Under the names Orseille, Orceille, Orsolle, Ursolle, Orcheil, Orchel,
in Italian Oricello[66], Orcella, Roccella, in Dutch Orchillie, and in
English Archil, Canary weed or Orchilla weed, is understood a lichen
used for dyeing, and from which a kind of paint is also prepared. This
species of lichen, of which the best figure and a full description may
be seen in Dillenius[67], is by Linnæus called _Lichen roccella_. It
is found in abundance in some of the islands near the African coast,
particularly in the Canaries, and in several of the islands in the
Archipelago. It grows upright, partly in single partly in double stems,
which are about two inches in height. When it is old these stems are
crowned with a button, sometimes round and sometimes of a flat form,
which Tournefort very properly compares to the excrescences on the
arms of the Sepia. Its colour is sometimes a light, and sometimes a
dark gray. Of this lichen with lime, urine, ammoniacal salts, or a
solution of ammonia prepared by distillation, is formed a dark red
paste, which in commerce has the same name, and which is much used in
dyeing. That well-known substance called litmus is also made of it.
Theophrastus[68], Dioscorides[69], and their transcriber Pliny[70],
give the name of _Phycos thalassion_ or _pontion_ to a plant which,
notwithstanding its name, is not a sea-weed but a lichen, as it grew
on the rocks of different islands, and particularly on those of Crete
or Candia. It had in their time been long used for dyeing wool, and
the colour it gave when fresh was so beautiful, that it excelled the
ancient purple, which was not red, as many suppose, but violet. Pliny
tells us, that with this lichen dyers gave the ground or first tint
to those cloths which they intended to dye with the costly purple. At
least I so understand, with Hardouin and others, the words _conchyliis
substernitur_, which the French dyers express by the phrase _donner le
pied_.
Though several kinds of lichen produce a similar red dye, I agree in
opinion with Dillenius, that _Phycos thalassion_ is our archil; for at
present no species is known which communicates so excellent a colour,
and which corresponds so nearly with the description of Theophrastus.
Besides, it is still collected in the Grecian islands, and it appears
that it has been used there since the earliest ages[71].
Tournefort[72] found this lichen in the island Amorgos, which lies on
the eastern side of Naxos, and which at present is called Morgo. In
his time it was sent to England and Alexandria, at the rate of ten
rix-dollars per hundred weight; and he says expressly that it was
common in the other islands. He shows from Suidas, Julius Pollux[73],
and other ancient writers, that this island was once celebrated for a
kind of red linen cloth, which in commerce had the name of the island;
and he conjectures, not without probability, that it might have been
dyed with this lichen.
Imperati[74] says, that the _roccella_, of which he gives a figure, was
procured from the Levant. This naturalist gives the figure also of a
lichen from Candia, used for dyeing, which was then called _rubicula_,
and which, as may be seen in Bauhinus[75], is comprehended under the
name of Roccella. Dillenius and Linnæus, however, make it a distinct
species; and the latter names it _Lichen fuciformis_. This distinction
is, perhaps, not improper: for the _rubicula_ does not grow like a
shrub or bush, as the _roccella_, but belongs rather to the foliaceous
lichens. Be this as it may, it is certain, as Dillenius has remarked,
and as I know from my own observation, that _L. fuciformis_ is often
mixed with the real roccella, and particularly with that brought from
the Canary Islands; but whether it be equally good, experience has not
yet taught us.
From what has been said, I think I may venture to conclude that our
archil was not unknown to the ancient Grecians. But when was it first
employed as a dye by the moderns, and introduced into our commerce?
Some writers are of opinion that this drug was first found in the
Canary Islands, and afterwards in the Levant. The use of it, therefore,
is not older than the last discovery of that island. That this opinion
is false, will appear from what follows.
Among the oldest and principal Florentine families is that known under
the name of the Oricellarii or Rucellarii, Ruscellai or Rucellai,
several of whom have distinguished themselves as statesmen and men of
letters. This family are descended from a German nobleman named Ferro
or Frederigo, who lived in the beginning of the twelfth century[76].
