INDIGO.

It is more than probable that indigo, so early as the time of

Dioscorides and Pliny, was brought to Europe, and employed there in

dyeing and painting. This I shall endeavour to show; but under that

name must be understood every kind of blue pigment, separated from

plants by fermentation, and converted into a friable substance by

desiccation; for those who should maintain that real indigo must be

made from those plants named in the botanical system _Indigofera

tinctoria_, would confine the subject within too narrow limits; as the

substance which our merchants and dyers consider as real indigo is

prepared, in different countries, from so great a number of plants,

that they are not even varieties of the same species.

Before the American colonies were established, all the indigo employed

in Europe came from the East Indies; and till the discovery of a

passage round the Cape of Good Hope, it was conveyed, like other Indian

productions, partly through the Persian Gulf, and partly by land to

Babylon, or through Arabia and up the Red Sea to Egypt, from which

it was transported to Europe. Considering this long carriage, as the

article was not obtained, according to the Italian expression, _a

drittura_, that is, in a direct manner, it needs excite no surprise,

that our knowledge, in regard to its real country and the manner of

preparing it, should be exceedingly uncertain and imperfect. Is it

astonishing that articles, always obtained through Arabia, should be

considered as productions of that country; and that many commodities

which were the work of art, should be given out to be productions of

nature? For more than a hundred years the Dutch purchased from the

Saxons cobalt, and smalt made from it, and sold them again in India;

and the Indians knew as little where and in what manner the Dutch

obtained them, as the Saxons did the people who were the ultimate

purchasers and consumers. The real nature of indigo was not generally

known in Europe till the Europeans procured it from the first hand;

yet long after that period, and even in the letters-patent obtained

on the 23rd of December 1705, by the proprietors of the mines in the

principality of Halberstadt and the county of Reinstein, indigo

was classed among minerals on account of which works were suffered

to be erected; but this only proves the individual ignorance of the

undertakers, and also of their superiors, when they read what they had

written, and confirms the justness of Ovid’s advice,

Disce bonas artes, moneo, Germana juventus;

Non tantum trepidos ut tueare reos.

What Dioscorides calls _Indicon_, and Pliny and Vitruvius _Indicum_,

I am strongly inclined to believe to have been our indigo[615]. It

was a blue pigment brought from India, and used both in painting and

in dyeing. When pounded it gave a black powder, and when suspended in

water it produced an agreeable mixture of blue and purple. It belonged

to the costly dye-stuffs, and was often adulterated by the addition

of earth. On this account, that which was soft without any roughness,

and which resembled an inspissated juice, was esteemed the best. Pliny

thinks[616] that pure indigo may be distinguished from that which is

adulterated by burning it, as the former gives an exceedingly beautiful

purple flame, and emits a smell similar to that of sea-water. Both he

and Dioscorides speak of two kinds, one of which adheres to reeds,

in the form of slime or scum thrown up by the sea; the other, as

Dioscorides says, was scraped from the sides of the dye-pans in the

form of a purple-coloured scum; and Pliny expressly remarks, that it

was collected in this manner in the establishments for dyeing purple.

The former relates also, that _Indicum_ belonged to the astringent

medicines; that it was used for ulcers and inflammations, and that it

cleansed and healed wounds.

This is all, as far as I know, that is to be found in the works of

the ancients respecting _Indicum_. I have given it at full length, as

accurately as possible, and I have added, in order that the reader may

be better able to compare and judge, references to the original words

of the authors. _Indicon_, it is true, occurs in other passages; but

it was certainly different from the one already mentioned. I allude,

for example, to the black _Indicon_ of Arrian and the _Indicon_ of

Hippocrates. Of the former I shall treat in particular hereafter;

and in regard to the latter, I refer to the author quoted in the note

below[617]. It is not at all surprising that these names should be

applied to more Indian commodities, since at present we give to many

kinds of fruit, flowers, fowls and other things, the appellation of

Indian. The ancients, indeed, were not so careful as to distinguish

always, by a proper addition, the many articles to which they gave

the name of _Indica_; and they had reason to expect that their

contemporaries would readily comprehend by the connexion, the kind that

was properly meant. Their commentators, however, in later times have

for the most part thought only of one species or thing, and by these

means they have fallen into mistakes which I shall here endeavour to

rectify.

Everything said by the ancients of _Indicum_ seems to agree perfectly

with our indigo. The proper country of this production is India; that

is to say, Gudscharat or Gutscherad, and Cambaye or Cambaya, from which

it seems to have been brought to Europe since the earliest periods.

It is found mentioned, from time to time, in every century; it is

never spoken of as a new article, and it has always retained its old

name; which seems to be a proof that it has been used and employed in

commerce without interruption.

