A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume II (of 2)

I shall now proceed to examine that metal which the Greeks named κασσίτερος, or, as Pliny says, Cassiteron, and which he expressly adds was called by the Latins plumbum candidum (white lead). I have no new hypothesis to recommend; my sole object is truth. I wish for certainty, and, when that is not to be obtained, probability; at the same time, however, I cannot rest satisfied with the judgement given by the compilers of dictionaries, and the translators and commentators of ancient authors, because I firmly believe that they never made any researches themselves on the subject.

That the ancients were acquainted with our tin as early as we find the word cassiteros mentioned by them, I am not able to prove, and I doubt whether it is possible to do so; the contrary seems to me to be more probable. In my opinion, it was impossible for the Phœnicians, at so early a period, to obtain this metal from Portugal, Spain, and England, in such quantity that it could be spread all over the old world. The carriage of merchandise was not then so easy. If all the cassiteron was procured from the north-west parts of Europe, it appears to me that it must have been much dearer than it seems to have been in the oldest times, to judge from the information that has been preserved.

In my opinion, the oldest cassiteron was nothing else than the stannum of the Romans, the werk of our smelting-houses, that is, a mixture of lead, silver, and some other accidental metals. That this has not been expressly remarked by any Greek writer, is to me not at all surprising. The works of those who might be supposed to have possessed knowledge of this kind have not been handed down to us. We should not have known what stannum was, had not the only passage of Pliny which informs us been preserved. I am as little surprised that Herodotus should say he did not know where cassiteron was obtained. How many modern historians are ignorant of the place from which zinc, bismuth, and tombac are brought! and however easy it might be for our historians to acquire knowledge of this kind if they chose, it was in the same degree difficult for Herodotus, in whose time there were not works on mineralogy, technology, and commerce, to furnish such information. At the period when he lived, cassiteron perhaps was no metallurgic production of any neighbouring mines, but a foreign commodity, a knowledge of which, mercantile people endeavoured in those early ages, much more than is the case in modern times, to conceal, and which also could be better concealed than at present.

That real tin was afterwards known to the Greeks, I readily believe; but I find no proof of it, nor can I determine the time at which they first became acquainted with this metal. It is not improbable that they considered it only as a variety of their old cassiteron, or the stannum of the Romans, as the latter declared both to be a variety of lead. It might be expected that the Greeks would have given a peculiar name to the new tin, in order to distinguish it from the old, as the Romans really did; but this appears not to have been the case. I think, however, to have remarked that, so early as the time of Aristotle, real foreign tin was called the Tyrian or Celtic, because Tyre undoubtedly was, at that period, the market for this commodity.

According to the conjectural accounts hitherto given, there is no necessity for believing the word cassiteron to be Phœnician or Celtic. The Greeks seem to have used it before they had Phœnician tin; and because they afterwards considered the Phœnician ware as a kind of their cassiteron, and at the same time heard of islands from which it was brought, they named these islands the Cassiterian, as Herodotus has done, though he expressly says that he did not know where they were situated. This ancient historian seems to have entertained nearly the same opinion in regard to the origin of the name, for he adds, “At any rate the name Eridanus is not foreign, but originally Greek521.” It is, however, very possible that every thing said of these islands, in the time of Herodotus, was merely a fabrication of the Greek merchants, none of whom had the least knowledge of the Phœnician trade to England522. In this case the bedil of the Hebrews might be only stannum, and thus would be removed the wonder of Michaelis, how the Midianites could have obtained tin so early523. I will not, however, deny that the contrary of what has been here stated is equally possible. The Greeks might have obtained real tin at a very early period by trade, and along with it the foreign name, from which was formed cassiteros. The art of preparing stannum may not have been known among them, and therefore under the cassiteron of the Greeks we must undoubtedly understand tin. In this case one could comprehend why stannum is not mentioned in the works of the Greeks; and if the plumbum album of Pliny be our tin, of which there can be scarcely a doubt, his testimony that the cassiteron of Homer was the same belongs to this place.