One of his descendants in the year 1300 carried on a great trade in
the Levant, by which he acquired considerable riches, and returning at
length to Florence with his fortune, first made known in Europe the
art of dyeing with archil. It is said that a little before his return
from the Levant, happening to make water on a rock covered with this
lichen, he observed that the plant, which was there called _respio_ or
_respo_, and in Spain _orciglia_, acquired by the urine a purple, or,
as others say, a red colour. He therefore tried several experiments;
and when he had brought to perfection the art of dyeing wool with this
plant, he made it known at Florence, where he alone practised it for a
considerable time, to the great benefit of the state. From this useful
invention the family received the name of Oricellarii, from which at
last was formed Rucellai[77].
As several documents, still preserved among the Florentine archives,
confirm the above account of the origin of this family name, from the
discovery of dyeing with oricello[78], we may, in my opinion, consider
it as certain that the Europeans, and first the Florentines, were made
acquainted with this dye-stuff and its use in the beginning of the
fourteenth century. At that time the Italians brought from the East the
seeds of many arts and sciences, which, afterwards sown and nurtured
in Europe, produced the richest harvests; and nothing is more certain
than that the art of dyeing was brought to us from the East by the
Italians. I do not believe that the merit of having discovered this
dye by the above-mentioned accident is due to that Florentine; but I
am of opinion that he learnt the art in the Levant, and on his return
taught it to his countrymen, which was doing them no small service[79].
After that period the Italians long procured archil from the Levant
for themselves, and afterwards for all Europe. I say for a long time,
because since the discovery of the Canary Islands the greater part of
that substance has been procured from them.
These islands, after being a considerable time lost and forgotten,
were again discovered about the end of the fourteenth or the beginning
of the fifteenth century, and since that time they have been much
frequented by the Europeans. One of the first who endeavoured to
obtain an establishment there, was John de Betancourt, a gentleman
of Normandy, who in 1400, or, as others say, in 1417, landed on
Lancerotta. Amongst the principal commodities which this gentleman and
other Europeans brought back with them was archil, which was found
there more beautiful and in greater abundance than anywhere else; and
Betancourt enjoyed in idea the great profit which he hoped to derive
from this article in commerce. Glass is surprised that the Europeans,
immediately upon their arrival, sought after this lichen with as much
eagerness and skill as they did after gold in America, though they
were not so well acquainted with the former as the latter before the
discovery of these new lands[80]. But as this is not true, the wonder
will cease.
According to information procured in the year 1731, the island of
Teneriffe produced annually five hundred quintals of this moss; Canary,
four hundred; Forteventura, Lancerotta, and Gomera, three hundred
each; and Fero, eight hundred; making in all two thousand six hundred
quintals. In the islands of Canary, Teneriffe and Palma, the moss
belongs to the crown; and in the year 1730 it was let by the king of
Spain for one thousand five hundred piastres. The farmers paid then for
collecting it from fifteen to twenty rials per hundred weight[81]. In
the rest of the islands it belongs to private proprietors, who cause
it to be collected on their own account. In the beginning of the last
century a hundred weight, delivered on board at Santa Cruz, the capital
of Teneriffe, was worth from only three to four piastres; but since
1725 it has cost labour amounting to ten piastres, because it has been
in great request at London, Amsterdam, Marseilles, and throughout all
Italy[82]. In the year 1726 this lichen cost at London eighty pounds
sterling per ton, as we are told by Dillenius, and in 1730 it bore the
same price.
