Those who wish to afford more room for conjecture might, from a passage of St. Jerome, render it probable that this kind of fur had the same smell as musk. Musk indeed was then known; but is it not possible that this father may have considered the musk animal to be a mouse, as Conrad Gesner suspected? To me it is more probable that he was acquainted with the musk bags used in commerce, and named them peregrini muris olentes pelliculæ. It however cannot be proved by this passage, that the skin of the musk animal was purchased for fur clothing on account of its smell. For, in the first place, the skin of this animal, with the hair on it, has not a musky smell; and this is known not only from the description given of it, but is proved by a skin which I obtained in a very fresh state. In the second place, this animal is as large as a deer half a year old; the size therefore will not warrant the use of the diminutive pellicula. And, in the third place, the skin does not afford valuable fur. The hair is thick; almost bristly, and so tender that it breaks with the least force. These skins are used only by the natives of the country where they are produced, for caps and winter clothing; but when they have been freed from the hair, and tanned white, they form leather exceedingly soft and fine. Those who are satisfied with an appearance of probability may recollect, in reading the passage of Jerome, that the sable, when daily used, throws out a faint and not unpleasant smell of musk, and assert that the Pontic mouse was the sable.
Far more probable is the conjecture of our great zoologist, that mus Ponticus was the name given at first to the earless marmot, M. catili, and that it was afterwards applied to the squirrel and ermine[765]. This opinion he supports by the observation, that the torpidity in winter, the rumination, and the affinity to the alpine mouse, M. alpinus, which Pliny seems to acknowledge[766], agree better with the M. catili than any other animal. To this may be added, that it is said by Hesychius and Phavorinus, that the Parthian name of the animal was simoor; and that the earless marmot is still named by the Tartars symron, and by the Calmucks dshymbura. The similarity is indeed great, and this opinion is further confirmed by the skins of the earless marmot being used at present by some of the Siberian tribes for summer clothing, and sent as articles of commerce, with other furs, to China, though they belong only to the cheapest kinds, so that a thousand of them cost scarcely eight or ten roubles[767].
Amidst this scanty information, were I allowed to offer a conjecture, I should be inclined rather to the opinion of those who consider the Pontic mouse to have been our ermine. For, in the first place, this animal is very abundant in the countries from which the ancients obtained their beautiful furs; and it seems almost impossible that they should not at an early period have remarked the superiority of its skin to that of the earless marmot. Secondly, it appears that the Pontic mouse has been commonly considered as the ermine, since that name in general was known; and there is reason to think that our forefathers could not err in the name of an article which has been uninterruptedly employed in commerce.
The name ermine occurs very often in works of the middle ages, and written in various ways, such as Harmellina, Harmelinus, Ermelinus, Harminiæ and Arminiæ or Armerinæ or hereminiæ pelles, Ermena, Erminea and erminatus, ornamented with ermine; all which words Du Cange supports by proofs. At what time these names were first used I am not able to determine; but they are to be found, at any rate, as early as the eleventh century, in the letters of Peter Damiani[768]. Du Cange asserts that they came from Armenia, in which country this kind of fur was in old times highly esteemed, as is proved by a passage in Julius Pollux; and this appears the more probable, from the circumstance that the words Hermenia and Hermenii were formerly used and written instead of Armenia and Armenii[769]. Fischer has rejected this opinion too inconsiderately, because the ermine was not procured from Armenia, but sent through it, from the northern countries to Europe. The same thing is said by Du Cange; but he gives it to be understood that this commodity was among the Armenian productions; and even if he has erred in this respect, his derivation still remains the most probable. Marco Polo, the celebrated traveller of the thirteenth century, mentions the ermine among the most expensive ornaments of the Tartars, and says that it was brought from the northern countries to Europe.
The sable seems to have been known much later than the ermine. Its real country is the most northern part of Asia, to which commerce was not extended till a late period; yet it is probable that it was known before the Russians became acquainted with Siberia, by means of the Permians, Woguls and Samoeides, at the end of the fifteenth century. It is also fully proved that the fine furs of Siberia were the production which induced the Russians to make a conquest of that country[770]. Besides, sables existed formerly in Permia, where at present they are very scarce. The numerous remains of antiquity still found in Siberia prove that at a very early period it was inhabited by a people who carried on commerce, and were well-acquainted with the arts.
Conrad Gesner believed that the name sable occurs for the first time in Albertus Magnus, who wrote in the thirteenth century, under the word Cebalus, or Chebalus. In the same century Marco Polo mentions, at least in the Latin translation, zibellina pellis, as a valuable kind of fur. But if sabelum be the sable, as the similarity of the word seems to show, it must have been known in the twelfth century, and even earlier. The name sabelum occurs in Alanus Insulanus, and Du Cange found sabelinæ pelles as early as the year 1138, though sabelum perhaps means the marten. Gebellinica pellis, gibelini or gibellini martores, were mentioned in the eleventh century, and sabellinæ and gebellinicæ pelles were undoubtedly the same[771]. I shall not however enter further into this inquiry, which it appears would be endless, and at the same time of little benefit.
The marten, the fur of which approaches nearest to that of the sable, appears to be first mentioned by Martial, who says, speaking of an unsuccessful hunting excursion, that the hunter was overjoyed if he caught only a marten[772]. But the reading is very doubtful; for many, instead of martes, read meles; and the latter occurs in Varro, Pliny, and other writers, whereas the former is found nowhere else. In the middle ages, however, or at any rate in the twelfth century, martures, mardrini, and marturinæ vestes frequently occur; and I can see no reason why they may not be considered as marten skins, a name which has been retained in all the European languages.
With as little certainty can it be determined what our forefathers meant by the words vares, varii, vairus, vajus, varus, vayrus, veyrus or the vair of the French, and under griseum and grisum. That they belong to costly kinds of fur is universally admitted. Sometimes varium and griseum appear to be the same; and sometimes the former seems to be more valuable than the latter. That the former was spotted, or parti-coloured, is apparently announced by the name; for both the leopard and panther are by Pliny called variæ. What in heraldry is named by the French vair, and the Germans eisenhütlein, vellus varium, and which is considered by the former as the skin of an animal gray on the back and white on the belly[773], alludes to this also. Sometimes, however, it seems to signify a fur dress composed of differently-coloured pieces of fur sewed together. Most writers are of opinion that it means grauwerk, petit-gris, vech, veh, vech, vehwammen, also the squirrel; and there is certainly a species of that animal which might justify the name varius, as its skin is at present employed for variegated bordering or trimming; but I do not know whether grauwerk[774] could be so dear as varium is said to have been, as it is among the productions of Europe, though the best at present comes from Siberia. The word veeh is derived, as Frisch says, from the Italian vaio; the latter, according to Muratori[775], is formed from varius, and even at present a dress lined with fur is called roba vaja.
Cirogillinæ pelles, named by the council of Paris in the year 1212, were rabbit skins[776]. Rabbit warrens, so early as the thirteenth century, were not scarce in England; for in a letter of grace respecting the forests, in 1215, every proprietor was permitted to establish them on his own lands[777].
By the term cattinæ pelles[778], which are also often named, must undoubtedly be understood cats’ skins. In France, in the twelfth century, the skins of native animals were considered as of little value; but the Spanish and Italian were highly prized. The skins of the black fox, which at present are the dearest kind of furs, as a single one in Russia is often sold for six hundred and even a thousand roubles, occur in the thirteenth century, among the wares which were sent from the most northern countries to Europe[779]; and without doubt these were meant by Damiani in the passage above quoted[780].