Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopædia Britannica/Aqua Tofana

by Andrew Duncan (1773-1832)

AQUA TOFANA, called also Aqua della Toffanina, or Aqua della Tofa, from its supposed inventress,—Aqua del petesino,^[1]—Aquetta di Napoli, or simply Aquetta,—a poisonous liquor which was used to a very great extent at Naples and Rome during the latter half of the seventeenth century. Gmelin^[2] says, that more people were destroyed by it than by the plague, which had prevailed a short time before it came into use; and Garelli, chief physician to the Emperor, wrote to Hoffmann that Tofania confessed she had used it to poison more than six hundred persons. This he learnt from the Emperor himself, to whom the whole criminal process instituted against her was transmitted.^[3]

It is to be regretted, that Garelli, who had such an authentic source of information, has not given us some details of the infamous Tofana or Tofania; as the little that we know of her rests upon the authority of travellers, and is evidently exaggerated, and sometimes irreconcilable with established facts. She was a Sicilian by birth, and resided first at Palermo, and then at Naples. When she began to exercise her horrible profession, is nowhere stated; but it will presently appear, that it must have been at a very early age, and before 1659. She was extremely liberal of her preparation, chiefly it is said, to ladies tired of their husbands; and the better to conceal the nature of her gift, it was put up in small flat phials, inscribed Manna of St Nicholas of Bari, ornamented on one side with an image of the Saint, that it might pass for a liquid said to drop from his tomb at Bari, which was in great request on account of the medicinal virtues ascribed to it. Nor is it ascertained how long she carried on her murderous practices with impunity and undiscovered. Labat^[4] says, that when he was at Civita Vecchia in 1709, the Viceroy of Naples, then Count Daun, made the discovery. It was long before she was secured, as she was extremely cautious, and often changed her abode or retired into Convents. At last she was betrayed, and, although in a Convent, was seized and carried to the Castel del Uovo, where she was examined. Cardinal Pignatelli, then Archbishop of Naples, indignant at the violation of a religious sanctuary, threatened to excommunicate the whole city, if she was not delivered up to him, and the people were ready to rise. But the sagacious Viceroy caused a report to be spread, that she and her accomplices had determined upon the same day, to poison all the springs in the city, the fruits brought to market, and the public granaries. The manœuvre succeeded. The credulous people were now clamorous for her punishment, and saw with satisfaction the persons whom she accused of having purchased her Aquetta, taken from the Churches and Monasteries. Some of inferior birth were executed publicly; those of higher rank secretly in prison; and the whole city resounded with the praises of the Viceroy, whose energy had saved it from general destruction. A kind of compromise was entered into with the Cardinal; in consequence of which, after being strangled, her body was thrown at night into the court of the Convent, by way of testifying some respect for the rights of the Church. But the reverend traveller must have either been misinformed as to the actual execution of this Medea, or she must have been resuscitated; for Garelli expressly says that she was alive in prison at Naples, when he wrote to Hoffmann, not long before 1718; and Keysler, who visited Naples in 1730,^[5] likewise asserts, that she was then living in prison, and that few strangers left the city without going to see her. He describes her as a little and very old woman.

The Roman ladies very quickly availed themselves of Tofania’s dicovery; for it was remarked in 1659, that many husbands died when they became disagreeable to their wives; and several of the clergy also gave information, that, for some time past, various persons had confessed themselves guilty of poisoning. This led to the detection of a society of young married women (who had, for their president, an old woman of the name of Hieronyma Spara, a pretended fortune-teller), as the perpetrators of these murders. On being put to the torture they all confessed except Spara, who seemed to rely upon the protection of powerful individuals whom she had formerly served. But she was left to her fate, and was hanged along with her assistant, one Gratiosa. Others were afterwards hanged, or whipt and banished. Spara, who was a Sicilian, had acquired her knowledge from Tofania at Palermo.^[6]

