FOOTNOTES
[712] Pausan. x. 38. p. 895.
[713] Sat. xiv. 185.
[714] Varro De Re Rust. lib. i. 1, 6.
[715] Diodor. Siculus, Pausanias, Propertius.
[716] Virg. Æneid. viii. 177, 368; ix. 306; xi. 576. To the same purpose are various passages in the Odyssey.
[717] Eleg. iv, 1. 12.
[718] Lib. iv. 3, 11.
[719] See Ferrarius De Re Vestiar. iv. 2. 2. in Thesaurus Antiquitat. Roman. vi. p. 908. Aristophan. Nubes, 1, 1, 73.
[720] Livius, v. 2. p. 11.—Florus, 1. 12.—Tacit. Annal. 14. 38.—Corn. Nepos, Agesil. cap. 8.—Lipsius De Militia Rom. lib. v. dial. 1, p. 313.
[721] Lib. viii. 55, p. 483. The hair of this animal seems to have been an article of trade, and comprehended under the head of wool, as we find by the Roman code of laws. L. 70. § 9.—De Legat. 3, or Digest. lib. xxxii. leg. 70. 9. Cushions however were stuffed with it. See Waarenkunde, i. p. 271.
[722] For the following information on this subject I am indebted to the friendship of Professor Eichorn:—“Of furs being used as dresses of magnificence I find very faint traces. I shall however quote all the passages where allusion is made to furs.
“In Genesis, chap. xxv. ver. 25, Esau is said to have felt to the touch like a hairy garment, אדרת שער. A fur dress must here be meant; for Rebecca endeavoured to make Jacob like his brother, by binding pieces of goats’ skins around his hands and neck.—Genesis xxvii. ver. 16.
“In Joshua, chap. vii. ver. 21, the true reading is אדות שכער, and signifies a Babylonian mantle, consequently one made of wool, respecting which many passages have been collected by various authors, and particularly Fischer in Prolus. de Vers. Græc. Vet. Test. p. 87. One manuscript, according to Kennicot, has however אדרת שעו, a hairy mantle or fur; but this has arisen either through an error in transcribing, one consonant, נ Nun, being omitted; or from the conjecture of some Jewish copyist, who was acquainted with costly furs but not with a Babylonian mantle. If the reading of Kennicot is to be retained, it would, on account of the price, be an important passage, in regard to costly furs.
“Among the Hebrews, the prophets wore fur dresses, if not in general, at any rate very often.
“The mantle of Elijah, 2 Kings, chap. ii. ver. 8, 13, 14, was of fur; because on account of his clothing he was called a hairy man, 2 Kings, chap. i. ver. 8.
“A hairy mantle, as a mark of distinction, is mentioned in the book of Zechariah, chap. xiii. ver. 4.
“In 1 Maccabees, chap. xiii. ver. 37, the high priest Simon obtained from king Demetrius βαίνη, which is certainly a false reading for βαίτα, or βαίτη. The only question is, whether βαίτη, which was merely a shepherd’s dress, consequently made of sheep skins, signified also a dress of state, as there is reason to conjecture from the persons who sent and who received it as a present. See Theocrit. Idyll. iii. 25. et ibi Schol. Furs, as a present, in the hot climate of Bassorah, are mentioned by Niebuhr.”
[723] The best refutation of this supposed Vandalism is to be found in Schlözer’s Essay, in the second edition of F. I. L. Mayers Fragmenten aus Paris. Hamb. 1798, 8vo, ii. p. 353. Nowhere do we find that the works of art were destroyed by the Goths or Vandals; on the contrary, it appears that they had sufficient culture to hold them in just estimation. Genseric carried away works of art from Rome, in the same manner as the Romans had done from Greece; but they were carefully packed up and not destroyed; he did therefore what Bonaparte did in those countries which were unable to withstand the force of his armies. If the epithet of Vandalism is to be applied to modern events, it seems most applicable to those who carried away works of art from countries into which the conquerors promised to introduce the rights of man, liberty, and happiness. The Christian writers, even, and among these St. Augustine, admit that the Goths after their victories were not so cruel and rapacious as the Romans. Orosius, who lived in the beginning of the fifth century, relates, that a Goth of high rank, after the taking of Rome, having found in a house some gold and silver vessels which had been plundered from the church of St. Peter, gave notice to Alaric, and that the latter caused them to be sent back safe to the church. The account given of the arms and accoutrements of these northern tribes proves also that they were acquainted with the arts, and that they employed them to ornament their clothing. The fur dresses therefore may have been very handsome.
