Rome. Where he enumerates those things which ought to belong to a house when sold, he mentions, besides other articles used for extinguishing fires, _siphones_[590]. But if this word means here fire-engines, the passage seems to prove too much; for it must then be admitted that each house had a fire-engine of its own. These implements therefore must have been small hand-engines, such as are kept in many houses at present; and in that case the passage cannot be adduced as a proof of public engines, such as Pliny regrets the want of at Nicomedia. But it is much more probable that Ulpian alludes only to those _siphones_ which, according to the account of Strabo, were to be found in every house at Rome; that is, pipes which conveyed water to it for domestic purposes.
From the total want of fire-engines, or the imperfect manner in which they were constructed, what Seneca says must have been true, namely, that the height of the houses at Rome rendered it impossible to extinguish them when on fire[591]. That the buildings there were exceedingly high, and the lanes, the bridges and even the principal streets remarkably narrow, is well-known[592]. It is supposed by Archenholz and others, that the houses at Rome were built of such a height on account of the great heat in that warm climate; but the chief reason was undoubtedly that assigned by Vitruvius[593], which still produces a like effect. For want of room on the earth, the buildings were extended towards the heavens; so that at last the greatest height of an edifice was fixed by law at seventy, and afterwards at sixty feet. In Hamburg, at present, where ground is dear and daily becoming more valuable, the greater part of the houses are little less than sixty feet in height; a few even are seventy; and that it is thereby rendered difficult, if not impossible, notwithstanding the perfection of the German engines, to extinguish fires, is proved by the melancholy instance of Gera, where the houses are now built lower. With Neubert’s engine, which was tried at Hamburg in 1769, eight firemen threw eleven and a half cubic feet of water to the height of sixty-two or sixty-three feet.
In the East engines were employed not only to extinguish but to produce fires. The Greek fire, invented by Callinicus, an architect of Heliopolis, a city afterwards named Balbec, in the year 678, the use of which was continued in the East till 1291[594], and which was certainly liquid[595], was employed in many different ways; but chiefly on board ship, being thrown from large fire-engines on the ships of the enemy. Sometimes this fire was kindled in particular vessels, which might be called fire-ships, and which were introduced among a hostile fleet; sometimes it was put into jars and other vessels, which were thrown at the enemy by means of projectile machines[596], and sometimes it was squirted by the soldiers from hand-engines; or, as appears, blown through pipes. But the machines with which this fire was discharged from the fore-part of ships, could not have been either hand-engines or such blow-pipes. They were constructed of copper and iron, and the extremity of them sometimes resembled the open mouth and jaws of a lion or other animal; they were painted and even gilded, and it appears that they were capable of projecting the fire to a great distance[597]. These machines by ancient writers are expressly called spouting-engines. John Cameniata, speaking of the siege of his native city, Thessalonica, which was taken by the Saracens in the year 904, says that the enemy threw fire into the wooden works of the besieged, which was blown into them by means of tubes, and thrown from other vessels[598]. This passage, which I do not find quoted in any of the works that treat on the Greek fire, proves that the Greeks in the beginning of the tenth century were no longer the only people acquainted with the art of preparing this fire, the precursor of our gunpowder. The emperor Leo, who about the same period wrote his art of war, recommends such engines, with a metal covering, to be constructed in the fore-part of ships[599], and he twice afterwards mentions engines for throwing out Greek fire[600]. In the East one may easily have conceived the idea of loading some kind of pump with the Greek fire; as the use of a forcing-pump for extinguishing fires was long known there before the invention of Callinicus.
At what time the towns in Germany were first furnished with fire-engines I am not able to determine. In my opinion they had regulations in regard to fires much earlier than engines; and the former do not seem to be older than the first half of the sixteenth century. The oldest respecting the city of Frankfort-on-the-Maine, with which I am acquainted, is of the year 1460. The first general ordinance respecting fires in Saxony was issued by Duke George in 1521. The first for the city of Dresden, which extended also to the whole country, was dated 1529. In many towns, the first regulations made by public authority for preventing fires will no doubt be found in the general regulations in regard to building, which seem to be somewhat older than the particular ordinances concerning fires. At Augsburg an express regulation in regard to building was drawn up and made publicly known as early as 1447. In turning over old chronicles, it is remarked that great fires began to occur less frequently in the sixteenth century; and this is undoubtedly to be ascribed to the improved mode of building[601], the precautions enjoined by governments to prevent fires, and the introduction of apparatus for extinguishing them. But by the invention of fire-engines, every thing in this respect was so much changed, that a complete revision of the regulations in regard to the extinguishing of fires became necessary; and therefore the first mention of town fire-engines will in all probability be found in the new fire ordinances of the sixteenth and following century.