It is true, as the ancients say, that good indigo, when pulverized,

is of a blackish colour. The tincture, however, is partly blue and

partly purple; but under the latter term we must understand an

agreeable violet, and not, as is often the case, our scarlet. It is

true also that good indigo is soft or smooth to the touch[618] when

pounded; it floats on water, and at present, as in the time of Pliny,

is adulterated and rendered heavier by the admixture of some earth,

which in general, as appears, is fine pounded slate[619]. It is further

true that the purity of it can be discovered by burning it. Indigo

free from all foreign bodies leaves but little ash, while that which

is impure leaves a large quantity of earth. Pliny, perhaps, did not

rightly understand this test by fire, and added from conjecture, what

he says in regard to the colour of the flame and the smell of the

smoke, that this proof might not remain without an explanation. It is,

however, possible that those who considered indigo to be sea-slime,

imagined that they perceived in it a smell of sea-water. A naturalist

of modern times, who refers petrifactions to Noah’s flood, believed

that he could smell sea-water in them after the lapse of so many

thousand years.

_Indicum_, on account of its long carriage by land, must have been

dear, and therefore it was one of those pigments which the ancient

painters, who were often poor slaves, were not accustomed to keep in

any quantity by them, and with which it was necessary they should be

supplied by those for whom they executed paintings[620]. Our indigo was

also exceedingly dear till it was cultivated in the West Indies, where

the value of it decreased as long as good land was plentiful and the

price of labour was lessened by the slave-trade.

That indigo, which at present is used only by dyers, should have been

employed also for painting, needs excite no surprise. It was applied to

this purpose till the invention of painting in oil, and the discovery

of Prussian blue, smalt and other pigments of a superior quality. It is

even still used by landscape-painters to produce a pale gray; but it

will not harmonise with oil. As to the medical properties of indigo,

I can at any rate show that the experiments made with it at the end

of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century fully

confirm the high encomium bestowed by Dioscorides upon his _Indicum_.

There was a time when the former was much prescribed and recommended.

At present our physicians are acquainted with purer and more powerful

remedies than indigo, the internal use of which, as the fermented mass

is prepared in copper vessels, must be attended with suspicion.

That the author, so often mentioned already, was not acquainted with

the preparation of indigo, cannot be denied. It would, indeed, have

been extraordinary had the account of it reached the Greeks and the

Romans undisguised by fables, added either to answer the purposes of

the interested merchant, or accidentally in the course of its long

journey, in passing through so many countries and languages. It appears

to me, however, that through these it may still be discovered; and in

all probability we should be better able to form some idea of it were

the oldest method of making indigo still known. In the slime deposited

on the reeds, I think I can remark the first degree of fermentation, or

commencement of putrefaction, without which the pigment could not be

separated. Who knows whether the indigo plants in the earliest times

were not deposited in pits or in stagnant water, in the same manner

as our flax and hemp? Who knows whether after putrefaction they were

not taken out, and the colouring parts adhering to them washed off

and collected? The quantity indeed obtained by this process would not

be great, and at present a much better method is employed; but the

improvements made in every art have been gradual. The old inhabitants

of the Canary islands scratched their land with the horns of oxen,

because they were not acquainted with the spade, and far less with the

plough. The above conjecture will appear much more probable, when it

is known that in many parts of India the plants were formerly placed

in large pits; and in Malta, where indigo was still cultivated in

the seventeenth century, they were put into reservoirs or basins in

order to ferment[621]. If this was usual in the oldest times, it may

be easily seen how fabulous accounts might arise. Indigo was a slime

attracted from the water by a reed, which the indigo plant, stripped of

its bark, was considered to be.

Dioscorides speaks of another kind of indigo, which was the dried

purple-coloured scum of the dye-pans. My predecessors, considering this

account as an error, which might have arisen either from conjecture or

misconception, or which was purposely occasioned by merchants, did not

think it worthy of further examination. I cannot, however, refrain from

remarking, that a blue pigment, and even a very fine one, if the proper

preparations had been made for that purpose, might have been obtained

in this manner. It was not indeed indigo, in the proper sense of the

word, but a pigment of a similar nature. That fine high-priced powder

sold, at present, under the name of blue carmine, is made from the

separated scum of a dye-liquor, in which the finest colouring particles

remain suspended. The scum or flower of a blue pan[622] which floats

on the surface exhibits a play of many colours; and as among these the

ancient purple is frequently observed, it may therefore very properly

be said to have a purple colour[623]. In my opinion, there is no reason

to disbelieve Dioscorides, when he says that in his time a blue pigment

named indigo was made in this manner, especially as it can be proved

that the woad-dyers, at the end of the sixteenth century, separated

from their pans a colouring substance, which they sold instead of

indigo, an article at that time exceedingly dear[624]. Besides, we

read that in the establishments for dyeing black, the scum was in like

manner collected in old times in the form of a black pigment, and this

practice, as appears, was usual in all the dye-houses in general.

Pliny, who says that this indigo was made in the purple dye-houses,

seems either to have misunderstood Dioscorides, or to have been too

precipitate; but it is certain that the scum in the purple dye-houses

may have been collected and dried into a purple-coloured carmine.

