Trebellius Pollio, in his life of Claudius II. (c. 14 and 17.), twice mentions white garments of silk mixed with cheaper materials, which were destined for that emperor.
CYPRIAN,
Bishop of Carthage in the third century, inveighs in the following terms against the use of silk:
Tu licet indumenta peregrina et vestes sericas induas, nuda es. Auro te licet et margaritis gemmisque condecores, sine Christi decore deformis es. De Lapsis, p. 135. ed. Fell.
Although thou shouldest put on a tunic of foreign silk, thou art naked; although thou shouldest beautify thyself with gold, and pearls, and gems, without the beauty of Christ thou art unadorned.
Also in his treatise on the dress of Virgins he says,
Sericum et purpuram indutæ, Christum induere non possunt: auro et margaritis et monilibus adornatæ, ornamenta cordis et pectoris perdiderunt.
Those who put on silk and purple, cannot put on Christ: women, adorned with gold and pearls and necklaces, have lost the ornaments of the heart and of the breast.
In the same place he gives us a translation of the well-known passage of Isaiah enumerating the luxuries of female attire among the Jews: “In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon, the chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers, the bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the head-bands, and the tablets, and the ear-rings, the rings, and nose-jewels, the changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins, the glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the veils.” Isaiah in. 18-23.