Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

Eric Vought
Copyright 2003, 2004 Eric Vought Revision 20031203.1 Revision 20031210.1 Revision 20040215.1 Revision History 03 Dec 2003 Initial publication. 10 Dec 2003 Revised after Magna Faire. 15 Feb 2004 More editting. Added to tallow discussion.

Table of Contents
Background ............................................................................................................... 2 Sources ............................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................... 4 Goals ........................................................................................................................ 4 Materials ................................................................................................................... 5 Method ..................................................................................................................... 6 Results ...................................................................................................................... 8 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 10 Beeswax vs Tallow ............................................................................................ 10 Crude Fiber Wicking ......................................................................................... 10 Beeswax vs. Paraffin ......................................................................................... 11 Modern vs. Twine Wicking ................................................................................. 11 Next Steps ............................................................................................................... 11

Abstract
In this article, we report on the construction and test burning of a selection of candles using historical materials and construction to varying degrees. We compare and contrast the different techniques in order to give the re-enactor or historical recreator an idea of the tradeoffs involved in using "correct" lighting. Along the way, we shed some light on what crafters and users of medieval lighting materials might have experienced. A draft of this article was originally presented in competition at the 2003 Magna Faire and Regional Arts and Sciences Competition for the Kingdom of Meridies in the Society for Creative Anachronisms

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

Background
I have been a mundane candlemaker for some years and am now doing so professionally. My involvement with the SCA has naturally led to an interest in period candlemaking and historical reproduction. Appropriate documentation for reproduction candles is particularly difficult to find, and accurate descriptions of the behavior and construction of such candles are nearly non-existant. Candlemaking was a common manual skill and it seems that medieval chandlers saw no need to document the process. Additionally, as candles are designed to be consumed and wax is subject to mice, few examples survive. Many candlemakers or organizations dealing with candlemaking (e.g.: wax suppliers, The National Candle Association, etc.,) have a short blurb about the history of candlemaking. These histories generally have about the same form: they start with Egyptian rushlights, talk briefly about the Romans pouring tallow over some unidentified form of wicking, occasionally make a short side trip into folks lighting ducks on fire, and then go into the medieval candles. The medieval chandlers, they assert, had the choice between tallow, which was smoky and smelled bad, and beeswax, which was and is terribly expensive. Then, in the 1800's, along came paraffin and the future was bright; paraffin burns cleanly without odor and smell and it is cheap enough for the masses. Paraffin is made from petroleum distillates which, by and large, have replaced traditional ingredients in many housewares and toiletry products. The petroleum industry has pushed hard for this wholesale ad2

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

option and the heavy, decades long, marketting effort may have distorted most people's view of historical practice. In all likelihood, period products are not as bad and paraffin not quite as perfect as made out. In this article, we present some historical source material, but mostly use it to provide direction for a more direct and practical inquiry. We produce candles by a number of methods with a number of materials and burn them. We compare the various techniques and provide some speculation on the methods of period artisans. We will then use these data in future research. Our experience will allow us to better understand period sources and perhaps give us a better idea where to look for them.