[724] Glossarium, p. 1282.
[725] Virgilii Georg. iii. 381.—Ovid. Trist. iii. 10, 19; v. 7, 49.—Ex Ponto, iv. 10, 1.—Justinus, ii. 2, p. 43.—Seneca, epist. 90.—Rutilii Itiner. ii. 49.—Claudian, viii. 466; xxvi. 481.—Ammian. Marcell. xxxi. 2.—Prudentius in Symmachum, ii. 695.—Isidor. Origin. xix. 23.—Sidon. Apollin. epist. i. 2, where he describes Theodoric II. king of the Goths, the son of Theodoric I. and brother of Thorismundus: pellitorum turba satellitum. In epist. vii. 9, the kings of the Goths are called pelliti reges.
[726] Tacitus De Moribus German. 17.
[727] Variegated furs of this kind sewed together are mentioned by Pollux, vii. 60, p. 729.
[728] Plutarchus in Lycurgo. In like manner, the savages in the South Seas are acquainted with the art of giving more beauty and value to their ornaments made of feathers, shells, and the teeth of their enemies killed in battle.
[729] Lagerbring Svea Rikes Hist. Part 2. p. 88.
[730] At this period the Danes appear to have spent in eating and drinking the treasure they obtained in plundering; they employed their time only in hunting and breeding cattle, and clothed themselves in the skins of their sheep; but Canute endeavoured to introduce among them the Saxon manners and dress. He had invited into his kingdom from Lower Saxony, which at that time was considered the seat of the arts and sciences, and refined manners, a great many workmen and artists, a colony of whom he established in Roeskild, the capital.
[731] Digestor. lib. xxxiv.
[732] De Habitu Muliebri, cap. i. p. 551.
[733] Charact. cap. 5 et 12.
[734] Apophthegm.
[735] See Herodian, ix. 13.
[736] De Institut. Orat. xi. 3, 144.
[737] Lex. 25, De Auro, Argento, Mundo.
[738] See the instances quoted by G. S. Treuer in Anastasis Veteris Germani Germanæque Feminæ. Helmst. 1729, 4to.
[739] Trist. v. 10, 31. For a complete history of their dress the reader must consult the authors quoted in Fabricii Bibliograph. Antiquaria, p. 861; and in Pitisci Lex. Antiq. v. Bracca.
[740] In his Annotations on Catullus, p. 100.
[741] In that learned and ingenious work, Erklärung der Vasengemälde, i. 3, p. 186.
[742] Lib. xxxiv. cap. 14, § 41, p. 667.
[743] Cap. 50, § 3.
[744] Lib. xi. p. 755: ἀνδρόποδα καὶ δέρματα.
[745] Histor. lib. iv. p. 306.
[746] Tacitus, Annal. iv. 72.
[747] Hist. Animal. xviii. 17. The singular word καναυτᾶνες, respecting which a great deal has been said by Pauw in his annotations to Phile de Animal. 48, p. 246, has lately been translated by Böttiger very happily, by the word kaftane, a kind of Turkish robe. In the present day these dresses of ceremony are of cotton, with flocks of silk worked into them, and for the most part are whitish, with a few rudely-formed pale yellow flowers: but the word formerly may have signified clothes in general, or fur clothing in particular, and perhaps the silk flocks may have been at first intended to represent fur. That furs at present are employed at Bassorah as presents, is proved by Professor Eichorn.
[748] Vita Agesilai, p. 602. See also Hellenica, lib. iv.
[749] Cyropædia, lib. viii., where he mentions χειρίδας δασείας. The Greeks and the Romans, however, did not wear gloves.
[750] Ammian. Marcell. xxii. 5, p. 232.
[751] Lib. v. 41.
[752] Annal. lib. xiii. In Athenæus, Deipnos. v. p. 197, Callixenus describes Persian counterpanes with figures representing animals, but I do not know whether I ought not, with Valois, to consider them as painted leather, or rather worked tapestry.
[753] Digest. lib. xxxix. tit. 4, 16, 7, or L. ult. § 7, de publicanis. In Gronovii Geographia Antiqua, p. 261, it is said that a great trade was carried on in Cappadocia with Babylonian leather. The vestes leporinæ appear to have been made of the hair of the Angora rabbits.
[754] L. 7, C. de excus. mun. or Cod. lib. 10, tit. 47, 7.
[755] Chardin, iv. p. 245.
[756] De Rebus Geticis, cap. 3, p. 612.
[757] History of the Germans, vol. ii.
[758] Cap. 5, p. 616.
