IN THE TIME OF VIRGIL 177 



their enemies. " Who will hesitate," he asks, " to fumigate with thyme 

 and to cut away the empty comb ?" He gives, in two divisions, a list of 

 those apicultural pests whose depredations the beekeeper should try to 

 prevent, or at least to control. Among the minor dangers that threaten 

 bees in the form of insects or small animals that have a taste for honey 

 or that eat the bees themselves, he mentions swallows, bee-martins, 

 newts, lizards, hornets, and spiders. When one considers the number of 

 bees in a single colony, however, — upwards of ten thousand in the 

 winter and several times as many in the summer — one can easily see 

 that the combined losses from these sources are insignificant. 



He mentions also the bee-moth, " shunning the light ;" an accurate 

 description, since its custom is to remain hidden during the day. It 

 does not attempt to enter the hive until dusk, when the bees can not 

 see to attack it. This moth is a really dangerous enemy, being able to 

 harass seriously a strong colony, and often to destroy entirely one that 

 has lost its queen. As Langstroth says of it : 



The bee-moth has for thousands of years supported itself ou the labors of 

 the bee, and there is no reason to suppose that it will ever become exterminated. 



It is rather curious that Virgil nowhere makes any mention of the bee- 

 louse, which, to-day at least, is a source of considerable trouble to the 

 beekeepers of Italy, although in this country it is almost unknown. 



His description of that disease of the bees already referred to — so 

 serious a scourge as to make it one of the chief dangers that threaten 

 them — completes his list. For there is very little reason to doubt that 

 this disease of which he speaks is the same as that now known as foul 

 brood, or else closely analogous to it. This is a highly contagious 

 disease, attacking first the brood, which decays instead of hatching; the 

 bees also become infected, and presently die. This malady was doubtless 

 known to apiculturists as long ago as Virgil's time; Aristotle, in his 

 " History of Animals," describes it briefly but in no doubtful terms. 

 Even to-day it is a justly dreaded enemy to apicultural prosperity. It is 

 scarcely to be wondered at that, when we have not yet devised a very sat- 

 isfactory method of dealing with it, Virgil's remedies should be of no 

 avail. To stamp it out, its spores and bacilli must be destroyed by fire or 

 some other equally efficient agent. His directions as to the various herbs 

 steeped in liquids, and the roots boiled in wine, which were to be fed 

 to the bees to cure this fell disease, were worthless. This treatment, 

 like certain precautions that he advises taking for the welfare of the 

 bees, such as being careful to cut down all the yew-trees near the bee- 

 yard, and never to burn red crabs in the fire, could not have been of the 

 slightest use save perchance to afford to the zealous beekeeper of those 

 times, who conscientiously followed these instructions, the salutary 

 sensations that follow duty done. 