As the Europeans did not become acquainted with the nature of indigo

till modern times, it needs excite no astonishment that the old

commentators should have erred in explaining the passages to which I

here allude; and their opinion can therefore be of little weight in

opposition to mine. Those who have approached nearest to the truth,

Sarazen, Mathioli, Salmasius, &c., speak as if indigo were made from

our woad, which however does not grow in India. Dioscorides speaks

also of woad in a particular section. Marcellus Vergilius says, that

Dioscorides meant indigo is certain; and this article is so generally

known that it is not worth while to mention it. But he himself seems

not to have been acquainted with it, else he would have amended the

erroneous passage which speaks of _Indian stone_[625]. This arose from

the ignorance of the old transcribers, who being unacquainted with

_Indicum_ thought only of _gemma Indica_, mentioned by Pliny[626]. But

Vergilius was right in this, that the purple lake, spoken of by Pliny,

and not by Dioscorides as he believes, can no longer be produced.

I have long made it a rule, and prescribed it to others, in explaining

any object mentioned by the ancients, never to admit, without the

strongest proofs, that the same article is denoted by different

appellations. This, it is true, has been often done. By these means

the small knowledge we possess of a thing that occurs under one name

only may be increased. A wider field may thus be opened for conjecture,

and more latitude may be given to the imagination; but at the same

time one may fall into groundless explanations, and hazard assertions,

which, with whatever caution and learning proposed, will, on closer

examination, be found either false or highly improbable. According

to this rule, I have carefully endeavoured not to suffer myself to

be so far misled by the respectability of my predecessors, as to

consider the _Indicum_ and _Indicum nigrum_ of the ancients to be the

same substance. On further research I find that the latter not only

appears by the epithet to be different from indigo, but that it is

China, or, as the Dutch call it, Indian ink. To prove this, I must

refer to the passage of Pliny[627] on which my assertion is founded;

and perhaps the short illustrations added will render this minuteness

less tedious to those who are fond of such disquisitions. In the

passage referred to, Pliny enumerates all the materials which in his

time were used for black ink. He therefore mentions two vitriolic

substances, a slime or sediment (_salsugo_), and a yellow vitriolic

earth (called also _misy_). Such minerals continued in use as long

as men were unacquainted with the art of lixiviating the salt, and

causing it to crystallize; or in other words, as long as they had no

vitriol-manufactories. He speaks also of lamp-black being made in huts

built for the purpose, which are described by Vitruvius, and from which

the smoke of burning pine-wood was conveyed into a close apartment. The

article was certainly adulterated, when soot, taken from the baths and

other places where an open fire was maintained with wood of all kinds,

was intermixed with it. It is very remarkable that black from burnt

refuse of grapes, _noir de vigne_, which at present our artists, and

particularly our copper-plate printers, consider as the most beautiful

black, was made even at that period. Germany hitherto has obtained the

greater part of this article from Mentz, through Frankfort, and on that

account it is called Frankfort black. Some is made also at Kitsingen,

Markbreit, and Munich. For this purpose the refuse of the grapes is

charred in a close fire, and being then finely pounded is packed into

casks. Pliny observes, that it was asserted that from this substance

one could obtain a black which might be substituted for indigo. Another

pigment was bone-black, or burnt ivory, which is highly esteemed even

at present. Besides these, continues he, there is obtained from India

what is called _Indicum_, the preparation of which I have not yet been

able to learn: but a similar pigment is made from the black scum of

the dye-pans, in places for dyeing black, and another kind is obtained

from charred fir-wood finely pulverized. The cuttle-fish (_sepia_)

likewise gives a black; but that however has nothing to do with the

present question. He remarks, in the last place, that every kind of

black pigment is improved, or rather the preparation of it completed,

by exposure to the sun[628]; that is to say, after gum has been added

to that intended for writing, and size to that destined for painting.

But that which was made with vinegar was more durable, and could not

be easily effaced by washing. All this is very true. Our ink acquires

a superior quality when exposed to the light of the sun in flat

vessels. That vinegar renders black colours faster, is well known to

our calico-printers; and those who wish to have good ink must employ in

making it the brightest vinegar of beer. It is equally true, that every

black pigment mixed up with gum or size can be sooner and easier washed

out again with water[629].

A considerable part of what has hitherto been quoted from Pliny, may

be found also in Vitruvius[630]. The latter, in like manner, mentions

huts for making lamp-black; he speaks also of ivory-black, and says

expressly, that when it is properly made it not only forms a good

colour and excellent ink, but approaches very near to _Indicum_.

Now I might here ask, whether it is at all probable that the learned

Pliny and the practical connoisseur of painting, the architect

Vitruvius, could consider and describe our blue indigo as a pigment

which, like lamp-black, could be employed as a black colour and

as ink? Is it credible that Pliny, if he meant blue indigo in the

before-mentioned passage, would have said that he was not able to

learn the preparation of it, when he expressly describes it, as he

believed it to be, in the course of a few lines further? Would Pliny

and Vitruvius, had they been acquainted with black indigo only, remark

immediately after, that, when costly indigo could not be obtained,

earth saturated with woad, consequently a blue earth, might be used in

its stead? Is not allusion here made to a blue pigment, as was before

to a black one? Is it not therefore evident, that the name of _Indicum_

was given to a black and also to a blue pigment brought from India? And

if this be the case, is it not highly probable that the black _Indicum_

was what we at present call Indian ink, which approaches so near to

the finest ivory-black, and black of wine lees, that it is often

counterfeited by these substances, a preparation of which is frequently

sold as Indian ink to unwary purchasers? Indian ink is in general use

in India, and has been so in all probability since the earliest ages.

