De Re Metallica · Georg Agricola
Insane indeed is he who makes more of riches than of virtue. Insane also is he who rejects them and considers them as worth nothing, instead of using them with reason. Yet as to the gold which Aristippus on another occasion flung into the sea from a boat, this he did with a wise and prudent mind. For learning that it was a pirate boat in which he was sailing, and fearing for his life, he counted his gold and then throwing it of his own will into the sea, he groaned as if he had done it unwillingly. But afterward, when he escaped the peril, he said: "It is better that this gold itself should be lost than that I should have perished because of it." Let it be granted that some philosophers, as well as Anacreon of Teos, despised gold and silver. Anaxagoras of Clazomenae also gave up his sheep-farms and became a shepherd. Crates the Theban too, being annoyed that his estate and other kinds of wealth caused him worry, and that in his contemplations his mind was thereby distracted, resigned a property valued at ten talents, and taking a cloak and wallet, in poverty devoted all his thought and efforts to philosophy. Is it true that because these philosophers despised money, all others declined wealth in cattle? Did they refuse to cultivate lands or to dwell in houses? There were certainly many, on the other hand, who, though affluent, became famous in the pursuit of learning and in the knowledge of divine and human laws, such as Aristotle, Cicero, and Seneca. As for Phocion, he did not deem it honest to accept the gold sent to him by Alexander. For if he had consented to use it, the king as much as himself would have incurred the hatred and aversion of the Athenians, and these very people were afterward so ungrateful toward this excellent man that they compelled him to drink hemlock. For what would have been less becoming to Marcus Curius and Fabricius Luscinus than to accept gold from their enemies, who hoped that by these means those leaders could be corrupted or would become odious to their fellow citizens, their purpose being to cause dissentions among the Romans and destroy the Republic utterly. Lycurgus, however, ought to have given instructions to the Spartans as to the use of gold and silver, instead of abolishing things good in themselves. As to the Babytacenses, who does not see that they were senseless and envious? For with their gold they might have bought things of which they were in need, or even given it to neighbouring peoples to bind them more closely to themselves with gifts and favours. Finally, the Scythians, by condemning the use of gold and silver alone, did not free themselves utterly from avarice, because although he is not enjoying them, one who can possess other forms of property may also become avaricious.
Now let us reply to the attacks hurled against the products of mines. In the first place, they call gold and silver the scourge of mankind because they are the cause of destruction and ruin to their possessors. But in this manner, might not anything that we possess be called a scourge to human kind,--whether it be a horse, or a garment, or anything else? For, whether one rides a splendid horse, or journeys well clad, he would give occasion to a robber to kill him. Are we then not to ride on horses, but to journey on foot, because a robber has once committed a murder in order that he may steal a horse? Or are we not to possess clothing, because a vagabond with a sword has taken a traveller's life that he may rob him of his garment? The possession of gold and silver is similar. Seeing then that men cannot conveniently do all these things, we should be on our guard against robbers, and because we cannot always protect ourselves from their hands, it is the special duty of the magistrate to seize wicked and villainous men for torture, and, if need be, for execution.
Again, the products of the mines are not themselves the cause of war. Thus, for example, when a tyrant, inflamed with passion for a woman of great beauty, makes war on the inhabitants of her city, the fault lies in the unbridled lust of the tyrant and not in the beauty of the woman. Likewise, when another man, blinded by a passion for gold and silver, makes war upon a wealthy people, we ought not to blame the metals but transfer all blame to avarice. For frenzied deeds and disgraceful actions, which are wont to weaken and dishonour natural and civil laws, originate from our own vices. Wherefore Tibullus is wrong in laying the blame for war on gold, when he says: "This is the fault of a rich man's gold; there were no wars when beech goblets were used at banquets." But Virgil, speaking of Polymnestor, says that the crime of the murderer rests on avarice:
"He breaks all law; he murders Polydorus, and obtains gold by violence. To what wilt thou not drive mortal hearts, thou accursed hunger for gold?"
And again, justly, he says, speaking of Pygmalion, who killed Sichaeus:
"And blinded with the love of gold, he slew him unawares with stealthy sword."
