Loe raamatut: «A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume I (of 2)», lehekülg 20

When the city at length increased in size and population, the cleaning of the streets became too troublesome and expensive to be left any longer to the care of individuals. Besides, those who inhabited the suburbs complained, and with great justice, that the burthen lay so heavy upon them as to be intolerable; because all the carts which entered the city, or which conveyed filth from it, rendered their streets much dirtier than the rest. It was resolved therefore, in the year 1609, that the streets should be cleaned at the public expense, under the inspection of the police; and a certain revenue in wine was set apart for that purpose. The first person with whom a contract was entered into for this service, was allowed yearly, for cleaning the whole city, 70,000 livres, which sum was raised in 1628 to 80,000⁸²⁴. In 1704, the Parisians were obliged to collect 300,000 livres, for which Government undertook to maintain the lamps and clean the streets; but in 1722 this contribution was increased to 450,000. The last contract with which I am acquainted is that of the year 1748, by which the contractors were to be allowed yearly, during six years, for removing the dirt, 200,000 livres, and for clearing away the snow and ice in winter 6000 more, making in all the sum of 206,000 livres⁸²⁵.

All these regulations and expenses however would undoubtedly have been attended with very little benefit, had not deliberate dirtying of the streets been strictly prohibited, and all opportunities of doing so been as much as possible prevented. As the young king Philip, whom his father Louis the Fat had united with himself as co-regent, and caused to be crowned at Rheims, was passing St. Gervais on horseback, a sow running against his horse’s legs made him stumble, and the prince being thrown was so much hurt, that he died next morning, 3rd October 1131. On account of this accident an order was issued that no swine in future should be suffered to run about in the streets; but this was opposed by the abbey of St. Anthony, because, as the monks represented, it was contrary to the respect due to their patron to prevent his swine from enjoying the liberty of going where they thought proper. It was found necessary therefore to grant these clergy an exclusive privilege, and to allow their swine, if they had bells fastened to their necks, to wallow in the dirt of the streets without molestation⁸²⁶.

A very improper liberty prevailed at Paris in the fourteenth century, which was, that all persons might throw anything from their windows whenever they chose, provided they gave notice three times before, by crying out Gare l’eau, which is as much as to say, Take care of water. This privilege was forbidden in 1372, and still more severely in 1395⁸²⁷. A like practice however seems to have continued longer at Edinburgh; for in the year 1750, when people went out into the streets at night, it was necessary, in order to avoid disagreeable accidents from the windows, that they should take with them a guide, who as he went along called out with a loud voice, in the Scotch dialect, Haud your haunde, Stop your hand⁸²⁸.

This practice however would not have been suppressed at Paris, had not the police paid particular attention to promote the interior cleanliness of the houses, and the erection of privies. Some will perhaps be astonished that these conveniences should have been first introduced into the capital of France by an order from government in the sixteenth century; especially as they are at present considered to be so indispensably necessary, that few summer-houses are constructed without them. Those however to whom this affords matter of surprise must be still more astonished when they are told that the residence of the king of Spain was destitute of this improvement at the very time that the English circumnavigators found privies constructed in the European manner near the habitations of the cannibals of New Zealand⁸²⁹. But Madrid is not the royal residence which has had dirty streets longest on account of this want. Privies began to be erected at Warsaw for the first time only within these few years⁸³⁰.

In the Parisian code of laws, Coûtume de Paris, which was improved and confirmed in 1513, it is expressly ordered, that every house should have a privy⁸³¹. This order, with the denunciation of severer punishment in case of disobedience, was renewed in 1533; and in 1538 the under officers of police were obliged to examine the houses and to report the names of those who had not complied with this beneficial regulation. It appears, however, that the order of 1533 was not the latest; for in 1697, and even in 1700, the police was under the necessity of strictly commanding “that people should construct privies in their houses, and repair those already constructed, and that within a month at furthest, under the penalty of being fined in case of neglect, and of having their houses shut up until they should be in a proper condition.” This order is given in the same words in the Coûtume de Mante, Etampes, Nivernois, Bourbonnois, Calais, Tournay, and Melun⁸³². That issued at Bordeaux is of the year 1585.

