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

Dionys. Periegesis, v. 563.

Prisciani Perieg. v. 575.

Avienus Descript. Urbis, v. 743.

Homeri Iliad. xviii. 612.

Iliad. xi. 25.

Iliad. xxiii. 561.

Iliad. xviii. 565, 574.

Hesiod. Scut. Herculis, v. 208.

Aristot. Œconom. lib. ii. p. 594.

Pollux Onomast. p. 1055.

Pomp. Mela, iii. 6, 24, p. 275.

Plin. xxxiii. 5, p. 621.

Plin. xxxiv. 17, § 48, p. 669; and lib. xxxiii. § 45: Optima specula apud majores fuerant Brundisiana stanno et ære mixtis. From a similar mixture the best metallic specula are cast at present.]

To this I shall add the following illustration. The name cassiteron is supposed, in general, to be derived from the Phœnician or Chaldaic[525 - Borlase’s Antiquities of Cornwall. Ox. 1754, fol. p. 29.]; 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 says[526 - Lib. iv. cap. 22, p. 230.], “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 Millin[527 - Minéralogie Homerique, Par. 1790, 8vo. A small treatise much esteemed.], 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 Iliad[528 - Lib. xi. 24, 25.] as two different things[529 - See what I have already said, vol. i. p. 472 (#Page_472).].

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 Watson[530 - Savot, p. 53. – Watson’s Chemical Essays, iv. p. 187.], 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 astonishment[531 - Schefferi Lapponia, Francof. 1673, 4to, pp. 210, 261, where a figure is given of a Lapland woman drawing threads.].

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 antiquities[532 - Phil. Trans. 1702, 1703, vol. xxiii. p. 1129.]; and in 1756 some tin vessels of Roman workmanship with Roman inscriptions were dug up in Cornwall[533 - Phil. Trans. 1759, vol. li. p. 13, where figures of the vessels are given. Whitaker’s Hist. of Manchester, i. p. 306.].

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 Devonshire[534 - Borlase’s Cornwall, p. 30; and his Observations on the Islands of Scilly. Oxf. 1756, 4to.]. 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 properly[535 - Natural Hist. of Cornwall, p. 177.], 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 merchandise[536 - In the Antiquities of Cornwall, p. 394: Ik, yk, ick, a common termination of creeks in Cornwall, as Pordinik, Pradnik.]. 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 Hesperides[537 - Dionysii Orbis Descriptio. Londini, 1679, 8vo, p. 220, where Hill’s observations deserve to be read.].

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 empire[538 - Voyages de Chardin. Rouen, 1723, 12mo, iv. 65, where it is expressly said that Persia has no tin, but that it obtains it from India. The same thing is confirmed by Tavernier.]. 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 Fortunatus[539 - Fortunati Opera. Romæ, 1786, 4to, i. p. 14, lib. i. cap. 8.], 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 stanna[540 - Proofs may be found in Dufresne.].”

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 foundation[541 - Wencesl. Hagec Böhmische Chronik. Nürnb. 1697, fol. p. 53.].

When the English writers[542 - For example, Borlase in Natur. Hist. – Speed’s Theatre of Great Britain. – Camden’s Britannia. – Anderson’s Hist. of Commerce, &c.] 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 Romans[543 - This metal, however, must have remained long dear; for it is remarked in the Archæologia, vol. iii. p. 154, from an expense-book of the Earls of Northumberland, that vessels of tin, about the year 1500, in consequence of their dearness, had not become common. This is confirmed also by a regulation respecting the household of Henry VIII., printed also in the Archæologia, where it is said, “Officers of the squillery to see all the vessels, as well silver as pewter, be kept and saved from stealing.”]. 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.

Brusch, who was murdered by two noblemen in 1559, seems to place the discovery of the tin mines at Schlackenwalde, which he says are younger than those of Schönfeld, in the thirteenth or twelfth century[544 - C. Bruschii redivivi Beschreib. des Fichtelberges. Nürnb. 1683.]. Albertus Magnus, who died in 1280, says that in his time a great deal of tin was dug up in various parts of Germany. At present the principal tin works are at Geyer, Ehrenfriedersdorf and Altenberg.

The art of tinning plate-iron was invented either in Bohemia or Germany, and introduced at a later period into England, France, and other countries. But as the whole history of the German mines is very defective and uncertain, the period when this useful and highly profitable branch of business was begun is not known. Yarranton, an English writer, of whom I shall speak more hereafter, relates that the first tinning of this kind was made in Bohemia; that a Catholic clergyman, who embraced the Lutheran religion, brought the art, about the year 1620, to Saxony, and that since that time all Europe has been furnished with tin-plate from Germany.

