reduced to three and a half, and after the latest improvements to two.
Mills by which grain is only freed from the husk and rounded, are called barley-mills, and belong to the new inventions. At first barley was prepared only by pounding, but afterwards by grinding; and as it was more perfectly rounded by the latter method, it was distinguished from that made by pounding by the name of pearl-barley. Barley-mills differ very little in their construction from meal-mills; and machinery for striking barley is generally added to the latter. The principal difference is that the mill-stone is rough-hewn around its circumference; and, instead of an under-stone, has below it a wooden case, within which it revolves, and which, in the inside, is lined with a plate of iron pierced like a grater, with holes, the sharp edges of which turn upwards. The barley is thrown upon the stone, which, as it runs round, draws it in, frees it from the husk, and rounds it; after which it is put into sieves and sifted. At Ulm, however, the well-known Ulm barley is struck by a common mill, after the stones have been separated a sufficient distance from each other. The first kind of barley-mills is a German invention. In Holland the first was erected at Saardam not earlier than the year 1660. This mill, which at first was called the Pellikaan, scarcely produced in several years profit sufficient to maintain a family; but in the beginning of the last century there were at Saardam fifty barley-mills, which brought considerable gain to their proprietors451.
As long as the natural freedom of man continued unrestrained by a multiplicity of laws, every person was at liberty to build on his own lands and possessions whatever he thought proper, and not only water- but also wind-mills. This freedom was not abridged even by the Roman law452. But as it is the duty of rulers to consult what is best for the whole society under their protection, princes took care that no one should make such use of common streams as might impede or destroy their public utility453. On this account no individual was permitted to construct a bridge over any stream; and it is highly probable that the proprietors of land, when water-mills began to be numerous, restrained, from the same principle, the liberty of erecting them, and allowed them only, when after a proper investigation they were declared to be not detrimental. Water-mills, therefore, were included among what were called regalia; and among these they are expressly reckoned by the emperor Frederic I.454 On small streams however which were not navigable, the proprietors of the banks might build mills everywhere along them455.
The avarice of landholders, favoured by the meanness and injustice of governments, and by the weakness of the people, extended this regality not only over all streams, but also over the air and wind-mills. The oldest example of this with which I am at present acquainted, is related by Jargow456. In the end of the fourteenth century, the monks of the celebrated but long since destroyed monastery of Augustines, at Windsheim, in the province of Overyssel, were desirous of erecting a wind-mill not far from Zwoll; but a neighbouring lord endeavoured to prevent them, declaring that the wind in that district belonged to him. The monks, unwilling to give up their point, had recourse to the bishop of Utrecht, under whose jurisdiction the province had continued since the tenth century. The bishop, highly incensed against the pretender who wished to usurp his authority, affirmed that no one had power over the wind within his diocese but himself and the church at Utrecht, and he immediately granted full power, by letters patent, dated 1391, to the convent at Windsheim, to build for themselves and their successors a good wind-mill, in any place which they might find convenient457. In the like manner the city of Haerlem obtained leave from Albert count palatine of the Rhine to build a wind-mill in the year 1394458.
Another restraint to which men in power subjected the weak, in regard to mills, was, that vassals were obliged to grind their corn at their lord’s mill, for which they paid a certain value in kind. The oldest account of such ban-mills, molendina bannaria, occurs in the eleventh century. Fulbert, bishop of Chartres, and chancellor of France, in a letter to Richard duke of Normandy, complains that attempts began to be made to compel the inhabitants of a part of that province to grind their corn at a mill situated at the distance of five leagues459. In the chronicle of the Benedictine monk Hugo de Flavigny, who lived in the eleventh and twelfth century, we find mention of molendina quatuor cum banno ipsius villæ460. More examples of this servitude, secta ad molendinum, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, may be seen in Du Fresne, under the words molendinum bannale.
It is not difficult to account for the origin of these ban-mills. When the people were once subjected to the yoke of slavery, they were obliged to submit to more and severer servitudes, which, as monuments of feudal tyranny, have continued even to more enlightened times. De la Mare461 gives an instance where a lord, in affranchising his subjects, required of them, in remembrance of their former subjection, and that he might draw as much from them in future as possible, that they should agree to pay a certain duty, and to send their corn to be ground at his mill, their bread to be baked in his oven, and their grapes to be pressed at his wine-press. But the origin of these servitudes might perhaps be accounted for on juster grounds. The building of mills was at all times expensive, and undertaken only by the rich, who, to indemnify themselves for the money expended in order to benefit the public, stipulated that the people in the neighbourhood should grind their corn at no other mills than those erected by them.
FOOTNOTES
380 Hesiod, Opera et Dies, 421.—It appears that both the mortar and pestle were then made of wood, and that the former was three feet in height; but, to speak the truth, Hesiod does not expressly say that this mortar was for the purpose of pounding corn. The mortar was called ὕπερος, pila; the pestle ὕπερος, or ὕπερον, pistillus or pistillum; to pound, μάσσειν, pinsere, which word, as well as pinsor, was afterwards retained when mills came to be used.—Plin. lib. xviii. c. 3.
381 Plin. xviii. 10. ii. p. 111. This passage Gesner has endeavoured to explain, in his Index to the Scriptores Rei Rusticæ, p. 59, to which he gives the too-dignified title of Lexicon Rusticum.
382 Gellius, iii. c. 3.
383 Deuteronomy, ch. xxiv. v. 6.
384 When Moses threatened Pharaoh with the destruction of the first-born in the land of Egypt, he said, “All the first-born shall die, from the first-born of Pharaoh that sitteth on the throne, even unto the first-born of the maid-servant that is behind the mill.”—Genesis, ch. xi. v. 5. See Homeri Odyss. vii. 103, and xx. 105.
385 Apuleii Metamorph. lib. ix.
386 The oldest cattle-mills have, in my opinion, resembled the oil-mills represented in plate 25th of Sonnerat, Voyages aux Indes, &c., i. Zurich, 1783, 4to. To the pestle of a mortar made fast to a stake driven into the earth, is affixed a shaft to which two oxen are yoked. The oxen are driven by a man, and another stands at the mortar to push the seed under the pestle. Sonnerat says, that with an Indian hand-mill two men can