All these regulations of police were not much older in Germany than in Paris. The cleaning of the streets was considered there as an almost dishonourable employment, which in some places was assigned to the Jews, and in others to the executioner’s servants. The Jews were obliged to clean the streets of Hamburgh before the present regulations were established. How old these may be I do not know, but in the year 1585 there were dirt carts in that city, and a tax was paid by the inhabitants for supporting them. At Spandau, in 1573, the skinners were obliged to sweep the market-place, which was not then paved, and for this service they were paid by the council⁸³³. In the beginning of the seventeenth century the streets of Berlin were never swept, and the swine belonging to the citizens wallowed in the increasing dirt the whole day, as well as in the kennels, which were choked up with mud. In the year 1624, when the elector desired the council to order the streets to be cleaned, they replied, that it would then be of no use, as the citizens at that time were busy with their farms. Near Peter’s church there was a heap of dust so large that it almost prevented people from passing, and it was with great difficulty, and not until strict orders had been often repeated, that the elector could get the inhabitants to remove it. For a long time dirt of every kind was emptied in the new market-place, and lay there in such quantity, that an order was issued in 1671, that every countryman who came to the market should carry back with him a load of dirt. The director of the public mill made continual complaints, that, by the dirt being shot down near the long bridge, the mill-dam was prevented from flowing. Hog-sties were erected in the streets, sometimes even under the windows. This practice was forbidden by the council in 1641⁸³⁴; but it was nevertheless continued, until the elector at length, in the year 1681, gave orders that the inhabitants should not feed swine; and this prohibition was carried into effect without any exception, as St. Anthony had no abbeys at Berlin. Privies, however, seem to have been common in the large and flourishing towns of Germany much earlier than in the capital of France; and those who are not disposed to find fault with me for introducing proofs here which historians have not disdained to record, may read what follows⁸³⁵: – In the annals of Frankfort on the Maine, where mention is made of the cheapness of former times, we are told how much a citizen there gave in the year 1477 for cleaning his privy⁸³⁶. We are informed also, that in 1496 an order was issued by the council forbidding the proprietors of houses situated in a certain place planted with trees to erect privies towards the side where the trees were growing; and that in 1498, George Pfeffer von Hell, J.U.D. and chancellor of the electorate of Mentz, fell by accident into a privy, and there perished. It appears however from the streets and houses of most of our cities, that they were constructed before such conveniences were thought of, and that these were erected through force at a later period⁸³⁷.

[A new era in paving has been commenced by the substitution of wood for stone, but unfortunately, its vast superiority in some respects is nearly if not quite counterbalanced by its defects, so that it will probably be laid aside. An imperfect kind of wooden pavement has been much used in North America, and is known by the name of corduroy road; but the wooden pavement, properly so called, seems to have been first used in Russia, and within the last few years, on a small scale at Vienna, New York, &c. Its use in London was first suggested by Mr. Finlayson in 1825. It was originally formed of hexagonal prismatic pieces of wood, the grain of which was placed vertically. The blocks have been kept together in various ways, some by mere position, others by wooden pegs, strong iron wire, &c. The great disadvantage of wooden pavement is that it becomes slippery in wet weather. Attempts have been made to remedy this defect, by raising those in the centre above the level of the lateral ones, or grooving the surfaces of the blocks. Another objection to wooden pavement is the difficulty of laying a firm and durable foundation. The retention of water by the spaces left between the blocks and in the pores of the wood itself, whereby an atmosphere of moisture is continually preserved, has also been considered as likely to predispose to certain diseases. Whether the latter is true or not, the short duration of their adoption has hardly afforded sufficient opportunities of deciding. The checking of the vibrations communicated from vehicles constantly running in the streets, renders the wooden pavement of extreme value; its durability has also been stated on good authority to exceed that of stone, and its expense to be less. In these particulars however it has not answered expectation; and from the immense number of horses which are daily thrown down, from the want of resisting points on its surface, its use will probably be abandoned; and in several of the large thoroughfares where it had been adopted it is now being replaced by stone.