It has been remarked by Von Stetten, that in the building accounts of the city of Augsburg, fire-engines are first mentioned in the year 1518. They are called there _instruments for fires_, _water syringes_ useful at fires; and these names seem to announce that the machine was then in its infancy. At that time they were made by a goldsmith at Friedberg, named Anthony Blatner, who the same year became a citizen of Augsburg. From the account added,--that the wheels and levers were constructed by a wheelwright, and from the greatness of the expense,--there is reason to conclude that these were not small, simple hand-engines, but large and complex machines. In that respectable dictionary entitled Maaler’s Teutschsprach, Zurich, 1561, I find fire-hooks and fire-ladders, but no instrument similar to a fire-engine.
In the year 1657, the well-known jesuit Caspar Schott was struck with admiration on seeing at Nuremberg a fire-engine, which had been made there by John Hautsch. It stood on a sledge, ten feet long and four feet broad. The water-cistern was eight feet in length, four in height, and two in width. It was moved by twenty-eight men, and forced a stream of water an inch in diameter to the height of eighty feet[602]; consequently over the houses. The machine was drawn by two horses. Hautsch distributed throughout Germany an engraving of it, with an offer of constructing similar ones at a moderate price, and teaching the use of them; but he refused to show the internal construction of it to Schott, who however readily conjectured it. From what he says of it, one may easily perceive that the cylinders did not stand in a perpendicular direction, but lay horizontally in a box, so that the pistons moved horizontally, and not vertically, as at present. Upright cylinders therefore seem to belong to the more modern improvements. Schott adds, that this was not a new invention, as there were such engines in other towns; and he himself forty years before, and consequently in 1617, had seen one, but much smaller, in his native city. He was born, as is well-known, in 1608, at Königshofen, not far from Würzburg. George Hautsch also, son of the above artist, constructed similar engines, and perhaps with improvements, for Wagenseil[603] and others have ascribed to him the invention.
The first regulations at Paris respecting fires, as far as is known, were made to restrain incendiaries, who in the fourteenth century, under the name of _Boutefoux_, occasioned great devastation, not only in the capital, but in the provinces. This city appears to have obtained fire-engines for the first time in the year 1699; at any rate the king at that period gave an exclusive right to Dumourier Duperrier to construct those machines called _pompes portatives_; and he was engaged at a certain salary to keep in repair seventeen of them, purchased for Paris, and to procure and to pay the necessary workmen. In the year 1722 the number of these engines was increased to thirty, which were distributed in different quarters of the city; and at that time the contractors received annually 20,000 livres. The city, however, besides these thirty royal engines, had a great many others which belonged to the Hotel de Ville, and with which the Sieur Duperrier had nothing to do[604].
In the middle of the seventeenth century fire-engines indeed were still very imperfect. They had neither an air-chamber nor buckets, and required a great many men to work them. They consisted merely of a sucking-pump and forcing-pump united, which projected the water only in spurts, and with continual interruption. Such machines, on each movement of the lever, experience a stoppage, during which no water is thrown out; and because the pipe is fixed, it cannot convey water to remote places, though it may reach a fire at no great distance, where there are doors and windows to afford it a passage. At the same time the workmen are exposed to danger from the falling of the houses on fire, and must remove from them to a greater distance. Hautsch, however, had adapted to his engine a flexible pipe, which could be turned to any side as might be necessary, but certainly not an air-chamber, otherwise Schott would have mentioned it. In the time of Belidor there were no other engines in France, and the same kind alone were used in England in 1760. Professor Busch at least concludes so[605], from the account then given by Ferguson, who called Newsham’s engine, which threw the water out in a continued stream, a new invention. In Germany the oldest engines are of this kind.
Who first conceived the idea of applying to the fire-engine an air-chamber, in which the included air, by compressing the water, forces it out in a continued stream, is not known. According to a conjecture of Perrault, Vitruvius seems to speak of a similar construction; but Perrault himself acknowledges that the obscure passage in question[606] might be explained in another manner. The air-chamber in its action has a similarity to Hero’s fountain, in which the air compressed by the water obliges the latter to ascend[607].
I can find no older fire-engine constructed with an air-chamber than that of which Perrault has given a figure and description. He says it was kept in the king’s library at Paris, and during fires could project water to a great height; that it had only one cylinder, and yet threw out the water in one continued jet. He mentions neither its age nor the inventor; and I can only add that his book was printed in 1684. The principle of this machine, however, seems to have been mentioned before by Mariotte, who on this account is by some considered as the inventor; but he does not appear to have had any idea of a fire-engine, at least he does not mention it.
It is certain that the air-chamber, at least in Germany, came into common use after it was applied by Leupold to fire-engines, a great number of which he manufactured and sold. He gave an account of it in a small work, consisting of four sheets quarto, which was published in 1720, but at first he kept the construction a secret. The engines which he sold consisted of a strong copper box closely shut and well-soldered. They weighed no more than sixteen pounds, occupied little room, had only one cylinder; and a man with one of them could force up the water without interruption to the height of from twenty to thirty feet. About 1725 Du Fay saw one of Leupold’s engines at Strasburg, and discovered by conjecture the construction of it, which he made known in the Transactions of the Academy of Sciences at Paris for that year. It is very singular that on this occasion Du Fay says nothing of Mariotte, or of the engine in the king’s library. Leupold, however, had some time before, that is in 1724, given a description and figure in his Theatrum Machinarum Hydraulicarum[608], with which undoubtedly Du Fay was not acquainted.
