Chapter XXII: Part 22

[1249] Plin. lib. viii. cap. 48. That the cloth of Attalus was embroidered with the needle is proved by a passage of Silius Italicus, lib. xiv. 661. We find by Martial, lib. xiii. ep. 28, that the Babylonian cloth was also ornamented with embroidery; and the same author, lib. xiv. ep. 50, extols the weaving of Alexandria, as being not inferior to the Babylonian embroidery with the needle. In opposition to which might be quoted a passage of Tertullian De Habitu Mulierum, where he makes use of the word _insuere_ to the Phrygian work, and of _intexere_ to the Babylonian. By these expressions it would appear that he wished to define accurately the difference of the Phrygian and Babylonian cloth, and to show that the former was embroidered and the latter wove. But Tertullian often plays with words. _Intexere_ is the same as _insuere_. In Pliny, book xxxv. ch. 9, a name embroidered with gold threads is called “aureis litteris in palleis intextum nomen.”

[1250] Lamprid. Vita Alexand. Severi, c. 40.

[1251] Odyss. lib. v. 230; x. 23, 24.

[1252] Vita Aureliani, cap. 46.

[1253] A doubt however arises respecting this proof. It is possible that the author here speaks of gilt silver; for, as the ancients were not acquainted with the art of separating these metals, their gold was entirely lost when they melted the silver. I remember no passage in ancient authors where mention is made of weaving or embroidering with threads of silver gilt.

[1254] Salmas. ad Vopisc. p. 394; et ad Tertull. de Pallio, p. 208. Such cloth at those periods was called συρματινὸν, συρματηρὸν, drap d’argent.

[1255] Antiquitat. Ital. Medii Ævi, ii. p. 374.

[1256] Pyrotechnia, lib. ix.

[1257] La Piazza Universale, Ven. 1610, 4to.

[1258] Von Murr, in Journal zur Kunstgeschichte, v. p. 78. To this author we are indebted for much important information respecting the present subject.

[1259] Bjornstahls Briefe, i. p. 269.

[1260] See a description of it in Sprengel’s Handwerken und Künsten, iii. p. 64; or in the tenth volume of the plates belonging to the Encyclopédie, under the article Tireur et fileur d’or.

[1261] Bericht von Gold- und Silber-dratziehen; von Lejisugo. Lubeck, 1744, 8vo, p. 199.

[1262] Winkelmann, von den Herculan. Entdeckungen.

[1263] Ibid. p. 38.

[1264] Second Bulletin des Fouilles d’une Ville Romaine, par Grignon. Paris, 1775, 8vo, p. 111.

[1265] Von Murr, Beschreibung von Nürnberg, 1778, 8vo, p. 229.

[1266] Some explain the following words in the twelve tables of the Roman laws, “Cui auro dentes vincti sunt,” as alluding to this circumstance. Funccius however does not admit of this explanation, because he does not believe it possible to bind a tooth in that manner. It has, nevertheless, been sufficiently confirmed both by ancient and modern physicians. Celsus, de Medicina, lib. vii. cap. 12.

[1267] A description of this excellent machine may be found in Sprengel’s Handwerken, iv. p. 208; Cancrinus Beschreibung der vorzüglichsten Bergwerke, Frankf. 1767, 4to, p. 128; in the tenth volume of the plates to the Encyclopédie under the article Tireur et fileur d’or; and other works. Von Murr quotes a very ingenious description of it by the well-known poet Eobanus Hessus, who died in 1540.

[1268] This account may be found vol. i. p. 197 of the Urbis Norimbergæ Descriptio, Hagenoæ, 1518, fol. cap. 5.

[1269] Nachricht von Nürnbergischen Künstlern, p. 281.

[1270] In the Journal des Freyherrn von Bibra.

[1271] Journal von und für Teutschland, 1788, achtes Stück, p. 102.

[1272] Piece-workers were such masters as were obliged to work privately by the piece; because, according to the imperial patent, no one except Held or those whom he permitted durst carry on this business. For this permission it was necessary to pay a certain sum of money.

[1273] The family at this period consisted of Frederick Held and his three sons Bartholomew, Frederick, and Paul.

[1274] Von Breslau, Documentirte Geschichte, ii. 2, p. 409.

[1275] Chronica Cygnæa, durch Tob. Schmidten, Zwickau, 1656, ii. p. 254.

[1276] Anderson’s Hist. Commerce, iv. p. 101.

[1277] Husbandry and Trade improved, by J. Houghton, 1727, 8vo, ii. p. 188.

[1278] Dictionnaire de Commerce, par Savary, ii. p. 599.--Dictionnaire des Origines, par D’Origny, ii. p. 285.

[1279] Dictionnaire Etymologique, i. p. 593. The author quotes the following passage from a French bible printed at Paris in 1544: “Ne ayes pas merveilles, si tu lis en aucuns lieux à la fois, que ces choses estoient d’airain, et à la fois arcal; car airain et arcal est un mesme metal.”

[1280] Bulletin des Fouilles d’une Ville Romaine, i. p. 22.

[1281] Menage, Dictionnaire Etymologique, i. p. 593.

[1282] Jungii Disquisit. de Reliquiis, &c. Hanov. 1783, 4to.

[1283] History of Sumatra. London, 1783, 4to, p. 145.

[1284] Kindersley Briefe von der Insel Teneriffa und Ostindien. Leipzig, 1777, 8vo. The jesuit Thomans praises the negroes of Monomotapa on the same account. See his Reise und Lebensbeschreibung. Augsburg, 1788, 8vo.

[1285] Von Stetten, Kunstgeschichte, i. p. 489, and ii. p. 287.

[1286] Bericht von Dratziehen, p. 192.

BUCK-WHEAT.

Grasses alone, and of these the seeds only of those which are so abundant in an eatable farinaceous substance that they deserve to be cultivated as food to man, are properly corn. Notwithstanding this definition, buck-wheat, which belongs to a kind of plants that grow wild in Europe, knot-grass, water-pepper, &c., because it is sown and employed like corn, is commonly reckoned to be corn also. Our wheat and oats, however, were not produced from indigenous grasses, as has been the opinion of some learned naturalists, who, nevertheless, were not botanists; nor has buck-wheat been produced from the above-mentioned wild plants[1287]. Both these assertions can be proved by the strongest botanical evidence; and the latter is supported by historical testimony, which cannot be adduced in regard to the proper species of corn, as they were used before the commencement of our history.