In regard to the question, which opinion seems the most probable, I will not enter into any dispute; but I must maintain that, in regard to the periods of Homer and Herodotus, no certainty can be obtained. To justify this assertion, I shall here point out everything I have found relating to cassiteron, and, as far as possible, in the original words, quoting the different works in the manner in which all the words for dictionaries of natural history ought to be arranged.

I. Vocatur Latinis plumbum candiduma sive albumab, et Græcis jam Iliacis temporibus teste Homero cassiterona.

II. Mineræ (calculi) coloris nigri, quibus eadem gravitas quæ auroa.

III. Non nascitur cum argento, quod ex nigro fita.

IV. Nascitur summa tellure arenosaa; sed etiam ex profunda effoditurh.

V. Arenæ istæ lavantur a metallicis, conflatæque in album plumbum resolvuntura.

VI. Plumbum candidum est pretiosius nigroa.

VII. Facile in igne fluit, ita ut plumbi albi experimentum in charta sit, ut liquefactum pondere videatur, non calore rupisseac. Celticum citius quam plumbum fluit, atque adeo in aqua; colore inficit, quæcunque tangatc.

VIII. Nulli rei sine mixtura utilea.

IX. Adulteratur plumbo nigrod.

X. Stannum adulteratur addita æris candidi tertia portione in plumbum albuma.

XI. Incoquitur æris operibus, Galliarum invento, ita ut vix discerni possit ab argento, eaque incoctilia vocanta.

XII. Adhibetur ad ocreas heroump; ad thoraces exornandosqr; ad scuta ornandast; ad speculay.

XIII. Ex eo nummos percussit Dionysius tyrannus Syrac.uv.

XIV. Secum jungi nequit sine plumbo nigro, nec plumbum nigrum inter se jungi potest sinealboax.

XV. Gignitur in Hispaniah; Lusitaniaah Gallæciaa, in Iberiakl, apud Artabrosh, in Britanniaj: in insulis quæ Cassiterides dictæ sunt Græcisefhkw, in insula quam Mictim vocat Timæus, et a Britannia sex dierum navigatione abesse refertg; in insulis Hesperidibusmno apud Drangas populos Persicos regionis Arianæi.524

To this I shall add the following illustration. The name cassiteron is supposed, in general, to be derived from the Phœnician or Chaldaic525; but on this point I am not able to decide. Mela, where he explains the name of the Cassiterian islands, calls it only plumbum, without the addition of any epithet, unless it has been lost in transcribing. But Pliny himself says526, “Cassiterides dictæ Græcis a fertilitate plumbi.” It is possible, therefore, that the leaden vessels, which are often mentioned in the works of the ancients, were in part tin; but I cannot possibly agree with Millin527, who makes the cyanos of Homer to be tin. This word evidently denotes mountain-green, or some species of stone coloured by it, which in former times, like the lapis lazuli at present, was employed for making various kinds of ornaments. Besides, cyanos and cassiteros are mentioned in the Iliad528 as two different things529.

What Pliny says of the colour and weight of those minerals that produced tin, corresponds exceedingly well with tin ore, which, as is well known, is among the heaviest of minerals, though the specific gravity of the metal itself is but small. It is also true that lead is seldom found without silver; and tin perhaps has never been found with the latter. What we read in regard to the obtaining of tin ore, agrees very well with our washing-works. Even at present the greater part of the tin ores are found in fragments and washed.

The smelting of this metal, even when all the rules of art are not employed, is attended with little difficulty, though Goguet is of a different opinion. As of all metals it melts easiest in the fire, it requires only a small degree of heat and no artificial furnace; but as it is readily calcined, and after repeated reduction loses its malleability, care must be taken that the reduced metal can immediately flow off; and on that account our furnaces have an aperture always kept open. It is probable that the ancients, in their small furnaces, could easily make a similar arrangement.

Tin at all times must have been dearer than lead, as the latter was found in abundance, but the former in small quantities. In England at present tin costs about four times as much as lead. At Hamburg, in 1794, a pound of English block tin cost eleven schillings and a half, and tin in bars thirteen schillings; but a hundred pounds of English lead were worth at that time only fourteen marks, and Goslar lead eleven and a half marks ready money.