This much, however, is certain, that the tinning of iron is more modern than the tinning of copper. The first articles made by the bottle-makers were flasks of copper tinned, which in old times were used in war and on journeys, like the stagnone, still employed in Spain and Portugal, in which all kinds of distilled waters are sent from Malta[545 - See Gegenwärtiger Staat von England, Portugal, und Spanien (by Theodore King of Corsica), ii. p. 25.].

Among the English, who formerly had a monopoly of the tin trade, and who still possess the best and richest tin mines, the introduction of this art of employing their native production did not at first succeed; and this circumstance afforded Becher a subject for raillery[546 - Narrisch Weisheit, p. 51.]. But about the year 1670, a company sent to Saxony, at their expense, an ingenious man named Andrew Yarranton, in order to learn the process of tinning. Having acquired there the necessary knowledge, he returned to England with some German workmen, and manufactured tin-plate, which met with general approbation. Before the company, however, could carry on business on an extensive scale, a man of some distinction, having made himself acquainted with Yarranton’s process, obtained a patent for this art; and the first undertakers were obliged to give up their enterprise, which had cost them a great deal of money, and yet no use was made of the patent which had been obtained[547 - Yarranton’s England’s Improvement by Sea and Land, 1698.].

About the year 1720, which, on account of the many new schemes and the deceptive trade carried on in consequence of them, will ever be memorable in the history of English folly, among the many bubbles, as they were then called, was an establishment for making tin-plate; and this was one of the few speculations of that period which were attended with advantage. The first manufactory of this kind was established in Monmouthshire, perhaps at the village of Pontypool, where tin-plate was at any rate made so early as 1730[548 - Watson’s Chem. Essays, iv. p. 203. – Anderson’s Commerce.]. In France, the first experiment to introduce this branch of manufacture was made under Colbert, who procured workmen, some of whom were established at Chenesey, in Franche-Comté, and others at Beaumont-la-Ferriere in the Nivernois. But the want of skill and proper support rendered this expensive undertaking fruitless. Some manufactories, however, were brought to be productive in the last century; the oldest of which was established at Mansvaux in Alsace, in the year 1726. This was followed, in 1733, by another at Bain in Lorraine, which obtained its privilege from Duke Francis III., and this was confirmed by Stanislaus in 1745[549 - This is related by Diderot in his article Fer-blanc in the Encyclopédie. That the Fer-blanc of the French is tin plate every one knows; but what are we to understand by ferrum candidum, a hundred talents of which were given as a present to Alexander in India? No commentator has noticed this appellation. In the index, however, to Snakenburg’s Curtius, I find the conjecture that it may mean the ferrum Indicum, which, lib. xvi. § 7. ff de Publicanis, or Digest. xxxix. 4, § 16, 7, is named among the articles liable to pay duty; but some editions in this passage have ebenum Indicum. The reader is referred also to Photii Biblioth. p. 145, where Ctesias relates a fable in regard to Indian iron. Pliny, xxxiv. 14, p. 667, mentions ferrum Sericum, which in his time was considered as the best; but still it may be asked, why is the epithet white applied in particular to the Indian iron? Compare Aristot. de Mirab. Auscult. pp. 96, 426.].

That tin, in modern times, has been brought from the East Indies to Europe is well-known; but I have never been so fortunate as to discover when this trade began. It is, however, known, that at the commencement of the sixteenth century a good deal of information had been obtained in Europe in regard to East Indian tin. Louis Barthema, who was then in India, speaks of Malacca tin[550 - Ramusio, fol. i. p. 166. c.], as does also F. Mendez Pinto, who was there in 1537, and Odoard Barbosa mentions that which was carried from Caranguor to Malacca. Barbosa wrote in 1516[551 - Ib. i. p. m. 317. d.]. Munster, Mercator, and other old geographers relate, that before the establishment of the Portuguese dominion in India, large tin coins were in circulation in the island of Sumatra.

The greater part of the East-Indian tin comes from Siam, Malacca, and Banca. In the last-mentioned place, which is an island near the south-east coast of Sumatra, the mines are said to have been discovered in 1711. In 1776 there were ten pits, which were worked by Chinese, on account of the king of Palimbang. One hundred and twenty-five pounds cost him only five rix dollars; and for this quantity he received from the Dutch East-India company, to whose government he was subject, from thirteen to fifteen dollars. The greater part went to China, or was used in India; but in the year 1778 the company sent 700,000 pounds to Europe, which was sold at the rate of a hundred pounds for forty-two florins. Malacca furnishes yearly about three or four hundred thousand pounds; but the principal part of it remains in India. In the year 1778 the company sold 100,000 pounds in Amsterdam. A great deal of tin is sold also in its factory at Siam. All the tin sold by it at Amsterdam between the years 1775 and 1779 amounted to 2,421,597 pounds.