A very valuable material for the formation of foot-pavements has been found and patented in asphalte. That which has been most used for this purpose is the native asphalte from Seyssel; it is mixed with a small quantity of native bitumen and sand. In preparing it, 93 parts of native asphalte are reduced to powder and seven of bitumen; these are melted together and fine gravel or sand stirred in the mixture. It is then spread upon a concrete foundation in layers about an inch in thickness. Its elasticity renders it exceedingly durable. Various compositions have been substituted for this mixture, but we believe none have been found to answer so well. The application of bituminous substances to carriage-pavements has been almost exclusively limited to court-yards, but there is very good evidence of its applicability to public thoroughfares, in a piece of pavement, about 150 feet in length by 10 feet in width, laid down in 1838 at Whitehall, as a sample of Messrs. Claridge’s patent. It still remains in perfect condition. The principal objection to the general adoption of asphaltic pavement in the streets of London, appears to be the difficulty of raising and relaying it, a process so constantly required to reach the innumerable gas and water-pipes beneath.

Pavements have been laid down, especially in court-yards and stables, one of the principal constituents of which is caoutchouc.]

COLLECTIONS OF NATURAL CURIOSITIES

If it be true that the written accounts which those who had recovered from sickness caused to be drawn out of their cure, their disorder, and the medicines employed to remove it, and to be hung up in the temples, particularly that of Æsculapius, were the first collections of medical observations⁸³⁸, as seems to appear by the testimony of Hippocrates, who did not disdain to make use of them in order to acquire information⁸³⁹; we have every reason to conjecture, that the rare animals, plants and minerals, generally preserved in the temples also, were the first collections of natural curiosities, and that they may have contributed as much to promote the knowledge of natural history, as those tablets to improve the art of medicine. Natural objects of uncommon size or beauty, and other rare productions, on which nature seemed to have exerted her utmost power, were in the earliest periods consecrated to the gods⁸⁴⁰. They were conveyed to the temples, where their value became still enhanced by the sacredness and antiquity of the place; where they continued more and more to excite respect and awaken curiosity, and where they were preserved as memorials to the latest generations, with the same reverence as the other furniture of these buildings. In the course of time these natural curiosities dedicated to the gods became so numerous, that they formed collections which may be called large for those periods, and for the infant state in which natural history then was.

When Hanno returned from his distant voyages, he brought with him to Carthage two skins of the hairy women whom he found on the Gorgades islands, and deposited them as a memorial in the temple of Juno, where they continued till the destruction of the city⁸⁴¹. The horns of a Scythian animal, in which the Stygian water that destroyed every other vessel could be contained, were sent by Alexander as a curiosity to the temple of Delphi, where they were suspended, with an inscription, which has been preserved by Ælian⁸⁴². The monstrous horns of the wild bulls which had occasioned so much devastation in Macedonia, were by order of king Philip hung up in the temple of Hercules. The unnaturally formed shoulder-bones of Pelops were deposited in the temple of Elis⁸⁴³. The horns of the so-called Indian ants were shown in the temple of Hercules at Erythræ⁸⁴⁴; and the crocodile found in attempting to discover the sources of the Nile was preserved in the temple of Isis at Cæsarea⁸⁴⁵. A large piece of the root of the cinnamon-tree was kept in a golden vessel in one of the temples at Rome, where it was examined by Pliny⁸⁴⁶. The skin of that monster which the Roman army in Africa attacked and destroyed, and which probably was a crocodile, an animal common in that country, but never seen by the Romans before the Punic war, was by Regulus sent to Rome, and hung up in one of the temples, where it remained till the time of the Numantine war⁸⁴⁷. In the temple of Juno, in the island of Melita, there were a pair of elephant’s teeth of extraordinary size, which were carried away by Masinissa’s admiral, and transmitted to that prince, who, though he set a high value upon them, sent them back again because he heard they had been taken from a temple⁸⁴⁸. The head of a basilisc was exhibited in one of the temples of Diana⁸⁴⁹; and the bones of that sea-monster, probably a whale, to which Andromeda was exposed, were preserved at Joppa, and afterwards brought to Rome⁸⁵⁰. In the time of Pausanias, the head of the celebrated Calydonian boar was shown in one of the temples of Greece; but it was then destitute of bristles, and had suffered considerably by the hand of time. The monstrous tusks of this animal were brought to Rome, after the defeat of Antony, by the emperor Augustus, who caused them to be suspended in the temple of Bacchus⁸⁵¹. Apollonius tells us, that he saw in India some of those nuts which in Greece were preserved in the temples as curiosities⁸⁵².