Another improvement, no less useful, is the leather hose added to the engine, which can be lengthened or shortened as necessary, and to which the fire-pipe is applied, so that the person who directs the jet of water can approach the fire with less danger. This invention, it is well known, belongs to two Dutchmen, both named Jan van der Heide[609], who were inspectors of the apparatus for extinguishing fires at Amsterdam. The first public experiments made with it took place in 1672; and were attended with so much success, that at a fire next year, the old engines were used for the last time, and the new ones introduced in their stead. In 1677, the inventor obtained an exclusive privilege to make these engines during the period of twenty-five years. In 1682, engines on this construction were distributed in sufficient number throughout the whole city, and the old ones were entirely laid aside. In 1695 there were in Amsterdam sixty of these engines, the nearest six of which were to be employed at every fire. In the course of a few years they were common throughout all the towns in the Netherlands.
All these circumstances have been related by the inventor in a particular work; which, on account of the excellent engravings it contains, is exceedingly valuable[610]. Of these, the first seven represent dangerous conflagrations at which the old engines were used, but produced very little effect. One of them is the fire which took place in the stadthouse of Amsterdam in the year 1652. The twelve following plates represent fires which were extinguished by means of the new engines, and exhibit, at the same time, the various ways in which the engines may be employed with advantage. According to an annexed calculation, the city of Amsterdam lost by ten fires, when the old apparatus was in use, 1,024,130 florins; but in the following five years, after the introduction of the new engines, the loss occasioned by forty fires amounted only to 18,355 florins; so that the yearly saving was ninety-eight per cent. Of the internal construction of these engines no description or plates have been given; nor do I remember to have read a passage in any author from which it can be concluded that they were furnished with an air-chamber, though in the patents they were always called _spouting-engines_, which threw up one continued jet of water. The account given even of the nature of the pipe or hose is short and defective, probably with a view to render it more difficult to be imitated. It is only said that it was made of leather in a particular manner; and that, besides being thick, it was capable of resisting the force of the water.
The conveyer or bringer was invented also about the same time by these two Dutchmen. This name is given at present to a box which has on the one side a sucking-pump, and on the other a forcing-pump. The former serves to raise the water from a stream, well, or other reservoir, by means of a stiff leathern pipe, having at the extremity a metal strainer pierced with holes to prevent the admission of dirt, and which is kept suspended above the mud by a round piece of cork. The forcing-pump drives the water thus drawn up through a leathern pipe into the engine, and renders the laborious conveyance of water by buckets unnecessary.
At first, indeed, this machine was exceedingly simple. It consisted only of a leathern pipe screwed to the engine, the end of which widened into a bag supported near the reservoir, and kept open by means of a frame, while the labourers poured water into it from buckets. A pump, however, to answer this purpose was soon constructed by the Van der Heides, who named it a _snake-pump_. By its means they were able to convey the water from the distance of a thousand feet; but I can find no account of the manner in which it was made. From the figure, I am inclined to think that they used only one cylinder with a lever. Sometimes also they placed a portable pump in the water, which was thus drawn into a leathern hose connected with it, and conveyed to the engine. Every pipe or hose for conveying water in this manner they called a _wasserschlange_, water-snake, and this was not made of leather, like the hose furnished with a fire-pipe, but of sail-cloth. They announced, however, that it required a particular preparation, which consisted in making it water-tight by means of a proper cement. The pipe also, through which the water is drawn up, must be stiffened and distended by means of metal rings; otherwise the external air, on the first stroke of the pump, would compress the pipe, so that it could admit no water. It is here seen that pipes made of sail-cloth are not so new an invention as many have supposed. That our present apparatus for conveying water to the fire-engine is much more ingenious, as well as convenient, must be allowed; but I would strongly recommend that in all cities there should be pumps, or running wells of water, to the spout of which pipes having one end screwed to a fire-engine might be affixed. The Van der Heides, among the advantages of their invention, stated that this apparatus rendered it unnecessary to have leathern buckets, which are expensive, or at any rate lessened their number, as well as that of the workmen.
From this account, the truth of which cannot be doubted, one may readily believe that engines with leathern hose were certainly not invented by Gottfried Fuchs, director of the fire apparatus at Copenhagen, in the year 1697, as publicly announced in 1717, with the addition, that this invention was soon employed both in Holland and at Hamburg. Fuchs seems only to have made known the Dutch invention in Denmark, on occasion of the great fire which took place on the 19th of April 1689, at the Opera-house of Amalienburg, when the beautiful palace of that name, and more than 350 persons were consumed. At any rate we are told in history, that, in consequence of this calamity, an improvement was made in the fire establishment, by new regulations issued on the 23rd of July 1689, and that engines on the Dutch construction, which had been used more than twelve years at Amsterdam, were introduced.
