DE RE METALLICA
with
Biographical Introduction, Annotations and Appendices upon
the Development of Mining Methods, Metallurgical
Processes, Geology, Mineralogy & Mining Law
from the earliest times to the 16th Century
A. B. Stanford University, Member American Institute of Mining Engineers,
Mining and Metallurgical Society of America, Société des Ingéniéurs
Civils de France, American Institute of Civil Engineers,
Fellow Royal Geographical Society, etc., etc.
A. B. Stanford University, Member American Association for the
Advancement of Science, The National Geographical Society,
Royal Scottish Geographical Society, etc., etc.
1950
Dover Publications, Inc.
NEW YORK
JOHN CASPAR BRANNER Ph.D.,
The inspiration of whose teaching is no less great than his contribution to science.
This New 1950 Edition of DE RE METALLICA is a complete and unchanged reprint of the translation published by The Mining Magazine, London, in 1912. It has been made available through the kind permission of Honorable Herbert C. Hoover and Mr. Edgar Rickard, Author and Publisher, respectively, of the original volume.
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
TRANSLATORS' PREFACE.
here are three objectives in translation of works of this character: to give a faithful, literal translation of the author's statements; to give these in a manner which will interest the reader; and to preserve, so far as is possible, the style of the original text. The task has been doubly difficult in this work because, in using Latin, the author availed himself of a medium which had ceased to expand a thousand years before his subject had in many particulars come into being; in consequence he was in difficulties with a large number of ideas for which there were no corresponding words in the vocabulary at his command, and instead of adopting into the text his native German terms, he coined several hundred Latin expressions to answer his needs. It is upon this rock that most former attempts at translation have been wrecked. Except for a very small number, we believe we have been able to discover the intended meaning of such expressions from a study of the context, assisted by a very incomplete glossary prepared by the author himself, and by an exhaustive investigation into the literature of these subjects during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. That discovery in this particular has been only gradual and obtained after much labour, may be indicated by the fact that the entire text has been re-typewritten three times since the original, and some parts more often; and further, that the printer's proof has been thrice revised. We have found some English equivalent, more or less satisfactory, for practically all such terms, except those of weights, the varieties of veins, and a few minerals. In the matter of weights we have introduced the original Latin, because it is impossible to give true equivalents and avoid the fractions of reduction; and further, as explained in the Appendix on Weights it is impossible to say in many cases what scale the Author had in mind. The English nomenclature to be adopted has given great difficulty, for various reasons; among them, that many methods and processes described have never been practised in English-speaking mining communities, and so had no representatives in our vocabulary, and we considered the introduction of German terms undesirable; other methods and processes have become obsolete and their descriptive terms with them, yet we wished to avoid the introduction of obsolete or unusual English; but of the greatest importance of all has been the necessity to avoid rigorously such modern technical terms as would imply a greater scientific understanding than the period possessed.
Agricola's Latin, while mostly free from mediæval corruption, is somewhat tainted with German construction. Moreover some portions have not the continuous flow of sustained thought which others display, but the fact that the writing of the work extended over a period of twenty years, sufficiently explains the considerable variation in style. The technical descriptions in the later books often take the form of House-that-Jack-built sentences which have had to be at least partially broken up and the subject occasionally re-introduced. Ambiguities were also sometimes found which it was necessary to carry on into the translation. Despite these criticisms we must, however, emphasize that Agricola was infinitely clearer in his style than his contemporaries upon such subjects, or for that matter than his successors in almost any language for a couple of centuries. All of the illustrations and display letters of the original have been reproduced and the type as closely approximates to the original as the printers have been able to find in a modern font.
