Although the professed object of alchemy has now met with that contempt it merited—because, notwithstanding the immense sums which have been expended, the time lost, and unprofitable labour employed in the unavailing search after what probably never will be found—yet the labour lost and money expended has not been totally useless, since it has served to open the seals which secured chemical science to the modern world; and which is the chief, if not the sole advantage it can claim over antiquity for superiority of information.
Painting on glass, but, perhaps, staining had been a more appropriate expression, or, properly speaking, in enamel, with the preparations for colouring in mosaic work, may, to a certain extent, be justly considered as branches of the art of colouring glass; in all which there is no colour more difficult to be attained than a beautiful red; it now is, and ever has been, most difficult, consequently the dearest colour. The presumed ignorance of ancient artists in preparing this colour has afforded some reason, it is said, to suppose the ancients knew of no other substance proper for that purpose but calx of iron, or manganese. To this we may reply, many specimens are found which show they were not so ignorant in that art, and that it is more than probable the same jealousy which is found to exist in modern days among artizans might prevent our sagacious predecessors from publishing the secrets of their respective professions to the world. We contend, that as the materials must then have had existence, which have been since so successfully employed, pray what was the reason the ancients should not avail themselves of their benefit? In all the higher speculations of science and arts, where the great and superior energies of genius were requisite, this perfection in the ancients far surpassed any exertions which have been since achieved by the moderns. To instance one artist and one art solely, we name the great Praxiteles, so famous in the art of statuary, whose works were a model of perfection.
ETCHING ON GLASS AND GLASS CUTTING.
Without entering into the history of the lapidary’s art, we only propose to speak of those things which ancient and modern authors have said upon the art of engraving on glass, observing, that it was an art anciently known to both the Greeks and Romans; although it appears extremely probable, that from their expressed ignorance of many of those properties which modern chemistry has discovered to belong to matter, they were ignorant of the art of etching on glass.
From antique specimens still preserved, a doubt cannot for a moment be suffered to exist on our minds, but that the art of engraving upon glass was familiar to the Greek artists, who formed upon glass both linear figures, and in relievo, by the same means as are now employed for nearly the same purpose, if we can place any confidence in an able and learned lapidary, Natter, who has established, that the ancients employed the same kind of instruments for this purpose, or nearly such as are now in use; abating, perhaps the use of diamonds, and the dust of that precious material, for which it is conceived they used emery powder, and the dust of glass.
From what is related by Pliny, it certainly appears that they used the lapidary’s wheel, an instrument moving in a horizontal direction over the work-table.
Some have thought that drinking cups and vessels may have been formed from the glass whilst in a state of fusion, by means of this wheel; to this they think those words of Martial refer, where he says, calices audaces, having reference to the boldness of the artisan’s touch; those vessels he was constructing often broke under the last touch he bestowed upon his transparent labours, although, perhaps, of costly value; these accidents must of necessity have rendered those articles extremely expensive.
There are not wanting many who affirm the art of glass-cutting, with the instruments necessary for that operation, to be of modern invention. Those assign it to the ingenuity of Caspar Lehmann, originally an engraver on iron and steel, and who, as Beckmann informs us, made an attempt, which succeeded, in cutting crystal, and afterwards glass in the same manner. This artist, we are told, was in the service of Rodolphus, the second emperor of that name, who, in the year 1609, besides giving him valuable presents, conferred on him the title of lapidary and glass-cutter to his court, and gave him a patent, allowing him the exclusive privilege of exercising this new art. He worked at Prague, where he had an assistant of the name of Zacharias Belzer; but George Schwanhard, one of his pupils, carried on the business to a much larger extent. The last named was a son of Hans Schwanhard, a joiner at Rothenburg, and was born in 1601; at the age of seventeen he went to Prague, to learn the art of cutting glass from Lehmann. His good behaviour won so much upon the affections of his master, that on his death in the year 1622, he left him his heir. Schwanhard succeeded in obtaining a continuation of the patent from the emperor, and removed to Nuremburg, where he wrought for many of the nobility of that district. This was, we believe, the occasion of that city claiming the honour of being the birth-place of this new art. In the year 1652, he worked at Prague, and also at Ratisbon, by command of the Emperor Ferdinand III.; and he died in 1676. He left two sons, who both followed the lucrative employment of their father. Afterwards Nuremburg produced many expert masters in the art, who, from the improvement in the tools, and also from discovering more economical modes of using them, were enabled to execute the orders of the public at a more moderate rate than had been previously charged for some articles. Those latter masters likewise brought this art to a much greater degree of perfection. Notwithstanding Zahn was of the same country, and must have been apprised of the facts previously stated, yet he mentions it as a very recent invention at Nuremberg, at the time he published his “Oculus Artificial.” He also furnishes a plate, giving at the same time a description of the various instruments employed. However, that this invention is not purely novel, may be perceived from those facts we have already submitted.
It should be stated that before this latter re-introduction, artists used, with a diamond, to cut figures upon glass in almost every form, as far as the representation by lines went. The history of diamonds has been presented to the public by Mr. Mawe, in his observations on the diamond districts of Brazil. It appears to be yet undetermined whether the ancients used that stone for the purpose of cutting others; upon this point Pliny appears to be satisfied that they did.