[Tin occurs native in two forms, as peroxide and as sulphuret of tin and copper. The last is rare; the former constitutes the great source of tin, and in its native state mixed with arsenic, copper, zinc and tungsten, is called tin-stone; but when occurring in rounded masses, grains, or sand in alluvial soil, is called stream-tin. The metal reduced from the tin-stone forms block-tin; whilst that from the stream-tin, and which is the purest, is called grain-tin.

The annual produce of the tin mines and works of Cornwall is estimated at 4000 tons, worth from £65 to £80 a ton. About 30,000 cwt. of unwrought tin are annually exported from Britain, chiefly to France, Italy and Russia; which is, exclusive of tin and pewter wares and tin-plates, in declared value nearly £400,000, sent to the United States, Italy, Germany, France, the colonies, &c. Moreover, from 10,000 to 30,000 cwt. of Banca and Malay tin are imported for re-exportation to the continent and the United States.

An important enamel has lately been patented for lining the interior of cast iron vessels and utensils used in cooking, chemical operations, &c., which will probably replace tinned articles in a great degree. To apply the process, the vessels are cleansed with weak sulphuric acid, then washed and dipped into a thin paste made with quartz first melted with borax, felspar and clay free from iron, then reduced to an impalpable powder, and sufficient water added to form thinnish paste. The vessels are then powdered inside with a linen bag, containing a very finely powdered mixture of felspar, carbonate of soda, borax, and a little oxide of tin. The articles are then dried and heated in an enamelling furnace. The coating is very white, bears the action of fire without cracking, and completely resists acid or alkaline solutions.]

SOWING-MACHINES

That under the terms sowing-machine, semoir, drill-plough, macchine per seminare, are understood implements by which the seeds of those plants cultivated on a large scale, and particularly the different species of corn, can be regularly deposited in the earth, and at any distance from each other, at pleasure, is at present generally known. The principal part of the machine consists of a box, having within it a cylinder furnished with cogs, which forms the axes of two wheels, and which, as it revolves, assists the seed put into the box to escape through holes formed at a proper distance from each other in the bottom.

At first, these machines were exceedingly simple, and had only in the fore-part a ploughshare; but afterwards a harrow was applied behind, so that with such an apparatus one could plough, sow, and harrow at the same time. It was attended, however, with the common fault of all very complex machines; it was too artificial, too expensive, and too easily deranged. The greater part, therefore, of those lately made have only a harrow behind them.

Since the beginning of the last century so many machines of this kind have been invented, that to give a complete catalogue of them would be difficult. The invention, however, does not belong either to our period or to the English, who have hitherto paid the greatest attention to the improvement and employment of it. I have somewhere read that a proposal for a machine of this kind occurs in Theophrastus; but I have not yet been able to discover the passage. I am much rather inclined, from the information I have hitherto obtained, to place this invention in the sixteenth century, and to ascribe the merit of it to the Italians. By our oldest writers on agriculture, Heresbach, Colerus, Florinus, Hohberg and others, it is not mentioned.

Joseph Locatelli, of whom, however, very little is known, is commonly considered as the inventor. That he was a nobleman of Carinthia, but not a count, as he is called in Iöcher’s Dictionary of Learned Men, is proved by a small work consisting of two sheets in quarto, now in my possession[552 - The title is, Beschreibung eines neuen Instruments mit welchem das Getraide zugleich geackert und gesäet werden kan; erfunden von Locatelli, Landmann im Erz-Herzogthum Cärndten. Anno 1603. Without the name of any place, printer, or publisher.]. It is there stated, that experiments were made with a machine of this kind by the emperor’s order, at the imperial palace and market of Laxenburg, in the presence of a commissioner, named Pietro Bonaventura von Crollolanza, appointed for that purpose. These experiments succeeded so well, that a crop of sixty for one was obtained from land not manured, and subject to frequent inundation. On this account the emperor rewarded the inventor, and sent him with letters of recommendation to the king of Spain.

In this small work no date is mentioned but on the title-page; and if that be correct, the invention must be placed in the last year of the sixteenth or the first of the seventeenth century, consequently in the reign of the emperor Rudolphus II., who had a great fondness for mechanical inventions. This treatise is certainly the same which, as Reinman says, was printed in 1690 without any place being mentioned, and according to Haller, at Jena, 1690; but the author of it cannot have been the inventor, as asserted by Iöcher, who adds, that the tract in question was printed at Vienna in the year above-mentioned.

The date 1603, however, can hardly be correct; it ought rather to be 1693, and in that case the tract might have been three times printed between that period and 1690. The date in the title-page of my copy appears properly to have in it a 9, which resembles a zero, only because the compositor used a type on which the lower part of the figure was broke. That this conjecture is true, I have, I think, sufficiently proved; though Munchhausen, Haller, and others read the date 1603.