In India all artificial productions are of very great antiquity; and

therefore I will venture to say, that it is not probable that Indian

ink is a new invention in India, although it may probably have been

improved, and particularly by the Chinese.

To confound the two substances, however, called indigo (_indicum_)

at that period was not possible, as every painter and dealer in

colours would know that there were two kinds, a blue and a black. It

has, nevertheless, occurred to me, that in the works of the ancients

obscurity may have sometimes been avoided by the addition of an

epithet; and I once thought I had found in Pliny an instance of this

foresight; that is, where he names all kinds of colours--_purpurissum_,

_Indicum cæruleum_, _melinum_, _auripigmentum_, _cerussa_[631]. I

conceived that in this passage our indigo was distinguished from

the black _indicum_ by the epithet _cæruleum_. But my joy at this

discovery was soon damped by Hardouin, who places between _Indicum_ and

_cæruleum_ a comma, which is not to be found in many of the oldest and

best editions. I cannot, therefore, get rid of this comma; for it is

beyond all dispute that _cæruleum_ was the common appellation of blue

copper ochre, that is, mountain blue. I shall now proceed to examine

whether my observation be true, that the Greeks frequently used the

term black _indicum_, when they meant to denote the black, and not the

blue.

The term _nigrum Indicum_ occurs in Arrian, Galen, Paulus Ægineta,

and perhaps in the works of other Greek physicians; and as the Latin

writers were acquainted with an _Indicum_ which dyed black, there is

reason to conjecture that this was the _Indicum nigrum_ of the Greeks,

though I should rather be inclined to translate this appellation by the

words Indian black, in the same manner as we may say Berlin blue, Roman

red, Naples yellow, Brunswick green, Spanish brown, &c.; or I should as

readily translate it Indian ink. Arrian introduces it along with other

Indian wares. I do not indeed find that he makes any mention of indigo

properly so called; but a complete catalogue of merchandise is not to

be expected from him. _Indicum_, however, occurs once more in this

author; but in the passage where it is found it is only an epithet to

another article. Speaking of cinnabar, he adds, that he means that kind

called Indian, which is obtained from a tree in the same manner as gum.

I am inclined to think that he alludes to dragon’s blood, which on

account of its colour was at that time called cinnabar.

Some have conjectured that what in Arrian is named _laccos chromatinos_

was our indigo, which indeed might be classed among the lakes,

according to the present meaning of that word. Others understand by it

gum-lac[632]. But I am unacquainted with any proofs that gum-lac was

known at so early a period. I much doubt whether this meaning of the

word lac be so old; and I must confess that the opinion of Salmasius

appears to me highly probable, namely, that Arrian alluded to a kind of

party-coloured garment: for besides the grounds adduced by Salmasius,

it deserves to be remarked, that in the passage in question different

kinds of clothes, and no other articles are mentioned. Besides, the

epithet _chromatinos_ is applied by the same writer, in the same sense,

to other kinds of clothing. It cannot therefore be said that Arrian

mentions our gum-lac, the origin of which word Salmasius endeavours to

discover.

In the works of Galen, which have not yet been sufficiently

illustrated, I have found _Indicum nigrum_ only four times. In a place

where he speaks of diseases of the eyes[633], he extols it on account

of its cleansing quality; and says it can be used for wounds, when

there is no inflammation. In another place[634], it occurs in three

prescriptions for eye-salves. I have however endeavoured, but without

success, to find in this excellent writer an explanation of what he

calls _Indicum_; though he has explained almost all the different

articles then used in the Materia medica. It appears therefore that the

Greeks gave the name of _Indicum_ to our indigo, and also to Indian

black or Indian ink.

It however cannot be denied that, in opposition to this opinion,

considerable doubts arise. Many who think that the black indigo

(_nigrum Indicum_) of Pliny and Vitruvius was not ink, but our

indigo, remark, that things of a dark blue or dark violet colour were

by the Greeks and the Romans frequently named black; and therefore

that the blue indigo might in this manner be called black[635]. But

the examples adduced as proofs are epithets applied by the poets

to dark-coloured flowers. Because nature produces no black flowers,

the poets, who are fond of everything uncommon, extraordinary, and

hyperbolic, call flowers black, when they are of so dark a tint as to

approach nearly to black. Thus clear and deep water is called black. It

is however hardly credible that painters and dyers, who must establish

an accurate distinction between colours, should have spoken in so vague

a manner. Salmasius suspects that _Nil_ and _Nir_, the Arabic names of

indigo, have arisen from the Latin word _niger_.

