In the sixteenth century sapphires, emeralds, rubies, garnets, jacinths, coral and sardonyxes were used in all tonics prescribed to protect the heart against the effects of poison and of the plague.
As it was noted that these remedies were frequently ineffectual, an explanation was sought in the fact that spurious stones were often used, the apothecaries either not having the knowledge to recognize the genuine stones, or being moved by a desire to profit by the substitution of some inferior substance.
Hence physicians were warned to be on their guard against such deceptions, and only to employ thoroughly trustworthy apothecaries for the compounding of their prescriptions. A substitution frequently made was that of the so-called yellow chrysoprase (cerogate), a stained chalcedony, for the jacinth, although the true jacinth of the andents was of the color of the amethyst. The grinding of coral in a brass mortar, instead of in one of marble, was also regarded as a very dangerous proceeding, whidi would have the worst possible results for the unlucky patient who took the powder, for some particles of the brass might be rubbed away and mix with the coral. This was said to have often produced very serious illness.
In a price-list of a firm of German druggists, printed in 1757, all the precious stones still appear. Here the cost of a pound of rock-crystal is six groschen ($.18) ; the same quantity of emerald was priced at eight groschen ($.25), while the pound of sapphire was quoted at sixteen groschen ($.50), of ruby at one thaler ($.75), and of lapis-lazuli at five thalers ($3.75). This indicates quite clearly the quality of the emerald, sapphire and ruby offered for sale. A pound of Oriental bezoar commanded the highest prioe, sixteen thalers ($12).”
Regarding the length of time during which various preparations retained their strength, Braunfels states that, according to the opinion of the Arabian physicians, the solution of lapis Armenus lasted for ten years, while that of lapis lazuli could be preserved only about three years. A list of the indispensable materials which should be in eyery good pharmacy included the following precious stones :
Jacinth, Magnes, emerald, hematite, Sapphire, Coral, Topaze, Jasper
The supposed medicinal properties of precious stones are subjected to a searching criticism by the Veronese physician, Francesco India, writing in 1593.
After establishing the distinction between alimentary and medicinal substances he proceeds to exclude from the latter category the jacinth, emerald, sapphire, etc. because although they could be reduced to a powder, they could not be dissolved, so that when taken in a potion they could be absorbed in the human system.
Hence no such effects could properly be ascribed to them as were to be expected from the regular and normal medicinal agencies. This writer ascribes the original use of such stones as remedies for malignant fevers and other dangerous diseases to the Arabs, adding that “had they not made this mistake and thus led many physicians into error they would have been better worthy of praise.”
In fact he does not hesitate to pronounce the emphatic opinion that these stones are not remedial agents fit to be
administered or used by any rational physician.
That powdered hematite (red oxide of iron) possesses an astringent quality and may really be looked upon as a medicine, he fully recognizes, more particularly its efficacy for the care of diseases of the eye, but neither these nor similar qualities can be credited to sapphires, emeralds, or jacinths.
At the same time he is not disposed to deny that these stones may have some subtle effect upon the body when worn, or when held in the month for a time. Thus he agrees with Avicenna (Ben Sina) that a jacinth worn over the heart may strengthen that organ, for he knows of the power inherent in jasper to check a hemorrhage. In a word his argument is principally directed against the internal use of powders made from these hard and unassimilable stones.
