SPINNING, DYEING, AND WEAVING.—HIGH DEGREE OF EXCELLENCE ATTAINED IN THESE ARTS.
Fourth century—Curious account of silk found in the Edict of Diocletian—Extravagance of the Consul Furius Placidus—Transparent silk shifts—Ausonius describes silk as the produce of trees—Quintus Aur Symmachus, and Claudian’s testimony of silk and golden textures—Their extraordinary beauty—Pisander’s description—Periplus Maris Erythræi—Dido of Sidon. Mention of silk in the laws of Manu—Rufus Festus Avinus—Silk shawls—Marciannus Capella—Inscription by M. N. Proculus, silk manufacturer—Extraordinary spiders’ webs—Bombyces compared to spiders—Wild silk-worms of Tsouen—Kien and Tiao-Kien—M. Bertin’s account—Further remarks on wild silk-worms. Christian authors of the fourth century—Arnobius—Gregorius Nazienzenus—Basil—Illustration of the doctrine of the resurrection—Ambrose—Georgius Pisida—Macarius—Jerome—Chrysostom—Heliodorus—Salmasius—Extraordinary beauty of the silk and golden textures described by these authors—Their invectives against Christians wearing silk. Mention of silk by Christian authors in the fifth century—Prudentius—Palladius—Theodosian Code—Appollinaris Sidonius—Alcimus Avitus. Sixth century—Boethius. (Manufactures of Tyre and Sidon—Purple—Its great durability—Incredible value of purple stuffs found in the treasury of the King of Persia.)
Some curious evidence respecting the use of silk, both unmixed with linen and with the warp of linen, or some inferior material, is found in the Edict of Diocletian, which was published A. D. 303 for the purpose of fixing a maximum of prices for all articles in common use throughout the Roman Empire[46]. The passage pertaining to our present subject, is as follows:
| Sarcinatori in veste soubtili replicat(u)ræ | * sex |
| Eidem aperturæ cum subsutura olosericræ | * quinquaginta |
| Eidem aperturæ cum subsutura su(b)sericæ | * triginta |
| (Sub)suturæ in veste grossiori | * quattuor. |
| Denarii[47]. | |
| To the Tailor for lining a fine vest | 6 |
| To the same for an opening and an edging with silk | 50 |
| To the same for an opening and an edging with stuff made of a mixed tissue of silk and flax | 30 |
| For an edging on a coarser vest | 4 |
| Colonel Leake’s translation. | |
[46] It was edited A. D. 1826, by Colonel Leake, as a sequel to his Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor, and is also published in Tr. of the Royal Society of Literature, vol. i. p. 181.
[47] A Roman coin of the value of about sixteen or seventeen cents, called Denarii from the letter X upon it; which denoted ten.
This document proves, in exact conformity with the passages quoted from Solinus and Ammianus, that silk had come into general use at the commencement of the fourth century. It is also manifest from this extract, that silk was employed in giving to garments a greater proportion of intricacy and ornament than had been in use before.
The authors who make mention of silk in the fourth and following centuries are very numerous. We shall first take the heathen authors, and then the Christian writers, whose observations often have some moral application, which gives them an additional interest.
The unknown author of the Panegyric on the emperor Constantine, pronounced A. D. 317, thus mentions silk as characterizing oriental refinement.
Facile est vincere timidos et imbelles, quales amœna Græcia et deliciæ Orientis educunt, vix leve pallium et sericos sinus vitando sole tolerantes.
It is easy to vanquish the timid and those unused to war, the offspring of pleasant Greece and the delightful East, who, whilst they avoid the heat of the sun, can scarcely bear even a light shawl and folds of silk.
The testimony of the Roman historian Flavius Vopiscus, in reference to the practice of the emperor Aurelian and the dearness of silk during his reign, has already been produced. This author, in his life of the same emperor, makes the following remarks on a display of silk which he had himself recently witnessed.
We have lately seen the Consulate of Furius Placidus celebrated in the Circus with so great eagerness for popularity, that he seemed to give not prizes, but patrimonies, presenting tunics of linen and silk, borders of linen, and even horses, to the great scandal of all good men.