Sources
Several sources were used to provide direction. The sources that have been located thus far and which were used here are not themselves period. Only one quote is from a primary source and it is from 1609 and quoted indirectly in an online discussion. We are currently more interested in what may have been than what actually was; we will look to more direct literary support after the conclusion of our experiment. We take several quotes from Stefan's Florilegium [http://www.florilegium.org], an online list of quotes discussing medieval crafts, and one from the 1911 Britanica Encyclopedia. First of all, we note that medieval candles may have been made from a variety of materials and even a mix of them: Candles in period could be tallow, beeswax, or a mixture thereof. It is interesting to note that unlike current fashion, medieval beeswax candles were apparently refined as much as possible, to make them as white as possible. Modern yellow beeswax candles are only accurate inasmuch as they are made from beeswax, but they are not refined enough for medieval tastes. Margaret FitzWilliam of Kent The assertion that yellow candles were not used is directly contradicted by the following quote, which talks about dying white candles to look like the "yellow wax". Dying with turmuric is a workable technique I have used many times with paraffin candles. It produces a canary yellow. This may indicate an error in the above assertion or it may indicate a difference in taste in fashion over time, in different countries, or different classes. It is possible, for instance, that pure white candles ("virgin wax") were used in church ceremonies and for entertaining guests, but that crude wax found everyday use in a household or in clerical work. Note that people in the Rennaisance had a taste for the antique (as evidenced by their "Medieval Faires" in Arthurian garb (Maurice Keene, Chivalry, 1984) and may have been dying white wax yellow to look "quaint" much in the same way that people today dye refined white sugar brown. 39. A Delicate Candle for a Ladies Table. Cause your duch Candles to bee dipped in Virgin wax, so as their last coat may bee meerly wax: and by this meanes you may carry them in your hand without melting, and the sent of the tallow will not break thorow to giue offence: but if you would haue them to resemble yellow wax-candles, then first let the tallow be coloured with Turmerick boyled therein, and strained: and after your Candles haue beene dipped therein to a sufficient greatnesse, let them take their last coat from yellow wax: this may be done in a great round Cane of tinplate, hauing a bottome, and being somewhat deeper than the length of your candles: and as the waxe spendeth, you may still supply it with more. From Plat's Delights for Ladies, 1609 I have not been able to discover the precise meaning of "duch candles", but from context, this passage appears to suggest a method for mitigating the shortcomings of tallow candles. This is in essence the same method used today when chandlers coat low quality paraffin with a layer of high quality, highmelting point paraffin. The higher temperature wax on the outside traps the molten wax from the center and prevents dripping.

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

The following quotes discuss the [alleged] practice of pouring tapers rather than dipping. The above quote suggests that wax tapers were dipped at least some of the time at least by 1609. The below discuss pouring wax over wicks in order to conserve expensive wax. Unfortunately, the 1911 encyclopedia entry does not date this practice. The first quote, however, provides some useful tidbits for future research, including attempting to track down the church mandate. The encyclopedia entry elsewhere notes that medieval wax candles were known as bougies and that "candle" in some parts referred specifically to tallow. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition (via Dictionary.com) defines bougie to be a "fine wax" and notes that it comes from the name of a city in northern Algeria. This may be useful when source hunting later. The same dictionary notes that candle comes from the Latin candela; the verb candere means "to shine". Beeswax Candles: Basically beeswax was to[sic] sticky to mold and to[sic] expensive to dip. While we can get good quality beeswax fairly cheap in large quantity today no such period resource existed, particularly in early period. Pure wax candles were definitely reserved for high nobility and prominent church functions. More common was a mix of wax and tallow. There is still a church edict, I believe passed in the late 1300's, in force mandating the percentage of beeswax on certain church alters and holidays. Molded candles originated somewhere in France in the late 1400's and even then were used almost exclusively for tallow. The most common method, which is still used today, of making beeswax candles is pouring. In essence you have a copper melting/ catch pan at the edge of a large raised vertical wheel on which your wicks are hung (see diagram below). The wicks were predipped, straightened, and hung on the wheel with loops on both ends of the wick. As you turn the wheel the wicks pass over the copper pan and can be flipped (this makes an even thickness instead of the tapering you get with dipped candles) and then wax is ladled over it. By the time it comes around again the wax is sufficiently hardened to flip and pour again. I've tried this process many times and while initially tricky it does work quite well. I use extra large/ wide popcorn bins in a double boiler configuration with a simple wooden hanging stand/brace over the top and a portable electric burner (carefully marked so I know what temp I want) underneath. With only a pound of wax and some careful pouring I can easily make a candle 14 -16 inches tall. With several pounds of wax I can make a whole row of them. Bran the Dark; Barony of Mag Mor; Calontir Pouring, used in the case of wax, which cannot well be moulded because it contracts in cooling and also has a tendency to stick to the moulds, consists in ladling molten wax upon the wicks suspended from an iron ring. When of the desired thickness the candles are rolled under a plate on a marble slab. 1911 Britanica Encyclopedia --- "CANDLE" [1911encyclopedia.org] We also have a basis for discussing molded candles after 1300.

Acknowledgements
Lady Aine of Glencoe (MKA Cathleen McIntire) and Juliana ingean David (MKA Arwen Garrett) have been of considerable help dipping batches of tapers. Juliana has also contributed a fair amount of the wicking that went into these experiments. I would also like to thank the judges at Magne Faire for their comments on the first round of this project.