There are no footnotes in the original text, and Mr. Hoover is responsible for them all. He has attempted in them to give not only such comment as would tend to clarify the text, but also such information as we have been able to discover with regard to the previous history of the subjects mentioned. We have confined the historical notes to the time prior to Agricola, because to have carried them down to date in the briefest manner would have demanded very much more space than could be allowed. In the examination of such technical and historical material one is appalled at the flood of mis-information with regard to ancient arts and sciences which has been let loose upon the world by the hands of non-technical translators and commentators. At an early stage we considered that we must justify any divergence of view from such authorities, but to limit the already alarming volume of this work, we later felt compelled to eliminate most of such discussion. When the half-dozen most important of the ancient works bearing upon science have been translated by those of some scientific experience, such questions will, no doubt, be properly settled.
We need make no apologies for De Re Metallica. During 180 years it was not superseded as the text-book and guide to miners and metallurgists, for until Schlüter's great work on metallurgy in 1738 it had no equal. That it passed through some ten editions in three languages at a period when the printing of such a volume was no ordinary undertaking, is in itself sufficient evidence of the importance in which it was held, and is a record that no other volume upon the same subjects has equalled since. A large proportion of the technical data given by Agricola was either entirely new, or had not been given previously with sufficient detail and explanation to have enabled a worker in these arts himself to perform the operations without further guidance. Practically the whole of it must have been given from personal experience and observation, for the scant library at his service can be appreciated from his own
We have prepared a short sketch of Agricola's life and times, not only to give some indication of his learning and character, but also of his considerable position in the community in which he lived. As no appreciation of Agricola's stature among the founders of science can be gained without consideration of the advance which his works display over those of his predecessors, we therefore devote some attention to the state of knowledge of these subjects at the time by giving in the Appendix a short review of the literature then extant and a summary of Agricola's other writings. To serve the bibliophile we present such data as we have been able to collect it with regard to the various editions of his works. The full titles of the works quoted in the footnotes under simply authors' names will be found in this Appendix.
We feel that it is scarcely doing Agricola justice to publish De Re Metallica only. While it is of the most general interest of all of his works, yet, from the point of view of pure science, De Natura Fossilium and De Ortu et Causis are works which deserve an equally important place. It is unfortunate that Agricola's own countrymen have not given to the world competent translations into German, as his work has too often been judged by the German translations, the infidelity of which appears in nearly every paragraph.
We do not present De Re Metallica as a work of "practical" value. The methods and processes have long since been superseded; yet surely such a milestone on the road of development of one of the two most basic of human industrial activities is more worthy of preservation than the thousands of volumes devoted to records of human destruction. To those interested in the history of their own profession we need make no apologies, except for the long delay in publication. For this we put forward the necessity of active endeavour in many directions; as this book could be but a labour of love, it has had to find the moments for its execution in night hours, weekends, and holidays, in all extending over a period of about five years. If the work serves to strengthen the traditions of one of the most important and least recognized of the world's professions we shall be amply repaid.
It is our pleasure to acknowledge our obligations to Professor H. R. Fairclough, of Stanford University, for perusal of and suggestions upon the first chapter; and to those whom we have engaged from time to time for one service or another, chiefly bibliographical work and collateral translation. We are also sensibly obligated to the printers, Messrs. Frost & Sons, for their patience and interest, and for their willingness to bend some of the canons of modern printing, to meet the demands of the 16th Century.
July 1, 1912.
The Red House,
Hornton Street, London.
INTRODUCTION.