Two centuries ago, when botanists studied the ancients, and believed that they had been acquainted with and given names to all plants, some of them maintained that buck-wheat was their _ocimum_: others have considered it as the _erysimum_ of Theophrastus; and some as the _panicum_ or _sesamum_. All these opinions, however, are certainly false. It is indeed difficult to determine what plant the _ocimum_ of the ancients was; but it may be easily proved that it was not buck-wheat, as Bock or Tragus[1288] has confidently asserted. The _ocimum_, or a species of that name, for it seems to have been applied to several vegetable productions, was a sweet-smelling plant, called also, at least by later writers, _basilicum_; one kind of _ocimum_ had a thick, woody root[1289], and others possessed a strong medicinal virtue[1290]. The ancient writers on agriculture give it a place between the garden flowers and the odoriferous herbs[1291]; but none of these descriptions can be applied to our buck-wheat, which is both insipid and destitute of smell. Two unintelligible passages of an ancient writer on husbandry make _ocimum_ to have been a plant used for fodder, or rather a kind of green fodder or meslin composed of various plants mixed together[1292]. The _erysimum_ of Theophrastus produced seeds which had a very hot acrid taste[1293]; and he doubts whether it was eaten by cattle[1294]. Pliny says expressly that it ought to be classed rather among medicinal plants than those of the corn-kind[1295]; though Theophrastus has mentioned it more than once among the latter.

It is not worth the trouble to enter into an examination of more opinions of the like kind, as several respectable writers, who lived in the beginning of the sixteenth century, consider buck-wheat to be a plant first introduced into Europe in their time, though they are not all agreed in determining its native country. John Bruyerinus, or as he was properly called, La Bruyère-Champier, physician to Francis I., king of France, who in the year 1530 wrote his book, often printed, De Re Cibaria[1296], says that buck-wheat had been first brought to Europe a little before that time from Greece and Asia. That well-known botanist Ruellius[1297], who wrote in 1536, and Conrade Heresbach[1298], who died in 1576, give the same account. The latter calls the northern part of Asia the original country of this plant, or that from which it had a little before been brought to Germany. A nobleman of Brittany, whose book, Les Contes d’Eutrapel[1299], was printed after his death in 1587, remarks occasionally, that at the time when he wrote, buck-wheat had been introduced into France about sixty years, and that it had become the common food of the poor. Martin Schook[1300] wrote in 1661, that buck-wheat had been known in Flanders scarcely a hundred years. The old botanists, Lobelius, the brothers Bauhin, Matthiolus, and others, all assert that this grain was new in Europe[1301]. I shall here remark, that Crescentio, who lived in the thirteenth century, and described all the then known species of corn, makes no mention of buck-wheat. It undoubtedly acquired this name from the likeness which its seeds have to the fruit of the beech-tree[1302]; and in my opinion another name, that of _Heidenkorn_ (heath-corn), by which it is known in Germany, has been given it because it thrives best in poor sandy soil where there is abundance of heath. From the epithets _Turcicum_ and _Saracenicum_, its native country cannot be determined, for maize is called Turkish wheat, though it originally came from America. I consider also as improbable the conjecture of the learned Frisch[1303], that from the word _Heide_ (a heathen), an expression little known in Upper Germany, has arisen the appellation of _ethnicum_[1304], and thence _Saracenicum_, given to this plant, though the Bohemians call it _pohanka_, from _pohan_, which signifies also a heathen.

There is reason to believe that this grain must have been common in many parts of Germany in the fifteenth century. In a bible, printed in Low-German, at Halberstadt, in the year 1522, entitled Biblia Dudesch, the translator, who is not known, but who is supposed to have been a catholic, translates a passage of Isaiah, chap. xxviii. ver. 25, which Luther translates _er säet spelz_, he soweth spelt, by the words _he seyet bockwete_, he soweth buck-wheat[1305]. The name _heydenkorn_ occurs in a catalogue of plants so early as the year 1552[1306]; and Jos. Maaler, or Pictorius, has in his Dictionary, printed in octavo, at Zurich in 1561, Heidenkorn, _Ocimum_. I find there also, Heydel, a plant, _Panicum_. Dasypodius[1307] likewise in his Dictionary, of which I have the edition printed in 1537, says _Panicum_, Butzweyss, Heydel; and in a vocabulary of the names of plants added to it, Heydel, _Panicum_. Butz Weysz, _Panicum_. Frisch has the word Heydel-Fench, which he explains by Buck-wheat; and he remarks that in the Swiss dialect _Buch_ is changed into _Butz_. Ryff or Rivius, a physician who lived in the middle of the sixteenth century, has changed _Buch_ or _Book_ into _Bauch_, and such errors often arise by transforming the High- into Low-German. It has, however, analogy in its favour, for the long _o_ of the Low-German is in High-German often changed into _au_: for example, _look_, _lauch_; _schmooken_, _smauchen_; _ook_, _auch_; _ooge_, _auge_. But the long _o_ of the Low-German becomes frequently the long _u_ of the High-German; as _good_, _gut_; _buch_, _buchbaum_; _book_, _bookbaum_, &c.

That buck-wheat was cultivated in England about the year 1597, is proved by Gerard’s Herbal.

A new species of this grain has been made known of late years, under the name of Siberian buck-wheat, which appears by experience to have considerable advantages over the former. It was sent from Tartary to Petersburgh by the German botanists who travelled through that country in the beginning of the last century; and it has thence been dispersed over all Europe. We are however told in the new Swedish Economical Dictionary, that it was first brought to Finland by a soldier who had been a prisoner in Tartary[1308]. Linnæus received the first seeds, in 1737, from Gerber the botanist[1309], and described the plant in his Hortus Cliffortianus. After this it was mentioned by Ammann[1310], in 1739; but it must have been earlier known in Germany, at least in Swabia; for in 1733 it was growing in the garden of Dr. Ehrhart, at Memmingen[1311]. In Siberia this plant sows itself for four or five years by the grains that drop, but at the end of that time the land becomes so full of tares that it is choked, and must be sown afresh. Even in the œconomical gardens in Germany it is propagated in the same manner; and it deserves to be remarked that it grows wild among the corn near Arheilgen, a few miles from Darmstadt, though it is cultivated nowhere in the neighbourhood. Had it been indigenous there, Ehrhart might in 1733 have raised it from German seed.