Goals
The goal of this project was to explore a number of techniques and combinations thereof, gather notes and impressions, and use the results to target further research. As such, I wanted to evaluate the following materials for candles: beeswax (yellow, white, and minimally refined), tallow, mixes of tallow and 4

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

beeswax. Paraffin is not period (1854), but is nevertheless used by many reenactors and serves as a useful point for comparison. I also planned to compare modern wicking to unbleached hemp twine and experiment with twisted dried grass. Lastly, I wanted to identify the tradeoffs in four production techniques: dipping candles in wax, dipping in wax floating on water, pouring wax over the wick, and molding. I had several specific questions in mind: Is tallow as bad (smelly, smoky) as described? Does it have any positive features? How much work is involved maintaining non-self-trimming wicking? Does the candle material make a diference? Is beeswax really uneconomical for the reenactor, particularly given the long burn times of beeswax candles? Can dried grasses or other crude vegetable fiber be used for wicking? What is it like?

Materials
The beeswax used was white refined, yellow semi-refined, and golden minimally-refined. There were some serious difficulties in obtaining significant quantities of tallow. In the past, I have obtained it for soap-making and other uses from the grocery store meat counter. The increase in outsourcing for meat cuts means that these stores no longer have tallow. The tallow used was two-thirds rendered beef fat and one-third mixed fats including beef, pork, and poultry. I had a very limited amount of tallow available, and this affected my choice of tests. The paraffin was a premium-grade 145 degree wax with no other additives. The modern wicking is a flat braided wicking recommended for standard sized tapers. Twine wicking was made with unbleached hemp which was hand-plied using the reverse-wrap to about the thickness of garden twine. Normally, a candlemaker would vary the type and thickness of the modern wicking for beeswax and paraffin candles (beeswax requires a more open and thicker wicking). Since I am not as interested in the behavior of beeswax with modern wicking, I have used the same for both candle types. 1

1An astute reader may notice the candle with lucet-cord wicking in the photo on this page. I have experimented with lucet-cord

wicking, but it is very labor intensive and I have no indication for its use earlier than the colonial period.

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

From left to right: modern flat wicking, hand-made lucet wicking, hand-made twine wicking Grass was cut and brought in to dry. Due to wet weather outside and a need to accelerate the drying process, I stuck it in a warm oven in an open pan in about the same manner that I would dry hand-ground flour or dry-roast roots. I have used this same preparation to filter water or hot tallow in the past. I plied the fiber loosly and prepped some of it by dipping in wax; some of it was actually soaked in wax for 30 minutes or more.

Method
I made and tested pairs of tapers as follows: 7" paraffin with modern wicking and with twine wicking 7" yellow beeswax with modern wicking and twine wicking 7" tapers of 50% beeswax and 50% tallow.

These tapers were dipped. I also made the following items which were not as rigorously tested but will be commented on below: Small (birthday-candle-sized) tapers of pure tallow. Poured tapers from white beeswax A 2" tall, 3" diameter pillar of half beeswax, half tallow and one of pure beeswax, both with twine wicking A poured beeswax taper with a dried grass wick and one with a grass wick that had been soaked for 30 minutes in melted beeswax. A small taper of tallow with a dried grass wick. A small pillar of minimally processed beeswax. 6

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

Additional taller items for display with the entry. Shorter items were burned to conserve wax and reduce burn time.

The tapers were dipped via a bare wick, folded such that a pair of tapers is made from each wick. A set of hooks over the stove allowed me to rotate three pairs at a time, allowing the wax of one pair to cool while dipping another. The wicks were prepared by dipping once, straightening, then cooling. When the candles were finished and were still warm, they were rolled over parchment paper to smooth. An olive oil can was used for dipping. The can is tall enough for standard tapers but is narrow and uses relatively little wax. The wax level was allowed to drop naturally as the tapers were dipped, grading and tapering the candles.