Hose or pipes of this kind for conveying water were however not entirely unknown to the ancients. At least the architect Apollodorus says, that to convey water to high places exposed to fiery darts, the gut of an ox, having a bag filled with water affixed to it, might be employed; for on compressing the bag, the water would be forced up through the gut to the place of its destination[611]. This was a conveyer of the simplest kind.
Among the latest proposals for improving the hose is that of weaving one without a seam. In 1720, some of this kind were made of hemp at Leipsic, by Beck, a lace-weaver, as we are told by Leupold, in his before-mentioned work on fire-engines, which was printed the same year. After this they were made by Erke, a linen-weaver of Weimar; and at a later period they were made of linen at Dresden, and also in Silesia[612]. In England, Hegner and Ehrliholzer had a manufactory at Bethnal-green, near London, where they made water-tight hose without seams[613]. Some of the same kind are made by M. Mögling on his estate near Stutgard, on a loom of his own invention, and are now used in many towns of the duchy of Wirtemberg. I shall here remark, that Braun had a loom on which shirts could be wove without a seam, like those curious works of art sometimes brought from the East Indies, and of which he has given a full description with an engraving[614].
In the last place, I shall observe, that notwithstanding the belief of the Turks in predestination, fire-engines are in use at Constantinople, having been introduced by Ibrahim Effendi.
[The fire-engines now in use are made upon the air-chamber principle above-described. Mr. Braithwaite has applied steam-power to the working of fire-engines. On this principle a locomotive and a floating engine have been constructed. The former was first employed at a fire in the Argyle Rooms in 1830. It required eighteen minutes to elapse before the water in the boiler was raised to 212°, and threw up from thirty to forty tons of water per hour, to a height of ninety feet. Two others have been constructed by the same engineer, one of which threw up ninety tons of water per hour, and one made for the king of Prussia threw up about 61¾ tons per minute. In the steam floating engine which lies in the Thames, the machinery either propels the vessel, or works the pumps as required. The pipes used for conveying the water from the plugs to the engines are now constructed of leather, the seams being either sewed up or fastened with metallic rivets.]
FOOTNOTES
[582] Lib. x. cap. 12, p. 347. Compare lib. ix. cap. 9. p. 321.
[583] In that book entitled Πνευματικὰ, or Spiritualia. It may be found Greek and Latin in Veterum Mathematicorum Opera, Parisiis 1693, fol. p. 180.
[584] Epist. 42, lib. x.
[585] Lib. v. edit. Almel. p. 360.
[586] Plin. lib. v. cap. ult.
[587] Poliorcetica, p. 32, in Veterum Mathematicorum Opera.
[588] Orig. xx. 6. Fire-engines are used in many towns to wash the windows in the upper stories, which cannot be taken out.
[589] See Digest. i. tit. 15, where all persons are ordered to have water always ready in their houses. Also Digest. 47, tit. 9. Many things relating to this subject may be found in L. A. Hambergeri Opuscula, Jenæ et Lips. 1740, 8vo, p. 12; in the Dissertation de Incendiis. Further information respecting the police establishment of the Romans in regard to fires, is contained in two dissertations, entitled G. C. Marquarti de Cura Romanorum circa Incendia. Lips. 1689, 4to. And Ev. Ottonis Dissertat de Officio Præfecti Vigilum circa Incendia. Ultrajecti 1733.
[590] Digest. xxxiii. 7, 18. Dier. Genial. v. 24.
[591] Controvers. 9, libri ii.
[592] In Germany also the roads and the distance between the ruts made by cart-wheels were in old times very narrow. Some years ago, when the new tile-kiln was built before the Geismar gate at Göttingen, there was found at a great depth, a proof of its antiquity, a street or road which had formerly proceeded to the city with so small a space marked out by carriage-wheels, that one like it is not to be seen in Germany.
[593] Lib. ii. cap. 8.
[594] Hanovii Disquisitiones. Gedani 1750, 4to, p. 65.
[595] Annæ Comnenæ Alexiad. lib. 16. p. 385; πῦρ ὑγρόν.
[596] A projectile machine of this kind is mentioned by Joinville, p. 39.
[597] See the passage of Anna Comnena quoted by Hanov. p. 335.
[598] In Leonis Allatii Σύμμικτα. Colon. 1653, 8vo, p. 239.
[599] Cap. 19, § 6, p. 322.
[600] Pp. 344, 346.
[601] Thus in the year 1466 straw thatch, and in 1474 the use of shingles were forbidden at Frankfort.--Lersner, ii. p. 22.
[602] Doppelmayer says that the water was driven to the height of a hundred feet.
[603] Doppelmayer, p. 303.
[604] Contin. du Traite de la Police, par De la Mare, p. 137.
[605] Mathematik zum Nutzen und Vergnügen, 8vo, p. 396.
[606] Lib. x. cap. 12.
[607] Spiritualia, 36, p. 35.
[608] Vol. i. p. 120, tab. 45, fig. 2.
[609] In the patent, however, they were named _Jan_ and _Nicholas van der Heyden_.