For lust and eagerness after gold and other things make men blind, and this wicked greed for money, all men in all times and places have considered dishonourable and criminal. Moreover, those who have been so addicted to avarice as to be its slaves have always been regarded as mean and sordid. Similarly, too, if by means of gold and silver and gems men can overcome the chastity of women, corrupt the honour of many people, bribe the course of justice and commit innumerable wickednesses, it is not the metals which are to be blamed, but the evil passions of men which become inflamed and ignited; or it is due to the blind and impious desires of their minds. But although these attacks against gold and silver may be directed especially against money, yet inasmuch as the Poets one after another condemn it, their criticism must be met, and this can be done by one argument alone. Money is good for those who use it well; it brings loss and evil to those who use it ill. Hence, very rightly, Horace says:
"Dost thou not know the value of money; and what uses it serves? It buys bread, vegetables, and a pint of wine."
And again in another place:
"Wealth hoarded up is the master or slave of each possessor; it should follow rather than lead, the 'twisted rope.'"
When ingenious and clever men considered carefully the system of barter, which ignorant men of old employed and which even to-day is used by certain uncivilised and barbarous races, it appeared to them so troublesome and laborious that they invented money. Indeed, nothing more useful could have been devised, because a small amount of gold and silver is of as great value as things cumbrous and heavy; and so peoples far distant from one another can, by the use of money, trade very easily in those things which civilised life can scarcely do without.
The curses which are uttered against iron, copper, and lead have no weight with prudent and sensible men, because if these metals were done away with, men, as their anger swelled and their fury became unbridled, would assuredly fight like wild beasts with fists, heels, nails, and teeth. They would strike each other with sticks, hit one another with stones, or dash their foes to the ground. Moreover, a man does not kill another with iron alone, but slays by means of poison, starvation, or thirst. He may seize him by the throat and strangle him; he may bury him alive in the ground; he may immerse him in water and suffocate him; he may burn or hang him; so that he can make every element a participant in the death of men. Or, finally, a man may be thrown to the wild beasts. Another may be sewn up wholly except his head in a sack, and thus be left to be devoured by worms; or he may be immersed in water until he is torn to pieces by sea-serpents. A man may be boiled in oil; he may be greased, tied with ropes, and left exposed to be stung by flies and hornets; he may be put to death by scourging with rods or beating with cudgels, or struck down by stoning, or flung from a high place. Furthermore, a man may be tortured in more ways than one without the use of metals; as when the executioner burns the groins and armpits of his victim with hot wax; or places a cloth in his mouth gradually, so that when in breathing he draws it slowly into his gullet, the executioner draws it back suddenly and violently; or the victim's hands are fastened behind his back, and he is drawn up little by little with a rope and then let down suddenly. Or similarly, he may be tied to a beam and a heavy stone fastened by a cord to his feet, or finally his limbs may be torn asunder. From these examples we see that it is not metals that are to be condemned, but our vices, such as anger, cruelty, discord, passion for power, avarice, and lust.
The question next arises, whether we ought to count metals amongst the number of good things or class them amongst the bad. The Peripatetics regarded all wealth as a good thing, and merely spoke of externals as having to do with neither the mind nor the body. Well, let riches be an external thing. And, as they said, many other things may be classed as good if it is in one's power to use them either well or ill. For good men employ them for good, and to them they are useful. The wicked use them badly, and to them they are harmful. There is a saying of Socrates, that just as wine is influenced by the cask, so the character of riches is like their possessors. The Stoics, whose custom it is to argue subtly and acutely, though they did not put wealth in the category of good things, they did not count it amongst the evil ones, but placed it in that class which they term neutral. For to them virtue alone is good, and vice alone evil. The whole of what remains is indifferent. Thus, in their conviction, it matters not whether one be in good health or seriously ill; whether one be handsome or deformed. In short:
"Whether, sprung from Inachus of old, and thus hast lived beneath the sun in wealth, or hast been poor and despised among men, it matters not."