It is certain, however, that all these articles, though preserved in the temples of the ancients as rarities or memorials of remarkable events, or as objects calculated to silence unbelief, were not properly kept there for the purpose to which our collections of natural curiosities are applied; but at the same time it must be allowed that they might be of as much utility to naturalists, as the tablets, in which patients who had recovered thanked the gods for their cures, were to physicians.

We are told by Suetonius, that the emperor Augustus had in his palace a collection of natural curiosities⁸⁵³. I, however, do not remember that any of the ancient naturalists make mention of their own private collections; though it is well known that Alexander gave orders to all huntsmen, bird-catchers, fishermen and others, to send to Aristotle whatever animals they could procure⁸⁵⁴; and although Pliny was accustomed to make observations on such as he had an opportunity of seeing. No doubt can be entertained that a collection of natural curiosities was formed by Apuleius, who, next to Aristotle and his scholar Theophrastus, certainly examined natural objects with the greatest ardour and judgement; who caused animals of every kind, and particularly fish, to be brought to him either dead or alive, in order to describe their external and internal parts, their number and situation, and to determine their characteristic peculiarities, and assign names to them; who undertook distant journeys to become acquainted with the secrets of nature; and who on the Getulian mountains collected petrifactions, which he considered as the effects of Deucalion’s flood. It is much to be lamented that the zoological works of this learned and ingenious man have been lost.

The principal cause why collections of natural curiosities were scarce in ancient times, must have been the ignorance of naturalists in regard to the proper means of preserving such bodies as soon spoil or corrupt. Some methods were indeed known and practised, but they were all defective and inferior to that by spirit of wine, which prevents putrefaction, and which by its perfect transparency permits objects covered by it to be at all times viewed and examined. These methods were the same as those employed to preserve provisions, or the bodies of great men deceased. They were put into salt brine or honey, or were covered over with wax.

It appears that in the earliest periods bodies were preserved from corruption by means of salt⁸⁵⁵, and that this practice was long continued. We are told that Pharnaces caused the body of his father Mithridates to be deposited in salt brine, in order that he might transmit it to Pompey⁸⁵⁶. Eunapius, who lived in the fifth century, relates that the monks preserved the heads of the martyrs by means of salt⁸⁵⁷; and we are informed by Sigebert, who died in 1113, that a like process was pursued with the body of St. Guibert, that it might be kept during a journey in summer⁸⁵⁸. In the same manner the priests preserved the sow which afforded a happy omen to Æneas, by having brought forth a litter of thirty pigs, as we are told by Varro, in whose time the animal was still shown at Lavinium⁸⁵⁹. A hippocentaur (probably a monstrous birth), caught in Arabia, was brought alive to Egypt; and as it died there, it was, after being preserved in salt brine, sent to Rome to the emperor, and deposited in his collection, where it was shown in the time of Pliny, and in that of Phlegon⁸⁶⁰. Another hippocentaur was preserved by the like method, and transmitted to the emperor Constantine at Antioch⁸⁶¹; and a large ape of the species called Pan, sent by the Indians to the emperor Constantius, happening to die on the road by being shut up in a cage, was placed in salt, and in that manner conveyed to Constantinople⁸⁶². This method of preserving natural objects has been even employed in modern times to prevent large bodies from being affected by corruption. The hippopotamus described by Columna was sent to him from Egypt preserved in salt⁸⁶³.

To put dead bodies in honey, for the purpose of securing them from putrefaction, is an ancient practice⁸⁶⁴, and was used at an early period by the Assyrians⁸⁶⁵. The body of Agesipolis king of Sparta, who died in Macedonia, was sent home in honey⁸⁶⁶, as were also the bodies of Agesilaus⁸⁶⁷ and Aristobulus⁸⁶⁸. The faithless Cleomenes caused the head of Archonides to be put in honey, and had it always placed near him when he was deliberating upon any affair of great importance, in order to fulfil the oath he had made to undertake nothing without consulting his head⁸⁶⁹. According to the account of some authors, the body of Alexander the Great was deposited in honey⁸⁷⁰, though others relate that it was embalmed according to the manner of the Egyptians⁸⁷¹. The body of the emperor Justin II. was also placed in honey mixed with spices⁸⁷². The wish of Democritus to be buried in honey⁸⁷³ is likewise a confirmation of this practice. Honey was often applied in ancient times to purposes for which we use sugar. It was employed for preserving fruit⁸⁷⁴; and this process is not disused at present. In order to preserve fresh for many years the celebrated purple dye of the ancients, honey was poured over it⁸⁷⁵, and certain worms useful in medicine were kept free from corruption by the like means⁸⁷⁶. By the same method also were natural curiosities preserved, such as the hippocentaur already mentioned; and it has been employed in later times, as is proved by the account given by Alexander ab Alexandro⁸⁷⁷, respecting the supposed mermen.