Pope Alexander VII., immediately on the discovery and punishment of those who dealt in poison in his capital, published an edict forbidding the distillation of aquafortis, or the purchase of any of its ingredients, without the permission of the Government; which Gmelin considers as an artifice to misload the people as to the real composition of the poison, or as originating in the absurd nomenclature of the Chemists of former times, who called arsenic, concrete aquafortis. But the prudence of the Pope was rendered fruitless; for we are informed by Gayot di Pitaval (Causes Celèbres, Vol. I. Amsterd, 1764, p. 317.), on what authority he does not state, that Tofania’s fatal secret was disclosed by the indiscretion of the judges at Naples, to whom she had made confession of her crime. The whole city soon knew that she employed in its composition a very common herb, and that its preparation was otherwise easy; and in this way the art of poisoning became very common in Naples, where, Keysler says, it was still secretly practised when he visited Italy; and Archenholz,^[7] who was there in 1780, states, that Aqua Tofana was them in use, although its composition was only known to a few; but Joseph Frank, who was long Professor in Pavia, and has written a work on toxicology (Handbuch der Toxicologie, Wien, 1803, p. 168.), regards this as an unfounded calumny, and asserts that it no longer exists or is heard of.

Aqua Tofana is described as being as limpid as rock water, and without taste, and hence it could be administered without exciting suspicion. The Abbé Gagliani adds,^[8] that there was not a lady in Naples, who had not some of it lying openly on her toilet among her perfumes, in a phial known only to herself.

It was generally believed, that the effect of this poison was certain death; and that it could be so tempered or managed, as to prove fatal in any determinate time, from a few days to a year or upwards. Four or six drops were reckoned a sufficient dose, and they were said to produce no violent symptoms, no vomiting, or but very seldom, no pains, convulsions, inflammation, or fever;^[9] but only a feeling of indisposition, without any very definite symptoms, except sometimes inextinguishable thirst; the victim, however, sunk into a languid state, and his weakness increased daily. Disgust at all kinds of food, and weariness of life, succeeded; the nobler organs were then attacked, the lungs were wasted by suppuration, and death closed the miserable scene. This termination was the more certain, that the true cause of these symptoms was not at first suspected, and the remedies commonly prescribed rather aggravated the evil. Indeed, even when known, no treatment was of any avail, although a Dr Branchaletti, according to Keysler, wrote a book on its remedies, until it was discovered by accident that lemon-juice, when very early administered in large doses, sometimes proved effectual (Bertholinus), after which, Keysler tells us, that the poison fell into some disrepute.

Various accounts of the composition of this detestable liquor have been given. Abbé Gagliani, and more lately Archenholz, state it to be a preparation of cantharides and opium; but this is perfectly inconsistent both with its appearance and effects. By no preparation can the smell and taste of opium, if the quantity be sufficient to produce any effect, be concealed, and the acrimony of cantharides is equally connected with its activity. The one of these drugs is highly stimulant, the other a sedative, and neither of them capable of remaining latent in the system, or injuring the constitution. Erndtel,^[10] but without any probability, has conjectured that the chief ingredient was lead: Halle (Die deutchen Giftpflanzen, Berlin, 1783) believes, that it was prepared from the frothy saliva gathered round the mouth of a person tortured to death. Garelli, on the contrary, positively asserts it to have been nothing but a solution of crystallized arsenic in a large quantity of water, with the addition, for some unknown reason, of a very innocent herb, the Antirrhinum cymbalaria. The same account is given by Bertholinus, Lobel (Der freymüthige Heilkunstler, Berlin, 1786), Plenk (Toxicologia, p. 335), Haller,^[11] Molitor (Commerc. Lit. Noric. 1737, p. 182), and Möhsen,^[12] and is received by the most judicious systematic writers, as Gmelin and Hahnemann. (Ueber die Arsenikvergiftung, 8vo, Leipzig, 1786, p. 35.) Wildberg,^[13] however, considers its composition to be unknown.