For my part, I see no reason why anything that is in itself of use should not be placed in the class of good things. At all events, metals are a creation of Nature, and they supply many varied and necessary needs of the human race, to say nothing about their uses in adornment, which are so wonderfully blended with utility. Therefore, it is not right to degrade them from the place they hold among the good things. In truth, if there is a bad use made of them, should they on that account be rightly called evils? For of what good things can we not make an equally bad or good use? Let me give examples from both classes of what we term good. Wine, by far the best drink, if drunk in moderation, aids the digestion of food, helps to produce blood, and promotes the juices in all parts of the body. It is of use in nourishing not only the body but the mind as well, for it disperses our dark and gloomy thoughts, frees us from cares and anxiety, and restores our confidence. If drunk in excess, however, it injures and prostrates the body with serious disease. An intoxicated man keeps nothing to himself; he raves and rants, and commits many wicked and infamous acts. On this subject Theognis wrote some very clever lines, which we may render thus:
"Wine is harmful if taken with greedy lips, but if drunk in moderation it is wholesome."
But I linger too long over extraneous matters. I must pass on to the gifts of body and mind, amongst which strength, beauty, and genius occur to me. If then a man, relying on his strength, toils hard to maintain himself and his family in an honest and respectable manner, he uses the gift aright, but if he makes a living out of murder and robbery, he uses it wrongly. Likewise, too, if a lovely woman is anxious to please her husband alone she uses her beauty aright, but if she lives wantonly and is a victim of passion, she misuses her beauty. In like manner, a youth who devotes himself to learning and cultivates the liberal arts, uses his genius rightly. But he who dissembles, lies, cheats, and deceives by fraud and dishonesty, misuses his abilities. Now, the man who, because they are abused, denies that wine, strength, beauty, or genius are good things, is unjust and blasphemous towards the Most High God, Creator of the World; so he who would remove metals from the class of blessings also acts unjustly and blasphemously against Him. Very true, therefore, are the words which certain Greek poets have written, as Pindar:
"Money glistens, adorned with virtue; it supplies the means by which thou mayest act well in whatever circumstances fate may have in store for thee."
And Sappho:
"Without the love of virtue gold is a dangerous and harmful guest, but when it is associated with virtue, it becomes the source and height of good."
And Callimachus:
"Riches do not make men great without virtue; neither do virtues themselves make men great without some wealth."
And Antiphanes:
"Now, by the gods, why is it necessary for a man to grow rich? Why does he desire to possess much money unless that he may, as much as possible, help his friends, and sow the seeds of a harvest of gratitude, sweetest of the goddesses."
Having thus refuted the arguments and contentions of adversaries, let us sum up the advantages of the metals. In the first place, they are useful to the physician, for they furnish liberally the ingredients for medicines, by which wounds and ulcers are cured, and even plagues; so that certainly if there were no other reasons why we should explore the depths of the earth, we should for the sake of medicine alone dig in the mines. Again, the metals are of use to painters, because they yield certain pigments which, when united with the painter's slip, are injured less than others by the moisture from without. Further, mining is useful to the architects, for thus is found marble, which is suitable not only for strengthening large buildings, but also for decoration. It is, moreover, helpful to those whose ambition urges them toward immortal glory, because it yields metals from which are made coins, statues, and other monuments, which, next to literary records, give men in a sense immortality. The metals are useful to merchants with very great cause, for, as I have stated elsewhere, the use of money which is made from metals is much more convenient to mankind than the old system of exchange of commodities. In short, to whom are the metals not of use? In very truth, even the works of art, elegant, embellished, elaborate, useful, are fashioned in various shapes by the artist from the metals gold, silver, brass, lead, and iron. How few artists could make anything that is beautiful and perfect without using metals? Even if tools of iron or brass were not used, we could not make tools of wood and stone without the help of metal. From all these examples are evident the benefits and advantages derived from metals. We should not have had these at all unless the science of mining and metallurgy had been discovered and handed down to us. Who then does not understand how highly useful they are, nay rather, how necessary to the human race? In a word, man could not do without the mining industry, nor did Divine Providence will that he should.