That tin melts easier than lead is very true. According to the latest experiments the former fuses at 442°, whereas lead requires 612° of Fahrenheit’s thermometer. Both metals can be fused in paper when it is closely wrapped round them. Aristotle and Pliny meant to say the same thing of their paper; and the latter adds that the paper, even when it became torn, was not burnt. What the first says of melting in water, some have too inconsiderately declared to be a fable; but it is not entirely false. Tin, when mixed with lead and bismuth in certain proportions, is so fusible that it melts in boiling water, because it requires less heat to be fused than water does to be brought to a state of ebullition. That the Celtic tin contained a great deal of lead, appears from the observation, that when rubbed it made the fingers black; an effect which would not have been produced by pure tin.

That tin in the time of Pliny was mixed with lead, and in various proportions, we are told by himself. At that period a mixture of equal parts tin and lead was called argentarium; and that of two parts lead and one part tin, tertiarium. Others mixed the latter composition with an equal quantity of tin, and named the mixture also argentarium, and this was commonly used for tinning.

I must, however, acknowledge that the last words of Pliny I do not fully comprehend. They have not indeed been noticed by any commentator; but I do not on that account believe that I am the only person to whom they have been in part unintelligible. Savot and Watson530, who were undoubtedly capable of giving some decisive opinion on them, have purposely left that part, which to me appears obscure, untranslated and without any explanation. Pliny says, “Improbiores ad tertiarium additis æquis partibus albi, argentarium vocant, et eo quæ volunt, incoquunt.” He seems here to throw out a reproach against those who melted together equal quantities of tertiarium and pure tin, and then gave it the name of argentarium, as if it had been of an inferior quality to the argentarium first named. But equal quantities of tertiarium and pure tin produced a mixture, in which for one part of lead there were two of tin. How then could those who made this mixture be called improbiores? To answer this question I shall venture to give my conjecture. Pliny perhaps meant to say, that tinning properly ought to be done with pure tin, but that unprincipled artists employed for that purpose tin mixed with lead. If this be the true meaning, his reproach was not unfounded. On the same account, because all tin was then adulterated with lead, Galen gives cautions against the use of tinned vessels, and advises people to preserve medicines rather in glass or in golden vessels. But why does Pliny add, “ideo album nulli rei sine mixtura utile?” In using these words, it is possible he may have alluded, not to tinning, but to things cast of tin, which, according to the ideas of that time or the nature of the tin, if of that metal alone, would be too brittle. This seems to be said by the preceding words, to which the ideo refers: “albi natura plus aridi habet, contraque nigri tota humida est, ideo album…” I hope the reader will forgive me for entering so deeply into criticism; but if Pliny’s valuable work is ever to become intelligible, occasional contributions of this kind must not be despised.

Of the process employed in tinning in ancient times, we have no account; but the words of Pliny incoquere and incoctilia seem almost to denote that it was performed, as in tinning our iron wares, by immersing the vessels in melted tin. It appears also to have been done at an early period in a very perfect manner, both because the tinned articles, as Pliny says, could scarcely be distinguished from silver, and because the tinning, as he adds, with an expression of wonder, did not increase the weight of the vessels. The metal, therefore, was applied so thin that it could make no perceptible addition to the weight. This is the case still, when the work has been skilfully executed; and it affords a remarkable proof of the astonishing divisibility of metal. Dr. Watson caused a vessel, the surface of which contained 254 square inches, and which weighed twenty-six ounces, to be tinned, and found that the weight was increased only half an ounce; consequently half an ounce of tin was spread over 254 square inches.