Towards the end of the year 1730, the captain of an English vessel,
which came from the Cape de Verde islands, brought a bag of archil to
Santa Cruz by way of trial. He discovered his secret to some Spanish
and Genoese merchants, who, in the month of July 1731, resolved to
send a ship to these islands. They landed on that of St. Anthony and
St. Vincent, where in a few days they obtained five hundred quintals
of this lichen, which they found in such abundance, that it cost
them nothing more than a piastre per cent. by way of present to the
governor. The archil of the Cape de Verde islands appears larger,
richer, and longer than that of the Canaries, and this, perhaps, is
owing to its not being collected every year[83]. Adanson, in 1749,
found also the greater part of the rocks in Magdalen island, near
Senegal, covered with this lichen. Though the greater part of our
archil is at present procured from the Canary and Cape de Verde
islands, a considerable quantity is procured also from the Levant, from
Sicily, as Glass says, and from the coast of Barbary; and some years
ago the English merchants at Leghorn caused this lichen to be collected
in the island of Elba, and paid a high price for it[84].
Our dyers do not purchase raw archil, but a paste made of it, which
the French call _orseille en pâte_. The preparation of it was for a
long time kept a secret by the Florentines. The person who, as far
as I know, made it first known was Rosetti; who, as he himself tells
us, carried on the trade of a dyer at Florence. Some information was
afterwards published concerning it by Imperati[85] and Micheli the
botanist[86]. In later times this art has been much practised in
France, England, and Holland. Many druggists, instead of keeping this
paste in a moist state with urine, as they ought, suffer it to dry, in
order to save a little dirty work. It then has the appearance of a dark
violet-coloured earth, with here and there some white spots in it.
The Dutch, who have found out better methods than other nations of
manufacturing many commodities, so as to render them cheaper, and
thereby to hurt the trade of their neighbours, are the inventors also
of lacmus[87], a preparation of archil called _orseille en pierre_,
which has greatly lessened the use of that _en pâte_, as it is more
easily transported and preserved, and fitter for use; and as it is
besides, if not cheaper, at least not dearer. This art consists,
undoubtedly, in mixing with that commodity some less valuable
substance, which either improves or does not much impair its quality,
and which at the same time increases its weight[88]. Thus they pound
cinnabar and smalt finer than other nations, and yet sell both these
articles cheaper. In like manner they sift cochineal, and sell it at a
less price than what is unsifted.
It was for a long time believed that the Dutch prepared their lacmus
from those linen rags which in the south of France are dipped in the
juice of the _Croton tinctorium_[89]; and this idea appeared the more
probable, as most of this _tournesol en drapeaux_ was bought up by
the Hollanders: but, as they are the greatest adulterators of wine
in Europe, they may perhaps have used these rags to colour Pontack
and other wines. It is however not improbable that they at first made
lacmus of them, as their dye approaches very near to that of archil.
At present it is almost certainly known that _orseille en pâte_ is the
principal ingredient in _orseille en pierre_, that is in lacmus[90]:
and for this curious information we are indebted to Ferber[91]. But
whence arises the smell of the lacmus, which appears to me like that
of the Florentine iris? Some of the latter may, perhaps, be mixed
with it; for I think I have observed in it small insoluble particles,
which may have been pieces of the roots. The addition of this substance
can be of no use to improve the dye; but it may increase the weight,
and give the lac more body; and perhaps it may be employed to render
imperceptible some unpleasant smell, for which purpose the roots of
that plant are used on many other occasions.
Another kind of lichen, different from the roccella, which in commerce
is known by the names _orseille de terre_, _orseille d’Auvergne_,
is used also for the like purpose; but it contains fewer and weaker
colouring particles. This species, in botany, is called _Lichen
Parellus_ (_Lecanora Parella_), and is distinguished from the roccella
by its figure, as it grows only in a thin rind on the rocks. It is
collected in Auvergne, on rocks of granite and volcanic productions,
and in some parts of Languedoc; the greater part of it is brought from
St. Flour. Its name, _perelle_, comes from an old Languedocian word
_pére_ (_pierre_, a rock); as _roccella_, afterwards transformed into
_orseille_, is derived from _rocca_. The use of _perelle_ is very
trifling: the Dutch purchase it to make lacmus, perhaps on account of
its low price. This lichen has been found also in Northumberland[92]
and other mountainous districts of Great Britain, but it is not
collected there for any purpose.