[759] Langebek Scriptores Rerum Danicarum, fol. ii. p. 111.
[760] Torfæi Hist. Norveg. P. 2, p. 34. Compare Schlözer’s Nordische Geschichte in Algem. Welthistor. vol. xxxi. pp. 445, 458.—Having heard from M. Schlözer that the first certain traces of the Russian fur trade were to be found in the Russian Chronicles, works never yet used, I requested him, as the only person in Germany who could draw from these sources, to transmit to me what he had remarked on that subject. I am indebted to him, therefore, for the following valuable information, the result of a laborious comparison of various manuscript chronicles, for which he will no doubt receive the reader’s thanks.
“The following passages are taken from the ten Russian Chronicles, the greater part of them still in manuscript, as a proof that from the ninth century tribute in furs was demanded from the people in Russia by their conquerors.
I. “In the year 859, the Waringians, who came by sea, had tribute from the Tschudi, the Slavi, the Meri, and the Kriwitsches, a squirrel per man. The Chazares (in the Crimea) had tribute from the Poles (the inhabitants of the Ukrain), the Severians and the Wæitsches, a squirrel for each fireplace or hearth.
“The squirrel Sciurus vulgaris had in the old and new Russian language the five following names:—1st. ‘Bēla.’ This primitive word has been lost in the new Russian language, but is still preserved in the Chronicles, and in the adjectives ‘bēlij’ and ‘bēliczij mēch, Grauwerk’ (squirrel-skins). ‘Bēl’ in all the Sclavonic dialects signifies white. Can any connexion be discovered between the squirrel and a white colour? 2nd. ‘Bēlka,’ the diminutive of the former, is at present generally current. 3rd. ‘Wēkscha,’ from which is derived, 4th. ‘Wēkschitza,’ the diminutive. 5th. ‘Weweritza’ is old, but still exists in the Polish.
“The variations of these words which occur in manuscripts are abundant, and some of them exceedingly laughable. One transcriber has ‘bēla;’ most of the rest add ‘wēkscha,’ ‘wēkschitza’ or ‘weweritza,’ as if ‘bēla’ were the adjective white. Two manuscripts say expressly, ‘bēla,’ that is ‘wēkscha.’ In one, however, from ‘bēla weweritza’ has been made ‘bēla ‘dewitza,’ a fair or beautiful maid.
II. “In the year 883 Oleg went against the Drewians and Severians, whom he obliged to pay tribute, each a black marten.
“‘Po czernē kunē’ stands in all the manuscripts; one only has the diminutive ‘kunitzē.’ Another bad manuscript, which has ‘konē,’ a black horse, is not worthy of any remark.
III. “In 969 Svātoslav spoke to his mother and boyars: ‘I am not fond of Kief; I will reside in Pereyaslawetz on the Danube. There I shall be in the middle of my lands, to which every thing good in my territories flows: from the Greeks gold and pavoloki (silk-stuffs?), and wine and fruit of every kind; from the Tscheches (Bohemians) and Hungarians silver and horses; from Russia skora, wax, honey, and servants.’ Skora, skura, furs (according to the Great Lexicon of the Russian Academy), from which is derived skornak, similar furs prepared. That coarse skins or furs (in Russian schurka), such as the terga boum, imposed by the Romans on the Frieslanders, are not here meant, is proved by a passage in the Chronicle of Nicon, vol. ii. p. 15, where it is related of a savage people, who lived far to the north on the Ural, that they gave skora for a knife and a hatchet.
“That marten-skins, as well as pieces of them (mortki) and of squirrel-skins, were used as money in Novogorod, till the year 1411, is well-known from Saml. Russ. Geschichte, vol. v. p. 430.”
[761] Du Cange Glossarium.
[762] De Animantibus Subter. p. 490.
[763] Varro De Ling. Lat. lib. vi. p. 51.
[764] Seneca, epist. 90.
[765] Pallas, Novæ Species Quadr. e Glirium ord. 1778, p. 120.
[766] Lib. viii. 37.
[767] Pallas, p. 142. I shall here take occasion to remark, that the use of this animal’s skin, as well as the name, occurs in the eleventh century, in Bernardus Sylvester.
[768] Lib. ii. ep. 2.
[769] See a dissertation De l’Origine des Couleurs et des Métaux dans les Armoiries, added by Du Cange to his edition of Joinville. Paris, 1668, fol. p. 127. See also the article Hermine, in his Glossary to Geoffroy de Ville-Hardouin’s Conqueste de Constantinople; or the same in Diction. Etymolog.