The exact period here referred to is no doubt the Consulship of Placidus and Romulus, A. D. 343.
In the Epistles of Alciphron (i. 39.) Myrrhine, a courtesan, loosens her girdle, which probably fastened her upper garment or shawl. Her shift was silk, and so transparent as to show the color of her skin.
satirizes a rich man of mean extraction, who nevertheless made lofty pretensions to nobility of birth, pretending to be descended from Mars, Romulus, and Remus, and who therefore caused their images to be embossed upon his plate and woven in a silken shawl.—Epig. 26.
In the following line, he alludes to the production of silk in the usual terms:
This distinguished officer, in a letter to the Consul Stilicho, apologizes in the following terms for his delay in sending a contribution of Holoseric pieces, that is, webs wholly made of silk, to the public exhibitions.
Others have deferred supplying the water for the theatre and the Holoseric pieces, so that I have examples in my favor.—Epist. l. iv. 8.
In a letter to Magnillus (l. v. 20.) he speaks of Subseric pieces, webs made only in part of silk, as presents;
At your instigation the Subseric pieces have been supplied, which my men kept back after the price had been settled; and likewise everything else pertaining to the prizes which were to be given.
mentions silk in numerous passages. This poet, in describing the consular robes of the two brothers Probinus and Olybrius (A. D. 395.), represents the Gabine Cincture, by which the toga was girt over the breast, as made of silk.
In the following passage he represents the two brothers, Honorius and Arcadius, as dividing the empire of the world between them and receiving tributes of its productions from the most distant regions:
In a poem, which immediately succeeds this in the order of time, Claudian describes a magnificent toga, worn by Honorius on being appointed a fourth time consul, by saying, that it received its color (the Tyrian purple) from the Phœnicians; its woof (of silk forming stripes or figures) from the Seres; and its weight (produced by Indian gems) from the river Hydaspes[48]. Again, in his poem on the approaching marriage of Honorius and Maria, he mentions yellow silk curtains (l. 211.) as a decoration of the nuptial chamber.
[48] De IV. Cons. Honorii, i. 600, 601.
Again he says (in Eutrop. l. i. v. 225, 226. 304. l. ii. v. 337.):
He also mentions with delight the use of gold in dress, as well as of silk. The following passage represents the manner in which Proba, a Roman matron, near the end of the fourth century, expressed her affectionate congratulations on the elevation of her two sons to the Consulship, by preparing robes interwoven with gold for the ceremony of their installation.
From these verses we learn that Proba had herself acquired the art of covering the thread with gold, and that she then used her gold thread in the woof to form the stripes or other ornaments of the consular trabeæ. These are afterwards called stiff togas (togæ rigentes, l. 205.), on account of the rigidity imparted to them by the gold thread.
The same poet gives an elaborate description of a Trabea which he supposes to have been woven by the Goddess Rome with the aid of Minerva for the use of the Consul Stilicho. Five different scenes are said to have been woven in this admirable robe (regentia dona, graves auro trabeas), and certain parts of them were wrought in gold[49].
[49] In I. Cons. Stilichonis, L. ii. 330-359.
Again, Claudian supposes Thetis to have woven scarfs of gold and purple for her son Achilles:
Ipsa manu chlamydes ostro texebat et auro. (Ep. 35.)
The epigram in which this line occurs, seems to imply that Serena, mother-in-law of the Emperor Honorius, wove garments of the same kind for him.
Maria, the daughter of the above-mentioned Stilicho, was bestowed by him upon Honorius, but died shortly after, about A. D. 400. In February, 1544, the marble coffin, containing her remains, was discovered at Rome. In it were preserved a garment and a pall, which, on being burnt, yielded 36 pounds of gold. There were also found a great number of glass vessels, jewels, and ornaments of all kinds, which Stilicho had given as a dowry to his daughter[50]. We may conclude, that the garments discovered in the tomb of Maria were woven by the hands of her mother Serena, since the epigram of Claudian proves that she wove robes of a similar description for Honorius, and probably on the same occasion. Anastasius Bibliothecarius says, that when Pope Paschal was intent on finding the body of St. Cæcilia, having performed mass with a view to obtain the favor of a revelation on the subject, he was directed A. D. 821 to a cemetery on the Appian Way near Rome, and there found the body enveloped in cloth of gold[51]. Although there is no reason to believe, that the body found by Paschal was the body of the saint pretended, yet it may have been the body of a Roman lady who had lived some centuries before, and probably about the time of Honorius and Maria.