BIOGRAPHY.[1]
eorgius Agricola was born at Glauchau, in Saxony, on March 24th, 1494, and therefore entered the world when it was still upon the threshold of the Renaissance; Gutenberg's first book had been printed but forty years before; the Humanists had but begun that stimulating criticism which awoke the Reformation; Erasmus, of Rotterdam, who was subsequently to become Agricola's friend and patron, was just completing his student days. The Reformation itself was yet to come, but it was not long delayed, for Luther was born the year before Agricola, and through him Agricola's homeland became the cradle of the great movement; nor did Agricola escape being drawn into the conflict. Italy, already awake with the new classical revival, was still a busy workshop of antiquarian research, translation, study, and publication, and through her the Greek and Latin Classics were only now available for wide distribution. Students from the rest of Europe, among them at a later time Agricola himself, flocked to the Italian Universities, and on their return infected their native cities with the newly-awakened learning. At Agricola's birth Columbus had just returned from his great discovery, and it was only three years later that Vasco Da Gama rounded Cape Good Hope. Thus these two foremost explorers had only initiated that greatest period of geographical expansion in the world's history. A few dates will recall how far this exploration extended during Agricola's lifetime. Balboa first saw the Pacific in 1513; Cortes entered the City of Mexico in 1520; Magellan entered the Pacific in the same year; Pizarro penetrated into Peru in 1528; De Soto landed in Florida in 1539, and Potosi was discovered in 1546. Omitting the sporadic settlement on the St. Lawrence by Cartier in 1541, the settlement of North America did not begin for a quarter of a century after Agricola's death. Thus the revival of learning, with its train of Humanism, the Reformation, its stimulation of exploration and the re-awakening of the arts and sciences, was still in its infancy with Agricola.
We know practically nothing of Agricola's antecedents or his youth. His real name was Georg Bauer ("peasant"), and it was probably Latinized by his teachers, as was the custom of the time. His own brother, in receipts preserved in the archives of the Zwickau Town Council, calls himself "Bauer," and in them refers to his brother "Agricola." He entered the University of Leipsic at the age of twenty, and after about three and one-half years' attendance there gained the degree of Baccalaureus Artium. In 1518 he became Vice-Principal of the Municipal School at Zwickau, where he taught Greek and Latin. In 1520 he became Principal, and among his assistants was Johannes Förster, better known as Luther's collaborator in the translation of the Bible. During this time our author prepared and published a small Latin Grammar[2]. In 1522 he removed to Leipsic to become a lecturer in the University under his friend, Petrus Mosellanus, at whose death in 1524 he went to Italy for the further study of Philosophy, Medicine, and the Natural Sciences. Here he remained for nearly three years, from 1524 to 1526. He visited the Universities of Bologna, Venice, and probably
In 1526 Agricola returned to Zwickau, and in 1527 he was chosen town physician at Joachimsthal. This little city in Bohemia is located on the eastern slope of the Erzgebirge, in the midst of the then most prolific metal-mining district of Central Europe. Thence to Freiberg is but fifty miles, and the same radius from that city would include most of the mining towns so frequently mentioned in De Re Metallica—Schneeberg, Geyer, Annaberg and Altenberg—and not far away were Marienberg, Gottesgab, and Platten. Joachimsthal was a booming mining camp, founded but eleven years before Agricola's arrival, and already having several thousand inhabitants. According to Agricola's own statement[4], he spent all the time not required for his medical duties in visiting the mines and smelters, in reading up in the Greek and Latin authors all references to mining, and in association with the most learned among the mining folk. Among these was one Lorenz Berman, whom Agricola afterward set up as the "learned miner" in his dialogue Bermannus. This book was first published by Froben at Basel in 1530, and was a sort of catechism on mineralogy, mining terms, and mining lore. The book was apparently first submitted to the great Erasmus, and the publication arranged by him, a warm letter of approval by him appearing at the beginning of the book[5]. In 1533 he published De Mensuris et Ponderibus, through Froben, this being a discussion of Roman and Greek weights and measures. At about this time he began De Re Metallica—not to be published for twenty-five years.
Agricola did not confine his interest entirely to medicine and mining, for during this period he composed a pamphlet upon the Turks, urging their extermination by the European powers. This work was no doubt inspired by the Turkish siege of Vienna in 1529. It appeared first in German in 1531, and in Latin—in which it was originally written—in 1538, and passed through many subsequent editions.
At this time, too, he became interested in the God's Gift mine at Abertham, which was discovered in 1530. Writing in 1545, he says[6]: "We, as a shareholder, through the goodness of God, have enjoyed the proceeds of this God's Gift since the very time when the mine began first to bestow such riches."