Pouring was accomplished by heating wax in a pitcher, then ladelling it over a wick hung by a hook over a pie pan. The wick was flipped on a regular basis in order to even out the candle. Wax caught in the pie pan was peeled up and dropped back in the melting pot on a regular basis. The poured candles were also rolled on the parchment paper. For both the poured and dipped tapers, the wax was kept at approximately 160 degrees Fahrenheit throughout. The high temperature paraffin used had a melting point of 145 degrees F, which was close to that of the refined beeswax. Deviating from the optimum temperature is apparent; either the candle starts to shrink instead of grow (too hot), or starts to become very lumpy (too cold). There is no need for a thermometer to track the temperature. The beeswax and tallow mix had a somewhat lower melting point and the melting pot was adjusted down until the candles formed properly (approximately 145 degrees F). The molded candles were made by heating the wax in the melting pitcher and pouring into stainless steel and polycarbonate molds. Both mold styles have a wick hole in the bottom which is plugged by the 7

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

knotted wick in the case of polycarbonate, and by the wick and either a screw or a rubber plug in the case of the metal molds. The paraffin was poured in the range of 200 degrees F, the beeswax closer to 180 and the beeswax/tallow 160-170. Wax for molded candles is heated to a higher temperature to allow air bubbles to escape while the wax sets up. I presume that medieval chandlers would have used either wood or clay molds, which are usually poured at somewhat lower temperatures than steel or polycarbonate since they do not conduct heat away as efficiently. Steel (or aluminum) and plastic yield glossier candle surfaces than wood or clay but otherwise behave similarly.

Paraffin candles will unmold from steel/plastic molds relatively easily. As long as the mold is cleaned prior to use, the high temperature paraffin will unmold without additives or coatings. Any problems in this respect can be resolved by sticking the mold in the freezer (or outside at this time of year) to shrink the wax away from the sides. This is not the case with beeswax, and I would expect beeswax/tallow to be different as well. Beeswax is sticky and the mold must be coated with grease (I use olive oil) before pouring. Beeswax must almost always be chilled before unmolding, meaning that, without refrigeration, candlemaking is best done in cold weather2. If a candle does not unmold, it must be destroyed, often by pouring boiling water over and into the mold and then remelting the wax. The wicks for molded candles are prepared by dipping in wax prior to threading them into the mold. This pre-soaking causes the candle to light faster and burn smoothly.

Results
The beeswax, small tallow, mixed tallow, and paraffin candles all burned well with either wicking. The grass-wicked beeswax candles would not burn unless held upside down at a 45 degree angle--- the grass apparently was not drawing wax to the flame. Tallow candles with grass wicking do burn, however. Furthermore, the grass wicking is much easier to keep straight than twine or modern wicking. I could readily imagine the equivalent of votives or container candles using grass wicking. The tallow burns rather quickly, and the wicking does not; this produces a smoky, drippy, inefficient, and high maintenance candle. There were no significant differences in burn time for the tapers. The paraffin and mixed tallow candles averaged 6 hours. The pure beeswax averaged 6.5 hours. This can easily be due to slight differences in manufacture and an occasional draft in the room. It was invariably the leftmost candle which burned shorter, indicating air flow issues. I intend to conduct further repititions with taller candles. The pillars burned with no issues. There was a marked difference in burn time for the pillars. The

2Since beeswax was harvested from the combs late in the season, finding cold weather for candlemaking was probably never a

problem.

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

beeswax and mixed tallow candles both burned in excess of 30 hours for a mere 2 inches. A paraffin candle of similar construction burned in only 5 hours. There was no discernable odor for any of the tapers when burning. The refined beeswax candles had a somewhat plasticy scent when cold. The minimally refined beeswax had a honey scent both cold and burning. The tallow and mixed-tallow tapers were noticably sootier. This was determined by holding a foil pieplate above the flame and noting the residue. The beeswax and paraffin tapers were close to the same in this respect, with the paraffin being perhaps somewhat sootier. The tallow candles were quite soft. The mixed tallow candles were less so, but still very soft when compared to paraffin or especially bayberry candles. Without overdipping, pure tallow candles will not survive normal handling. The tallow mix candles dripped somewhat while the pure tallow dripped heavily. The tallow candles also had the disadvantage that the cats attempted to eat them. The twine wicking was not self-trimming and required cutting ("snuffing") at intervals. For the tapers, they were cut to a quarter inch every half hour. For the (beeswax) pillars, they only needed trimming once in twelve hours. The twine yielded lumpier tapers because the grain of the wicking is more coarse. The preparation of the twine is important to producing smooth candles. The twine wicking does not blow out. When blown out, the wick continues to smoulder and smoke. If not extinguished by wetting the fingers or using a candle extinguisher, the wick will burn to ash and become unusable.

