Read the book: «A History of Inventions, Discoveries, and Origins, Volume I (of 2)», page 34

BUTTER

Milk, the most natural and the commonest food of man, is a mixture of three component parts, whey, butter, and cheese. The caseous part is viscous; the butter is the fat, oily, and inflammable part, and properly speaking, is not perfectly dissolved in the serum or whey, but rather only diffused through it like an emulsion, so that it may be separated by rest alone, without any artificial preparation. When milk is in a state of rest, the oily part rises to the surface, and forms what is called cream. When the milk has curdled, which will soon be the case, the caseous parts separate themselves from the whey; and this separation may be effected also by the addition of some mixture, through means of which the produce is liable to many variations. The caseous part, when squeezed and mixed with salt, and sometimes herbs, and when it has been moulded into a certain form and dried, is used under the name of cheese, which will always be better, the greater the butyraceous part is that has been left in it. The cream skimmed, and by proper agitation in a churn or other vessel separated from the whey and caseous parts, becomes our usual butter.

This substance, though commonly used at present in the greater part of Europe, was not known, or known very imperfectly, to the ancients¹⁵⁴⁴. The ancient translators of the Hebrew writers¹⁵⁴⁵ seem however to have thought that they found it mentioned in Scripture¹⁵⁴⁶: but those best acquainted with biblical criticism, unanimously agree that the word chamea signifies milk or cream, or sour thick milk, and at any rate does not mean butter¹⁵⁴⁷. The word plainly alludes to something liquid, as it appears that chamea was used for washing the feet, that it was drunk, and that it had the power of intoxicating; and we know that mares’-milk, when sour, will produce the like effect. We can imagine streams of milk, but not streams of butter. This error has been occasioned by the seventy interpreters, who translate the Hebrew word by the word boutyron. These translators, who lived two hundred years after Hippocrates, and who resided in Egypt, might, as Michaelis remarks, have been acquainted with butter, or have heard of it; but it is highly probable that they meant cream, and not our usual butter. Those who judge from the common translation, would naturally conclude that the passage in Proverbs, chap. xxx., describes the preparation of butter by shaking or beating; but the original words signify squeezing or pressing, pressio, frictio mulgentis educit lac; so that milking and not making butter is alluded to.

The oldest mention of butter, though it is indeed dubious and obscure, is in the account given of the Scythians by Herodotus¹⁵⁴⁸. “These people,” says he, “pour the milk of their mares into wooden vessels, cause it to be violently stirred or shaken by their blind slaves, and separate the part that arises to the surface, as they consider it more valuable and more delicious than that which is collected below it.” The author here certainly speaks of the richest part of the milk being separated from the rest by shaking; and it appears that we have every reason to suppose that he alludes to butter, especially as Hippocrates, who was almost contemporary, mentions the same thing, but in a much clearer manner¹⁵⁴⁹. “The Scythians,” says the latter, “pour the milk of their mares into wooden vessels, and shake it violently; this causes it to foam, and the fat part, which is light, rising to the surface, becomes what is called butter. The heavy and thick part, which is below, being kneaded and properly prepared, is, after it has been dried, known by the name of hippace. The whey or serum remains in the middle.” This author, in my opinion, speaks here very distinctly of butter, cheese and whey. It is probable that the Scythians may have hastened the separation of the caseous part from the whey by warming the milk, or by the addition of some substance proper for that purpose. These passages therefore contain the first mention of butter, which occurs several times in Hippocrates, and which he prescribes externally as a medicine¹⁵⁵⁰; but he gives it another term (pikerion), which seems to have been in use among the Greeks earlier than the former, and to have been afterwards neglected. That this word signified butter, and was no longer employed in the time of Galen, appears from his translating it, in his explanation of the obsolete expressions of Hippocrates, by the word boutyron¹⁵⁵¹. It was even before that period explained in the same manner by Erotian, in his dictionary of the words used by that Greek physician; and he remarks, from an ancient writer, that the Phrygians called butter pikerion, and that the Greeks seemed to have borrowed the word from these people. It however occurs very seldom, and is to be found neither in Hesychius, Suidas, nor Pollux¹⁵⁵².

The poet Anaxandrides, who lived soon after Hippocrates, describing the wedding of Iphicrates, who married the daughter of Cotys, king of Thrace, and the Thracian entertainment given on that occasion, says that the Thracians ate butter¹⁵⁵³, which the Greeks at that time considered as a wonderful kind of food.