But, notwithstanding all this dexterity, which must be allowed to the Romans, they appear to have employed tinning at any rate for kitchen utensils and household furniture very seldom. It is scarcely ever mentioned, and never where one might expect it, that is to say, in works on cookery and domestic œconomy, where the authors give directions for preparing and preserving salt provisions. When they speak of the choice of vessels, they merely say that new earthen ones should be employed. Some of the physicians only have had the foresight to recommend tinned vessels. It does not appear indeed that the Romans, though copper vessels were in general use among them, employed any precautions to prevent them from being injurious to the health. Pliny only says that a coating of stannum improved the taste of food, and guarded against verdigris. The former part is to be thus understood; that the bad taste occasioned by copper was prevented; but he does not say that the health was secured by it. The term also incoctilia, usual in the time of Pliny, is found in his works alone. It is likewise remarkable, that among the numerous vessels found at Herculaneum, as I have already remarked, the greater part of them were of copper or stannum, few of which were silvered, and none tinned. Had tinning been then as much used as at present, some tinned vessels must have been found.

I shall further remark, that Pliny ascribes the invention of tinning to the Gauls; and that he extols in particular the work of the Bituriges, the old inhabitants of the province of Berry, and those articles made at Alexia or Alegia, which is considered to have been Alise in Auxois; that he speaks of tinning copper and not iron, and that according to his account not only tin was used for that purpose, but also stannum. By the passages already quoted, it is proved that in the time of Homer cassiteron was employed for ornamenting shields and certain kinds of dresses; but the further illustration of them I shall leave to others. The shields perhaps were inlaid with tin; and it is not improbable that threads were then made of this metal, and used for embroidering. That this art was at that period known may be readily believed, since the women of Lapland embroider their dresses, and particularly their fur cloaks, in so delicate and ingenious a manner, with tin threads drawn out by themselves, as to excite astonishment531.

What Pliny says is true, that lead cannot be soldered without tin, or tin without lead. For this operation a mixture of both metals, which fuses more readily than each of them singly, is employed. Instead of oil, mentioned by Pliny, workmen use at present in this process colophonium, or some other resin.

That vessels were made of cast tin at an early period is highly probable; but I do not remember to have seen any of them in collections of antiquities. I am acquainted only with two instances of their being found, both of which occurred in England. In the beginning of the last century some pieces of tin were discovered in Yorkshire, together with other Roman antiquities532; and in 1756 some tin vessels of Roman workmanship with Roman inscriptions were dug up in Cornwall533.

I shall pass over the history of the tin trade of the Phœnicians, the Greeks, the Gauls and the Romans, respecting which only scanty and doubtful information is to be found in the works of the ancients, but in those of the moderns a greater number of hypotheses. The situation even of the Cassiterides islands cannot with certainty be determined, though it is supposed in general, and not without probability, that they were the Scilly islands, which lie at the distance of about thirty miles from the most western part of the English coast; that is, the extremity of Cornwall, or, as it is called, the Land’s End. At the same time we must adopt the opinion of Ortelius, that under that appellation were included the coasts of Cornwall and Devonshire534. To those who are on the Scilly islands, Cornwall, as Borlase remarks, appears to be an island; and as it is impossible that the Scilly islands, which were called also Silures, could furnish tin sufficient for the ancient trade, especially as few and very small traces of old works are observed in them, it is more probable that the greater part of the metal was obtained from Cornwall. That the Phœnicians themselves worked mines there, cannot be proved; it is rather to be supposed that they procured the metal from the inhabitants by barter; but, on the other hand, there is reason to believe, from various antiquities, that the Romans dug up the ore themselves from the mine, and had works for extracting the metal.

The island Ictis of Diodorus Siculus, to which the ancient Britons carried tin, and from which it was conveyed by the Gallic merchants, is generally considered as the Isle of Wight; but Borlase remarks very properly535, that Ictis, according to the account of the ancients, must have been much nearer to the coast of Cornwall. He conjectures therefore, and with great probability, that this word was the general appellation of a peninsula, or bay, or a place of depôt for merchandise536. If the Mictis of Timæus and the Vectis of Pliny are not this island Ictis, it will be difficult to find them. It is very singular, that Dionysius, a later writer, and his follower Priscian, and Avienus, call the Cassiterides islands the Hesperides537.