The appellation of _Saracenicum_ gives me occasion to add the following remark: Ruellius[1312] says, that in his time a plant had begun to be introduced into the gardens of France, but merely for ornament, called Saracen-millet, the seeds of which were brought to that country about fifteen years before. This millet, which was from five to six feet in height, was undoubtedly a _Holcus_, and perhaps the same kind as that sought after by us for cultivation a few years ago, under the name of _Holcus sorghum_[1313]. This _Holcus_, however, was cultivated, at least in Italy, long before the time of Ruellius; for there is little reason to doubt that it was the _Milium indicum_ which was brought from India to that country in the time of Pliny[1314]. That ancient naturalist says it was a kind of millet seven feet high; that it had black seeds, and was productive almost beyond what could be believed. In the time of Herodotus it was cultivated at Babylon, but it must have been then little known to the Greeks; for that historian would not venture to mention its size and fertility, as he was afraid that his veracity might be called in question[1315]. According to his account, it grew to be as large as a tree. It is worthy of remark, that this kind of millet is still cultivated at Babylon, where it was seen and admired by Rauwolf[1316]. It is undoubtedly the monstrous _Holcus_ mentioned by Apollonius, who considered it as one of the most remarkable productions of India[1317]. It appears that it continued to be cultivated by the Italians in the middle ages; for it was described in the thirteenth century by Crescentio, who speaks of its use and the method of rearing it[1318]. The seeds had some time before been brought from Italy to Germany, and we find that it is on that account called Italian millet. The old botanists named it also _Sorgsamen_ and _Sorgsaat_; appellations formed from _sorghum_. The name _Morhirse_, under which it again came to us from Switzerland, in later times[1319], has arisen either from the black colour of one of the kinds, or it may signify the same as _Moren-hirse_ (Moorish-millet), because it is almost the only corn of the sable Africans[1320]. However this may be, it can never become an object of common cultivation among us, for our summer is neither sufficiently long nor sufficiently warm, to bring it to perfection. Last summer (1787) I could with difficulty obtain a few ripe grains for seed.

[The cultivation of buck-wheat has never been very extensive in this country, as it will not bear the frosts of our springs or the severity of winter. The only counties in which it is grown to a moderate extent are Norfolk and Suffolk, where it is called _brank_. If a small patch is occasionally met with elsewhere, it is in general principally for the sake of encouraging game, particularly pheasants, which are extremely fond of it.

The seed of the buck-wheat is said to be excellent for horses, the flowers for bees, and the plant green for soiling cows, cattle, sheep, or swine. No grain seems so eagerly eaten by poultry, or makes them lay eggs so soon or so abundantly. The flour is fine and white, but from a deficiency in gluten does not make good fermented bread; it serves well, however, for pastry and cakes, and in Germany and Holland is extensively used, especially by the farmers, dressed in a variety of ways, among others as pancakes, which if eaten hot are light and pleasant, but become very heavy as they cool. A hasty pudding made of the flour with water or milk, and eaten with butter and sugar, is considered a favourite dainty.]

FOOTNOTES

[1287] It cannot however be denied that some indigenous grasses might be brought by culture, perhaps, to produce mealy seeds that could be used as food. It is at any rate certain that some grasses, for example, the slender-spiked cock’s-foot panic-grass, _Panicum sanguinale_, which we have rooted out from many of our gardens, was once cultivated as corn, and is still sown in some places, but has been abandoned for more beneficial kinds.

[1288] “If the learned would lay aside disputing, and give place to truth, they would be convinced, both by the sight and the taste, that this plant (buck-wheat) is the _ocimum_ of the ancients.”--Kreuterbuch, Augsburg, 1546, fol. p. 248.

[1289] Theophrast. l. vii. c. 3.

[1290] Dioscor. l. ii. c. 171.

[1291] Geopon. l. ix. c. 28.

[1292] Varro, lib. i. cap. 31. That a kind of meslin is here to be understood, has been supposed by Stephanus, in his Prædium Rusticum, p. 493; and Matthiolus is of the same opinion. See Matthioli Opera, p. 408. Buck-wheat may have been employed green as fodder; and it is indeed often sown for that use; but there are many other plants which can be employed for the like purpose.

[1293] Dioscorid. l. ii. c. 188.

[1294] Theophrast. p. 941.

[1295] Plin. lib. xviii. cap. 10. He says in the same place, and also p. 291, that the _erysimum_ was by the Latins called also _irio_; and hence it is that Ruellius and other old botanists give that name to buck-wheat.

[1296] The first edition was published in octavo, at Lyons, in 1560. Two editions I have now before me; the first is called Dipnosophia seu Sitologia, Francofurti, 1606, 8vo. The other Joan. Bruyerini Cibus Medicus, Norimbergæ, 1659, 8vo. The author was a grandson of Symphorien Champier, whose works are mentioned in Haller’s Biblioth. Botan. i. p. 246.

[1297] De Natura Stirpium, Basiliæ, 1543, fol. p. 324.

[1298] Rei Rusticæ Libri Quatuor. Spiræ Nemetum, 1595, 8vo, p. 120. He calls it triticum faginum, φαγόπυρον, or nigrum triticum, buck-wheat.

[1299] Le Grand d’Aussy quotes from this book in his Histoire de la Vie Privee des François, i. p. 106, the following words: “Sans ce grain, qui nous est venu depuis soixante ans, les pauvres gens auraient beaucoup à suffrir.”

[1300] M. Schookii Liber de Cervisia. Groningæ, 1661, 12mo.

[1301] Lobelii Stirpium Adversaria. Antv. 1576, fol. p. 395.--Bauhini Hist. Plant. ii. p. 993.--Chabræi Stirpium Sciagraphia. Gen. 1666, fol. p. 312, and in App. p. 627.--C. Bauhini Theatr. Bot. p. 530.

[1302] The beech-tree in German is called _Buche_ or _Buke_, in Danish _Bög_, and in Swedish, Russian, Polish, and Bohemian, _Buk_.

[1303] Wörterbuch, p. 434. This derivation may be found also in Martinii Lexicon, art. Fagopyrum.

[1304] Buck-wheat is sometimes named by botanists _frumentum ethnicum_ (heathen-corn), and _triticum Saracenicum_, because some have supposed that it was introduced into Europe from Africa by the Saracens.