It is very remarkable that the word butter does not occur in Aristotle, and that he even scarcely alludes to that substance, though we find in his works some very proper information respecting milk and cheese, which seems to imply careful observation. At first he gives milk only two component parts, the watery and the caseous; but he remarks afterwards, for the first time, in a passage where one little expects it, that in milk there is also a fat substance, which under certain circumstances, is like oil¹⁵⁵⁴.

In Strabo there are three passages that refer to this subject, but from which little information can be obtained. This author says that the Lusitanians used butter instead of oil; he mentions the same circumstance respecting the Ethiopians; and he relates in another place, that elephants, when wounded, drank this substance in order to make the darts fall from their bodies¹⁵⁵⁵. I am much astonished, I confess, to find that the ancient Ethiopians were acquainted with butter, though it is confirmed by Ludolfus¹⁵⁵⁶. It ought to be remarked also, that according to Aristotle, the elephants, to cure themselves, did not drink butter, but oil¹⁵⁵⁷. In this he is followed by Pliny¹⁵⁵⁸; and Ælian says, that for the above purpose these animals used either the bloom of the olive-tree, or oil itself¹⁵⁵⁹; but Arrian, who lived a hundred years after Strabo, and who has related everything respecting the diseases of the elephant and their cures, in the same order as that author, has omitted this circumstance altogether¹⁵⁶⁰. Is the passage of Strabo, therefore, genuine? Ælian however says, in another part of his book, that the Indians anointed the wounds of their elephants with butter¹⁵⁶¹.

We are told by Plutarch, that a Spartan lady paid a visit to Berenice, the wife of Dejotarus, and that the one smelled so much of sweet ointment, and the other of butter, that neither of them could endure the other. Was it customary, therefore, at that period, for people to perfume themselves with butter?

Of much more importance are the remarks made by Dioscorides and Galen on this subject. The former says that good butter was prepared from the fattest milk, such as that of sheep or goats, by shaking it in a vessel till the fat was separated. To this butter he ascribes the same effects, when used externally, as those produced by our butter at present. He adds also, and he is the first writer who makes the observation, that fresh butter might be melted and poured over pulse and vegetables instead of oil, and that it might be employed in pastry in the room of other fat substances. A kind of soot likewise was at that time prepared from butter for external applications, which was used in curing inflammation of the eyes and other disorders. For this purpose the butter was put into a lamp, and when consumed, the lamp was again filled till the desired quantity of soot was collected in a vessel placed over it.

Galen, who distinguishes and confirms in a more accurate manner the healing virtues of butter, expressly remarks that cow’s-milk produces the fattest butter; that butter made from sheep’s- or goat’s-milk is less rich; and that ass’s-milk yields the poorest. He expresses his astonishment, therefore, that Dioscorides should say that butter was made from the milk of sheep and goats. He assures us that he had seen it made from cow’s-milk, and that he believes it had thence acquired its name¹⁵⁶². “Butter,” says he, “may be very properly employed for ointments; and when leather is besmeared with it, the same purpose is answered as when it is rubbed over with oil. In cold countries, which do not produce oil, butter is used in the baths; and that it is a real fat may be readily perceived by its catching fire when poured over burning coals¹⁵⁶³.” What has been here said is sufficient to show that butter must have been very little known to, or used by, the Greeks and Romans in the time of Galen, that is, at the end of the second century.

The Roman writers who give an account of the ancient Germans, all relate that they lived principally on milk; but they disagree in one thing, because many of them tell us that they used cheese, while others affirm that they were not even acquainted with the method of preparing it¹⁵⁶⁴. Pliny, on the other hand, says that they did not make cheese, but butter, which they used as a most pleasant kind of food. He ascribes to them also the invention of it; for it is highly probable that under the expression “barbarous nations” he meant the people of Germany: and his description of butter appears to me so clear, that I do not see how it can be doubted¹⁵⁶⁵. He very justly remarks, that, in order to make butter in cold weather, the milk ought to be warmed, but that in summer this precaution is not necessary. The vessel employed for making it seems to have had a great likeness to those used at present; we are told at least that it was covered, and that in the lid there were holes¹⁵⁶⁶. What he says however respecting oxygala is attended with difficulties; and I am fully persuaded that his words are corrupted, though I find no variations marked in manuscripts by which this conjecture can be supported. Having made an attempt by transposing the words to discover the real sense, I found that I had placed them in the same order as that in which they had been before arranged by Dithmar, who, in his annotations on Tacitus, quotes them in the same manner as I would read them, and with so much confidence that he does not even hint they were ever read otherwise. Had we both been critics, this similarity might have given our conjecture perhaps more authority; but Dithmar also was a professor of the œconomical sciences¹⁵⁶⁷.