Agricola seems to have resigned his position at Joachimsthal in about 1530, and to have devoted the next two or three years to travel and study among the mines. About 1533 he became city physician of Chemnitz, in Saxony, and here he resided until his death in 1555. There is but little record of his activities during the first eight or nine years of his residence in this city. He must have been engaged upon the study of his subjects and the preparation of his books, for they came on with great rapidity soon after. He was frequently consulted on matters of mining engineering, as, for instance, we learn, from a letter written by a certain Johannes Hordeborch[7], that Duke Henry of Brunswick applied to him with regard to the method for working mines in the Upper Harz.
In 1543 he married Anna, widow of Matthias Meyner, a petty tithe official; there is some reason to believe from a letter published by Schmid,[8] that Anna was his second wife, and that he was married the first time at Joachimsthal. He seems to have had several children, for he commends his young children to the care of the Town Council during his absence at the war in 1547. In addition to these, we know that a son, Theodor, was born in 1550; a daughter, Anna, in 1552; another daughter, Irene, was buried at Chemnitz in 1555; and in 1580 his widow and three children—Anna, Valerius, and Lucretia—were still living.
In 1544 began the publication of the series of books to which Agricola owes his position. The first volume comprised five works and was finally issued in 1546; it was subsequently considerably revised, and re-issued in 1558. These works were: De Ortu et Causis Subterraneorum, in five "books," the first work on physical geology; De Natura Eorum quae Effluunt ex Terra, in four "books," on subterranean waters and gases; De Natura Fossilium, in ten "books," the first systematic mineralogy; De Veteribus et Novis Metallis, in two "books," devoted largely to the history of metals and topographical mineralogy; a new edition of Bermannus was included; and finally Rerum Metallicarum Interpretatio, a glossary of Latin and German mineralogical and metallurgical terms. Another work, De Animantibus Subterraneis, usually published with De Re Metallica, is dated 1548 in the preface. It is devoted to animals which live underground, at least part of the time, but is not a very effective basis of either geologic or zoologic classification. Despite many public activities, Agricola apparently completed De Re Metallica in 1550, but did not send it to the press until 1553; nor did it appear until a year after his death in 1555. But we give further details on the preparation of this work on p. xv. During this period he found time to prepare a small medical work, De Peste, and certain historical studies, details of which appear in the Appendix. There are other works by Agricola referred to by sixteenth century writers, but so far we have not been able to find them although they may exist. Such data as we have, is given in the appendix.
As a young man, Agricola seems to have had some tendencies toward liberalism in religious matters, for while at Zwickau he composed some anti-Popish Epigrams; but after his return to Leipsic he apparently never wavered, and steadily refused to accept the Lutheran Reformation. To many even liberal scholars of the day, Luther's doctrines appeared wild and demagogic. Luther was not a scholarly man; his addresses were to the masses; his Latin was execrable. Nor did the bitter dissensions over hair-splitting theology in the Lutheran Church after Luther's death tend to increase respect for the movement among the learned. Agricola was a scholar of wide attainments, a deep-thinking, religious man, and he remained to
In 1546, when he was at the age of 52, began Agricola's activity in public life, for in that year he was elected a Burgher of Chemnitz; and in the same year Duke Maurice appointed him Burgomaster—an office which he held for four terms. Before one can gain an insight into his political services, and incidentally into the character of the man, it is necessary to understand the politics of the time and his part therein, and to bear in mind always that he was a staunch Catholic under a Protestant Sovereign in a State seething with militant Protestantism.