[1305] A particular description of this scarce bible may be found in J. H. a Seelen’s Selecta Litteraria, Lubecæ, 1726, 8vo, p. 398, 409.

[1306] This small work is entitled Vocabula Rei Nummariæ, &c. Additæ sunt Appellationes Quadrupedum, et Frugum, a Paulo Ebero et Casp. Peucero. Witebergæ, 1552, 8vo.

[1307] Dictionarium Latino-Germanicum. Argentorati, 4to.

[1308] Nya Swenska Economiska Dict. Stockh. 1780, 8vo, vol. ii.

[1309] Abhandlungen der Schwedisch. Akad. der Wissenschaften, vi. p. 107, where is given, as far as I know, the first figure of it.

[1310] Stirpes Rariores Imperii Russici, 1739, 4to.

[1311] Ehrhart’s Œkonomische Pflanzen Historie, viii. p. 72.

[1312] Ruellius De Natura Stirp. lib. ii. cap. 27. Some very improperly have considered this plant as Turkish wheat.

[1313] Several species of this genus were cultivated in the southern districts. Their distinguishing characteristics do not however appear as yet to be fully established. Bauhin makes the proper _sorghum_ to be different from the _durra_ of the Arabs. Linnæus in his last writings has separated _Holcus bicolor_ from _sorghum_. Forskal thus describes the _durra_: “Holcus panicula ovata; spiculis sessilibus, subvillosis; alternatim appendiculatis; flosculo uno vel duobus vacuis, sessilibus.” There are kinds of it with white and reddish-yellow (_fulva_) seeds. According to his account, however, the Arabs cultivate another kind known under the name of _dochna_, though in less quantity, chiefly as food for fowls.

[1314] Lib. xviii. cap. 7. _Holcus sorghum_ is sold at Venice for brooms, as we are told by Ray in his Hist. Plant.

[1315] Herodot. lib. i. cap. 193.

[1316] Beschreibung der Reyss Leonhardi Rauwolfen. Frankf. 1582, 4to, ii. p. 68. The author observes that this kind of millet is mentioned also by Rhases and Serapion.

[1317] Philostrat. Vita Apollon. lib. iii. cap. 2.

[1318] Melica cioe saggina e conosciuta, et e di due manere, una rossa et una bianca, e trovasene una terza manera che a più bianca che l’miglio. Crescentio D’Agricoltura. In Venetia, 1542, 8vo, lib. iii. cap. 17. It appears therefore that in our dictionaries _saggina_ ought not to be explained by Turkish wheat alone.

[1319] Andrea, Briefe aus der Schweitz. Zurich, 1776, 4to, p. 182.

[1320] Adanson, Voyage au Senegal.

SADDLES.

In early ages the rider sat on the bare back of his horse without anything under him[1321]; but, in the course of time, some kind of covering, which consisted often of cloth, a mattress, a piece of leather or hide, was placed over the back of the animal. We are informed by Pliny[1322], that one Pelethronius first introduced this practice; but who that person was is not certainly known. Such coverings became afterwards more costly[1323]; they were made frequently in such a manner as to hang down on both sides of the horse, as may be seen by the beautiful engravings in Montfaucon[1324], and were distinguished among the Greeks and Romans by various names[1325]; but even after they were common, it was reckoned more manly to ride without them. Varro boasts of having rode, when a young man, without a covering to his horse; and Xenophon[1326] reproaches the Persians because they placed more clothes on the backs of their horses than on their beds, and gave themselves more trouble to sit easily than to ride skilfully. On this account such coverings were for a long time not used in war; and the old Germans, who considered them as disgraceful, despised the Roman cavalry who employed them[1327]. The information, therefore, of Dion Cassius[1328], according to whom such coverings were first allowed to the Roman cavalry by Nero, is very doubtful. This author, perhaps, alludes only to reviews, at which, it is probable, the cavalry were before obliged always to appear without them. In the time of Alexander Severus, the horses of the whole Roman cavalry had beautiful coverings[1329]. Saddles, however, at that period were certainly unknown, though they afterwards obtained the old name _ephippium_, which originally signified nothing more than a covering for a horse. Xenophon says, a rider, whether placed on the bare back of the animal or on a covering, must not assume a position as if he sat upon one of those seats which people use in carriages[1330].

Our saddles at present consist of a wooden frame called the saddle-tree, which has on the fore part the pommel; behind it the crupper; and at the sides the stirrups. In the inside they are stuffed like a cushion, and on the outside are covered with leather or cloth. They are made fast to the horse by means of a girth which goes round the animal’s belly; and the breast-leather and crupper prevent them from being moved either forwards or backwards. It is extremely probable that they were invented in the middle of the fourth century: but it is hardly possible to find any certain proof; for we have reason to believe that the ancient covering was gradually transformed into a saddle. Pancirollus[1331] thinks that the first mention of a saddle is to be found in Zonaras; and many have adopted his opinion. This historian relates that Constantine the younger was killed in the year 340 when he fell from his saddle. But in this proof alone I place very little confidence; and Pancirollus seems to have founded his assertion on the Latin translation, in which the word _sella_ is used. Both the Greek and Latin terms[1332], it is true, were employed at later periods to signify a proper saddle; but the Greek word was used long before for the back of the horse, or the place where the rider sat; and the words of Zonaras may be so understood as if Constantine was killed after he had fallen from his horse[1333].

Montfaucon[1334] has given a figure of the pillar of Theodosius the Great, on which he thinks he can distinguish a saddle; and indeed, if the engraving be correct, it must be allowed that the covering of the horse on which the rider sits seems, in the fore part, to resemble the pommel, and behind the extremity of the saddle-tree of our common saddles.

The clearest proof of the antiquity of saddles is the order of the emperor Theodosius in the year 385, by which those who wished to ride post-horses were forbidden to use saddles that weighed more than sixty pounds. If a saddle was heavier, it was to be cut to pieces[1335]. This passage appears certainly to allude to a proper saddle, which at that period, soon after its invention, must have been extremely heavy; and we may conclude from it also, that every traveller had one of his own. As the saddle is here called _sella_, and as that word occurs oftener at this than at any other period, for the seat of the rider, it is probable that it is to be understood afterwards as signifying a real saddle. Besides, it cannot be denied that where it is used, many other little circumstances are found which may with great propriety be applied to our saddles.

