OR, AN INQUIRY RESPECTING MINERAL SUBSTANCES MENTIONED BY THE ANCIENTS: WITH OCCASIONAL REMARKS ON THE USES TO WHICH THEY WERE APPLIED. Nathaniel Fish BY N. F. MOORE, LL. D. PROFESSOR OF THE GREEK AND LATIN LANGUAGES IN COLUMBIA NEW YORK: PUBLISHED BY G. & C. CARVILL & CO. M DCCC XXXIV. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1834, by In the clerk's office of the District Court for the Southern District WM. VAN NORDEN, PRINT. PREFACE. THE author is aware that in venturing upon a scientific theme he transcends the limits of his province, but relies for indulgence on the fact, that his subject is considered chiefly in the light in which it presents itself in the writings of those ancients whom it is his proper business to interpret. It is, moreover, possible for one who makes no pretension to original discovery; who, far from being a proficient, is himself a learner; to collect from various quarters, and arrange, what may contribute to the entertainment or instruction of others, who want leisure or opportunity for similar pursuits. And if, in the performance of this task, he occasionally fail, he may reasonably hope to find in those, whom superior knowledge qualifies to aid him, not severe censors, but indulgent friends. As such, then, does the author look to the learned and scientific, for benevolent suggestions, that may enable him, perhaps, at some future time, to render this, now very imperfect essay, somewhat less unworthy their regard. ANCIENT MINERALOGY. ONE who professes his intention to treat of Ancient Mineralogy, may well anticipate some objection to the term; and that it will, perhaps, be asked: "What is meant by Ancient Mineralogy?" Mineralogy is a science with which the ancients were wholly unacquainted-and certainly they were so, if we understand, what the term now implies a well digested classification, and systematic arrangement of every known substance in the mineral world. But, in regard as well to Mineralogy, as to Botany, Chemistry, and other branches of Natural Science, it will hardly be denied that the ancients possessed much and various information; although, on the other hand, it may be granted, that they had little science according to the modern acceptation of the term. Aristotle was a good zoologist, and Theophrastus a good botanist and mineralogist, notwithstanding their ignorance of modern systems; and they fail to obtain, in these characters, the credit they deserve, because the facts known to them from ob |