FOOTNOTES
[135] The works in which this subject has been already treated are the following:—Eberhartus de Weihe, de Speculi origine, usu et abusu. A compilation formed without taste, of which I gave some account in the [Article on Chimneys].—Spanhemii Obs. in Callimachi hymn. lavacr. Palladis, p. 615.—Académie des Inscriptions, t. xxiii. p. 140.—Recherches sur les Miroirs des Anciens, par Menard. A short paper, barren of information.—Saggi di Dissertazioni Accad. dell’ Accad. Etrusca dell’ città di Cortona, vii. p. 19: Sopra gli Specchi degli Antichi, del Sig. Cari. A translation from the French, with the figures of some ancient mirrors. It contains an explanation of some passages in Pliny, where he seems to speak of a mirror formed of a ruby, and some conjectures respecting the mirror of Nero. An anonymous member of the Academy, in an appendix, confirms the former, and considers the latter, very properly, as improbable.—Caylus, Recueil d’Antiquités, iii. p. 331, and v. p. 173. A description and figures of ancient mirrors, with some chemical experiments on their composition.—Amusemens Philosophiques. Par le père Bonaventure Abat. Amst. 1763, 8vo, p. 433: Sur l’Antiquité des Mirroirs de Verre. A dissertation worthy of being read on account of the author’s acquaintance with the ancient writers, and his knowledge of technology; but he roves beyond all proof, and employs too much verbosity to decorate his conjectures.
[136] Passages of the poets, where female deities and shepherdesses are represented as contemplating themselves in water instead of a mirror, may be found in the notes to Phædri Fab. i. 4, in the edition of Burmann.
[137] Chap. xxxvii. ver. 18.
[138] Exodus, chap. xxxviii. ver. 8.
[139] Historia Vitri apud Judæos, in Comment. Societat. Scient. Gotting. iv. p. 330. Having requested Professor Tychsen’s opinion on this subject, I received the following answer:—“You have conjectured very properly that the mirrors of the Israelitish women, mentioned Exod. xxxviii. 8, were not employed for ornamenting or covering the washing-basins, in order that the priests might behold themselves in them; but that they were melted and basins cast of them. The former was a conceit first advanced, if I am not mistaken, by Nicol. de Lyra, in the fourteenth century, and which Michaelis himself adopted in the year 1754; but he afterwards retracted his opinion when he made his translation of the Old Testament at a riper age. In the Hebrew expression there is no ground for it; and mirrors could hardly be placed very conveniently in a basin employed for washing the feet. I must at the same time confess that the word (מראת) which is here supposed to signify a mirror, occurs nowhere else in that sense. Another explanation therefore has been given, by which both the women and mirrors disappear from the passage. It is by a learned Fleming, Hermann Gid. Clement, and may be found in his Dissertatio de Labro Æneo, Groning. 1732, and also in Ugolini Thesaurus, tom. xix. p. 1505. He translates the passage thus: Fecit labrum æneum et operculum ejus æneum cum figuris ornantibus, quæ ornabant ostium tabernaculi. This explanation however is attended with very great difficulties; and as all the old translators and Jewish commentators have here understood mirrors; and as the common translation is perfectly agreeable to the language and circumstances, we ought to believe that Moses, not having copper, melted down the mirrors of his countrywomen and converted them into washing-basins for the priests.”
[140] Oneirocrit. lib. iii. cap. 30. p. 176.
[141] Joh. Sarisberiensis, i. cap. 12.
[142] Plin. lib. xxxiii. cap. 9. Seneca, Quæst. Nat. i. cap. 5.
[143] Vita Probi, cap. iv. p. 926: “Patinam argenteam librarum decem specillatam.” Salmasius chooses rather to read specellatam. I am inclined to think that this word ought to be read in Suetonius instead of speculatum, where he speaks of an apartment which Horace seems to have been fond of. That historian, in his Life of Horace, says, “Ad res venereas intemperantior traditur: nam speculato cubiculo scorta dicitur habuisse disposita, ut quocunque respexisset, ibi ei imago coitus referretur.” Lessing, who in his Miscellanies (Vermischten Schriften, Berlin 1784, 12mo, iii. p. 205) endeavours to vindicate the poet from this aspersion, considers the expression speculatum cubiculum, if translated an apartment lined with mirrors, as contrary to the Latin idiom, and thinks therefore that the whole passage is a forgery. Baxter also before said that this anecdote had been inserted by some malicious impostor. This I will not venture to contradict, but I am of opinion that specillatum or specellatum cubiculum is at any rate as much agreeable to the Roman idiom as patina specillata. This expression Salmasius and Casaubon have justified by similar phrases, such as opera filicata, tesselata, hederata, &c. The chamber in which Claudian makes Venus ornament herself, and be overcome by the persuasion of Cupid, was also covered over with mirrors, so that whichever way her eyes turned, she could see her own image. Did Claudian imagine that this goddess knew how to employ such an apartment, not only for dressing, but even after she was undressed, as well as Horace? I have seen at a certain court, a bed entirely covered in the inside with mirrors.
