1892 The flowing bowl when and what to drink (1892, c1891)

HISTORY.

36

cold. Pliny, after he has spoken of solids and their formation out of warmth and cold, says: " Contraria huic causa crystallum facit, gelu vehe- mentiore concrete*. Non aliubi certe repcritur quam ubi maxime hibernce nives rigent, glaciemque esse certum Seneca Minor and other contemporaries express the same opinion, as does also Isodorus of the seventh century. Agricola of the sixteenth century is the first philos- opher who is opposed to it; in his book De Ortu et Cau- sis Subterraneorum he says: " If the crystal was formed out of water, it naturally would have to be lighter than water, for ice floats on water. He denies emphatically that any stony material might be formed of water with- out any additional ingredients : " Satis intellegimiis^ ex sola aqua non gigni lapidem ullum" In the seventeenth century alchemists believed that an occult chemical transformation of water to stone was possible, and similar fables and humbug were still believed in during the last century. An exception of this rule was Be-cher, who taught that crystals could not be formed of ice, as they are found also in localities where neither severe nor long- lasting cold reigns. Le Roy, in the year 1767, tried to demonstrate be- fore the Academy of Paris, that all experiments made until then did not prove the possibility of changing water into earth. He meant, earth was mixed to the water in a suspended form; that it was not formed anew est, unde et nomen Greed dedere"