Nazarius, in his panegyric on Constantine the Great, describing the manner in which the enemy’s cavalry were destroyed, says that, when almost lifeless, they hung _sedilibus_. Lipsius is of opinion that they could have hung in this manner only by saddles; but there is reason to think that they might lay hold of the coverings of the horses, if it be certain that these were girded to the animals like our saddles. Of this, however, there is no proof; for though some have asserted that _postilena_ signified a girth, that meaning has not been supported by sufficient authorities; and it is more probable that the words _postilena_, _antilena_, and also _postella_ and _antella_, as well as the girth itself, which they are supposed to express, were not introduced till after the invention of saddles. The first word occurs in Plautus[1336]; but it perhaps alludes to some part of the harness of draught-horses or cattle. Vegetius[1337] distinguishes saddle-horses from others; and the saddle-tree seems to be mentioned by Sidonius Apollinaris[1338]. In the fifth century saddles were made so extravagantly magnificent, that a prohibition was issued by the emperor Leo I. in which it was ordered that no one should ornament them with pearls or precious stones[1339]. In the sixth century, the emperor Mauritius required that the saddles of the cavalry should have large coverings of fur[1340]. Further information respecting saddles in later times may be seen in Du Cange, who has collected also various terms of art to which the invention of saddles gave rise, such as _sellatores_, saddlers, of which the French have made _selliers_; _sellare_, the saddle-tree; _sellare_ and _insellare_, to saddle. The ignominious punishment of bearing the saddle, of which a good account may be found in Du Cange[1341], had its origin in the middle ages. The conjecture of Goropius Becanus[1342], that the saddle was invented by the _Salii_, and named after them, is not worth refutation; as it is perfectly clear that the denomination of _sella_ arose from the likeness of a saddle to a chair; and by way of distinction Sidonius and the emperor Leo say _sella equestris_; and Jornandes says _sella equitatoria_. Others, perhaps, will pass no better judgement on a conjecture which I shall here venture to give. I consider it as probable that the invention of saddles belongs to the Persians; because, according to the testimony of Xenophon, they first began to render the seat of the rider more convenient and easy, by placing more covering on the backs of their horses than was usual in other countries. Besides, the horses of Persia were first made choice of in preference for saddle-horses, on account, perhaps, of their being early trained to bear a saddle, though Vegetius[1343] assigns a different reason.

FOOTNOTES

[1321] J. Lipsii Poliorcet. seu de Militia Romana, lib. iii. dial. 7.

[1322] Lib. vii. cap. 56. Hyginns, fab. 274.

[1323] Coverings for horses made of the costly skins of animals are mentioned by Silius Italicus, lib. iv. 270, and lib. v. 148. Also by Statius. See Thebaid. lib. iv. 272. Costly coverings of another kind occur in Virgil, Æneid. lib. vii. 279; viii. 552; and Ovid. Metam. lib. vii. 33. Livy, lib. xxxi. cap. 7, comparing the luxury of the men and the women, says, “Equus tuus speciosius instructus erit, quam uxor vestita.”

[1324] Antiquité Expliquée, tom. ii. lib. 3. tab. 27, 28, 29, 30.

[1325] Seneca, Epist. 80: “Equum empturus, solvi jubes stratum.” Macrob. Saturnal. i. 11: “Stultus est, qui, empturus equum, non ipsum inspicit, sed stratum ejus et frenum.” Apuleius calls these coverings for horses _fucata ephippia_. They were called also στράματα.

[1326] Pæd. lib. viii.

[1327] Cæsar, De Bello Gallico, lib. iv. 2. An old saddle with stirrups was formerly shown to travellers at Berne in Switzerland, as the saddle of Julius Cæsar. The stirrups, however, were afterwards taken away, and in 1685 they were not to be seen. Mélanges Historiques, recueillis et commentez par Mons.----Amst. 1718, 12mo, p. 81.

[1328] Lib. lxiii. 14. After writing the above, I found with satisfaction that Le Beau, in l’Académie des Inscriptions, vol. xxxix. p. 333, forms the same conjecture. Before that period, the cavalry, when reviewed, were obliged to produce their horses without any covering, that it might be more easily seen whether they were in good condition. This useful regulation was abolished by Nero, in order that the cavalry might exhibit a grander appearance. He employed his soldiers for show, as many princes do at present.

[1329] Lamprid. Vita Alex. Severi, cap. 50.

[1330] De Re Equestri, p. 602. Respecting the stool or chair placed in carriages for people to sit on, see Pitisci Lexic. art. Sella curulis.

[1331] De Rebus Deperditis, lib. ii. tit. 16.

[1332] Ἕδρα and sella.

[1333] Zonaras, lib. xiii. cap. 5. Ἐκπέπτωε τῆς ἕδρας ὁ Κονσταντίνος. Nicetas in And. Comnenus, lib. i. Τῆς ἕδρας ἀποβάλλεται. The word ἕδρα occurs twice in Xenophon, De Re Equestri. He gives an account how the back of the horse should be shaped in order that the rider may have a fast and secure seat; τῷ ἀναβάτῃ ἀσφαλέστεραν τὴν ἕδραν; and where he speaks of currying, says that the hair on a horse’s back ought to be combed down, as the animal will then be less hurt by his rider. I have taken the trouble to consult other historians who give an account of the death of Constantine, but they do not mention this circumstance.

[1334] Antiq. Expliquée, vol. iv. lib. iii. cap. 75, tab. 30.

[1335] Codex Theodosian. lib. viii. tit. 5, leg. 47. Codex Justin. lib. xii. tit. 51, 12.

[1336] Casina. i. 37. See Scheffer, De Re Vehiculari. Frankf. 1671, 4to, p. 125; and Gesneri Thesaur. Ling. Lat.

[1337] De Arte Veterinaria, iv. 6, 2 and 4.

[1338] Lib. iii. epist. 3.

[1339] Codex Justin. lib. xi. tit. 11.

[1340] Mauricii Ars Militaris; edit. Schefferi, lib. i. cap. 2.

[1341] See art. Sellam gestare.

[1342] Lib. ii. Francicorum, p. 48.

[1343] Vegetius, De Arte Veterin. iv. 6, 4to, p. 1157.

STIRRUPS.