Saxony had been divided in 1485 between the Princes Ernest and Albert, the former taking the Electoral dignity and the major portion of the Principality. Albert the Brave, the younger brother and Duke of Saxony, obtained the subordinate portion, embracing Meissen, but subject to the Elector. The Elector Ernest was succeeded in 1486 by Frederick the Wise, and under his support Luther made Saxony the cradle of the Reformation. This Elector was succeeded in 1525 by his brother John, who was in turn succeeded by his son John Frederick in 1532. Of more immediate interest to this subject is the Albertian line of Saxon Dukes who ruled Meissen, for in that Principality Agricola was born and lived, and his political fortunes were associated with this branch of the Saxon House. Albert was succeeded in 1505 by his son George, "The Bearded," and he in turn by his brother Henry, the last of the Catholics, in 1539, who ruled until 1541. Henry was succeeded in 1541 by his Protestant son Maurice, who was the Patron of Agricola.
At about this time Saxony was drawn into the storms which rose from the long-standing rivalry between Francis I., King of France, and Charles V. of Spain. These two potentates came to the throne in the same year (1515), and both were candidates for Emperor of that loose Confederation known as the Holy Roman Empire. Charles was elected, and intermittent wars between these two Princes arose—first in one part of Europe, and then in another. Francis finally formed an alliance with the Schmalkalden League of German Protestant Princes, and with the Sultan of Turkey, against Charles. In 1546 Maurice of Meissen, although a Protestant, saw his best interest in a secret league with Charles against the other Protestant Princes, and proceeded (the Schmalkalden War) to invade the domains of his superior and cousin, the Elector Frederick. The Emperor Charles proved successful in this war, and Maurice was rewarded, at the Capitulation of Wittenberg in 1547, by being made Elector of Saxony in the place of his cousin. Later on, the Elector Maurice found the association with Catholic Charles unpalatable, and joined in leading the other Protestant princes in war upon him, and on the defeat of the Catholic party and the peace of Passau, Maurice became acknowledged as the champion of German national and religious freedom. He was succeeded by his brother Augustus in 1553.
Agricola was much favoured by the Saxon Electors, Maurice and Augustus. He dedicates most of his works to them, and shows much gratitude for many favours conferred upon him. Duke Maurice presented to him a house and plot in Chemnitz, and in a letter dated June 14th, 1543[9] in connection therewith, says: "... that he may enjoy his life-long a freehold house unburdened by all burgher rights and other municipal service, to be used by him and inhabited as a free dwelling, and that he may also, for the necessities of his household and of his wife and servants, brew his own beer free, and that he may likewise purvey for himself and his household foreign beer and also wine for use, and yet he shall not sell any such beer.... We have taken the said Doctor under our especial protection and care for our life-long, and he shall not be summoned before any Court of Justice, but only before us and our Councillor...."
Agricola was made Burgomaster of Chemnitz in 1546. A letter[10] from Fabricius to Meurer, dated May 19th, 1546, says that Agricola had been made Burgomaster by the command of the Prince. This would be Maurice, and it is all the more a tribute to the high respect with which Agricola was held, for, as said before, he was a consistent Catholic, and Maurice a Protestant Prince. In this same year the Schmalkalden War broke out, and Agricola was called to personal attendance upon the Duke Maurice in a diplomatic and advisory capacity. In 1546 also he was a member of the Diet of Freiberg, and was summoned to Council in Dresden. The next year he continued, by the Duke's command, Burgomaster at Chemnitz, although he seems to have been away upon Ducal matters most of the time. The Duke addresses[11] the Chemnitz Council in March, 1547: "We hereby make known to you that we are in urgent need of your Burgomaster, Dr. Georgius Agricola, with us. It is, therefore, our will that you should yield him up and forward him that he should with the utmost haste set forth to us here near Freiberg." He was sent on various missions from the Duke to the Emperor Charles, to King Ferdinand of Austria, and to other Princes in matters connected with the war—the fact that he was a Catholic probably entering into his appointment to such missions. Chemnitz was occupied by the troops of first one side, then the other, despite the great efforts of Agricola to have his own town specially defended. In April, 1547, the war came to an end in the Battle of Mühlberg, but Agricola was apparently not relieved of his Burgomastership until the succeeding year, for he wrote his friend Wolfgang Meurer, in April, 1548,[12] that he "was now relieved." His public duties did not end, however, for he attended the Diet of Leipzig in 1547 and in 1549, and was at the Diet at Torgau in 1550. In 1551 he was again installed as Burgomaster; and in 1553, for the fourth time, he became head of the Municipality, and during this year had again to attend the Diets at Leipzig and Dresden, representing his city. He apparently now had a short relief from public duties, for it is not until 1555, shortly before his death, that we find him again attending a Diet at Torgau.