[144] Iliad. lib. xiv. ver. 166.
[145] Hymnus in Lavacrum Palladis, v. 15, 21. It was however customary to ascribe a mirror to Juno, as Spanheim on this passage proves; and Athanasius, in Orat. contra Gentes, cap. xviii. p. 18, says that she was considered as the inventress of dress and all ornaments. Should not therefore the mirror, the principal instrument of dress, belong to her? May it not have been denied to her by Callimachus, because he did not find it mentioned in the description which Homer has given of her dressing-room?
[146] De Natur. Deorum, iii. 22.
[147] Licetus de Lucernis Antiq. lib. vi. cap. 92.
[148] Lib. xxxiv. cap. 17, p. 669.
[149] Quæst. Nat. at the end of the first book.
[150] Mostell. act i. sc. 3. v. 101.
[151] Arrianus in Epictet. i. cap. 20, p. 79.
[152] Among the remaining passages of the ancients with which I am acquainted, in which mention is made of silver mirrors, the following deserves notice. Chrysostom, Serm. xvii. p. 224, who, in drawing a picture of the extravagance of the women, says, “The maid-servants must be continually importuning the silversmith to know whether their lady’s mirror be yet ready.” The best mirrors therefore were made by the silversmiths. It appears that the mirror-makers at Rome formed a particular company; at least Muratori, in Thesaur. Inscript. Clas. vii. p. 529, has made known an inscription in which collegium speculariorum is mentioned. They occur also in Codex Theodos. xiii. tit. 4, 2. p. 57, where Ritter has quoted more passages in which they may be found. But perhaps the same name was given to those who covered walls with polished stones, and in latter times to glaziers.
[153] Lib. xxxiii. c. 9. p. 627, and lib. xxxiv. c. 17, p. 669.
[154] Philosophical Transactions, vol. lxvii. p. 296.
[155] Quomodo Historia sit conscrib. cap. 51, Bipont edition, iv. p. 210, 535. Commentators have found no other way to explain κέντρον (a word which occurs in Lucian’s description of the mirror), than by the word centre, to which, according to their own account, there can be here no allusion. In my opinion κέντρον signifies those faulty places which are not capable of a complete polish, on account of the knots or cracks which are found in them. Lucian therefore speaks of a faultless mirror which represents the image perfect, as he afterwards informs us.
[156] As the account of these experiments is given only in an expensive work, which may not often fall into the hands of those who are best able to examine it, I insert it here. “The ancient mirror, which I examined, was a metallic mixture, very tender and brittle, and of a whitish colour inclining to grey. When put into the fire, it remained a long time in a state of ignition before it melted. It was neither inflammable nor emitted any smell like garlic, which would have been the case had it contained arsenic. It did not either produce those flowers which are generally produced by all mixtures in which there is zinc. Besides, the basis of this mixture being copper, it would have been of a yellow colour had that semi-metal formed a part of it. I took two drams of it and dissolved them in the nitrous acid. A solution was speedily formed, which assumed the same colour as solutions of copper. It precipitated a white powder, which I carefully edulcorated and dried. Having put it into a crucible with a reductive flux, I obtained lead very soft and malleable.
“Having filtered the solution, I took a part of it, upon which I poured an infusion of gall-nuts, but it produced no change. A solution of gold, which I poured upon another part, made it assume a beautiful green colour; but no precipitate was formed: which is sufficient to prove that there was neither iron nor tin in the mixture.
“On the remaining part of the solution I poured a sufficient quantity of the volatile alkali to dissolve all the copper that might be contained in it. The solution became of a beautiful sapphire blue colour, and a white precipitate was formed. Having decanted the liquor, and carefully edulcorated the precipitate, I endeavoured to reduce it; but whether it was owing to the quantity being too small, or to my not giving it sufficient heat, I could not succeed. I had recourse therefore to another method.