Respecting the antiquity of stirrups several men of learning[1344] have long ago made researches; but as their observations are scattered through a great variety of books, some of which are now scarce, and are mingled with much falsehood, it will perhaps afford pleasure to many to find here collected and reduced into order the greater, or at least the most important, part of them. In executing this task I shall aim at more than the character of a diligent collector; for to bring together information of this kind, to arrange it, and to make it useful, requires no less readiness of thought than the labours of those who assume the character of original thinkers, and who imagine that they render others inferior to themselves when they bestow on them the appellation of compilers.

We have here a new proof how much people may be deceived, when they suppose that objects must be of great antiquity because they tend to common convenience and because they appear even so indispensably necessary and easy to have been invented, that one can scarcely conceive how they could at any time have been wanting. I cannot, however, deprive our ancestors of the merit of ingenuity and invention; for they must undoubtedly have possessed no small share of talents and ability, to perform, without the assistance of our arts, what perhaps would be difficult even for the present age to accomplish. And who knows but there are many things still to be invented, the discovery of which may give posterity equal reason to reproach us?

Stirrups are useful in two points of view; for they not only assist one in mounting, but also in riding, as they support the legs of the rider, which otherwise would be exposed to much inconvenience. No traces of any invention for this purpose are to be found in the old Greek and Latin writers; and though means to assist people to get on horseback were devised in the course of time, neither stirrups nor any permanent support to the legs were for a long period thought of. Nothing that could perform the same service as a stirrup is to be perceived on ancient coins which exhibit the representation of persons on horseback; on statues cast or formed with the chisel, or on any remains of ancient sculpture. In the excellent equestrian statues of Trajan and Antoninus, the legs of the rider hang down without any support whatever. Had stirrups been in use when these statues were formed, the artists certainly would not have omitted them; and the case would have been the same with those writers who speak so fully of riding, and of the necessary equipage and furniture. How is it possible, that Xenophon, in the two books which he wrote expressly on horsemanship and the art of riding, where he gives rules for mounting, and where he points out means for assisting old people and infirm persons, should not have mentioned stirrups had he been acquainted with them? And how could they have been passed over by Julius Pollux, in his Lexicon, where he gives every expression that concerns riding-furniture?

Hippocrates[1345] and Galen[1346] speak of a disease which in their time was occasioned by long and frequent riding, because the legs hung down without any support. Suetonius[1347] also relates that Germanicus, the father of Caligula, by riding often after dinner endeavoured to strengthen his ankles, which had become weak; and Magius explains this very properly by telling us, that as his legs hung down without stirrups, they would be continually moved backwards and forwards, and of course the circulation of the blood towards those parts would be increased.

Neither in the Greek nor Roman authors do we meet with any term that can be applied to stirrups, for _staffa_, _stapia_, _staphium_, _stapha_, _stapedium_, _stapeda_, and _stapes_ are words formed in modern times. The last, as Vossius and others say, was invented by Franc. Philelphus, who was born in 1398 and died in 1481[1348], to express properly a thing unknown to the ancients, and for which they could have no name. The other words are older, as may be seen in Du Cange, and appear to be derived from the German _stapf_, which is still retained in _Fuss-stapf_, a foot-step.

The name of one of the ear-bones, which, on account of its likeness to a stirrup, has from anatomists received the same appellation, may occur here to some of my readers; and if that expression was known to the ancients, it might invalidate my assertion. That small bone, however, was first remarked at Naples in the year 1546 by John Philip Ingrassias, a Sicilian, who called it _stapes_. To the ancient anatomists it was not known[1349].

Montfaucon is of opinion that it is impossible there could be stirrups before saddles were invented, because the former, at present, are fastened to the latter. This conclusion, however, is not altogether just. Stirrups might have been suspended from leather straps girt round the horse. In mounting, it would only have been necessary that some one should hold fast the strap on the other side; and stirrups arranged in this manner would have supported the feet of the rider as well as ours. It is certain that mounting on horseback was formerly much easier than it has been since the invention of high saddles; and it is probable that stirrups were introduced soon after that period. The arguments which I have here adduced will receive additional force when one considers the inconvenient means which the ancients employed to assist them in getting on horseback; and which, undoubtedly, they would not have used had they been acquainted with stirrups.

The Roman manners required that young men and expert riders should be able to vault on horseback without any assistance. To accustom them to this agility there were wooden horses in the Campus Martius, on which practitioners were obliged to learn to mount and dismount, both on the right and the left side, at first unarmed, and afterwards with arms in their hands[1350]. In many public places, particularly highways, stones were erected, to which a rider could lead his horse in order to mount with more facility. Such stones Gracchus caused to be set up[1351]; and they were to be found at many cities, in the sixteenth century, especially near the council-houses, that they might be used by the members of the council, who at that time did not ride in coaches. A convenience of this kind was constructed at the Roman gate at Frankfort in 1502; and steps for the same purpose may be still seen in many parts of England, where they are employed principally by the ladies. If a certain ludicrous inscription be ancient, such a stone was called _suppedaneum_; but this word occurs nowhere else[1352].

People of high rank and fortune kept riding-servants to assist them in mounting, who were called _stratores_[1353]. It was usual also to have portable stools, which were placed close to the horse when one wished to mount; and this gave rise to the barbarous practice of making conquered princes and generals stoop down that the victor might more easily get on horseback by stepping upon their backs as upon a stool. In this ignominious manner was the emperor Valerian treated by Sapor, king of Persia[1354]. Some horses also were so instructed that they kneeled until the rider mounted[1355]; and warriors had on their spears or lances a step or projection, on which they could rest the foot while they got on horseback[1356]. Winkelmann has described a cut stone in the collection of Baron Stosch, on which a rider is represented in the act of mounting with one foot on the step of his spear; and it appears, by an ancient drawing, that a leather loop[1357], into which the foot could be put, was fastened sometimes to the lance also.

Of those who believe that traces of stirrups are to be found among the ancients, no one has erred more than Galeotus Martius[1358], who follows a wrong reading in Lucretius[1359], and translates still worse the words which he adopts. Magius and others consider as authentic an inscription, in which stirrups are clearly mentioned; and because the letters D. M. (_diis manibus_), usual in Pagan inscriptions, appear at the top, he places it in the first century of the Christian æra[1360]. Menage[1361], however, and others have already remarked that this inscription was forged in modern times, and in all probability by Franc. Columna, who lived in the middle of the sixteenth century, and who sometimes called himself Polyphilus[1362]. Gruter, therefore, reckons it among those which ought to be rejected as spurious: and of as little authority is the silver coin on which the Emperor Constantine is represented on horseback with stirrups.