All three taper methods worked with no serious issues. The dip method, of course required a large amount of wax, approximately five pounds of beeswax in an olive oil can. Between seven and eight pounds were needed for "standard" length tapers. Note that beeswax tapers required significantly more wax by weight to fill the same container than paraffin. Dipping into wax floating on water worked essentially the same. It was somewhat easier to regulate temperature and used less wax (approx. one pound at a time). A rather large gain in this case was a dramatic reduction in time spent waiting for wax to melt. It took over three hours to melt a full pot of wax, but less than an hour to boil water and melt one pound. Pouring wax over the wicks also used very little wax (I could probably get away with a half pound to pour one pair of tapers, consuming about 5 ounces). It was, however, rather involved and produced very lumpy tapers. I believe that, even with considerable experience, pouring will produce lumpy candles as compared to dipping. Aside from the lumpiness, poured candles can be readily identified due to a vertical banding in the wax; dipped candles band horizontally as the wax hardens. Molded/extruded tapers as are now being produced do not have these bands. Molding the candles showed some interesting differences between the materials. Paraffin candles (using the 145 degree wax), as noted above, will demold without any issues. Beeswax is sticky and considerable care must be taken. Adding tallow to the beeswax improved mold release. There were further differences in the way the candles set-up. Paraffin candles form a depression or well at the top as they cool. This well must be punctured to release trapped air and then the well is refilled. Beeswax formed a hollow inside and tended to crack while setting up, requiring more care when cooling and topping off molds. The tallow mix was somewhere between these extremes. Overall, the beeswax/tallow mix was less sticky and easier to handle than beeswax alone. The more refined beeswax was less well behaved than the semi-refined wax. 9

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

Conclusion
Beeswax vs Tallow
We now have a much more complete and complex picture of the various available materials than we did to start with. In particular, the choice between tallow and beeswax is more than a matter of "tallow bad, beeswax expensive". There are clear reasons for adulterating (or overdipping) tallow with beeswax and more reasons for adulterating beeswax with tallow than mere economy. Tallow used as a wax conditioner improves the behavior of beeswax, much in the way that stearic acid extracted from tallow is still used to improve paraffin today. Certain types of wicking probably used in period appear to be unusable with beeswax. We have not found many of the supposed downsides of tallow in this experiment. Tallow is clearly too soft for regular use or handling, but it is not terribly smoky compared to paraffin, no smell was discernable, and the softness can be mitigated by mixing/overdipping with beeswax or with stearic acid for colonial or civil war era reenactment3 It is possible that the reputation for smell comes from the same source as the reported bad smell of period tallow soaps: improperly rendered fats or the use of drippings from cooking. Bacon grease, for instance, does have a strong odor as it burns, as does spoiled fat. I am also forced to speculate on the effect of an animal's diet on the odor of the fat: venison from the north eastern US which grazes on cedar and other pungent plants takes on a sharp flavor, but grain-fed venison from further west does not.