Agricola died on November 21st, 1555. A letter
A brass memorial plate hung in the Cathedral at Zeitz had already disappeared in 1686, nor have the cities of his birth or residence ever shown any appreciation of this man, whose work more deserves their gratitude than does that of the multitude of soldiers whose monuments decorate every village and city square. It is true that in 1822 a marble tablet was placed behind the altar in the Church of St. Jacob in Chemnitz, but even this was removed to the Historical Museum later on.
He left a modest estate, which was the subject of considerable litigation by his descendants, due to the mismanagement of the guardian. Hofmann has succeeded in tracing the descendants for two generations, down to 1609, but the line is finally lost among the multitude of other Agricolas.
To deduce Georgius Agricola's character we need not search beyond the discovery of his steadfast adherence to the religion of his fathers amid the bitter storm of Protestantism around him, and need but to remember at the same time that for twenty-five years he was entrusted with elective positions of an increasingly important character in this same community. No man could have thus held the respect of his countrymen unless he were devoid of bigotry and possessed of the highest sense of integrity, justice, humanity, and patriotism.
AGRICOLA'S INTELLECTUAL ATTAINMENTS AND POSITION IN SCIENCE.
Agricola's education was the most thorough that his times afforded in the classics, philosophy, medicine, and sciences generally. Further, his writings disclose a most exhaustive knowledge not only of an extraordinary range of classical literature, but also of obscure manuscripts buried in the public libraries of Europe. That his general learning was held to be of a high order is amply evidenced from the correspondence of the other scholars of his time—Erasmus, Melanchthon, Meurer, Fabricius, and others.
Our more immediate concern, however, is with the advances which were due to him in the sciences of Geology, Mineralogy, and Mining Engineering. No appreciation of these attainments can be conveyed to the reader unless he has some understanding of the dearth of knowledge in these sciences prior to Agricola's time. We have in Appendix B given a brief review of the literature extant at this period on these subjects. Furthermore, no appreciation of Agricola's contribution to science can be gained without a study of De Ortu et Causis and De Natura Fossilium, for while De Re Metallica is of much more general interest, it contains but incidental reference to Geology and Mineralogy. Apart from the book of Genesis, the only attempts at fundamental explanation of natural phenomena were those of the Greek Philosophers and the Alchemists. Orthodox beliefs Agricola scarcely mentions; with the Alchemists he had no patience. There can be no doubt, however, that his views are greatly coloured by his deep classical learning. He was in fine to a certain distance a follower of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Strato, and other leaders of the Peripatetic school. For that matter, except for the muddy current which the alchemists had introduced into this already troubled stream, the whole thought of the learned world still flowed from the Greeks. Had he not, however, radically departed from the teachings of the Peripatetic school, his work would have been no contribution to the development of science. Certain of their teachings he repudiated with great vigour, and his laboured and detailed arguments in their refutation form the first battle in science over the results of observation versus inductive speculation. To use his own words: "Those things which we see with our eyes and understand by means of our senses are more clearly to be demonstrated than if learned by means of reasoning."[15] The bigoted scholasticism of his times necessitated as much care and detail in refutation of such deep-rooted beliefs, as would be demanded to-day by an attempt at a refutation of the theory of evolution, and in consequence his works are often but dry reading to any but those interested in the development of fundamental scientific theory.
In giving an appreciation of Agricola's views here and throughout the footnotes, we do not wish to convey to the reader that he was in all things free from error and from the spirit of his times, or that his theories, constructed long before the atomic theory, are of the clear-cut order which that basic hypothesis has rendered possible to later scientific speculation in these branches. His statements are sometimes much confused, but we reiterate that their clarity is as crystal to mud in comparison with those of his predecessors—and of most of his successors for over two hundred years.