Among the Scythians⁸⁷⁸, Assyrians⁸⁷⁹, and Persians⁸⁸⁰, dead bodies were covered over with wax. That of Agesilaus, because honey could not be procured, was preserved in this manner⁸⁸¹, which indeed ought not to be despised even at present. When the Orientals are desirous of transporting fish to any distance, they cover them over with wax⁸⁸²; and the apples carried every year to the northern parts of Siberia and Archangel, from the southern districts of Russia, are first dipped in melted wax, which, by forming a thick coat around them, keeps out the air, and prevents them from spoiling. This property has in my opinion given rise to the ancient custom of wrapping up in wax-cloth the dead bodies of persons of distinction. Linen, or perhaps silk, which had been done over with wax, was used on such occasions, but not what we at present distinguish by the name of wax-cloth, which is only covered with an oil-varnish in imitation of the real kind. The body of St. Ansbert, we are told, was wrapped up linteo cerato; and a camisale ceratum⁸⁸³ was drawn over the clothes which covered that of St. Udalric. When Philip duke of Burgundy died in 1404, his body was wrapped up in thirty-two ells de toile cirée⁸⁸⁴. In an ancient record, respecting the ceremony to be used in burying the kings of England, it is ordered that the body shall be wrapped up in wax-cloth⁸⁸⁵. In the year 1774, when the grave of king Edward I., who died in 1307, was opened, the body was found so closely wrapped up in wax-cloth, that one could perfectly distinguish the form of the hand, and the features of the countenance⁸⁸⁶. The body of Johanna, mother of Edward the Black Prince, who died in 1359, was also wrapped up in cerecloth; and in like manner the body of Elizabeth Tudor, the second daughter of Henry VII., was cered by the wax-chandler⁸⁸⁷. After the death of George II., the apothecary was allowed one hundred and fifty-two pounds for fine double wax-cloth, and other articles necessary to embalm the body⁸⁸⁸. The books found in the grave of Numa, as we learn from the Roman historians, though they had been buried more than five hundred years, were, when taken up, so entire, that they looked as if perfectly new, because they had been closely surrounded with wax-candles. Wax-cloth it is probable was not then known at Rome⁸⁸⁹.

In those centuries usually called the middle ages, I find no traces of collections of this nature, except in the treasuries of emperors, kings and princes, where, besides articles of great value, curiosities of art, antiquities and relics, one sometimes found scarce and singular foreign animals, which were dried and preserved. Such objects were to be seen in the old treasury at Vienna; and in that of St. Denis was exhibited the claw of a griffin, sent by the king of Persia to Charlemagne; the teeth of the hippopotamus, and other things of the like kind⁸⁹⁰. In these collections the number of the rarities always increased in proportion as a taste for natural history became more prevalent, and as the extension of commerce afforded better opportunities for procuring the productions of remote countries. Menageries were established to add to the magnificence of courts, and the stuffed skins of rare animals were hung up as memorials of their having existed. Public libraries also were made receptacles for such natural curiosities as were from time to time presented to them; and as in universities the faculty of medicine had a hall appropriated for the dissection of human bodies, curiosities from the animal kingdom were collected there also by degrees; and it is probable that the professors of anatomy first made attempts to preserve different parts of animals in spirit of wine, as they were obliged to keep them by them for the use of their pupils; and because in old times dead bodies were not given up to them as at present, and were more difficult to be obtained.

