Quite a number of little vessels of this dark green glass, ornamented with prunts and quillings of various forms, have been dredged up from the Scheldt at Antwerp, or found in the excavation of new docks. They may be studied in the museum now established in the Steen. Footnote 186: The term prunt should perhaps be restricted to those cases where the ‘blob’ is sufficiently large and hot to melt away the subjacent glass. When this is not the case, unless we adopt the German word _Warze_ or wart, the term ‘stud’ applies better. If again the ‘blob’ of hot glass is merely dropped on the surface it may be termed a ‘tear.’ Footnote 187: Every art, he says, must adapt itself to the country where it is practised; and so we Germans have set all kinds of knobs and rings on our glasses, so that they may be somewhat stronger and more lasting, and be more easily held in the hands of fuddled and clumsy folk (‘_von vollen und ungeschicklichen Leuten_’). This quotation is from one of the Lutheran pastor’s ‘sermons’ on glass (see below, p. 262). Mathesius lived in what has been called ‘the classical age of German thirst,’ and was ever ready to gird at the failings of his contemporaries in this respect. Footnote 188: The seventeenth-century _roemer_ has been revived in Germany of late, and at Ehrenfeld, near Cologne, this form, as well as other old models, is skilfully if somewhat mechanically copied in both bottle-green and bluish-green glass. Footnote 189: This later arrangement is well seen in a still-life piece in the Jones collection, signed ‘J. W. Preyer, 1854.’ Compare the carefully painted _roemer_ in this picture—the solid foot wound round with a thin stringing—with the seventeenth-century glass in the picture by Jan van de Velde referred to below. Footnote 190: Already in the fifteenth century the _vitra Veneciana_ are distinguished from the _Vitrum silvestrum sive montanum_, otherwise _wald-glas_. Footnote 191: For this district we have in the excellent work of E. von Czihak—_Schlesische Gläser_, Breslau, 1891—a better source of information than is available for any other of the glass-making centres of Germany or Bohemia. Footnote 192: Published by Froben at Bâle in 1556; the dedication, however, is dated 1551. Footnote 193: So Agricola states in the very last paragraph of his book. As this passage seems to have been sometimes misinterpreted, I will quote it in full from the original Latin edition. He mentions the various shapes that glass may be made to assume, and continues:—