[610] Beschryving der nieuwliiks uitgevonden Slang-Brand-Spuiten, Jan van der Heide, Amst. 1690, folio.
[611] Poliorcet. page 32.
[612] Leipziger Intelligenzblatt, 1775, p. 345; and 1767, p. 69. Teutscher Merkur, 1783.
[613] Lysons’s Environs of London.
[614] Vestitus Sacerdotum Hebræorum. Amst. 1701, 4to, i. p. 273. Much useful information in regard to various improvements in the apparatus for extinguishing fires may be found in Aug. Niemann Uebersicht der Sicherungsmittel gegen Feuersgefahren. Hamb. und Kiel, 1796, 8vo.
INDIGO.
It is more than probable that indigo, so early as the time of Dioscorides and Pliny, was brought to Europe, and employed there in dyeing and painting. This I shall endeavour to show; but under that name must be understood every kind of blue pigment, separated from plants by fermentation, and converted into a friable substance by desiccation; for those who should maintain that real indigo must be made from those plants named in the botanical system _Indigofera tinctoria_, would confine the subject within too narrow limits; as the substance which our merchants and dyers consider as real indigo is prepared, in different countries, from so great a number of plants, that they are not even varieties of the same species.
Before the American colonies were established, all the indigo employed in Europe came from the East Indies; and till the discovery of a passage round the Cape of Good Hope, it was conveyed, like other Indian productions, partly through the Persian Gulf, and partly by land to Babylon, or through Arabia and up the Red Sea to Egypt, from which it was transported to Europe. Considering this long carriage, as the article was not obtained, according to the Italian expression, _a drittura_, that is, in a direct manner, it needs excite no surprise, that our knowledge, in regard to its real country and the manner of preparing it, should be exceedingly uncertain and imperfect. Is it astonishing that articles, always obtained through Arabia, should be considered as productions of that country; and that many commodities which were the work of art, should be given out to be productions of nature? For more than a hundred years the Dutch purchased from the Saxons cobalt, and smalt made from it, and sold them again in India; and the Indians knew as little where and in what manner the Dutch obtained them, as the Saxons did the people who were the ultimate purchasers and consumers. The real nature of indigo was not generally known in Europe till the Europeans procured it from the first hand; yet long after that period, and even in the letters-patent obtained on the 23rd of December 1705, by the proprietors of the mines in the principality of Halberstadt and the county of Reinstein, indigo was classed among minerals on account of which works were suffered to be erected; but this only proves the individual ignorance of the undertakers, and also of their superiors, when they read what they had written, and confirms the justness of Ovid’s advice,
Disce bonas artes, moneo, Germana juventus;
Non tantum trepidos ut tueare reos.
What Dioscorides calls _Indicon_, and Pliny and Vitruvius _Indicum_, I am strongly inclined to believe to have been our indigo[615]. It was a blue pigment brought from India, and used both in painting and in dyeing. When pounded it gave a black powder, and when suspended in water it produced an agreeable mixture of blue and purple. It belonged to the costly dye-stuffs, and was often adulterated by the addition of earth. On this account, that which was soft without any roughness, and which resembled an inspissated juice, was esteemed the best. Pliny thinks[616] that pure indigo may be distinguished from that which is adulterated by burning it, as the former gives an exceedingly beautiful purple flame, and emits a smell similar to that of sea-water. Both he and Dioscorides speak of two kinds, one of which adheres to reeds, in the form of slime or scum thrown up by the sea; the other, as Dioscorides says, was scraped from the sides of the dye-pans in the form of a purple-coloured scum; and Pliny expressly remarks, that it was collected in this manner in the establishments for dyeing purple. The former relates also, that _Indicum_ belonged to the astringent medicines; that it was used for ulcers and inflammations, and that it cleansed and healed wounds.
This is all, as far as I know, that is to be found in the works of the ancients respecting _Indicum_. I have given it at full length, as accurately as possible, and I have added, in order that the reader may be better able to compare and judge, references to the original words of the authors. _Indicon_, it is true, occurs in other passages; but it was certainly different from the one already mentioned. I allude, for example, to the black _Indicon_ of Arrian and the _Indicon_ of Hippocrates. Of the former I shall treat in particular hereafter; and in regard to the latter, I refer to the author quoted in the note below[617]. It is not at all surprising that these names should be applied to more Indian commodities, since at present we give to many kinds of fruit, flowers, fowls and other things, the appellation of Indian. The ancients, indeed, were not so careful as to distinguish always, by a proper addition, the many articles to which they gave the name of _Indica_; and they had reason to expect that their contemporaries would readily comprehend by the connexion, the kind that was properly meant. Their commentators, however, in later times have for the most part thought only of one species or thing, and by these means they have fallen into mistakes which I shall here endeavour to rectify.
Everything said by the ancients of _Indicum_ seems to agree perfectly with our indigo. The proper country of this production is India; that is to say, Gudscharat or Gutscherad, and Cambaye or Cambaya, from which it seems to have been brought to Europe since the earliest periods. It is found mentioned, from time to time, in every century; it is never spoken of as a new article, and it has always retained its old name; which seems to be a proof that it has been used and employed in commerce without interruption.