That the Drangians had tin mines appears to me highly improbable; Strabo is the only writer who says so, in a few words; and nothing of the kind is to be found in any other author. If Drangiana be considered as a part of Persia, to which that district belongs at present, it is stated by all modern travellers that tin is not to be found anywhere in the Persian empire538. If we reckon it a part of India, Pliny asserts that no tin-works were then known in that country. In his time, this metal was sent thither as an article of commerce, and was purchased with precious stones and pearls. This last circumstance has by some been considered as a proof of the high price of the metal at that period; but he says nothing further than that tin was among the imports of India at that time, and that jewels and pearls formed a part of the exports. It may be said that the inhabitants of the Spanish colonies in America gave their silver for our linen, but we cannot thence prove that it bears a high price.

That the word stannum, in the time of Pliny, did not signify tin but a compounded metal, is as certain as that in later times it became the common name of tin. Hence arises the question, Since what time has our tin been known under the appellation of stannum?

This question, as far as I know, has never yet been examined; and this, I hope, will be a sufficient excuse if I should not be able to give an answer completely satisfactory. The first author in whom I find the Greek word cassiteros translated by stannum is Avienus, in the free translation of Dionysius; who, as proved by Wernsdorf, lived about the middle of the fourth century. The next who translates the Greek word in the same manner, is Priscian; who, according to the grounds alleged by Wernsdorf, must have lived in the beginning of the sixth century.

From what I already know, I suspect that the long and improper name plumbum candidum began in the fourth century to be exchanged for stannum; and it is probable that, at that time, tin was so abundant that it banished the old stannum, to which it might have a resemblance. In later centuries, then, stannum always signified tin; and in the middle ages various words were arbitrarily formed from it which do not occur in the Latin authors. The stannea tecta, or roof of the church at Agen, on the Garonne, in Guienne, described by the ecclesiastical poet Fortunatus539, about the end of the sixth century, consisted undoubtedly of tinned plates of copper. Stagnare occurs often for tinning, as stagnator does for a tin-founder. In the thirteenth century, Henry III. of England gave as a present a stagnarium or a stannaria, a tin mine or tin work, or as others say, fodina stanni. In the fourteenth century, there was in England, under Edward III., a stannaria curia; and in the same century, besides various other ornaments, lunulæ stanneatæ were forbidden to the clergy. In a catalogue of the year 1379, the following articles occur: “tria parva stanna modici valoris … item unum stannum parvum … item duo magna stanna540.”

In regard to the tin trade of the Spaniards, I can unfortunately say nothing: the tin-works in Spain, we are told, were abandoned under the government of the Moors. England, as is generally asserted, enjoyed an exclusive trade in this metal till the thirteenth century, when the tin mines were discovered and worked in Bohemia. But the exact time when this took place I am not able to determine. The Bohemian works, in all probability, are older than the Saxon; but it is still more certain that the account given by Hagec, that they were known so early as the year 798, is entirely void of foundation541.

When the English writers542 treat on the history of this metal, they seldom fail to repeat what has been said on the subject by Matthew Paris. This Benedictine monk, who was by birth an Englishman, and died in 1259, relates, in his History of England, that a Cornish-man having fled to Germany, on account of a murder, first discovered tin there in the year 1241. He adds, that the Germans soon after furnished this metal at so cheap a rate, that they could sell it in England, on which the price there fell, very much to the loss of Richard Earl of Cornwall, so well known by his having been elected king of the Romans543. Since Matthew relates this as an event which took place in his time, it would perhaps be improper to doubt it; but it still appears strange that no mention is to be found of this circumstance in the Bohemian or German Annals. Gmelin also must not have met with any account of it, else he would have announced it. Peithner likewise is silent respecting it: on the contrary, he says that the tin mines in the neighbourhood of the town of Grauppen were discovered as early as the year 1146, by a peasant named Wnadec, belonging to the village of Chodicze. Of the antiquity of the Saxon mines I can give no account: had any information on that subject existed, it would certainly have been noticed by Gmelin.