[50] Surii Comment. Rerum Gest. ab anno 1500, &c.
[51] “Aureis vestitum indumentis.” De Vitis Rom. Pontificum Mogunt. 1602, p. 222.
Pisander, who belonged to the same period (900 B. C.) with Homer, speaks of the Lydians as wearing tunics adorned with gold. Lydus observes, that the Lydians were supplied with gold from the sands of the Pactolus and the Hermus[52].
[52] De Magistratibus Rom. L. iii. § 64.
Virgil also represents the use of gold in weaving, as if it had existed in Trojan times. One of the garments so adorned was manufactured by Dido, the Sidonian, one by Andromache, and another was in the possession of Anchises[53]. In all these instances the reference is to the habits of Phœnice, Lycia, or other parts of Asia.
[53] Æn. iii. 483.; iv. 264.; viii. 167.; xi. 75.
He describes an ape ludicrously attired in a silk jacket; and, inveighing against the progress of luxury, he speaks of some to whom even silk garments were a burthen. In elaborate descriptions of the figured consular robes (the Trabeæ) of Honorius and Stilicho, he mentions the reins and other trappings of horses, as being wrought in silk[54].
[54] Rubra Serica, De VI. Cons. Honor. I. 577. Serica Fræna. In I. Cons. Stilichonis 1. ii. V. 350.
The frequent allusions to silk in the complimentary poems of Claudian, receive illustration from various imperial laws, which were promulgated in the same century, and in part by the very emperors to whom his flattery is addressed, and which are preserved in the Code of Justinian. Their object was not to encourage the silk manufacture, but, on a principle very opposite to that of modern times, to make it an imperial monopoly. The admiration excited by the splendor and elegance of silk attire was the ground, on which it was forbidden that any individual of the male sex should wear even a silken border upon his tunic or pallium, with the exception of the emperor, his officers and servants. To confine the enjoyment of these luxuries more entirely to the imperial family and court, all private persons were strictly forbidden engaging in the manufacture, gold and silken borders were to be made only in the imperial Gynæcea[55].
[55] See the Corpus Juris Civilis, Lugduni 1627, folio, tom. v. Codex Justiniani, l. x. tit. vii. p. 131. 134.
In this important document on ancient geography and commerce, we find repeated mention of silk in its raw state, in that of thread, and woven[56]. These articles were conveyed down the Indus to the coast of the Erythrean Sea. They were also brought to the great mart of Barygaza, which was on the Gulf of Cambay near the modern Surat, and to the coast of Lymirica, which was still more remote. The author of the Periplus states, that they were carried by land through Bactria to Barygaza from a great city called Thina, lying far towards the North in the interior of Asia. He of course refers to some part of Serica. It is remarkable, that he makes no mention of silk as the native production of India.
[56] Arriani Opp., vol. ii. Blancardi, pp. 164. 170. 173. 177.
Silk is mentioned in two passages of the laws of Manu, viz. XI. v. 168, and XII. v. 64. It is, however, observed by Heeren, who quotes passages of the Ramayana that make mention of silk, that garments of this material are there represented as worn only on festive occasions, and that they were undoubtedly Seric or Chinese productions[57]. Indeed it appears that the cloth made from the thread of the native worms of Hindostan, although highly valued for strength and durability, is not remarkable for fineness, beauty, or splendor.
[57] Ideen über die Politik, &c. der alten Welt, i. 2. pp. 647. 648. 665-668. 677. 3rd edition. Göttingen, 1815.
This author, adopting the common notion of his time, supposes the Seres to spin thread from fleeces which were produced upon the trees. He also mentions silk shawls (Serica pallia, l. 1008.) as worn by the female Bacchantes of Ionia in their processions in honor of Bacchus; and it is worthy of remark, that they are not mentioned in the original passage of Dionysius, the author whom Avienus translates, so that we may reasonably infer, that the use of them on these occasions was introduced between the time of Dionysius (about 30 B. C.) and that of Avienus (A. D. 400).