It is true, as the ancients say, that good indigo, when pulverized, is of a blackish colour. The tincture, however, is partly blue and partly purple; but under the latter term we must understand an agreeable violet, and not, as is often the case, our scarlet. It is true also that good indigo is soft or smooth to the touch[618] when pounded; it floats on water, and at present, as in the time of Pliny, is adulterated and rendered heavier by the admixture of some earth, which in general, as appears, is fine pounded slate[619]. It is further true that the purity of it can be discovered by burning it. Indigo free from all foreign bodies leaves but little ash, while that which is impure leaves a large quantity of earth. Pliny, perhaps, did not rightly understand this test by fire, and added from conjecture, what he says in regard to the colour of the flame and the smell of the smoke, that this proof might not remain without an explanation. It is, however, possible that those who considered indigo to be sea-slime, imagined that they perceived in it a smell of sea-water. A naturalist of modern times, who refers petrifactions to Noah’s flood, believed that he could smell sea-water in them after the lapse of so many thousand years.
_Indicum_, on account of its long carriage by land, must have been dear, and therefore it was one of those pigments which the ancient painters, who were often poor slaves, were not accustomed to keep in any quantity by them, and with which it was necessary they should be supplied by those for whom they executed paintings[620]. Our indigo was also exceedingly dear till it was cultivated in the West Indies, where the value of it decreased as long as good land was plentiful and the price of labour was lessened by the slave-trade.
That indigo, which at present is used only by dyers, should have been employed also for painting, needs excite no surprise. It was applied to this purpose till the invention of painting in oil, and the discovery of Prussian blue, smalt and other pigments of a superior quality. It is even still used by landscape-painters to produce a pale gray; but it will not harmonise with oil. As to the medical properties of indigo, I can at any rate show that the experiments made with it at the end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century fully confirm the high encomium bestowed by Dioscorides upon his _Indicum_. There was a time when the former was much prescribed and recommended. At present our physicians are acquainted with purer and more powerful remedies than indigo, the internal use of which, as the fermented mass is prepared in copper vessels, must be attended with suspicion.
That the author, so often mentioned already, was not acquainted with the preparation of indigo, cannot be denied. It would, indeed, have been extraordinary had the account of it reached the Greeks and the Romans undisguised by fables, added either to answer the purposes of the interested merchant, or accidentally in the course of its long journey, in passing through so many countries and languages. It appears to me, however, that through these it may still be discovered; and in all probability we should be better able to form some idea of it were the oldest method of making indigo still known. In the slime deposited on the reeds, I think I can remark the first degree of fermentation, or commencement of putrefaction, without which the pigment could not be separated. Who knows whether the indigo plants in the earliest times were not deposited in pits or in stagnant water, in the same manner as our flax and hemp? Who knows whether after putrefaction they were not taken out, and the colouring parts adhering to them washed off and collected? The quantity indeed obtained by this process would not be great, and at present a much better method is employed; but the improvements made in every art have been gradual. The old inhabitants of the Canary islands scratched their land with the horns of oxen, because they were not acquainted with the spade, and far less with the plough. The above conjecture will appear much more probable, when it is known that in many parts of India the plants were formerly placed in large pits; and in Malta, where indigo was still cultivated in the seventeenth century, they were put into reservoirs or basins in order to ferment[621]. If this was usual in the oldest times, it may be easily seen how fabulous accounts might arise. Indigo was a slime attracted from the water by a reed, which the indigo plant, stripped of its bark, was considered to be.
Dioscorides speaks of another kind of indigo, which was the dried purple-coloured scum of the dye-pans. My predecessors, considering this account as an error, which might have arisen either from conjecture or misconception, or which was purposely occasioned by merchants, did not think it worthy of further examination. I cannot, however, refrain from remarking, that a blue pigment, and even a very fine one, if the proper preparations had been made for that purpose, might have been obtained in this manner. It was not indeed indigo, in the proper sense of the word, but a pigment of a similar nature. That fine high-priced powder sold, at present, under the name of blue carmine, is made from the separated scum of a dye-liquor, in which the finest colouring particles remain suspended. The scum or flower of a blue pan[622] which floats on the surface exhibits a play of many colours; and as among these the ancient purple is frequently observed, it may therefore very properly be said to have a purple colour[623]. In my opinion, there is no reason to disbelieve Dioscorides, when he says that in his time a blue pigment named indigo was made in this manner, especially as it can be proved that the woad-dyers, at the end of the sixteenth century, separated from their pans a colouring substance, which they sold instead of indigo, an article at that time exceedingly dear[624]. Besides, we read that in the establishments for dyeing black, the scum was in like manner collected in old times in the form of a black pigment, and this practice, as appears, was usual in all the dye-houses in general. Pliny, who says that this indigo was made in the purple dye-houses, seems either to have misunderstood Dioscorides, or to have been too precipitate; but it is certain that the scum in the purple dye-houses may have been collected and dried into a purple-coloured carmine.
