De Re Metallica (Hoover English translation)

...display the continuous flow of sustained thought that others exhibit, but the fact that the writing of this work extended over a period of twenty years sufficiently explains the considerable variation in style. The technical descriptions in the later books often take the form of repetitive, linked sentences that had to be at least partially broken up, with the subject occasionally reintroduced. Ambiguities were also sometimes found that it was necessary to carry over into the translation. Despite these criticisms, we must emphasize that Agricola was infinitely clearer in his style than his contemporaries on such subjects, or for that matter, than his successors in almost any language for a couple of centuries. All of the illustrations and display letters of the original have been reproduced, and the type approximates the original as closely as the printers were able to find in a modern font.

There are no footnotes in the original text, and Mr. Hoover is responsible for all of them. He has attempted in them to provide not only such comments as would tend to clarify the text, but also such information as we have been able to discover regarding the previous history of the subjects mentioned. We have confined the historical notes to the time prior to Agricola, because to have brought them up to date, even in the briefest manner, would have demanded much more space than could be allowed. In the examination of such technical and historical material, one is appalled at the flood of misinformation regarding ancient arts and sciences that has been released upon the world by the hands of non-technical translators and commentators. At an early stage, we considered that we must justify any divergence of view from such authorities, but to limit the already alarming volume of this work, we later felt compelled to eliminate most of such discussion. When the half-dozen most important ancient works bearing upon science have been translated by those with actual scientific experience, such questions will, no doubt, be properly settled.

We need make no apologies for De Re Metallica. For 180 years, it was never superseded as the textbook and guide for miners and metallurgists; until Schlüter’s great work on metallurgy in 1738, it had no equal. That it passed through some ten editions in three languages at a period when printing such a volume was no ordinary undertaking is in itself sufficient evidence of the importance in which it was held, and is a record that no other volume on the same subjects has equaled since. A large proportion of the technical data given by Agricola was either entirely new or had not been given previously with sufficient detail and explanation to enable a worker in these arts to perform the operations without further guidance. Practically the whole of it must have been derived from personal experience and observation, for the scant library at his service can be appreciated from his own Preface. Considering the part that the metallic arts have played in human history, the paucity of their literature up to Agricola’s time is amazing. No doubt the arts were jealously guarded by their practitioners as a sort of trade secret, and it is also probable that those who had knowledge were not usually of a literary turn of mind; and,