Beyond these (the Anthropophagi) are the Seres, who asperse their trees with water to obtain the down, which produces silk. L. vi. p. 223. ed. Grotii, 1599.
The following Inscription is given in Gruter, Tom. iii. p. DCXLV. It was found at Tivoli, and expresses that M. N. Proculus, silk-manufacturer, erected a monument to Valeria Chrysis, his excellent and deserving wife.
D. M.
VALERIAE. CHRYSIDI.
M. NVMIVS. PROCVLVS.
SERICARIVS.
CONJVGI. SVAE.
OPTIMÆ. BENEM.
FECIT.
Before proceeding to the Christian writers of the 4th and following centuries we may now introduce the remarks of Servius on the passage formerly quoted from Virgil. He is supposed to have written about A. D. 400.
Among the Indians and Seres there are on the trees certain worms, called Bombyces, which draw out very fine threads after the manner of spiders; and these threads constitute silk.
It will be seen hereafter, that these “Indian Seres” were the inhabitants of Khotan in Little Bucharia.
The frequent comparison of Bombyces to spiders by the ancients suggests the inquiry whether they employed the thread of any kind of spider to make cloth, as was attempted in France by M. Bon. The failure of his attempt is sufficient, as it appears, to show, that the extensive manufacture of garments from this material must have been scarcely possible in ancient times. It is also to be observed, that the ancients, when they compare the silk-worm to the spider, refer to the spider’s web, whereas M. Bon, not finding the web strong enough, made his cloth from the thread with which the spider envelopes its eggs[58].
[58] The most extraordinary account of a spider’s web, which we have ever seen, is that given by Lieutenant W. Smyth. He says, “We saw here (viz. at Pachiza, on the river Huayabamba in Peru) a gigantic spider’s web suspended to the trees: it was about 25 feet in height, and near 50 in length; the threads were very strong, and it had the empty sloughs of thousands of insects hanging on it. It appeared to be the habitation of a great number of spiders of a larger size than we ever saw in England.” Narrative of a Journey from Lima to Para, London, 1836, p. 141.
For some interesting notices of the great spider of Brazil the reader is referred to Caldcleugh’s Travels in South America, London 1825, vol. i. ch. 2. p. 41; and to the Rev. R. Walsh’s Notices of Brazil, London 1830, vol. ii. p. 300, 301. Mr. Caldcleugh “assisted in liberating from a spider’s net a bird of the size of a swallow, quite exhausted with struggling, and ready to fall a prey to its indefatigable enemies.” Mr. Walsh had his light straw hat removed from his head by a similar web extending from tree to tree in an opening through which he had occasion to pass. He wound upon a card several of the threads composing the web; and he observes, that, as these spiders are gregarious, the difficulties experienced by M. Bon from the ferocity of the solitary European spiders in killing and devouring one another, would not exist if the attempt were made to obtain clothing from the former.
In the forests of Java Sir George Staunton “found webs of spiders, woven with threads of so strong a texture as not easily to be divided without a cutting instrument.”—Account of Lord Macartney’s Embassy to China, London 1797, vol. i. ch. 7. p. 302. (See Chap. IX.)
But, although we have no reason to believe, that the web of any spider was anciently employed to make cloth, yet these accounts may have referred to worms, possibly varieties of the silk-worm, which spun long threads floating in the air. The common silk-worm spins and suspends itself by its thread, long before it begins its cocoon. It appears probable, therefore, that there may have been wild varieties of this creature, or perhaps other species of the same genus, which in the earlier stages of their existence spun threads long enough for use. We ground this conjecture partly on the following passage from Du Halde’s History of China[59].
[59] Vol. ii. p. 359, 360, 8vo. edition, London, 1736.
