Shakespeare, “The Tempest,” Act i. sc. 2.

References.—“Nouvelle Biographie Générale,” Vol. XVI. p. 179; “Grand Dict. Univ. du xixe siècle” of Pierre Larousse, Vol. VII. p. 786; Humboldt, “Cosmos,” 1849, Vol. II. p. 245; Becquerel, “Traité Expér.,” 1834, Vol. I. p. 34, and his “Résumé,” Chap. I; Le Breton, “Histoire,” 1884, p. 43; “La Lumière Electrique,” Juin 1891, p. 546, likewise Procopius, “De Bello, Vandal,” lib. ii. cap. 2; William Falconer’s “Observations,” etc. in Vol. III. p. 278 of “Mem. Lit. and Ph. Soc. Manchester,” 1790 (translated in Italian, 1791), for an account of the flames appearing upon the spear points of the Roman legions.

A.D. 400.—Marcellus Empiricus, who was magister officiorum in the reign of Theodosius the Great (379–395) states in his “De Medicamentis Empiricis,” Venetiis, 1547, P. 89, that the magnet called antiphyson attracts and repulses iron. This, adds Becquerel in his “Résumé,” Chap. III, further proves that these properties were known in the fourth century.

References.—Klaproth, “Boussole,” 1834, p. 12; Harris, “Magnetism,” I and II; “New Gen. Biogr. Dict.,” London, 1850, Vol. IX. p. 475.

A.D. 425.—Zosimus (Count), Greek historian, who lived under Theodosius II (401–450), “sometime advocate of the Treasury of the Roman Empire,” wrote the history of that empire from the reign of Augustus to the year A.D. 410, wherein he is the first to call attention to the electrolytic separation of metals, i. e. that the latter acquire a coating of copper upon being immersed in a cupreous solution.

References.—Gore, “Art of Electro-Met.,” 1877, p. 1, or the London 1890 edition, p. B; “A treatise on Electro-Metal.,” by Walter G. McMillan, London, 1890, p. 2; “Journal des Savants” for June 1895, pp. 382–387; Dr. Geo. Langbein’s treatise, translated by W. T. Brannt, Chap. I; “Nouvelle Biogr. Gén.” (Hœfer), Vol. XLVI. p. 1022; Schoell, “Hist. de la Littér. Grecque”; Pauly, “Real Encycl. ... Alterthums”; “Biogr. Univ.” (Michaud), Vol. XLV. p. 606; “Nouveau Larousse,” Vol. VII. p. 1429.

A.D. 426.—Augustine (Aurelius, Saint), the most prominent of the Latin Fathers of the Church, finishes his “De Civitate Dei,” which he began in 413, and which is considered the greatest monument to his genius. He was probably the most voluminous writer of the earlier Christian centuries. He was the author of no less than 232 books, in addition to many tractates or homilies and innumerable epistles (“Books and their Makers, during the Middle Ages,” Geo. Haven Putnam, New York, 1896, Vol. I. p. 3). In the “De Civitate Dei” he tells us (Basileæ, 1522, pp. 718–719) of the experiment alluded to herein at A.D. 1558. This had better be given in his own words (“De Civitate Dei,” lib. ii. cap. 4, Dod’s translation, Edinburgh, 1871):

“When I first saw it (the attraction of the magnet), I was thunderstruck (vehementer inhorrui), for I saw an iron ring attracted and suspended by the stone; and then, as if it had communicated its own property to the iron it attracted and had made it a substance like itself, this ring was put near another and lifted it up, and, as the first ring clung to the magnet, so did the second ring to the first. A third and fourth were similarly added, so that there hung from the stone a kind of chain of rings with their hoops connected, not interlinking but attached together by their outer surface. Who would not be amazed by this virtue of the stone, subsisting as it does, not only in itself, but transmitted through so many suspended rings and binding them together by invisible links? Yet far more astonishing is what I heard about the stone from my brother in the episcopate, Severus, Bishop of Milevis. He told me that Bathanarius, once Count of Africa, when the Bishop was dining with him, produced a magnet and held it under a silver plate on which he placed a bit of iron; then as he moved his hand with the magnet underneath the plate, the iron upon the plate moved about accordingly. The intervening silver was not affected at all, but precisely as the magnet was moved backward and forward below it, no matter how quickly, so was the iron attracted above. I have related what I have myself witnessed: I have related what I was told by one whom I trust as I trust my own eyes.”

References.—“Vie de St. Augustin,” by Poujoulat, second edition, Paris, 1852, and by G. Moringo, 1533; Possidius, also Rivius, “Vitæ de St. Augus.”; L. Tillemont, “Mémoires Eccles.,” 1702 (the 13th Vol. of which is devoted to an elaborate account of his life and controversies); Bindemann, “Der heilige Augustinus,” 1844; Butler, “Lives of the Saints”; Lardner, “Credibility of the Gospel History,” Vol. VI. part i. pp. 58–59, and Vol. X. pp. 198–303; Neander, “Geschichte der Christlichen Religion und Kirche”; Pellechet, “Catalogue Général des Incunables,” 1897, pp. 339–370; Alfred Weber, “History of Philosophy,” tr. by Frank Thilly, New York, 1896, pp. 188–198; “St. Augustine’s City of God,” tr. by Rev. Marcus Dods, Edinburgh, 1871, Vol. II. book xxi. pp. 420, 457; “Journal des Scavans,” Vol. XIV. for 1686, pp. 22–23, mentions the above-named experiment and the effect of diamond on the loadstone; “Journal des Savants” for Sept. 1898; Ueberweg, “Hist. of Philosophy” (Morris’ tr., 1885), Vol. I. pp. 333–346.

A.D. 450.—Aëtius (Amidenus), Greek physician, informs us (Aëtii, op. lib. xi. cap. 25) that “those who are troubled with the gout in their hands or in their feet, or with convulsions, find relief when they hold a magnet in their hand. Paracelsus recommended the use of the magnet in a number of diseases, as fluxes, hæmorrhages, etc., while Marcellus (“Steph. Artis. Med. Princip.,” II. p. 253) and Camillus Leonardus (“Speculum Lapidum,” lib. ii.) assert that it will cure the toothache.”