Further, it has been asked whether to work in metals is honourable employment for respectable people or whether it is not degrading and dishonourable. We ourselves count it amongst the honourable arts. For that art, the pursuit of which is unquestionably not impious, nor offensive, nor mean, we may esteem honourable. That this is the nature of the mining profession, inasmuch as it promotes wealth by good and honest methods, we shall show presently. With justice, therefore, we may class it amongst honourable employments. In the first place, the occupation of the miner, which I must be allowed to compare with other methods of acquiring great wealth, is just as noble as that of agriculture; for, as the farmer, sowing his seed in his fields injures no one, however profitable they may prove to him, so the miner digging for his metals, albeit he draws forth great heaps of gold or silver, hurts thereby no mortal man. Certainly these two modes of increasing wealth are in the highest degree both noble and honourable. The booty of the soldier, however, is frequently impious, because in the fury of the fighting he seizes all goods, sacred as well as profane. The most just king may have to declare war on cruel tyrants, but in the course of it wicked men cannot lose their wealth and possessions without dragging into the same calamity innocent and poor people, old men, matrons, maidens, and orphans. But the miner is able to accumulate great riches in a short time, without using any violence, fraud, or malice. That old saying is, therefore, not always true that "Every rich man is either wicked himself, or is the heir to wickedness."
Some, however, who contend against us, censure and attack miners by saying that they and their children must needs fall into penury after a short time, because they have heaped up riches by improper means. According to them nothing is truer than the saying of the poet Naevius:
"Ill gotten gains in ill fashion slip away."
The following are some of the wicked and sinful methods by which they say men obtain riches from mining. When a prospect of obtaining metals shows itself in a mine, either the ruler or magistrate drives out the rightful owners of the mines from possession, or a shrewd and cunning neighbour perhaps brings a law-suit against the old possessors in order to rob them of some part of their property. Or the mine superintendent imposes on the owners such a heavy contribution on shares, that if they cannot pay, or will not, they lose their rights of possession; while the superintendent, contrary to all that is right, seizes upon all that they have lost. Or, finally, the mine foreman may conceal the vein by plastering over with clay that part where the metal abounds, or by covering it with earth, stones, stakes, or poles, in the hope that after several years the proprietors, thinking the mine exhausted, will abandon it, and the foreman can then excavate that remainder of the ore and keep it for himself. They even state that the scum of the miners exist wholly by fraud, deceit, and lying. For to speak of nothing else, but only of those deceits which are practised in buying and selling, it is said they either advertise the veins with false and imaginary praises, so that they can sell the shares in the mines at one-half more than they are worth, or on the contrary, they sometimes detract from the estimate of them so that they can buy shares for a small price. By exposing such frauds our critics suppose all good opinion of miners is lost. Now, all wealth, whether it has been gained by good or evil means, is liable by some adverse chance to vanish away. It decays and is dissipated by the fault and carelessness of the owner, since he loses it through laziness and neglect, or wastes and squanders it in luxuries, or he consumes and exhausts it in gifts, or he dissipates and throws it away in gambling:
"Just as though money sprouted up again, renewed from an exhausted coffer, and was always to be obtained from a full heap."
