illon, in the year 1096, paid a visit to the emperor Alexius at Constantinople, what the latter chiefly admired was the rich and costly dresses of the Europeans bordered with furs.* In the beginning of the twelfth century, the canons of a cathedral suffered themselves to be corrupted by beautiful furs. The use of them, however, was forbidden to the clergy at one of the councils. According to that of London, in 1127, the abbesses and nuns were to wear those only made of lamb-skins and cat-skins. In the year 1187, when the Christians were beat near Tiberias, count Raimond having treacherously gone over to the Turks, the

p. 67. cap. 227: regio abundat pellibus peregrinis, quorum odor nostro orbi lætiferum superbiæ venenum propinavit. Et illi quidem ut stercora hæc ad nostram forte habent damnationem, qui per fas nefasque ad vestem anhelamus marturinam, quasi ad summam beatitudinem. Itaque pro laneis indumentis, quæ nos dicimus paldones, illi offerunt tam preciosos martures. At that time, therefore, the Germans gave woollen cloths in exchange for furs. In page 68, he says: pelles castorum et marturum, quæ nos admiratione sui dementes faciunt.

* Albertus Aquensis, Histor. Hierosol. lib. ii. cap. 16. in Gesta Dei per Francos, i. p. 203: Imperator tam magnifico et honorifico duce viso, ejusque sequacibus, in splendore et ornatu preciosarum vestium, tam ex ostro quam aurifrigio, et in niveo opere harmelino et ex mardrino grisioque et vario, quibus Gallorum principes præcipue utuntur, vehementer admirans honorem et decorem illum, ducem osculo suscepit.

Ivo Carn. Epistolæ 104: quos sibi pelliculis peregrinorum murium, atque aliis hujusmodi vanitatum aucupiis inescaverat.

Canon 12: Statutum est, ut nulla abbatissa vel sanctimonialis carioribus utatur indumentis, quam agninis vel cattinis.

latter found among the plunder of the Christian camp a complete assortment of furs. At the end of the twelfth century Gottfried or Gaufred, prior of Vigeois, complained that no one would any longer wear sheep-skins and fox-skins, which before had been worn by barons and the principal clergy.

We, however, find that princes sometimes endeavoured by the most effective means to restrain this magnificence. When Philip II of France, and Richard I of England, about the end of the twelfth century, undertook a crusade to the Holy Land, they resolved that neither of them should wear ermine, sable, or other costly furs. It appears that a similar resolution was adopted by St. Louis (Louis IX) in the following century; for the historians speaking of his crusade expressly say, that he avoided all magnificence, and wore no costly furs. In the year 1336, in the reign of Edward

• Albertus Aquensis, viii. 20, Gesta Dei per Francos, i. p. 321 : Sustulerunt Turci molles vestes, pelliceos varios, grisios, harmelinos, mardrinos, ostra innumerabilia auro texta.

+ In Labbei Biblioth. nova, tom. ii: Barones tempore prisco munifici largitores vilibus utebantur pannis, adeo ut Eustorgius episcopus, vicecomes Lemovicensis et vicecomes Combornensis arietinis et vulpinis pellibus aliquoties uterentur, quas post illos mediocres deferre erubescunt.

↑ Whilhelmus Neubrigensis, or Wilh. Bach. lib. iii. cap. 22: Statutum est etiam - - - quod nullus vario vel grisio, vel sabellinis vel escarletis utatur.

§ Whilhelmus de Nangis, p. 346: Ab illo tempore nunquam indutus est squarleto, vel panno viridi seu bruneto, nee pellibus variis,

III king of England, when foreign articles imported into the kingdom began to be taxed, it was enacted, that no person whose yearly income did not amount to a hundred pounds should wear furs, under the penalty of losing them.*

In Germany, in 1497, citizens who did not belong to the nobility or equestrian order were forbidden to wear lining of sable or ermine.† According to an ordinance of 1530, common citizens, tradesmen and shop-keepers were to wear no trimmed clothes, nor to use martin or other costly lining, and the rich were to wear lining made only of lamb-skins or those of the cow, fox, weasel, and the like. Merchants and tradespeople were not to wear martin, sable, or ermine, and at most weasel-skins; and their wives were to wear the fur only of the squirrel. Counts and lords were allowed all kinds of lining, sable and such like expensive kinds excepted. The latter permission was repeated, word for word, in the year 1548.§

sed veste nigri coloris, vel camelini seu persei. Gottfr. de Bello loco, cap. 8. Joinville Hist. de St. Louis, p. 118: C'est assavoir, que onques puis en ses habitz ne voulut porter ne menuver, ne gris, ne escarlate, ne estriesz, ne eperons dorez. Histoire de St. Louis, Paris 1638. 4to. p. 460.

* Barrington's Observations on the more ancient statutes. The third edit. Lond. 1769. 4to. p. 216.

+ Reichsabschied zu Lindau. 1497. § 11. in Samlung der Reichsabschiede. Franckfort 1747. fol. ii. p. 31.

Reformation guter Polizey zu Augsburg, 1530. § xi. 1. xii. 2. xiv. 4. in the same, p. 337, 338.

§ Ibid. 1548. § xiii. 3. in the same, p. 594.

When one considers how much the use of fur dresses was spread all over Europe, it must excite astonishment that they were not introduced at the court of Byzantium. No traces of them are to be found in any of the Byzantine historians; not even in that work in which the emperor Constantine describes the whole ceremonial of his court, and in which dresses of various kinds are named, as Reiske has already remarked.* Furs are no where represented on Grecian statues, in paintings, or other works of art; and it is seen by the passages above quoted, that in the magnificence which the European princes displayed in the time of the crusades at the court of Constantinople, nothing attracted so much attention as the different kinds of fur dresses. This seems the more astonishing, as a great trade was carried on, at that time, between Constantinople and those countries from which these wares were sent to Europe.

Over one of the gates of Milan is an image cut out in stone, of the twelfth century, representing an emperor, whose mantle is ornamented with small triangular patches of fur. Flamma believed that this carving was intended to represent one of the Greek emperors; but Giulini justly remarks, in opposition to this opinion, that furs never occur in any of the Greek sculpture. Be

Constantini libri de Ceremoniis aula Byzantinæ. Lipsia 1754. fol. ii. comment. p. 144.

sides, that image was evidently formed to ridicule the emperor, as is proved by the hideous monster seated close to him. But at that time the Milanese certainly had no cause to offend the Greek emperor, with whom they were in alliance; and Giulini has proved, in a very satisfactory manner, that the Milanese erected this image to ridicule the emperor Frederick I, who was their bitterest enemy.* On another image at Milan cut out in stone, of the thirteenth century, which represents the empe ror of Germany on his throne, surrounded by the electors, the latter have small mantles which are ornamented with triangular patches of fur of the same kind.t

STEEL.

STEEL is the same metal as iron, but it has some remarkable properties by which it is distinguished from common iron. It possesses such a superior degree of hardness, that it is capable of filing the latter; it strikes fire with vitreous stones, and scratches the hardest glass; it is heavier, has a stronger sound, exhibits on the fracture a finer

Memorie della citta di Milano, raccolte dal conte Georg. Giulini. In Milano, 4to. vi. p. 407. For this information I am indebted to my friend professor Fiorillo.

+Ibid. P. viii. p. 443.