The objection, that Paulus Ægineta, the physician, in a passage where

he refers to Dioscorides for the medical virtues of _Indicum_, applies

to it the epithet black, seems to have more weight[636]. It may be

added also, that the virtues, in general, which Galen ascribes to the

_Indicum nigrum_, appear to be similar to those ascribed by Dioscorides

to _Indicum_; and the latter in one place[637], where he speaks of

the healing of wounds, uses only the expression _Indicum_, and not

_Indicum nigrum_. It is particularly worthy of remark, that Zosimus,

the chemist, declares the hyacinth colour of the ancients, that of

woad, and the _Indicum nigrum_, to be the same[638] or similar. But to

those who know on how slight grounds the ancient physicians ascribed

medicinal qualities to many substances, it will not perhaps appear

strange, that, in consequence of the same name, they should ascribe

the same qualities to two different things. It is not improbable

that in cases of external injury, for which the _Indicum nigrum_ was

recommended, indigo and Indian ink might produce as much or as little

effect. I should consider of far greater importance the opinion of the

chemist Zosimus; but unfortunately his writings have not yet been

printed. The period in which he lived is still uncertain, and it is not

known whether all the chemical manuscripts which bear that name were

written by the same author.

From what has been said, I think it may, at any rate, be inferred, that

in the time of Vitruvius and Pliny, indigo, as well as Indian ink, was

procured from India, and that both were named _Indicum_. It is less

certain that the Greeks called indigo _Indicum_, and Indian ink _Indian

black_. Nay, it appears that indigo, on account of the very dark blue

colour which it exhibits both when dry and in the state of a saturated

tincture, was often named Indian black. In my opinion, it is proved

also that, in the old dye-houses, the workmen collected the scum thrown

up by the dye-pans, and dried it into a kind of lake or carmine.

I shall now prove what I have already asserted, that indigo was at all

times used, and continued without interruption to be imported from

India. I shall quote mention made of it in various centuries; but I am

convinced that attentive readers may find instances where it occurs in

many other writers.

The Arabian physicians, it is probable, all speak of indigo; but it is

unfortunate that in this point we must depend upon very incorrect Latin

translations. It appears also that they often repeat the information

of the Greeks, in regard to articles of the Materia medica, without

having been acquainted with them themselves. Rhases, who lived at

the end of the tenth century[639], mentions, “Nil, alias Indicum.”

Avicenna, who died in 1036, often speaks of indigo[640]; but in the

margin of the wretched translation it is remarked, that under the term

_Indicum_, alum (or much rather green vitriol) is to be understood.

In a passage, however, where he speaks of dyeing the hair black, he

certainly alludes to indigo, which, according to the translation,

produced _colorem pavonaceum_, or a violet colour. In the Latin we find

“Indicum indum bonum,” and this awkward expression Salmasius explains

by remarking, that the words in the Arabic are _Alusma Alhendia_, that

is, Indian woad. In the same place he mentions _Indicum carmenum_, a

kind of indigo which did not dye so much a violet colour as a black,

that is to say with the addition of green vitriol. Carmania, indeed,

bordered on Gedrosia, which is the proper country of indigo, where the

best is still prepared at Guzerat. In the explanation of some Arabic

words, printed in my copy of Avicenna, _Indicum_ is translated _granum

Nil_. Serapion, about the end of the eleventh century, mixed together,

as appears, every thing that the Greeks have said in regard to indigo

and woad. Averroes, in the middle of the twelfth century, mentions the

medicinal qualities of indigo as given by the Greeks, and adds, that it

was much used for dyeing.

Muratori gives a treaty, written in Latin, of the year 1193, between

the citizens of Bologna and Ferrara, which contains a list of those

articles subject to pay duty. Among these occurs _indigum_[641]. In the

thirteenth century, the celebrated Marco Polo, who spent twenty-six

years in travelling through Asia, and even some parts of China, relates

that he saw indigo, which the dyers used, made in the kingdom of Coulan

or Coilum; and he describes the process for preparing it[642]. Much

curious information in regard to the trade with this article, in the

middle of the fourteenth century, is contained in the valuable work of

Francesco Balducei Pegolotti[643]. We there find the names of different

kinds, such as _Indaco di Baldacca detto buccaddeo_, in all probability

from Bagdad, a city which in many old books of travels is called

Baldach or Baldac; also _Indaco del Golfo_, _Indaco di Cipri_, _Indaco

Rifanti_. Indigo, at that time, was imported in hides (_cuojo_), or in

leather bags (_otre_), and also in boxes (_casse_). What this traveller

says in regard to the signs by which its goodness may be known, is

very remarkable. Nicolo Conti, who travelled through India before the

year 1444, mentions _endego_ among the merchandise of Camboia[644].

That the expression _color indicus_ was used in the middle ages to

denote blue mixed with violet, is proved by Du Cange. It appears to me

therefore highly improbable that indigo should not be known to Rosetti,

as Professor Bischof supposes[645]. In that important work on dyeing,

however, which I mentioned long ago[646], it occurs several times, and

always under the name _endego_.

I shall here make one observation, which is of some importance in

the history of dyeing. It is found that in the middle ages the Jews

maintained in the Levant a great many establishments for dyeing, and

were the principal people who carried on this branch of business.

Benjamin the Jew, who died in 1173, says in his travels, in speaking of

some places, that “a Jew lived there who was a dyer;” or he remarks,

in regard to others, that “most of the Jews followed the occupation of

dyeing.” A scarlet-dyer lived at Tarento, and a purple-dyer at Thebes.