From Italy this poison seems to have found its way to Paris. In 1672 Godin de Sainte Croix, an adventurer, who lived in a scandalous intimacy with the Marchioness Brinvilliers, was suddenly killed by suffocation, as it is said, in consequence of the falling off of a mask of glass, which he wore to protect him from the fumes of certain chemical operations about which he was employed. As he had no known relations, his effects were examined by a public officer, and among them was found a casket, containing many packets of poisonous articles, sealed up in a mysterious manner, together with a kind of last will, directing the whole to be delivered to the Marchioness, and, in case of her having predeceased him, to be burnt unopened. This led to the discovery of his having been instructed in the art of preparing poison, by an Italian, called Exili, with whom he had become acquainted, when confined in the Bastille; and of his having furnished the Marchioness with the means of poisoning her father and her two brothers, besides others on whom she tried the effect of her preparations. One of these afterwards was called from her by the name Eau de Brinvilliers. She is also said to have employed a powder called Poudre de Succession.^[14] La Chaussée, who had been valet to Sainte Croix, was convicted of being accessory to these murders, and was broken alive on the wheel. The Marchioness herself, who had escaped to Liege, was also seized, and her execution, which took place on the 17th of July 1676, is described with revolting levity by Mad. de Sevigné in a letter to her daughter of that date.

The practice of poisoning, however, did not seem to terminate with the death of this infamous woman; and a particular court called Chambre des Poisons, or Chambre Ardente, was established in 1679, to endeavour to put an end to it. In consequence of the investigations which took place in it, many persons, some of the highest rank, especially the Duc de Luxembourg, were implicated. More than forty persons were at one time confined in the Bastille; but it was ascertained, that almost all of them had been guilty of no crime, but were merely the dupes of a few impostors, who pretended to raise spirits, foretell future events, and to possess many secrets of a similar nature. Two women, La Vigoureux and La Voisin, with the brother of the former, and a priest called Le Sage,^[15] pretended fortune-tellers, were convicted of being dealers in poison, and burnt alive, on the 22d Feb. 1680; some others were hanged, and others acquitted. This closed the proceedings of this inquisitorial court, which has been accused of being a political engine, contrived to serve the purposes of Louvois and the Marchioness de Montespan. Voltaire, however, admits that the crime of poisoning infected Paris from 1676 to 1680.

Concerning the effects of the Eau de Brinvilliers, Pitaval tells us (p. 271.) that the Marchioness’s father experienced violent effects from the poison,—extraordinary vomiting, insupportable pain at stomach, and great heat in the bowels. He died soon after his return from his country-seat to Paris. The brothers, and five other persons, were all taken ill, and affected with vomiting, after partaking of a tart at dinner. On their return from the country to Paris, the brothers had the appearance of persons who had been long ill; and after suffering, the one for two, and the other for three months, from nausea and vomiting, they died extremely emaciated, and as it were dried up, without fever, though experiencing a burning sensation in the stomach. On opening the bodies, the stomach and duodenum were black and tender, and the liver gangrenous and burnt. Mad. Sevigné relates, that the Marchioness often poisoned her husband, that she might marry Sainte Croix, but that the gallant, having no desire for a wife of her disposition, as often gave the poor husband an antidote. She is also said to have attempted to poison her sister; but did not succeed; and that she was in the habit of trying the effects of her poisons on the poor, and even on the patients in the Hotel Dieu, under pretence of charitably supplying them with biscuits. But Voltaire positively denies this horrible imputation, and says, that she never attempted the life of her husband, who overlooked a connection, of which he was the cause.