Crude Fiber Wicking

The results of the experimentation with dried grass also opens up a number of interesting questions. Was there a period (or locale) in which beeswax was not used because it would not burn with the available wicking? Are some forms of grass or crude vegatable fiber better than others? Were the poor burn characteristics (smoke, dripping, excessive need for trimming) mitigated in some fashion? In what way does the behavior of such candles relate to the reputation of tallow for being smoky in general? The poor burn characteristics of tallow tapers with crude grass fiber may have placed considerable pressure on the form such candles took. Getting a drippy, soft tallow taper to stand up and shed light without burning down the house would be a significant challenge which the stiffness of the fiber does not seem to mitigate. Nor is overdipping with beeswax likely to be sufficient in this case (this assertion will be tested in later experiments). As a candlemaker, I would expect period crude vegetable fiber candles to take one of two forms: The first form would be a rigid "wick" which is merely soaked and coated with tallow rather than dipped. This may represent the early Egyptian rushlights and approach a torch-like form. The lack of a thick layer of tallow would reduce dripping and force the substrate to actually combust more completely. The second form would be something approaching a modern votive or container-candle. Tallow has many of the characteristics of modern soy-based wax, which is used almost exclusively for container candles. A relatively stiff fiber wick would perform the same function as modern wire or paper core wicking. The walls of the container prevent dripping and slow the rate of burn as well as making the candle safer and easier to handle. In modern applications, a small amount of petrolatum is used to make the wax cling to the sides of the container. A small amount of beeswax may have the same effect. Clearly glass container candles would be economically prohibitive in period. Glass containers have the advantage of being transparent, which allows the light of the flame to shine through as it burns down into the container. Container candles would still function, however, if made from pottery, wood, or metal, though they would not light as well. Placing them beneath a reflective surface, such as a metal "hat", would improve their lighting ability. The other option is to fix the height of the flame by fully enclosing the fuel and letting the wick, which does not burn well anyway, stay at the same level. This is essentially a tallow lamp.
3There appear to be significant differences in hardness between different types of tallow. Fat rendered from pork, for instance, is

quite soft and is essentially useless by-itself forcfree-standing candles. Tallow from beef or poultry is harder.

10

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

It will be interesting to see if any of these variations appear in early period artwork, literary sources, or archaeological remains.

Beeswax vs. Paraffin

For the reenactor, the question of economy regarding the use of paraffin is also muddied. In the tapers tested here, there was little advantage to the use of beeswax. With period wicking and some care to coloration, paraffin candles or a mix of paraffin/beeswax would likely pass for wax/tallow candles in period, especially if the comment about white beeswax being preferred is held up by a search of primary sources. The choice of wicking is dominating the appearance of the candles here, and, at three times the cost, it is difficult to justify the use of beeswax tapers for regular use4. With pillar candles, however, the economic advantage of beeswax is clear. For six times the burn time, a mere threefold increase in the cost of wax is a bargain. A single beeswax pillar can last through a long event like Pennsic or many shorter events or feasts. The fact that the candles are more authentic makes the choice easy. The use of longer burning wax also makes handling the period wicking considerably easier since snuffing will be required with much less frequency.

Modern vs. Twine Wicking

The behavior and appearance of twine wicking versus modern wicking is marked. Here we refer to the venerable "blink test": would an actual medieval person blink if suddenly presented with the item in question? A candle, of whatever material, with modern wicking, would not pass the "blink test". A candle with twine wicking, even if made of paraffin, likely would. Given the increase in authenticity, it seems that the small additional maintenance involved with period wicking is easily justified, especially as it produces a need for further authentic trappings--- namely, a candle snuffer.

Next Steps
This examination has identified several areas for future study. These include: A search for actual church edicts regulating the composition of candles. Evidence to support or refute assertions about the level of refinement of period beeswax. More experimentation with pure tallow candles. I am currently working to secure a consistent supply. More and more rigorous burn tests. In particular, determining the best formulation (thickness, plying, material) for beeswax candles and whether there is a consistent improvement in burn time for beeswax versus paraffin. A search for period indications of mechanisms to mitigate problems with tallow and crude fiber wicking. Further documentation of period coloring of candles. I have amassed a fair bit of information about the effects of certain herbs and spices on candle color and scent, but have no indications of their period use. Investigation of the term bougie and expanding my search for documents to include this term.

4That is: aside from environmental/political considerations relating to the use of petroleum distillates. Beeswax is a renewable re-

source and its purchase can support local beekeepers and small farmers.

11

Examination of Materials, Wicking, and Techniques for Recreating Medieval Candles

Continued development of technique for poured tapers and a search for primary sources. Can poured tapers approach the consistency of dipped tapers? Are there other advantages to the technique I have not yet discovered?

At a lower priority, I also intend to investigate other period (or potentially period) fuels, including tallow tree (currently on an import control list in the US), cinnamon tree wax (oriental), and olive oil (the name for crude olive oil, lampata, comes from its use as in lighting).

12