At that period the Jews at Jerusalem had hired from the king a place

particularly well-fitted for dyeing, on the express condition that no

person besides themselves should be suffered to carry on there the

same business[647]. I am fully aware that well-founded doubts have

been entertained in regard to the credit which ought to be given to

Benjamin’s narration, and Jewish vanity is everywhere well-known; but

I do not see why he ought not to be believed in regard to this point;

for it may very naturally be asked, why he should have falsely ascribed

this occupation to his countrymen and no other? He speaks only once of

a Jew glass-maker, a woollen- and a silk-weaver. To this may be added,

that it is frequently stated in various authors, that the business

of dyeing was carried on in Italy by the Jews. Thus, in the eleventh

century, among the branches of revenue arising to the popes from

Benevento, mention is made of the taxes paid by the Jews on account of

their dye-houses. In the middle ages princes seem to have maintained

dye-houses on their own account. Instances occur of their giving away,

as presents, such establishments with all their apparatus[648]. A place

of this kind was called _tincta_, _tingta_, or _tintoria_. This dye

regale is to be deduced perhaps from the old establishments for dyeing

purple, which could be formed only by sovereigns, and not by private

individuals. Along with these _tinctæ_ the Jews are often mentioned,

so that it appears probable they were employed there as workmen.

There is reason therefore to conjecture that the Jews learned this

art in the East, and that they employed in Italy the same pigments

as were used in the dye-houses of the Levant. It is not improbable

also, that in the room of woad, which was then cultivated in Italy,

they introduced indigo, a substance richer in colouring matter, or at

any rate, rendered it more common. The Italians were the first people

in Europe who brought this art to a greater degree of perfection, as

they did many others; and it can be proved that the knowledge of it

was thence diffused to other countries. In the same proportion as this

took place, indigo, in my opinion, banished the native woad, which was

neither so advantageous, nor communicated so beautiful a colour as the

Italians were able to dye with the former. The use of it became more

extended when the productions of the East Indies were brought to Europe

by sea, and particularly after it could be obtained from America at a

much cheaper rate.

The first Portuguese ship, that commanded by Vasco de Gama, returned

from the East Indies in the year 1499, and was soon followed by several

more, all laden with the most valuable merchandise of the East. I

have never yet been able to find any invoice of the cargoes of these

vessels; and, unfortunately, we have no account of the early trade

carried on by the Portuguese with Indian productions. I have no means,

therefore, of proving that indigo was among the commodities first

imported. Spices, which in consequence of the general prevalence of

luxury, sold at that time exceedingly dear, together with precious

stones, formed, no doubt, the first articles of trade; but it is

not improbable that they were soon followed by indigo, for all the

travellers who about that period visited India, speak of it as one of

the most current articles.

Barbosa, a Portuguese, who collected there in 1516 valuable information

in regard to geography and trade, who afterwards accompanied Magelhaens

on his voyage round the world, and perished with him at the island of

Zebu, has given a price-current of the merchandise at Calecut, in which

the value of good indigo at that time is stated[649]. Corsali also, in

his letters written from India in 1516, mentions indigo among the wares

of Camboya. Louis Guicciardini, who wrote first in 1563, and died in

1589, speaking of the merchandise obtained by Antwerp from Portugal,

mentions _anil_ among that of the East Indies[650].

It is however certain that the trading company established in the

Netherlands in 1602, who learned at an early period the art of

rendering indispensably necessary to the Europeans cottons, tea, sago,

and other things of which they could always hope to find a sufficient

supply in India, carried on the greatest trade with these articles. The

first German writers who complain of indigenous woad being banished

by indigo, and those sovereigns who, by public orders, endeavoured to

prevent this change, ascribe the fault to the Netherlanders. Niska, who

wrote in 1630, says indigo had been introduced into Germany only thirty

years; and an order of the emperor Ferdinand III., dated 1654, says

that it had been imported into Germany from Holland some years before

that period.

That the importation at this time was very great, is proved by the

cargoes of the ships which arrived in Holland from the East Indies

in 1631. The first had 13,539 pounds of Sirches indigo; the second

82,734 pounds of Guzerat indigo; the third 66,996 pounds of the same;

the fourth 50,795 pounds of Bajano indigo; the fifth 32,251 pounds

of Chirches indigo; the sixth 59,698 pounds of Bejana indigo; and

the seventh 27,532 pounds of Chirches. I have mentioned these so

particularly, as one may thence see the different kinds, and the places

where made. These seven vessels, therefore, brought to Europe 333,545

pounds, which, at a low valuation, were worth five tons of gold, or

500,000 dollars. In the month of April 1633, three ships brought home

4092 _kartel_ of indigo, which were worth 2,046,000 rix-dollars.

The profit attending this trade induced people, soon after the

discovery of America, to manufacture indigo in that country; and

they were the more encouraged to do so by observing that the native

Americans, before they had the misfortune to become known to the

Christians, tinged their bodies and faces of a blue-violet colour, by

means of indigenous plants, which resembled the indigo plant of Asia.