Oxygala was evidently a kind of cheese, the preparation of which has been best described by Columella¹⁵⁶⁸. In order to make it, sweet milk was commonly rendered sour, and the serum was always separated from it. Of this process Pliny speaks likewise; but he first mentions under the above name a kind of cheese formed from the caseous parts which remained behind in the butter-milk, and which when separated from it by acids and boiling, were mixed and prepared in various ways. It must in general have been sourish; for, according to the account of Galen¹⁵⁶⁹, it affected the teeth, though he mentions also another kind of cheese, under the name of caseus oxygalactium¹⁵⁷⁰, which was perfectly mild. In the Geoponica¹⁵⁷¹ directions are given how this cheese may be kept fresh for a long time. If my reading be adopted, the medicinal effects spoken of by Pliny are not to be ascribed to the butter, but to the sour cheese¹⁵⁷²; and physicians undoubtedly will be much readier to allow them to the latter than to the former. Whether Tacitus by lac concretum, which he says was the most common food of the Germans, meant cheese or butter I cannot examine, as we have no grounds to enable us to determine this question, respecting which nothing more can be known¹⁵⁷³.

I have now laid before the reader, in chronological order, every thing that I found in the works of the ancients respecting butter; and it is certain, from what has been said, that it is not a Grecian, and much less a Roman invention; but that the Greeks were made acquainted with it by the Scythians, the Thracians and the Phrygians, and the Romans by the people of Germany¹⁵⁷⁴. It appears also, that when they had learned the art of making it, they employed it only as an ointment in their baths, and particularly in medicine. Besides the proofs already quoted, a passage of Columella¹⁵⁷⁵ deserves also to be remarked, because that author, and not Pliny, as Vossius thinks, is the first Latin writer who makes use of the word butyrum. Pliny recommends it mixed with honey to be rubbed over children’s gums in order to ease the pain of teething, and also for ulcers in the mouth¹⁵⁷⁶. The Romans in general seem to have used butter for anointing the bodies of their children to render them pliable¹⁵⁷⁷; and we are told that the ancient Burgundians besmeared their hair with it¹⁵⁷⁸. A passage of Clemens of Alexandria, in which he expressly says that some burned it in their lamps instead of oil, is likewise worthy of attention¹⁵⁷⁹. It is however certain, on the other hand, that it was used neither by the Greeks nor the Romans in cookery or the preparation of food, nor was it brought upon their tables by way of dessert, as at a later period was the custom. We never find it mentioned by Galen and others as a food, though they have spoken of it as applicable to other purposes. No notice is taken of it by Apicius; nor is there anything said of it in that respect by the authors who treat on agriculture, though they have given us very particular information concerning milk, cheese and oil. This, as has been remarked by other writers, may be easily accounted for, by the ancients having entirely accustomed themselves to the use of good oil; and in the like manner butter at present is very little employed in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and the southern parts of France, where it is sold in the apothecaries’ shops for medicinal purposes¹⁵⁸⁰. It is certain besides, that in warm countries it is difficult to preserve it for any length of time.

To conclude, I shall offer one remark, which, in my opinion is entirely new. It appears to me, by the information which I have here collected from the ancients, that at the period when these authors wrote, people were not acquainted with the art of making butter so clean and so firm as that which we use on our tables. On the contrary, I am fully persuaded that it was rather in an oily state, and almost liquid. They all speak of butter as of something fluid. The moderns cut, knead and spread butter; but the ancients poured it out as one pours out oil. Galen tells us, that, to make soot of butter, the butter must be poured into a lamp. Had the ancients used in their lamps hard or solid butter, as our miners use tallow in the lamps that supply them with light under ground, they would not have made choice of the expression to pour out. We are told that the elephants drank butter; and liquid butter must have been very familiar to the Greek translators of the Sacred Scriptures, when they could mention it as flowing in streams. Hecatæus, quoted by Athenæus, calls the butter with which the Pæonians anointed themselves, oil of milk¹⁵⁸¹. Casaubon observes on this passage, that the author makes use of these words, because butter was then employed instead of oil, and spoken of in the like manner, as was the case with sugar, which was at first considered to be a kind of honey, because it was equally sweet and could be applied to the same purposes. Hippocrates, on the like grounds, calls swine’s seam, swine’s oil¹⁵⁸². This explanation I should readily adopt, did not such expressions respecting butter, as one can apply only to fluid bodies, occur everywhere without exception. In warm countries, indeed, butter may be always in a liquid state; but I am of opinion that the ancients in general did not know by means of kneading, washing and salting, to render their butter so firm and clean as we have it at present. On this account it could not be long kept or transported, and the use of it must have been very much limited.