The information concerning the nature of the Eau de Brinvilliers, derived from the examination of Sainte Croix’s famous casket, is not satisfactory. It contained poisons enough to have killed a whole community; besides opium, lunar caustic, antimony and vitriol, more than 75 lbs. of corrosive sublimate, and two bottles of a liquid, like water, with a sediment in one. The clear liquid was probably his real poison; as none of the other substances could have been given so as to produce death, without instantly being detected, by their abominable taste; but what this liquid was, we can now only conjecture, for its examination, as reported by Pitaval, shows that the physicians, at that time, had not the slightest notion of the mode of detecting arsenic even in substance, much less in solution; and accordingly, although both the liquor and powder killed the animals to which they were given, it is candidly admitted, that the poison of Sainte Croix surpassed the art and capacity of the physicians, and that it baffled all their experiments to discover its composition. We have, however, no doubt, that arsenic was the only active ingredient of all these pretended secret poisons; as it is the only substance capable of explaining all the credible circumstances related of them. From the mode of administering them in small, but repeated and perhaps increased doses, there was some foundation for the belief that they could be given so as to kill in any determinate time, while their failing in any stance to produce death, was easily accounted for by supposing antidotes to have been administered. But although the progress of knowledge has proved, that there is no such thing as such antidotes, it has on the other hand, by rendering the detection of poison easy and certain, put a stop for ever to the trade of poisoner; and what is perhaps of equal importance, to the general alarm and cruel punishment of individuals which have often resulted from natural deaths being ascribed to poison. It is not because we know less, but because we know a great deal more than our forefathers, that the art of secret poisoning seems to be lost.—See Forensic Medicine in this Supplement. (X.)

1. Lanzoni Opera, 4to, Laus. 1738, Vol. I. p. 69.
2. Allgemeine Geschichte der mineralischen Gifte, 1st edit. 8vo, Nurnberg, 1777 p. 132. 2d edit. 8vo, Erfurt, 1811, p. 243.
3. F. Hoffmanni Med. Rat. Syst. P. II. cap. ii. § 19. Opera Omnia, 6 vol. folio, Genevae, 1748, Vol. I. p. 198.
4. Voyage en Espagne et en Italie, 8 tomes 8vo, Paris, 1730, Vol. IV. p. 33.
5. Travels through Germany, &c. 4 vols. 4to. 2d edit. London, 1756, Vol. II. p. 368.
6. J. F. Le Bret, Magazin zum Gebrauche der Staaten-kirchengeschichte, IV. Frank. 1774, p. 131—141, as quoted in the curious chapter on Secret Poisons, in Beckmann’s History of Inventions and Discoveries;—a work which has been of great assistance to us in pointing out authorities.
7. England und Italien, 5ter Theil 8vo, Carlsruhe, 1787, p. 184.
8. Weckherlin’s Chronologen, 12ter Band, p. 146—L’Espion Dévalisé. Feliciter Audax, London, 1782, p. 61; also Behrends, in Pyl’s Magazin für gerichtliche Arzneikunde und medicinische Polizey, B. I. St. 3. 1784, p. 428-477.—Beckmann.
9. Bertholinus alone enumerates very violent fever as its first effect. See J. J. Wepferi Historia Cicutæ Aquaticæ, 8vo. L. Bat. 1733, p. 372.
10. Dissert. de Veneno salutem sistens, Lipsiæ, 1701, § 21.
11. Vorlesungen über die gerichtliche Arzneikunde, 2^ter Band, p. 190.
12. Beschreibung einer Berlinischen Medallien-sammlung, 1. Th. p. 148.
13. Handbuch der gerichtlichen Arzeneywissenchaft, 8vo, Berlin, 1812, p. 224.
14. Heucher, Mithridates, sistens præservationem Principis a veneno, vide ejus Opera, 4to, Lipsiæ, 1745, Vol. I. p. 421; also, J. G. Arnold pr. C. G. Stentzell De Venenis terminatis et extemporaneis, quæ Galli les Poudres de Succession vocant. This powder was probably an arsenical composition; but it was supposed by Erndtel and Haller to be acetate of lead, and by Brendel (Institutiones Medicinæ Legalis, Halae, 1768) to consist of lead and bismuth.
15. Voltaire, Siècle de Louis XIV. chap. 26.