Whether the two plants are of the same genus, or whether the American

is different from that used in the other quarters of the globe, has

not yet, as far as I can find, been with certainty determined[651]. It

is however proved, that the assertion of Raynal and others, that this

plant was first conveyed to the new world from Asia by the Europeans,

is entirely erroneous. It is mentioned by Francis Colon (or Columbus),

in the Life of his father[652], among the valuable productions of the

island of Hispaniola or St. Domingo. Francis Hernandes reckons it among

the natural plants of Mexico, and says that the Americans used it for

dyeing their hair black. He adds, that they made from it a pigment

which they named _Mohuitli_ and _Tleuohuilli_, the same as the Latins

named _cæruleum_, and he describes also the method of preparing it.

This is confirmed by Clavigero in his account of Mexico.

This plant therefore must be reckoned among the few which are

indigenous in three-quarters of the globe. It is, however, highly

probable that the Europeans, in the course of time, introduced a better

species or variety into America, where several kinds are actually

cultivated at present.

In the history of the American indigo, I must here leave a considerable

hiatus, which perhaps may be one day filled up from books of travels

and topography. All that I know at present is, that the first indigo

brought to Europe was procured from Guatimala, consequently from

Mexico, and that this article was supplied at first, and for a long

time, by none of the West India islands but St. Domingo alone.

Krunitz says[653], but on what authority I do not know, that Lopez

de Gomes relates, that in his time a very fine sky-blue colour was

prepared in Hispaniola. If the person here alluded to be Lopez de

Gomara, who accompanied Ferdinand Cortez as chaplain[654], this

would be the oldest testimony that could be expected, and would

correspond with the account given by Labat. But I shall leave the

further investigation of this subject to others, and observe, that the

cultivation of indigo was begun in Carolina in 1747, and according to

Anderson, was encouraged the year following by premiums.

This article, therefore, was brought from both the Indies to Europe,

and recommended itself so much by the superiority and richness of its

dye, by the facility with which it could be used, and the advantages

attending it, that it suddenly banished from all dye-houses the

European woad, which was cultivated, in particular, in Thuringia in

Germany, in Languedoc in France, and in the neighbourhood of Rieti

in the dominions of the church. At first, a small quantity of indigo

only was added to the woad, by which the latter was improved; more was

afterwards gradually used, and at last the quantity became so large,

that the small admixture of woad served only to revive the fermentation

of the indigo, but was not capable itself of communicating any colour.

It was soon observed that every yard of cloth could be dyed somewhat

cheaper when indigo was used along with woad, than when the latter was

employed alone, according to the ancient method. Germany then lost a

production by which farmers, merchants, carriers, and others, acquired

great riches.

In the sixteenth century people began, in many countries, to make

considerable improvements in dyeing. For this purpose, new dye-stuffs,

both indigenous and foreign, were subjected to experiment, and trials

were made with salts which had never before been employed. In this

manner dyers sometimes obtained colours which pleased by their novelty

and beauty; but it needs excite no surprise that many new methods of

dyeing did not produce the desired effect. Many communicated colours

which were agreeable to the eye, but they soon faded; and some rendered

the dyed cloth so tender that it soon rotted on the shopkeepers’

shelves. Governments conceiving it then necessary to do something for

the security of the purchaser, considered the imperfection of the art

as a premeditated deception; and as it was at that time supposed that

some pigments could give durable and genuine colours, and others fading

or false ones; and also that the pernicious effects of salts could not

be prevented or moderated, they, in general, prohibited the use of all

new materials from which hurtful consequences had been observed to

arise.

Legislators are neither almighty, omniscient, nor infallible. With the

best views, and a firm determination to discharge their duty, they may

recommend things hurtful, and prohibit others that might be attended

with advantage. Were their commands and prohibitions inviolable,

insuperable, and irresistible, they would often confine the progress of

the arts and sciences, and render useful inventions impossible. But the

people, when they have not entirely become machines, know how to elude,

even at great personal hazard, faulty regulations, and by prohibited

ways to obtain greater advantages than those which formed the object of

the orders issued by their government. This was the case in regard to

the art of dyeing in the sixteenth century.

A recess of the diet held in 1577, prohibited, under the severest

penalties, the newly invented pernicious, deceitful, eating, and

corrosive dye called the _devil’s dye_, for which vitriol and other

eating substances were used instead of woad. This prohibition was

renewed in 1594 and 1603, with the addition of this remark, that, in

consequence of the weight of the bad dyes, a pound of undyed silk for

sewing or embroidery would produce two or three pounds of dyed[655].

Allusion seems to be made here to black, which at that time was the

colour of the higher orders. It appears that at this period astringent

juices and green vitriol began to be used more than they had been

formerly, and cloth when too long boiled with these substances, becomes

exceedingly tender: black cloth is even sometimes spoilt in this manner

at present. It is also true that cloth receives the greatest addition

in weight when dyed black, and the next greatest when dyed blue. I am

not acquainted with accurate experiments in regard to the weight which

cloth acquires by dyeing; but one may safely assert, that it is stated

far too high in the recess of the diet. Fifteen ounces of raw silk

lose by that kind of scouring which the French call _décruement_, four

ounces; consequently white silk weighs eleven ounces, but after it is

dyed black its weight is increased to thirteen ounces. In general, a

black dye increases the weight of cloth a fifth more than bright dyes.