It is therefore not to be wondered at if miners do not keep in mind the counsel given by King Agathocles: "Unexpected fortune should be held in reverence," for by not doing so they fall into penury; and particularly when the miners are not content with moderate riches, they not rarely spend on new mines what they have accumulated from others. But no just ruler or magistrate deprives owners of their possessions; that, however, may be done by a tyrant, who may cruelly rob his subjects not only of their goods honestly obtained, but even of life itself. And yet whenever I have inquired into the complaints which are in common vogue, I always find that the owners who are abused have the best of reasons for driving the men from the mines; while those who abuse the owners have no reason to complain about them. Take the case of those who, not having paid their contributions, have lost the right of possession, or those who have been expelled by the magistrate out of another man's mine: for some wicked men, mining the small veins branching from the veins rich in metal, are wont to invade the property of another person. So the magistrate expels these men accused of wrong, and drives them from the mine. They then very frequently spread unpleasant rumours concerning this amongst the populace. Or, to take another case: when, as often happens, a dispute arises between neighbours, arbitrators appointed by the magistrate settle it, or the regular judges investigate and give judgment. Consequently, when the judgment is given, inasmuch as each party has consented to submit to it, neither side should complain of injustice; and when the controversy is adjudged, inasmuch as the decision is in accordance with the laws concerning mining, one of the parties cannot be injured by the law. I do not vigorously contest the point, that at times a mine superintendent may exact a larger contribution from the owners than necessity demands. Nay, I will admit that a foreman may plaster over, or hide with a structure, a vein where it is rich in metals. Is the wickedness of one or two to brand the many honest with fraud and trickery? What body is supposed to be more pious and virtuous in the Republic than the Senate? Yet some Senators have been detected in peculations, and have been punished. Is this any reason that so honourable a house should lose its good name and fame? The superintendent cannot exact contributions from the owners without the knowledge and permission of the Bergmeister or the deputies; for this reason deception of this kind is impossible. Should the foremen be convicted of fraud, they are beaten with rods; or of theft, they are hanged. It is complained that some sellers and buyers of the shares in mines are fraudulent. I concede it. But can they deceive anyone except a stupid, careless man, unskilled in mining matters? Indeed, a wise and prudent man, skilled in this art, if he doubts the trustworthiness of a seller or buyer, goes at once to the mine that he may for himself examine the vein which has been so greatly praised or disparaged, and may consider whether he will buy or sell the shares or not. But people say, though such an one can be on his guard against fraud, yet a simple man and one who is easily credulous, is deceived. But we frequently see a man who is trying to mislead another in this way deceive himself, and deservedly become a laughing-stock for everyone; or very often the defrauder as well as the dupe is entirely ignorant of mining. If, for instance, a vein has been found to be abundant in ore, contrary to the idea of the would-be deceiver, then he who was to have been cheated gets a profit, and he who has been the deceiver loses. Nevertheless, the miners themselves rarely buy or sell shares, but generally they have jurati venditores who buy and sell at such prices as they have been instructed to give or accept. Seeing therefore, that magistrates decide disputes on fair and just principles, that honest men deceive nobody, while a dishonest one cannot deceive easily, or if he does he cannot do so with impunity, the criticism of those who wish to disparage the honesty of miners has therefore no force or weight.
In the next place, the occupation of the miner is objectionable to nobody. For who, unless he be naturally malevolent and envious, will hate the man who gains wealth as it were from heaven? Or who will hate a man who to amplify his fortune, adopts a method which is free from reproach? A moneylender, if he demands an excessive interest, incurs the hatred of men. If he demands a moderate and lawful rate, so that he is not injurious to the public generally and does not impoverish them, he fails to become very rich from his business. Further, the gain derived from mining is not sordid, for how can it be such, seeing that it is so great, so plentiful, and of so innocent a nature. A merchant's profits are mean and base when he sells counterfeit and spurious merchandise, or puts far too high a price on goods that he has purchased for little; for this reason the merchant would be held in no less odium amongst good men than is the usurer, did they not take account of the risk he runs to secure his merchandise. In truth, those who on this point speak abusively of mining for the sake of detracting from its merits, say that in former days men convicted of crimes and misdeeds were sentenced to the mines and were worked as slaves. But to-day the miners receive pay, and are engaged like other workmen in the common trades.