At a later period collections of natural curiosities began to be formed by private persons. The object of them at first appears to have been rather to gratify the sight than to improve the understanding; and they contained more rarities of art, valuable pieces of workmanship and antiquities, than productions of nature. It is certain that such collections were first made in places where many families had been enriched without much labour by trade and manufactures, and who, it is likely, might wish to procure to themselves consequence and respect by expending money in this manner. It is not improbable that such collections were formed, though not first, as Stetten thinks⁸⁹¹, at a very early period at Augsburg, and this taste was soon spread into other opulent cities and states.

Private collections, however, appear for the first time in the sixteenth century; and there is no doubt that they were formed by every learned man who at that period applied to the study of natural history. Among these were Hen. Cor. Agrippa of Nettesheim; Nic. Monardes, Paracelsus, Val. Cordus⁸⁹², Hier. Cardan, Matthiolus, 1577; Conrad Gesner, George Agricola, 1555⁸⁹³; Pet. Bellon, 1564; W. Rondelet, 1566; Thurneisser⁸⁹⁴; Abraham Ortelius, 1598⁸⁹⁵; and many others. That such collections were formed also in England⁸⁹⁶ during the above century, is proved by the catalogue which Hakluyt used for his works.

The oldest catalogues of private collections which I remember, are the following: Samuel Quickelberg, a physician from Antwerp, who about the year 1553 resided at Ingolstadt, and was much esteemed by the duke of Bavaria, published in quarto at Munich in 1565, Inscriptiones vel Tituli Theatri Amplissimi, complectentis Rerum Universitatis singulas Materias et Imagines. This pamphlet contained only the plan of a large work, in which he intended to give a description of all the rarities of nature and art. I have never had an opportunity of seeing it. I am acquainted only with a copious extract from it, which induces me to doubt whether Walch was right in giving it out as a catalogue of the author’s collection⁸⁹⁷.

The same year, 1565, John Kentmann, a learned physician in Torgau, sent a catalogue of his collection, which consisted principally of minerals and shells, to Conrad Gesner, who caused it to be printed⁸⁹⁸. The order observed in it is principally borrowed from Agricola. This collection, however, was not extensive. It was contained in a cabinet composed of thirteen drawers, each divided lengthwise into two partitions, and the number of the articles, among which, besides minerals, there were various productions found in mines and marine bodies, amounted to about sixteen hundred. It must however have been considerable for that period, as the collector tells us he laid out sums in forming it which few could be able to expend⁸⁹⁹; and as Jacob Fabricius, in order to see it, undertook a journey from Chemnitz to Torgau⁹⁰⁰. About this time lived in France that ingenious and intelligent potter, Bernard Palissy, who collected all kinds of natural and artificial rarities, and published a catalogue of them, which he made his guide in the study of natural history⁹⁰¹. Michael Mercati, a physician, who was contemporary, formed also in Italy a large collection of natural curiosities, and wrote a very copious description of them, which was first printed about the beginning of the last century⁹⁰². The collection of Ferdinand Imperati, a Neapolitan, the description of which was printed for the first time in 1599, belongs to the same period; and likewise the large collection of Fran. Calceolari of Verona, the catalogue of which was first printed in 1584⁹⁰³. Walch and some others mention the catalogue of Brackenhoffer’s collection as one of the earliest, but it was printed for the first time only in 1677.

[The Tradescants, father and son, are celebrated as being among the first collectors of rarities in this country, which they deposited during their lives in a large house situate in the parish of Lambeth. This became a place of fashionable resort from the curiosities it contained, and obtained the appellation of Tradescant’s ark. A catalogue of its contents was printed in 1656 under the title of Museum Tradescantium. In 1659 this collection was purchased by Elias Ashmole, who presented it, together with his books, MSS., and other rarities, to the University of Oxford in 1683, thereby commencing the now celebrated Ashmolean Museum.

About the same period, James Petiver, still celebrated for his curious and interesting botanical publications, made extensive collections of natural curiosities, employing captains, ship-surgeons, merchants, &c. to bring him whatever they could find suitable to his museum, at almost any cost. He kept up an extensive correspondence in pursuit of this object, and eventually formed one of the finest collections hitherto made in England. At his death it was purchased by that celebrated naturalist, Sir Hans Sloane, and thus became the foundation of perhaps the most important collection in Europe – the British Museum.