Mr. G. F. Rodwell on the Theory of Phlogiston. 3 



one direction by the destructive power of fire (his visible mani- 

 festation), and in the other by its beneficent and life-cherishing 

 attributes in the gentler form of solar light and heat. But the 

 first was not always an efficient proof; for Suidas relates that on 

 one occasion, when the Chaldseans sought to prove that their 

 god was greater than Canopus, a priest of the latter filled the 

 image of his god with water, having previously bored holes in it, 

 which were stopped up with wax. " The Chaldseans began the 

 contest with much rejoicing, and put fire round about the statue ; 

 the wax melted, the holes opened, and water gushing forth put 

 out the fire; hence the Chaldseans were laughed at for their 

 god"*. We trace some analogy with the Chaldsean practice in 

 the account of Elijah and the priests of Baal. 



The Greek philosophers adopted the four-element theory, 

 and they assigned a relative order of occurrence to the elements. 

 Thus fire was considered the most subtle, and it occupied the 

 highest place; next in order came air, then water, and finally 

 earth, most gross and occupying the lowest place. Fire and 

 air, they said, are light ; water and earth heavy. All fire has a 

 tendency upwards because it seeks to join that which is above 

 all ; all earth has a tendency downwards because it seeks to join 

 its elemental mother. Special prominence was given to one or 

 other of the elements by different philosophers. Thus Thales 

 maintained that water was the primal element (a theory which 

 was adopted in some of the later systems, notably in that of 

 Van Helmont, and partially in that of Becher) ; Anaximenes 

 considered air the primal element, while Hippasus the Pytha- 

 gorean, and his disciple Heraclitus, gave the prominence to fire. 

 This we can well understand when we remember that Pythagoras 

 drew somewhat largely from Chaldaic sources ; indeed his phi- 

 losophy is plainly tinctured by some of the Zoroastrian tenets. 

 Zeno held that there are two kinds of fire, — the one, common 

 artificial fire, which requires nutriment; the other, " are/cve/cov 

 irvp" the subtle elemental fire sustaining all things. This 

 latter he affirmed is diffused throughout the universe : even the 

 coldest bodies possess it ; for very cold water can be made colder, 

 and then becomes ice. The distinction would thus seem to have 

 been applied by Zeno between fire manifesting itself by pheno- 

 mena of light and heat, and the heat which is associated with all 

 substances, the presence of which can only be proved by artificial 

 conditions. This idea of the existence of two kinds of fire was 

 very generally adopted in after times ; and, as we shall presently 

 see, it forms the basis of the theory of Phlogiston. Chrysippus, 

 a follower of Zeno, considered fire the active principle of the 



* Stanley's ' History of Chaldaic Philosophy.' 

 B2 