Certainly, if mining is a shameful and discreditable employment for a gentleman because slaves once worked mines, then agriculture also will not be a very creditable employment, because slaves once cultivated the fields, and even to-day do so among the Turks; nor will architecture be considered honest, because some slaves have been found skilful in that profession; nor medicine, because not a few doctors have been slaves; nor will any other worthy craft, because men captured by force of arms have practised it. Yet agriculture, architecture, and medicine are none the less counted amongst the number of honourable professions; therefore, mining ought not for this reason to be excluded from them. But suppose we grant that the hired miners have a sordid employment. We do not mean by miners only the diggers and other workmen, but also those skilled in the mining arts, and those who invest money in mines. Amongst them can be counted kings, princes, republics, and from these last the most esteemed citizens. And finally, we include amongst the overseers of mines the noble Thucydides, the historian, whom the Athenians placed in charge of the mines of Thasos. And it would not be unseemly for the owners themselves to work with their own hands on the works or ore, especially if they themselves have contributed to the cost of the mines. Just as it is not undignified for great men to cultivate their own land. Otherwise the Roman Senate would not have created Dictator L. Quintius Cincinnatus, as he was at work in the fields, nor would it have summoned to the Senate House the chief men of the State from their country villas. Similarly, in our day, Maximilian Caesar would not have enrolled Conrad in the ranks of the nobles known as Counts; Conrad was really very poor when he served in the mines of Schneeberg, and for that reason he was nicknamed the "poor man"; but not many years after, he attained wealth from the mines of Fuerst, which is a city in Lorraine, and took his name from "Luck." Nor would King Vladislaus have restored to the Assembly of Barons, Tursius, a citizen of Cracow, who became rich through the mines in that part of the kingdom of Hungary which was formerly called Dacia. Nay, not even the common worker in the mines is vile and abject. For, trained to vigilance and work by night and day, he has great powers of endurance when occasion demands, and easily sustains the fatigues and duties of a soldier, for he is accustomed to keep long vigils at night, to wield iron tools, to dig trenches, to drive tunnels, to make machines, and to carry burdens. Therefore, experts in military affairs prefer the miner, not only to a commoner from the town, but even to the rustic.
But to bring this discussion to an end, inasmuch as the chief callings are those of the moneylender, the soldier, the merchant, the farmer, and the miner, I say, inasmuch as usury is odious, while the spoil cruelly captured from the possessions of the people innocent of wrong is wicked in the sight of God and man, and inasmuch as the calling of the miner excels in honour and dignity that of the merchant trading for lucre, while it is not less noble though far more profitable than agriculture, who can fail to realize that mining is a calling of peculiar dignity? Certainly, though it is but one of ten important and excellent methods of acquiring wealth in an honourable way, a careful and diligent man can attain this result in no easier way than by mining.
END OF BOOK I.
"The subterranean inanimate bodies are divided into two classes, one of which, because it is a fluid or an exhalation, is called by those names, and the other class is called the minerals. Mineral bodies are solidified from particles of the same substance, such as pure gold, each particle of which is gold, or they are of different substances such as lumps which consist of earth, stone, and metal; these latter may be separated into earth, stone and metal, and therefore the first is not a mixture while the last is called a mixture. The first are again divided into simple and compound minerals. The simple minerals are of four classes, namely earths, solidified juices, stones and metals, while the mineral compounds are of many sorts, as I shall explain later.
"Earth is a simple mineral body which may be kneaded in the hands when moistened, or from which lute is made when it has been wetted. Earth, properly so called, is found enclosed in veins or veinlets, or frequently on the surface in fields and meadows. This definition is a general one. The harder earth, although moistened by water, does not at once become lute, but does turn into lute if it remains in water for some time. There are many species of earths, some of which have names but others are unnamed.
"Solidified juices are dry and somewhat hard (subdurus) mineral bodies which when moistened with water do not soften but liquefy instead; or if they do soften, they differ greatly from the earths by their unctuousness (pingue) or by the material of which they consist. Although occasionally they have the hardness of stone, yet because they preserve the form and nature which they had when less hard, they can easily be distinguished from the stones. The juices are divided into 'meagre' and unctuous (macer et pinguis). The 'meagre' juices, since they originate from three different substances, are of three species. They are formed from a liquid mixed with earth, or with metal, or with a mineral compound. To the first species belong salt and Nitrum (soda); to the second, chrysocolla, verdigris, iron-rust, and azure; to the third, vitriol, alum, and an acrid juice which is unnamed. The first two of these latter are obtained from pyrites, which is numbered amongst the compound minerals. The third of these comes from Cadmia (in this case the cobalt-zinc-arsenic minerals; the acrid juice is probably zinc sulphate). To the unctuous juices belong these species: sulphur, bitumen, realgar and orpiment. Vitriol and alum, although they are somewhat unctuous yet do not burn, and they differ in their origin from the unctuous juices, for the latter are forced out from the earth by heat, whereas the former are produced when pyrites is softened by moisture.