[770] Mullers Samlung Russischer Geschichte, vi. p. 491. Fischers Sibirische Geschichte. St. Petersb. 1768, 8vo, p. 290.
[771] Du Cange, in his observations on Joinville, p. 137, thinks that the zebelinæ or sabelinæ pelles came from Zibel or Zibelet, a maritime town in Palestine, formerly called Biblium, because the skins were sent from it to Europe. This author meant Byblus, at present Gibelet or Gibeletto; but this derivation appears to me highly improbable.
[772] Epigram. x. 37, 18.
[773] Trier’s Wapen-Kunst, p. 62.—Gatterers Heraldik. p. 41.
[774] Grauwerk veh or feh means properly a kind of fur, composed of that of the Siberian squirrel and the marten joined together.—Trans.
[775] Antiquit. Ital. Medii Ævi, ii. p. 413.
[776] See the passages quoted by Du Cange, and what Gesner has said in Histor. Animal. under the head Cuniculus.
[777] Rapin’s England.
[778] See this article in Du Cange and Hoffmann’s Lexicon.
[779] Marco Polo.
[780] Lib. ii. epist. 2.
[781] Epig. 92: de birro castoreo.
[782] De dignitate sacerdotali, cap. 5.
[783] Lib. xvii. cap. 28. § 47; xxxii. cap. 9 and 10.
[784] Lib. xix. cap. 27, p. 474.
[785] Lib. xix. cap. 22.
[786] Constantin. de Ceremoniis Aulæ Byzantinæ, i. p. 254: σκαραμάγγων καστώριον. The editor, Reiske, thinks that it may have been a pelisse, because Herodotus, iv. 109, speaks of the beaver’s skin being used for clothing. But how different must the old Sarmatian manners have been from the Byzantine!
[787] Epist. 42.
[788] Eginhartus, Vita Caroli Magni, cap. 23.
[789] This anecdote is related by the monk of St. Gall, whose name is supposed to be Notker, in his book De Gestis Caroli Magni, ii. 27, printed in Bouquet, Historiens de la Gaule, v. p. 152. Whether Notker was the author of this chronicle or not, there can be no doubt that it was written after the year 883 and before 887, as has been proved by Basnage. Pavontalis vestis, a term used in this passage, does not always signify cloth wove or painted so as to resemble the colours of the peacock; the skin of the peacock was used for ornament; the people of all nations indeed decorated themselves with feathers till they became acquainted with dyeing. The art of those who prepared feathers was banished by that of the dyers.
[790] Carmen De Carolo Magno, in Op. ii. p. 453, v. 225.
[791] At the council of Aix-la-Chapelle in 817, where the dress of the monks was defined, it was ordered, “abbas provideat, unusquisque monachorum habeat ... wantos in æstate, muffulas in hieme vervecinas.” See Sirmond’s Concil. Antiq. Galliæ, Paris, 1629, fol. i. p. 442. Wantus is still retained in the Netherlandish dialect, where want signifies a glove without fingers, having only a place for the thumb; perhaps it is the same word as want, wand, or gewand, which formerly denoted every kind of woollen cloth. Hence is derived the French word gand; for gwantus and gantus were formerly used instead of wantus. It is equally certain that muffula is of German extraction; mouw at present in Dutch signifies a sleeve. But at what time that covering came into use into which both hands are thrust at present to secure them from the frost, and which according to the size now fashionable covers the whole body and is called a muff, I am not able to determine.
[792] Leges Wallicæ, ed. Wottoni. Londini, 1730, fol. p. 261.
[793] Landulphus, lib. ii. c. 18, in Murat. Rer. Ital. Script., tom. iv.
[794] Adam Bremensis in Lindenbrogii Script. Rer. Germ., p. 67.
[795] Albertus Aquensis, in Gesta Dei per Francos, i. p. 203.
[796] Ivo Carn. Epistolæ 104.
[797] Canon 12.
[798] Albertus Aquensis, in Gesta Dei per Francos, i. p. 321.
[799] In Labbei Biblioth. Nova, tom. ii.
[800] Wilhelmus Neubrigensis, lib. iii. cap. 22.
[801] Wilhelmus de Nangis, p. 346. Gottfr. de Bello Loco, cap. 8. Joinville Hist. de St. Louis, p. 118.
[802] Barrington’s Obs. on the more Ancient Statutes, 4to, p. 216.
[803] Constantini lib. de Ceremoniis Aulæ Byzantinæ, 1754.
[804] Giulini, Mem. della Città di Milano, vi. p. 407.
[805] Ib. viii. p. 443.