In mineralogy Agricola made the first attempt at systematic treatment of the subject. His system could not be otherwise than wrongly based, as he could scarcely see forward two or three centuries to the atomic theory and our vast fund of chemical knowledge. However, based as it is upon such properties as solubility and homogeneity, and upon external characteristics such as colour, hardness, &c., it makes a most creditable advance upon Theophrastus, Dioscorides, and Albertus Magnus—his only predecessors. He is the first to assert that bismuth and antimony are true primary metals; and to some sixty actual mineral species described previous to his time he added some twenty more, and laments that there are scores unnamed.
As to Agricola's contribution to the sciences of mining and metallurgy, De Re Metallica speaks for itself. While he describes, for the first time, scores of methods and processes, no one would contend that they were discoveries or inventions of his own. They represent the accumulation of generations of experience and knowledge; but by him they were, for the first time, to receive detailed and intelligent exposition. Until Schlüter's work nearly two centuries later, it was not excelled. There is no measure by which we may gauge the value of such a work to the men who followed in this profession during centuries, nor the benefits enjoyed by humanity through them.
That Agricola occupied a very considerable place in the great awakening of learning will be disputed by none except by those who place the development of science in rank far below religion, politics, literature, and art. Of wider importance than the details of his achievements in the mere confines of the particular science to which he applied himself, is the fact that he was the first to found any of the natural sciences upon research and observation, as opposed to previous fruitless speculation. The wider interest of the members of the medical profession in the development of their science than that of geologists in theirs, has led to the aggrandizement of Paracelsus, a contemporary of Agricola, as the first in deductive science. Yet no comparative study of the unparalleled egotistical ravings of this half-genius, half-alchemist, with the modest sober logic and real research and observation of Agricola, can leave a moment's doubt as to the incomparably greater position which should be attributed to the latter as the pioneer in building the foundation of science by deduction from observed phenomena. Science is the base upon which is reared the civilization of to-day, and while we give daily credit to all those who toil in the superstructure, let none forget those men who laid its first foundation stones. One of the greatest of these was Georgius Agricola.
DE RE METALLICA
Agricola seems to have been engaged in the preparation of De Re Metallica for a period of over twenty years, for we first hear of the book in a letter from Petrus Plateanus, a schoolmaster at Joachimsthal, to the great humanist, Erasmus,[16] in September, 1529. He says: "The scientific world will be still more indebted to Agricola when he brings to light the books De Re Metallica and other matters which he has on hand." In the dedication of De Mensuris et Ponderibus (in 1533) Agricola states that he means to publish twelve books De Re Metallica, if he lives. That the appearance of this work was eagerly anticipated is evidenced by a letter from George Fabricius to Valentine Hertel:[17] "With great excitement the books De Re Metallica are being awaited. If he treats the material at hand with his usual zeal, he will win for himself glory such as no one in any of the fields of literature has attained for the last thousand years." According to the dedication of De Veteribus et Novis Metallis, Agricola in 1546 already looked forward to its early publication. The work was apparently finished in 1550, for the dedication to the Dukes Maurice and August of Saxony is dated in December of that year. The eulogistic poem by his friend, George Fabricius, is dated in 1551.
The publication was apparently long delayed by the preparation of the woodcuts; and, according to Mathesius,[18] many sketches for them were prepared by Basilius Wefring. In the preface of De Re Metallica, Agricola does not mention who prepared the sketches, but does say: "I have hired illustrators to delineate their forms, lest descriptions which are conveyed by words should either not be understood by men of our own times, or should cause difficulty to posterity." In 1553 the completed book was sent to Froben for publication, for a letter[19] from Fabricius to Meurer in March, 1553, announces its dispatch to the printer. An interesting letter
Latin Editions.