As indigo after this soon became common, and the sale of woad was

injured, the first prohibition against the former was issued by Saxony

in the year 1650; and because government well knew how much depends on

a name, when one wishes to render an object odious or estimable, the

prohibition was couched in terms which seemed to show that indigo was

included among those eating substances, termed in the recess already

mentioned _devil’s dyes_. In the year 1652, Duke Ernest the Pious

caused a proposal to be made to the diet by his envoy, Dr. Hœnnen,

that indigo should be entirely banished from the empire, and that an

exclusive privilege should be granted to those who dyed with woad. This

was followed by an imperial prohibition on the 21st of April 1654, in

which every thing ordered in regard to the _devil’s dyes_ is repeated,

with this addition, that great care should be taken to prevent the

private introduction of indigo, by which the trade in woad was

lessened, dyed articles injured, and money carried out of the country.

The elector took the earliest opportunity the same year to make known

and enforce this prohibition with great severity in his dominions[656].

The people of Nuremberg, who at that time cultivated woad, went still

further. They made a law that their dyers should annually take an oath

not to use indigo; and at present they are obliged to do the same

thing, though indigo is as necessary to them as to others; a most

indecent disregard to religion, which, however, is not without example.

In the French monarchy, where all offices were purchased and sold,

every counsellor of parliament, on his entrance, was obliged to swear

that he had not obtained his place by money, until at length some one

had the courage to refuse taking a false oath. Thus also in Germany

many placemen must swear that they will observe all the orders of

government, yet many of them are daily violated, and indeed cannot be

observed, or at any rate, not without great mischief and confusion.

What was done in Germany in regard to Thuringia, was done in France

in regard to Languedoc. In consequence of an urgent representation by

the states of that province, the use of indigo was forbidden in 1598;

and this prohibition was afterwards repeated several times. But in the

well-known edict of 1669, in which Colbert separated the fine from the

common dyers, it was stated that indigo should be used without woad;

and in 1737 dyers were left at liberty to use indigo alone, or to

employ a mixture of indigo and woad[657].

In England, where, I believe, woad was not at that time cultivated,

the first mention of indigo in the laws occurs in the year 1581, under

the reign of Elizabeth, not, however, on account of a blue but a black

dye. No woollen articles were to be dyed black with the gall-nut,

madder or other materials, till they had received the first ground, or

been rendered blue by woad, or woad and indigo together[658]. In like

manner it was long believed that no durable black could be produced

unless the article were first dyed in a blue pan. Hats also were not

considered to be properly dyed unless traces of a blue tint could be

discovered on the place where they were cut[659]. At present our dyers

can communicate a durable black without a blue ground, as well as dye

a fixed blue without woad; and in every part of Europe foreign indigo

will continue to be the most common material for dyeing, till its high

price render it necessary to obtain a similar pigment from indigenous

plants[660].

[The dye-stuff of indigo is obtained from the plant by allowing it to

ferment with water; during this process it subsides in the form of a

blue deposit, which is collected and dried. As it occurs in commerce,

it contains several impurities, such as lime, silica, alumina, and

oxide of iron, in addition to the colouring matters, which are three in

number, a brown, red and blue; as also some glutinous matter.

The chief localities of the indigo-plant at present are Bengal and

Guatimala, though of late years the exportation from the latter has

been materially checked by the disturbed state of Central America.

In the early period of our occupation of India, indigo formed a

leading branch of the Company’s trade; but the rude manufacture of

the native population was in the course of time expelled from the

markets of Europe by the more skilfully prepared drug of America and

the West Indies. Soon after the peace of 1783, the West Indian process

of manufacture was introduced into Bengal, and the directors having

relaxed their prohibitory system so far as to permit the application

of British capital and skill to the cultivation of the plant on the

alluvial depositions of the Ganges, the exportations were gradually

increased, and the American and West Indian indigo almost entirely

driven from the market. The manufacture was also introduced into

Oude and the other north-western districts of the great plain of the

Ganges; and in later periods into some of the Madras provinces, into

Java and the Philippine Islands. The indigo produced everywhere else

is, however, very secondary both in quantity and quality to that of

Bengal and Bahar, the soil and climate of which seem to be particularly

congenial to the plant. The average supply of indigo at present may

be estimated as follows:--Bengal provinces, 34,500 chests, or about

9,000,000 lbs.; other countries, including Madras and Guatimala, 8500

chests; total, 43,000 chests. Of this there are consumed in the United

Kingdom, 11,500 chests, or about 3,000,000 lbs.; France, 8000 chests;

Germany and the rest of Europe, 13,500 chests; Persia, 3500 chests;

India, 2500 chests; United States, 2000 chests; other countries,

2000 chests; total, 43,000 chests, or upwards of 11,000,000 lbs. The

quantity imported into the United Kingdom in 1840 amounted to 5,831,269

lbs., and the quantity entered for home consumption amounted to

3,011,990 lbs. Upwards of four-fifths of the imports are from the East

Indies; the remainder chiefly from the West Indies, Guatimala, Peru

and the Philippine Islands. The surplus imported beyond the quantity

consumed is re-exported to Germany, Russia, Italy, Holland and other

parts of the continent of Europe. France and the United States derive

their main supplies by direct importation from Calcutta.]