of earth; the animal immediately covers up his urine because of his envy of mankind, and there it turns into stone. Moreover, like amber it has the color of fire, can be engraved, and attracts to itself not only leaves or straws, but even thin pieces of bronze and iron, as Theophrastus believes on the authority of a certain Diodes. I consider that all this is untrue and that a precious stone of this name has not been seen in our time.)
From these statements it seems likely that the substance variously known as lyngourion, lingourion, lyncurium, or langurium was none other than amber, and this identity has been upheld by some commentators.176 However, if the substance which Theophrastus calls lyngourion was really identical with the one called electron, it remains to be explained why he discusses them as though they were different substances. Possibly he was unaware that the same substance was known under these two different names. Certainly his statements about the mode of origin of these two substances indicate a lack of first-hand information that might easily have led him to just such a confusion of names. On the other hand, when he says that lyngourion had a high degree of transparency, he does suggest that there may have been a real difference between this substance and the one called electron, since the striated or clouded varieties of amber could not be so characterized. Possibly the name lyngourion was a special one applied only to flawless varieties of amber valued for purposes of adornment, whereas electron was the general name for amber, or the name applied to the less valued varieties.
Finally there, is the theory177 that lyngourion was not genuine amber but some sort of fossil resin either allied to amber or resembling it, but this seems to be based on what Theophrastus says about its mode of origin. His statements certainly indicate that lyngourion was found only in the ground, which is not true of genuine amber. However, it might also be inferred from what he says in section 29 that electron was also found in the ground and was therefore not genuine amber. Hence his statements give no valid reason for regarding lyngourion as different from amber. Actually, of course, the fanciful tale he tells about the formation
176 Blumner, Technologic und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Kiinste bet Griechen und Romern, Vol. II, pp. 381-82 (footnote). «* Ibid., p. 382.
• 112 ·