“I took the weight of two drams of the mixture, which I brought to a high state of ignition in a cuppel. When it was of a whitish-red colour, I threw upon it gradually four drams of sulphur, and when the flame ceased, I strengthened the fire in order to bring it to complete fusion. By these means I obtained a tender brittle regulus, whiter than the mixture, in which I observed a few small needles. Being apprehensive that some copper might still remain, I sulphurated it a second time, and then obtained a small regulus which was almost pure antimony.
“It results from these experiments, that the metal of which the ancients made their mirrors was a composition of copper, regulus of antimony, and lead. Copper was the predominant, and lead the smallest part of the mixture; but it is very difficult, as is well known, to determine with any certainty the exact proportion of the substances contained in such compositions.”
[In the examination of an Etruscan mirror, which was placed in my hands for analysis by Professor Gerhardt of Berlin, it was found to consist, in 100 parts, of 67·12 copper, 24·93 tin, and 8·13 lead, approximating closely to an alloy of eight parts of copper to three of tin and one of lead. The oxide of tin obtained in the course of analysis was carefully examined, before the blowpipe, for antimony, but I did not succeed in detecting a trace of that metal. A similar mirror had been likewise analysed by Klaproth; he found 62 per cent. copper, 32 tin, and 6 per cent. lead, but no trace of antimony.—W. F.]
[157] Of such large mirrors Seneca speaks in his Quæst. Nat. lib. i. Of the like kind was the mirror of Demosthenes mentioned by Plutarch, Lucian, and Quintilian.—Institut. Orat. xi. 3, 68, p. 572.
[158] Lib. xxxvi. c. 26, p. 758.
[159] Sueton. in Vita Domit. cap. xiv. p. 334.
[160] Lib. xxxvi. 22, p. 752.—“Cappadociæ lapis, duritia marmoris, candidus atque translucidus, ex quo quondam templum constructum est a quodam rege, foribus aureis, quibus clausis claritas diurna erat.”—Isidor. Origin. 16, 4. Our spar is transparent, though clouds and veins occur in it, like the violet and isabella-coloured, for example, of that found at Andreasberg. Compare this explanation with what Salmasius says in Exercitat. Plin. p. 184.
[161] Lib. xxxvii. cap. 5, p. 774.
[162] Lib. xi. cap. 37, p. 617.
[163] This dissertation of Abat may be found translated in Neuen Hamburg. Magazin. i. p. 568.
[164] Academia di Cortona, vii. p. 34.
[165] Origin. xvi. 7.
[166] Goguet, ii. p. 111. Fabricii Biblioth. Græca. vol. i. p. 70.
[167] Keyssler, i. pp. 17 and 441.
[168] Lib. xxxvii. cap. 7.
[169] De Lapid. § 61.
[170] [This stone acquired its name from its being much used in ornaments by the Incas or Princes of Peru.]
[171] De la Vega, ii. 28.
[172] Montamy in Abhandlung von den Farben zum Porzellan, Leipzig, 1767, 8vo, p. 222, asserts that he saw, in a collection of antiquities, glass mirrors which were covered behind only with a black foil.
[173] Lib. xxxvi. cap. 26, p. 758.
[174] Lib. xxxiii. cap. 9, p. 627.
[175] Trebell. Pollio, Vita Gallien. cap. 12.
[176] Chemical Essays, vol. iv. p. 246.
[177] Plin. lib. xxxiii.: Æs inaurari argento vivo, aut certe hydrargyro, legitimum erat. The first name here seems to signify native quicksilver, and the second that separated from the ore by an artificial process.
[178] Hist. Nat. Supplem. i. p. 451.
[179] Stob. Eclog. Antv. 1575, fol. p. 56.
[180] De Placitis Philos. ii. cap. 20.
[181] In Aratum, cap. 19.
[182] Lib. i. cap. 8.
[183] It is undoubtedly certain, that ὕαλος, which is translated vitreous or glassy, means any smooth polished body capable of reflecting rays of light. Originally it signified a watery body; and because watery bodies have a lustre, it was at length used for glass. See Salmas. ad Solin. p. 771.
[184] More observations respecting the opinion of Philolaus may be found in the edition of Plutarch’s work De Placitis Philosophorum by Ed. Corsinus, Flor. 1750, 4to, p. 61, and p. 23.