Magius quotes from the letters of Jerome, who died in the year 420, the following words, “Se cum quasdam accepit litteras jumentum conscensurum, jam pedem habuisse in bistapia.” These words have been again quoted by several writers; and we may readily believe that the author when he wrote them alluded to a stirrup. Magius however quotes from memory, and says, “Si memoria non labat.” But these words are not to be found in Jerome; and it is probable that Magius may have read them in the works of some other author.

The first certain account of stirrups, as far as I have been able to learn, is in a book by Mauritius[1363] respecting the art of war, where the author says that a horseman must have at his saddle two iron _scalæ_. This work, commonly ascribed to the emperor Mauritius, is supposed to have been written in the end of the sixth century; and it is not a sufficient proof to the contrary, that mention is made in it of the Turks, Franks, and Lombards. The first were then well known; for Justin II. some time before had concluded a peace with them: the Lombards made themselves known in the middle of that century: and the Franks had been known much longer. The same words are inserted by the emperor Leo VI., in his work on tactics, which he wrote in the end of the ninth century[1364]. Still clearer is another passage of Mauritius[1365], and of the emperor Leo[1366], where it is expressly said, that the _deputati_, who were obliged to carry the wounded horsemen from the field, ought to have two stirrups on the left side of the horse, one at the fore-part and the other at the hind-part of the saddle-tree, that they might each take a disabled soldier on horseback behind them. That these _scalæ_ were real stirrups there seems to be no reason to doubt; and in my opinion, that word, and other expressions of the like kind to be found in later writers, may be understood in this sense, especially as concomitant circumstances appear rather to strengthen than to oppose such a conjecture.

Isidore, in the seventh century, says “Scansuæ, ferrum per quod equus scanditur;” and also “Astraba, tabella, in qua pedes requiescunt[1367]:” both which expressions allude to stirrups. Leo the Grammarian, in the beginning of the tenth century[1368], calls them, as Mauritius does, _scalæ_. Suidas, who wrote about the same period, says _anaboleus_ signifies not only a riding-servant, who assists one in mounting, but also what by the Romans was called _scala_. As the machine used for pulling off boots is named a Jack, because it performs the office of a boy, in the like manner that appellation, which at first belonged to the riding-servant, was afterwards given to stirrups, because they answered the same purpose. Suidas, as a proof of the latter meaning, quotes a passage from an anonymous writer, who says that Massias, even when an old man, could vault on horseback without the assistance of a stirrup (_anaboleus_). Lipsius thinks that the passage is to be found in Appian[1369], respecting Masanissa; and in that case the first meaning of the word may be adopted. Suidas, according to every appearance, would have been in a mistake, had he given Masanissa at so early a period the Roman _scalæ_, with which he could not be acquainted. But that the passage is from Appian, and that Masanissa ought to be read instead of Massias, is only mere conjecture; at any rate Suidas could commit no mistake in saying that the Romans in his time made use of _scalæ_. Lipsius, however, was not altogether wrong in considering this quotation alone as an insufficient proof of stirrups, because with the still older and more express testimony of Mauritius he was unacquainted. Eustathius, the commentator of Homer[1370], speaks in a much clearer manner; but he gives us to understand that stirrups in his time, that is in the twelfth century, had not become very common. On a piece of tapestry of the eleventh century, which Montfaucon caused to be engraven[1371], the saddles of all the horses appear to have stirrups. Aimonius calls them _scandilia_[1372], and in the twelfth century the word _staffa_ occurs very often, and without doubt in that sense[1373]. In the ages of superstition, the clergy carried their boundless pride to such a length, that they caused emperors and kings to hold their stirrups when they mounted on horseback[1374]. It however long continued to be thought a mark of superior dexterity to ride without stirrups, at least Phile praises Cantacuzenus on this account[1375].

FOOTNOTES

[1344] The principal works in which information is to be found on this subject are the following: Hieron. Magii Miscellan. lib. ii. cap. 14.--Gruteri Lampas, ii. p. 1339.--Lipsii Poliorceticon sive de Militia Romana, Antv. 1605, lib. iii. dial. 7.--Pitisci Lexicon Antiquit. Rom. iii. p. 482.--Salmasius in Ælii Spart. Antonin. Carac. p. 163.--G. J. Vossius, De Vitiis Sermonis, Amst. 1695, fol. p. 11.--Polyd. Vergilius De Rerum Inventoribus, lib. iii. cap. 18.--Hugo De Militia Equestri, i. 4.--Licetus De Lucernis.--Menagiana, iv. p. 263.--Brown’s Vulgar Errors.--Berenger’s History and Art of Horsemanship, London, 1771, 4to.--Montfaucon, Antiquité Expliquée, iv. lib. 3, cap. 3, p. 77, and Supplement, iv. lib. ii. cap. 4.--Le Beau, in Mém. de l’Acad. des Inscriptions, xxxix. p. 537.

[1345] De Aëre, Locis et Aquis, sect. 3. The author here speaks in particular of the Scythians, who were always on horseback; but he afterwards extends his observations to all those much addicted to riding.

[1346] Galen. De Parvæ Pilæ Exercitio, cap. 5. De Sanitate Tuenda, lib. ii. cap. 11.

[1347] Vita Caligulæ, cap. 3.

[1348] Fabricii Biblioth. Med. et Inf. Ætatis, vol. v. p. 845.

[1349] The history of this anatomical discovery, written by Ingrassias himself, may be found in J. Douglas, Bibliographiæ Anatomicæ Specimen; Lugd. Bat. 1734, 8vo, p. 186. This discovery was claimed by a person named Columbus; but that it belongs to Ingrassias has been fully proved by Fallopius in his Observat. Anatomicæ.

[1350] Vegetius De Re Milit. i. 18.

[1351] Plutarchus, Vita C. Gracchi.

[1352] This inscription may be found in Thom. Porcacchi Funerali Antichi. Venet. 1574, fol. p. 14.

“Dis pedip. saxum
Cinciæ dorsiferæ et cluniferæ,
Ut insultare et desultare commodetur,
Pub. Crassus mulæ suæ Crassæ bene ferenti
Suppedaneum hoc cum risu pos.”

