60 Gesneri redivivi, aucti et emendati, tomus ii. Franc. 1669, fol. p. 62. More information respecting hybrids may be found in Brisson, Ornithologie, t. iii. p. 187; and Frisch, Vorstellung der Vögel in Teutschland, the twelfth plate of which contains several good figures.
61 Coleri Œconomia ruralis et domestica. Franc. 1680, folio.
62 Barrington’s paper in the Phil. Trans. vol. lxiii. p. 249.
63 Phalaris Canariensis. The best figure and description of it are to be found in Schreber’s Beschreibung der Gräser, ii. p. 83, tab. x. 2.
64 Lib. iii. c. 159, and lib. xxvii. c. 12.
65 Dictionnaire de Commerce, t. v. 1765, fol. p. 1149.
ARCHIL.
Under the names Orseille, Orceille, Orsolle, Ursolle, Orcheil, Orchel, in Italian Oricello66, 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 Dillenius67, 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.
Theophrastus68, Dioscorides69, and their transcriber Pliny70, 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 ages71.
Tournefort72 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 Pollux73, 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.
Imperati74 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 Bauhinus75, 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 century76. 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 Rucellai77.
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 oricello78, 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