That gems had sex is asserted by the earliest writers as well as by many of those of a later date. While this must usually be understood as a poetic way of indicating a difference in shade, the darker varieties being regarded as male and the lighter ones as female, Theophrastus, the earliest Greek writer on precious stones, clearly shows that this sexual distinction was sometimes seriously made, for he declares that, wonderful as it might seem, certain gems were capable of producing offspring.
This strange idea was still prevalent in the sixteenth century, and ingenious explanations were sometimes given of the cause of this phenomenon, as appears in the following account by Rueus of germinating diamonds:[27]
It has recently been related to me by a lady worthy of credence, that a noblewoman, descended from the illustrious house of Luxemburg, had in her possession two diamonds which she had inherited, and which produced others in such miraculous wise, that whoever examined them at stated intervals judged that they had engendered progeny like themselves. The cause of this (if it be permissible to philosophize regarding such a strange matter) would seem to be that the celestial energy in the parent stones, qualified by some one as “vis adamantifica,” first changes the surrounding air into water, or some similar substance, and then condenses and hardens this into the diamond gem.
The pearl-fishers of Borneo are said to preserve carefully every ninth pearl they find, and place them in a bottle with two grains of rice for each pearl, believing, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that these particular pearls have the power to engender and breed others. Custom and superstition require that each bottle shall have the finger of a dead man as a stopper.
PEARL DEALER.
From the “Hortus Sanitatis” of Johannis de Cuba [Strassburg, Jean Pryss, ca. 1483]: De lapidibus, cap. lxxviii. Author’s library.
Talismanic influences are taken into account in the wearing of jewelry by Orientals, two bracelets being frequently worn lest one member should become jealous of the other, thus disturbing the equilibrium of the whole organism. The piercing of the ears for ear-rings has been attributed to a desire to chastise the ear for its indiscretion in hearing secrets not intended to be heard, while costly and ornamental ear-rings are set in the ears to console those parts of our anatomy for the suffering caused by the operation of piercing. In the case of necklaces of brilliant metal, adorned with pendants of glittering stones, the talismanic purpose is to attract the beholder’s gaze and thus ward off the mysterious and dangerous emanations set forth by the Evil Eye; the necklace, or its ornaments, are supposed to perform a similar service to that rendered by the lightning-rod in diverting the electric discharge.
At an early date the Christian Church registered its opposition to the practice of wearing amulets. At the Council of Laodicea, held in 355 A.D., it was decreed, in the thirty-fourth canon, that priests and clerks must be neither enchanters, mathematicians, nor astrologers, and that they must not make “what are called amulets,” for these were fetters of the soul, and all who wore them should be cast out of the church.[28] This emphatic condemnation of the prevailing usage was not so much a protest against superstition per se as against pagan superstition, for almost if not all the amulets in use in the early centuries of our era bore heathen or heretical symbols or inscriptions. In later times the invincible tendency to wear objects of this character found expression in the use of those associated with Christian belief, such, for instance, as relics of the saints, medallions blessed by the priest, etc.