[185] Professor Heeren having given me his opinion on this passage of Stobæus, I shall here insert it for the satisfaction of the learned reader. The critics, says he, will hardly be persuaded that the words καὶ τὸ ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ πυροειδὲς κατὰ τὸ ἐσοπτροειδὲς are correct, as they can be translated different ways. With regard to the explanation of the matter, I build only on the plain meaning of the words. The author tells us, that Philolaus thought the sun to be a mirror; but we must conclude that he speaks of a mirror such as were then in use; a smooth plate of metal, and not a globe. In this case the first explanation of a glass globe falls to the ground. This is confirmed by Eusebius, who calls it ὑαλοειδὴς δίσκος, though it is possible that the latter word may be a gloss added by some grammarian, or by Eusebius himself. If we enter further into the explanation, we must adopt the plain idea, that the rays of the sun fall upon this plate, and are reflected to us. I am however of opinion, that ὕαλος ought to be translated glass, ὑαλοειδὴς glassy or vitreous; for the intention of Philolaus evidently was to define the substance of the sun’s body. The result of the whole is, Philolaus considered the sun as a plain plate of glass which reflected the rays or brightness of the æthereal fire. But that he was acquainted with a proper glass mirror does not thence follow with certainty.
[186] Pourquoy reluient les fenestres de verre si fort? Pourtant que la nature de l’estain, duquel elles sont basties par dedans, fort clere, meslée avec le verre cler aussi de lui mesme reluyst d’avantage; et le quel estain outrepassant ses raïons par les petits pores du verre, et augmentant doublement la face extérieure du dit verre, la rend grandement clere.—Problemes d’Alexandre Aphrod., traduit par M. Herret. Paris 1555, 8vo, p. 50.
[187] Origin. lib. xvi. 15, p. 394.
[188] Origin. lib. xvi. 18, p. 396.
[189] Lib. xxxvi. cap. 26, p. 759.
[190] Bayle, Diction. Histor. vol. iv. p. 462.
[191] Printed at Leipzig, 1504, in small folio. There is an edition also printed at Cologne in 1624, and Fabricius quotes a Venetian edition. Pisanus seems to have been a by-name given by some one to Peckham.
[192] Specul. Natur. ii. 78, p. 129.
[193] Ars Magna, cap. lxvii. p. 517, in Lullii Opera. Argent. 1607, 8vo.
[194] Opus Majus, ed. Jebb. Lond. 1733, fol. p. 346.
[195] Franc. Assisiatis et Ant. Paduani Opera. Lugd. 1653, fol.
[196] Nicephori Schol. in Synesium, in Synesii Op. Par. 1612, fol. p. 419.
[197] In the collection of antiquities at St. Denis, an ancient mirror was shown, which was said to have belonged to Virgil. It was oval, and before Mabillon let it fall, was fourteen inches in length and twelve in breadth, and weighed thirty pounds. It is transparent, and of a brownish-yellow colour. According to experiments made on purpose, it was found to consist of artificial glass, mixed with a considerable portion of lead; and as it had been preserved in the above collection from the earliest periods, the practice of adding lead to glass must be very old. But whether this mirror was covered at the back, and how it was covered, though these are the most important points, I find nowhere mentioned. In the collection of the Grand Duke of Tuscany there is a piece of the same kind, said also to have been the mirror of Virgil. See Le Veil, Kunst auf Glas zu malen, Nurnb. 1779, 4to, p. 23, and Hist. de l’Acad. des Sciences, 1737, p. 412.
[198] Villaret, Hist. de France. Par. 1763, xi. p. 142.
[199] In Miscellanea Berolinensia, i. p. 263; but nothing further is said respecting the art, than that it was daily used in the glass-houses. Had I an opportunity, I should make experiments of every kind in order to discover a method of forming plane mirrors also in the like manner.
[200] Wecker, in his book De Secretis, lib. x. p. 572, seems to say, that one must lay the saturated tin leaf so carefully on the glass plate, that no air can settle between them. According to Garzoni, the tin leaf is spread out on a smooth stone table, and after it has been rubbed over with quicksilver, the glass is placed above it.
[201] Tome iii. p. 87, art. Glace.
[202] Dict. Géog. de la France. Amst. 1762, fol. v. pp. 415, 672.
[203] A furnace for casting large glass plates, before it is fit to be set at work, cost, it is said, 3500l. It seldom lasts above three years, and even in that time it must be repaired every six months. It takes six months to rebuild it, and three months to repair it. The melting-pots are as big as large hogsheads, and contain above 200 cwt. of metal. If one of them burst in the furnace, the loss of the matter and time amounts to 250l.—Trans.