As the Europeans did not become acquainted with the nature of indigo till modern times, it needs excite no astonishment that the old commentators should have erred in explaining the passages to which I here allude; and their opinion can therefore be of little weight in opposition to mine. Those who have approached nearest to the truth, Sarazen, Mathioli, Salmasius, &c., speak as if indigo were made from our woad, which however does not grow in India. Dioscorides speaks also of woad in a particular section. Marcellus Vergilius says, that Dioscorides meant indigo is certain; and this article is so generally known that it is not worth while to mention it. But he himself seems not to have been acquainted with it, else he would have amended the erroneous passage which speaks of _Indian stone_[625]. This arose from the ignorance of the old transcribers, who being unacquainted with _Indicum_ thought only of _gemma Indica_, mentioned by Pliny[626]. But Vergilius was right in this, that the purple lake, spoken of by Pliny, and not by Dioscorides as he believes, can no longer be produced.
I have long made it a rule, and prescribed it to others, in explaining any object mentioned by the ancients, never to admit, without the strongest proofs, that the same article is denoted by different appellations. This, it is true, has been often done. By these means the small knowledge we possess of a thing that occurs under one name only may be increased. A wider field may thus be opened for conjecture, and more latitude may be given to the imagination; but at the same time one may fall into groundless explanations, and hazard assertions, which, with whatever caution and learning proposed, will, on closer examination, be found either false or highly improbable. According to this rule, I have carefully endeavoured not to suffer myself to be so far misled by the respectability of my predecessors, as to consider the _Indicum_ and _Indicum nigrum_ of the ancients to be the same substance. On further research I find that the latter not only appears by the epithet to be different from indigo, but that it is China, or, as the Dutch call it, Indian ink. To prove this, I must refer to the passage of Pliny[627] on which my assertion is founded; and perhaps the short illustrations added will render this minuteness less tedious to those who are fond of such disquisitions. In the passage referred to, Pliny enumerates all the materials which in his time were used for black ink. He therefore mentions two vitriolic substances, a slime or sediment (_salsugo_), and a yellow vitriolic earth (called also _misy_). Such minerals continued in use as long as men were unacquainted with the art of lixiviating the salt, and causing it to crystallize; or in other words, as long as they had no vitriol-manufactories. He speaks also of lamp-black being made in huts built for the purpose, which are described by Vitruvius, and from which the smoke of burning pine-wood was conveyed into a close apartment. The article was certainly adulterated, when soot, taken from the baths and other places where an open fire was maintained with wood of all kinds, was intermixed with it. It is very remarkable that black from burnt refuse of grapes, _noir de vigne_, which at present our artists, and particularly our copper-plate printers, consider as the most beautiful black, was made even at that period. Germany hitherto has obtained the greater part of this article from Mentz, through Frankfort, and on that account it is called Frankfort black. Some is made also at Kitsingen, Markbreit, and Munich. For this purpose the refuse of the grapes is charred in a close fire, and being then finely pounded is packed into casks. Pliny observes, that it was asserted that from this substance one could obtain a black which might be substituted for indigo. Another pigment was bone-black, or burnt ivory, which is highly esteemed even at present. Besides these, continues he, there is obtained from India what is called _Indicum_, the preparation of which I have not yet been able to learn: but a similar pigment is made from the black scum of the dye-pans, in places for dyeing black, and another kind is obtained from charred fir-wood finely pulverized. The cuttle-fish (_sepia_) likewise gives a black; but that however has nothing to do with the present question. He remarks, in the last place, that every kind of black pigment is improved, or rather the preparation of it completed, by exposure to the sun[628]; that is to say, after gum has been added to that intended for writing, and size to that destined for painting. But that which was made with vinegar was more durable, and could not be easily effaced by washing. All this is very true. Our ink acquires a superior quality when exposed to the light of the sun in flat vessels. That vinegar renders black colours faster, is well known to our calico-printers; and those who wish to have good ink must employ in making it the brightest vinegar of beer. It is equally true, that every black pigment mixed up with gum or size can be sooner and easier washed out again with water[629].
A considerable part of what has hitherto been quoted from Pliny, may be found also in Vitruvius[630]. The latter, in like manner, mentions huts for making lamp-black; he speaks also of ivory-black, and says expressly, that when it is properly made it not only forms a good colour and excellent ink, but approaches very near to _Indicum_.