"Stone is a dry and hard mineral body which may either be softened by remaining for a long time in water and be reduced to powder by a fierce fire; or else it does not soften with water but the heat of a great fire liquefies it. To the first species belong those stones which have been solidified by heat, to the second those solidified (literally 'congealed') by cold. These two species of stones are constituted from their own material. However, writers on natural subjects who take into consideration the quantity and quality of stones and their value, divide them into four classes. The first of these has no name of its own but is called in common parlance 'stone': to this class belong loadstone, jasper (or bloodstone) and Aetites (geodes?). The second class comprises hard stones, either pellucid or ornamental, with very beautiful and varied colours which sparkle marvellously; they are called gems. The third comprises stones which are only brilliant after they have been polished, and are usually called marble. The fourth are called rocks; they are found in quarries, from which they are hewn out for use in building, and they are cut into various shapes. None of the rocks show colour or take a polish. Few of the stones sparkle; fewer still are transparent. Marble is sometimes only distinguishable from opaque gems by its volume; rock is always distinguishable from stones properly so-called by its volume. Both the stones and the gems are usually to be found in veins and veinlets which traverse the rocks and marble. These four classes, as I have already stated, are divided into many species, which I will explain in their proper place.
"Metal is a mineral body, by nature either liquid or somewhat hard. The latter may be melted by the heat of the fire, but when it has cooled down again and lost all heat, it becomes hard again and resumes its proper form. In this respect it differs from the stone which melts in the fire, for although the latter regain its hardness, yet it loses its pristine form and properties. Traditionally there are six different kinds of metals, namely gold, silver, copper, iron, tin and lead. There are really others, for quicksilver is a metal, although the Alchemists disagree with us on this subject, and bismuth is also. The ancient Greek writers seem to have been ignorant of bismuth, wherefore Ammonius rightly states that there are many species of metals, animals, and plants which are unknown to us. Stibium when smelted in the crucible and refined has as much right to be regarded as a proper metal as is accorded to lead by writers. If when smelted, a certain portion be added to tin, a bookseller's alloy is produced from which the type is made that is used by those who print books on paper. Each metal has its own form which it preserves when separated from those metals which were mixed with it. Therefore neither electrum nor Stannum is of itself a real metal, but rather an alloy of two metals. Electrum is an alloy of gold and silver, Stannum of lead and silver (see note 33, p. 473). And yet if silver be parted from the electrum, then gold remains and not electrum; if silver be taken away from Stannum, then lead remains and not Stannum. Whether brass, however, is found as a native metal or not, cannot be ascertained with any surety. We only know of the artificial brass, which consists of copper tinted with the colour of the mineral calamine. And yet if any should be dug up, it would be a proper metal. Black and white copper seem to be different from the red kind. Metal, therefore, is by nature either solid, as I have stated, or fluid, as in the unique case of quicksilver. But enough now concerning the simple kinds.
"I will now speak of the compounds which are composed of the simple minerals cemented together by nature, and under the word 'compound' I now discuss those mineral bodies which consist of two or three simple minerals. They are likewise mineral substances, but so thoroughly mixed and alloyed that even in the smallest part there is not wanting any substance that is contained in the whole. Only by the force of the fire is it possible to separate one of the simple mineral substances from another; either the third from the other two, or two from the third, if there were three in the same compound. These two, three or more bodies are so completely mixed into one new species that the pristine form of none of these is recognisable.
"The 'mixed' minerals, which are composed of those same simple minerals, differ from the 'compounds,' in that the simple minerals each preserves its own form so that they can be separated one from the other not only by fire but sometimes by water and sometimes by hand. As these two classes differ so greatly from one another I usually use two different words in order to distinguish one from the other. I am well aware that Galen calls the metallic earth a compound which is really a mixture, but he who wishes to instruct others should bestow upon each separate thing a definite name."
For convenience of reference we may reduce the above to a diagram as follows:
1. Fluids and gases.
{ { Earths { (a) Simple { Solidified juices { minerals { Stones { { Metals { A. Homogenous { { bodies { { { (b) Compound { Being heterogeneous mixtures { { minerals { of (a) { 2. Mineral { bodies { { { B. Mixtures. Being homogenous mixtures of (a)
· · ·
End of part 7 of 36
Continue readingBook II
Starvard