Here _Dis pedip._ seems to be an imitation of _Dis Manibus_; _saxum_ of the usual word _sacrum_: and _bene ferenti_ of _bene merenti_.

[1353] Lipsius De Milit. Romana, p. 410. Pitisci Lexic. Antiq. These servants were called also ἀναβολεῖς.

[1354] Eutrop. lib. ix. cap. 6.--Victor. epit. 46.--Trebell. Pollio, Vita Valeriani.--Hofmanni Lexic. artic. Calcandi hostium corpora ritus, p. 642.

[1355] Strabo, lib. iii. says that the Spaniards instructed their horses in this manner.

[1356] Lipsius understands in this sense what Livy says, book iv. chap. 19, of Cornelius Cossus, “Quem cum ictum equo dejecisset, confestim et ipse hasta innisus se in pedes excepit.”

[1357] Figures of both may be seen in Berenger, tab. 8.

[1358] De Promiscua Doctrina, cap. 28.

[1359] Lib. v. 1296, “Et prius est repertum in equi conscendere costas.” Martius reads _clostris_; and thinks that _clostra_ is the Greek name for a ladder, which however is κροσσά.

[1360] In this inscription the following words occur, “Casu desiliens, pes hæsit stapiæ, tractus interii.”

[1361] Menagiana. Paris, 1715, vol. iv. p. 83.

[1362] Fabricii Biblioth. Med. et Inf. Ætatis, i. p. 1131.

[1363] Mauricii Ars Militaris, edita a Joh. Scheffero. Upsaliæ 1664, 8vo p. 22.

[1364] Leonis Tactica, edit. Meursii cap. vi. § 10. p. 57.

[1365] Lib. ii. cap. 8. p. 64.

[1366] Tactica, cap. xii. § 53, p. 150.

[1367] Both passages are quoted by Du Cange from the Gloss. Isidori. The latter word signified also the saddle-bow; for Suidas says, ‘Ἀστράβη, τὸ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐφιππίων ξύλον ὃ κρατοῦσιν οἱ καθεζόμενοι’. Lignum quod est in ephippiis, quod sessores tenent. Allusion is made to this saddle-bow by the emperor Frederic II. De Arte Venandi, ii. 71, p. 152, where he describes how a falconer should mount his horse: “Ponat pedem unum in staffa sellæ, accipiens _arcum sellæ_ anteriorem cum manu sua sinistra, supra quam jam non est falco, posteriorem autem cum dextra, super quam est falco.” Nicetas, however, in Manuel. Comnen. lib. ii. p. 63, gives that name to the whole saddle; for we are told that the Scythians, when about to cross a river, placed their arms on the saddle (ἀστράβην), and laying hold of the tails of their horses, swam after them.

[1368] Leonis Grammatici Chronographia, printed in the Paris Collection of the Byzantine Historians, with Theophanis Chronograph. 1655, fol. p. 470.

[1369] De Bellis Punicis, edit. Tollii, p. 107.

[1370] Odyss. lib. i. 155.

[1371] Monumens de la Monarchie Françoise, i. tab. 35.

[1372] Aimonius De Miraculis Sancti Benedicti, ii. 20.

[1373] Fredericus II. De Venat. lib. ii. cap. 71. According to Du Cange, stirrups as well as spurs occur seldom on seals in the eleventh century. In the thirteenth they are more frequent. See P. W. Gerkens Anmerkungen über die Siegel. Stendal, 1786, 8vo, part 2. Heineccius De Sigillis, p. 205. I shall here remark that Cœlius Rhodiginus, xxi. 31, is mistaken when he says that Avicenna calls stirrups _subsellares_. Licetus, De Lucernis, p. 786, has proved that this Arabian author speaks only of a covering to secure the feet from frost.

[1374] Instances of this pride have been collected by Du Cange in his annotations on Cinnamus, p. 470, and more may be found in his Dictionary, vol. vi. p. 681. When steps were not erected on the highways, a metal or wooden knob was affixed to each side of the saddle, which the rider, when about to mount, laid hold of, and then caused his servant to assist him. The servants also were often obliged to throw themselves down that their master might step upon their back. See Constantin. De Ceremoniis Aulæ Byzant. p. 242. A, 6; and p. 405, B, 3; also Reiske in his Annotations, p. 135.

[1375] In Cantacuz. edit Wernsdorfii. Lipsiæ, 1768, 8vo, p. 218, who calls stirrups κλίμακες, scalæ.

HORSE-SHOES.

It can be proved by incontestable evidence, that the ancient Greeks and Romans endeavoured, by means of some covering, to secure from injury the hoofs of their horses and other animals of burden; but it is equally certain that our usual shoes, which are nailed on, were invented much later[1376]. We are told by Aristotle[1377] and Pliny[1378], that shoes were put upon camels in the time of war, and during long journeys; and the former gives them the same name as that given to the shoes, or rather socks or soles, of the common people, which were made of strong ox-leather. When the hoofs of cattle, particularly oxen, had sustained any hurt, they were furnished with shoes, made of some plant of the hemp kind[1379], wove or plaited together[1380]. These indeed were only a sort of chirurgical bandages; but such shoes were given in particular to mules, which in ancient times were employed more than at present for riding; and it appears by two instances of immoderate extravagance handed down to us by Roman writers, that people of rank caused these shoes to be made very costly. Nero, when he undertook short journeys, was drawn always by mules which had silver shoes[1381]; and those of his wife Poppæa had shoes of gold[1382]. The information of these authors however is not sufficient to enable us to conjecture how these shoes were made; but from a passage of Dio Cassius we have reason to think that the upper part only was formed of those noble metals, or that they were perhaps plaited out of thin slips[1383].

Arrian also reckons these soles or shoes among the riding-furniture of an ass[1384]. Xenophon relates that certain people of Asia were accustomed, when the snow lay deep on the ground, to draw socks over the feet of their horses, as they would otherwise, he adds, have sunk up to the bellies in the snow[1385]. I cannot comprehend how their sinking among the snow could, by such means, have been prevented; and I am inclined rather to believe, that their feet were covered in that manner in order to save them from being wounded. The Russians, in some parts, such as Kamtschatka, employ the same method in regard to the dogs which draw their sledges, or catch seals on the ice. They are furnished with shoes which are bound round their feet, and which are so ingeniously made that their claws project through small holes[1386].