Now I might here ask, whether it is at all probable that the learned Pliny and the practical connoisseur of painting, the architect Vitruvius, could consider and describe our blue indigo as a pigment which, like lamp-black, could be employed as a black colour and as ink? Is it credible that Pliny, if he meant blue indigo in the before-mentioned passage, would have said that he was not able to learn the preparation of it, when he expressly describes it, as he believed it to be, in the course of a few lines further? Would Pliny and Vitruvius, had they been acquainted with black indigo only, remark immediately after, that, when costly indigo could not be obtained, earth saturated with woad, consequently a blue earth, might be used in its stead? Is not allusion here made to a blue pigment, as was before to a black one? Is it not therefore evident, that the name of _Indicum_ was given to a black and also to a blue pigment brought from India? And if this be the case, is it not highly probable that the black _Indicum_ was what we at present call Indian ink, which approaches so near to the finest ivory-black, and black of wine lees, that it is often counterfeited by these substances, a preparation of which is frequently sold as Indian ink to unwary purchasers? Indian ink is in general use in India, and has been so in all probability since the earliest ages. In India all artificial productions are of very great antiquity; and therefore I will venture to say, that it is not probable that Indian ink is a new invention in India, although it may probably have been improved, and particularly by the Chinese.
To confound the two substances, however, called indigo (_indicum_) at that period was not possible, as every painter and dealer in colours would know that there were two kinds, a blue and a black. It has, nevertheless, occurred to me, that in the works of the ancients obscurity may have sometimes been avoided by the addition of an epithet; and I once thought I had found in Pliny an instance of this foresight; that is, where he names all kinds of colours--_purpurissum_, _Indicum cæruleum_, _melinum_, _auripigmentum_, _cerussa_[631]. I conceived that in this passage our indigo was distinguished from the black _indicum_ by the epithet _cæruleum_. But my joy at this discovery was soon damped by Hardouin, who places between _Indicum_ and _cæruleum_ a comma, which is not to be found in many of the oldest and best editions. I cannot, therefore, get rid of this comma; for it is beyond all dispute that _cæruleum_ was the common appellation of blue copper ochre, that is, mountain blue. I shall now proceed to examine whether my observation be true, that the Greeks frequently used the term black _indicum_, when they meant to denote the black, and not the blue.
The term _nigrum Indicum_ occurs in Arrian, Galen, Paulus Ægineta, and perhaps in the works of other Greek physicians; and as the Latin writers were acquainted with an _Indicum_ which dyed black, there is reason to conjecture that this was the _Indicum nigrum_ of the Greeks, though I should rather be inclined to translate this appellation by the words Indian black, in the same manner as we may say Berlin blue, Roman red, Naples yellow, Brunswick green, Spanish brown, &c.; or I should as readily translate it Indian ink. Arrian introduces it along with other Indian wares. I do not indeed find that he makes any mention of indigo properly so called; but a complete catalogue of merchandise is not to be expected from him. _Indicum_, however, occurs once more in this author; but in the passage where it is found it is only an epithet to another article. Speaking of cinnabar, he adds, that he means that kind called Indian, which is obtained from a tree in the same manner as gum. I am inclined to think that he alludes to dragon’s blood, which on account of its colour was at that time called cinnabar.
Some have conjectured that what in Arrian is named _laccos chromatinos_ was our indigo, which indeed might be classed among the lakes, according to the present meaning of that word. Others understand by it gum-lac[632]. But I am unacquainted with any proofs that gum-lac was known at so early a period. I much doubt whether this meaning of the word lac be so old; and I must confess that the opinion of Salmasius appears to me highly probable, namely, that Arrian alluded to a kind of party-coloured garment: for besides the grounds adduced by Salmasius, it deserves to be remarked, that in the passage in question different kinds of clothes, and no other articles are mentioned. Besides, the epithet _chromatinos_ is applied by the same writer, in the same sense, to other kinds of clothing. It cannot therefore be said that Arrian mentions our gum-lac, the origin of which word Salmasius endeavours to discover.
In the works of Galen, which have not yet been sufficiently illustrated, I have found _Indicum nigrum_ only four times. In a place where he speaks of diseases of the eyes[633], he extols it on account of its cleansing quality; and says it can be used for wounds, when there is no inflammation. In another place[634], it occurs in three prescriptions for eye-salves. I have however endeavoured, but without success, to find in this excellent writer an explanation of what he calls _Indicum_; though he has explained almost all the different articles then used in the Materia medica. It appears therefore that the Greeks gave the name of _Indicum_ to our indigo, and also to Indian black or Indian ink.
It however cannot be denied that, in opposition to this opinion, considerable doubts arise. Many who think that the black indigo (_nigrum Indicum_) of Pliny and Vitruvius was not ink, but our indigo, remark, that things of a dark blue or dark violet colour were by the Greeks and the Romans frequently named black; and therefore that the blue indigo might in this manner be called black[635]. But the examples adduced as proofs are epithets applied by the poets to dark-coloured flowers. Because nature produces no black flowers, the poets, who are fond of everything uncommon, extraordinary, and hyperbolic, call flowers black, when they are of so dark a tint as to approach nearly to black. Thus clear and deep water is called black. It is however hardly credible that painters and dyers, who must establish an accurate distinction between colours, should have spoken in so vague a manner. Salmasius suspects that _Nil_ and _Nir_, the Arabic names of indigo, have arisen from the Latin word _niger_.
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume 2 (of 2)Chapter XIII: Part 13
0%37 min left in chapter