I shall remark in the last place, that butter appears to have been extremely scarce in Norway during the ages of paganism; for we find mention made by historians of a present of butter which was so large that a man could not carry it, and which was considered as a very respectable gift¹⁵⁸³.

AURUM FULMINANS

If a solution of chloride of gold be precipitated by an excess of ammonia, a yellow powder will be obtained, which, when heated, or only bruised, explodes suddenly with a prodigious report. The force of this aurum fulminans is terrible, and, in the hands of incautious persons, has often occasioned much mischief. But, however powerful, it cannot, as some have imagined, be employed instead of gunpowder, even were not this impossible on account of the high value of the metal from which it is made; for explosion does not take place when the powder is confined. Phænomena of this kind are always of importance, and afford subject of speculation to the philosopher, though no immediate use can be made of them¹⁵⁸⁴. Experiments, however, have rendered it probable that this powder may possess some medicinal virtues, and we are assured that it can be employed in enamel-painting.

He who attempts to trace out the invention of aurum fulminans is like a person bewildered in a morass, in danger every moment of being lost. I allude here to the immense wilderness of the ancient alchemists, or makers of gold; to wade through which, my patience, though pretty much accustomed to such labour, is not sufficiently adequate. Those who know how to appreciate their time will not sacrifice it in endeavouring to discover the meaning of books which the authors themselves did not, in part, understand, or to comprehend passages in which the writer tells us nothing, or, at any rate, nothing of importance. I have, however, made my way through this labyrinth from Spielmann to the works which are ascribed to Basilius Valentin¹⁵⁸⁵.

The period when this powder was invented is as uncertain as the accounts given of its composition. It is however probable that the discoverer was a German Benedictine monk, who lived about the year 1413¹⁵⁸⁶; and there is reason to think that he may have made many useful observations, of which we are yet ignorant. When new observations have been made respecting gold, they have always been found afterwards in the works of Valentin, in a passage which no one before could understand. Such writings are of no more utility than the answers of the ancient oracles, which were comprehended when a knowledge of them was no longer necessary, and which misled those who supposed that they comprehended them sooner. But the account of aurum fulminans in Valentin is so uncommonly intelligible, that it almost seems he either wrote in an explicit manner without perceiving it, or that the words escaped from him contrary to his intention. As the work in which it may be found is scarce, I shall transcribe the prescription¹⁵⁸⁷: —

“Take a pound of aqua regia made with sal-ammoniac; that is, take a pound of good strong aquafortis, and dissolve in it four ounces of sal-ammoniac, and you will thus obtain a strong aqua regia, which must be repeatedly distilled and rectified until no more fæsces remain at the bottom, and until it becomes quite clear and transparent. Take fine thin gold-leaf, in the preparation of which antimony has been used; put it into an alembic; pour aqua regis over it; and let as much of the gold as possible be dissolved. After the gold is all dissolved, add to it some oleum tartari, or sal tartari dissolved in a little spring-water, and it will begin to effervesce. When the effervescence has ceased, pour some more oil into it; and do this so often till the dissolved gold falls to the bottom, and until no more precipitate is formed, and the aqua regia remains pure and clear. You must then pour the aqua regia from the gold calx, and wash it well with water eight or ten times. When the gold calx is settled, pour off the water, and dry the calx in the open air when the sun shines, but not over the fire; for as soon as this powder becomes a little heated or warm, it explodes, and does much mischief, as it is so powerful and violent that no man can withstand it. When the powder has been thus prepared, take strong distilled vinegar and pour over it; keep it continually over the fire for twenty-four hours, without stirring it, so that nothing may fall to the bottom, and it will be again deprived of its power of exploding; but take great care that no accident happens by carelessness. Pour off the vinegar, and, having washed the powder, expose it to dry.”

The latter part of the receipt shows that Valentin had made experiments in order to discover how aurum fulminans might be deprived of its power of exploding, and he found that this could be done by vinegar. It appears from his writings that he had discovered also that the same thing could be effected by sulphur¹⁵⁸⁸.

After the time of Valentin, Crollius, who lived in the last half of the sixteenth century, seems to have been best acquainted with this powder, and to have principally made it known¹⁵⁸⁹: at any rate his works are referred to by most of the modern writers. He calls it aurum volatile, and speaks of its being useful in medicine. The name aurum fulminans was, as far as I know, first used by Beguin¹⁵⁹⁰. The method of preparing it is described by Kircher, who considers it as a thing uncommon, and who calls it pulvis pyrius aureus¹⁵⁹¹.