“The province of Chan-tong produces a particular sort of silk, which is found in great quantities on the trees and in the fields. It is spun and made into a stuff called Kien-tcheou. This silk is made by little insects that are much like caterpillars. They do not spin an oval or round cocoon, like the silk-worms, but very long threads. These threads, as they are driven about by the winds, hang upon the trees and bushes, and are gathered to make a sort of silk, which is coarser than that made of the silk spun in houses. But these worms are wild, and eat indifferently the leaves of mulberry and other trees. Those who do not understand this silk would take it for unbleached cloth, or a coarse sort of drugget.
“The worms, which spin this silk, are of two kinds: the first, much larger and blacker than the common silk-worms, are called Tsouen-kien; the second, being smaller, are named Tiao-kien. The silk of the former is of a reddish gray, that of the latter darker. The stuff made of these materials is between both colors, it is very close, does not fret, is very lasting, washes like linen, and, when it is good, receives no damage by spots, even though oil were to be shed on it.
“This stuff is much valued by the Chinese, and it is sometimes as dear as satin or the finest silks. As the Chinese are very skilful at counterfeiting, they make a false sort of Kien-tcheou with the waste of the Tche-kiang silk, which without due inspection might easily be taken for the genuine article.”
This account affords a remarkable illustration of many of the expressions of the ancient writers, such as “Bombyx pendulus urget opus,” Martial; “Per aerem liquando aranearum horoscopis idoneas sedes tendit,” Tertullian; “In aranearum morem tenuissima fila deducunt,” Servius.
In further illustration of the subject, and as tending to show that the Kien-tcheou is manufactured from the thread of a silk-worm, modified in its habits and perhaps in its organization by circumstances, we shall now quote a few passages from a work having the following title: “China; its costume, arts, manufactures, &c., edited from the originals in the cabinet of M. Bertin, with observations by M. Breton. Translated from the French. London, 1812.” Vol. iv. p. 55, &c.
“The wild silk-worms are found in the hottest provinces of China, especially near Canton. They live indifferently on all sorts of leaves, particularly on those of the ash, the oak, and the fagara, and spin a greyish and rarely white silk. The coarse cloth manufactured from it is called Kien-tcheou, will bear washing, and on that account persons of quality do not disdain to wear clothes of it. With this silk also the strings of musical instruments are made, because it is stronger and more sonorous.
“Entomologists treat but very superficially of the habits of the wild silk-worms, while they dwell in minute detail on the method of rearing them in Provence.
“It is between the nineteenth and twenty-second day of their existence, that they undertake the great work of spinning their cocoon. They curve a leaf into a kind of cup, and then form a cocoon as large and nearly as hard as a hen’s egg! This cocoon has one end open like a reversed funnel; it is a passage for the butterfly, which is to come out.
“The oak-worms are slower in making their cocoon than those of the fagara and ash, and they set about it differently. Instead of bending a single leaf, they roll themselves in two or three and spin their cocoon. It is larger, but the silk is inferior in quality, and of course not so valuable.
“The cocoons of wild silk-worms are so strong and compact, that the insects encounter great difficulty in extricating themselves, and therefore remain inclosed from the end of the summer, to the spring of the following year. These butterflies, unlike the domestic insect, fly very well.—The domestic silk-worm is but a variety of the wild species. It is fed on the leaves of the mulberry tree.” (See chap. VIII.)
The circumstance that the worms were sometimes fed with oak-leaves is mentioned in Du Halde’s History of China, vol. ii. p. 363.
Here then we have a justification of the ancients in asserting, both that the silk-worms produced long threads and webs floating in the air like those of spiders, and that they fed upon the leaves of the oak, the ash, and many other trees. It may be recollected, that Pliny expressly mentions both the oak (quercus) and the ash (fraxinus).
Until very lately the use of silk among the ancients was investigated only by philologists. Within a few years M. Latreille, an entomologist of the highest distinction, has directed his attention to the subject and has examined particularly the above-cited passages of Aristotle, Pliny, and Pausanias[60]. He never supposes the ancient Sericum to have been the produce of anything except the silk-worm. But of this there are several varieties, partly perhaps natural, and partly the result of domestication. He endeavors to explain some parts of Pliny’s description by showing their seeming correspondence with some of the practices actually observed by the Orientals in the management of silk-worms.
[60] M. Latreille’s paper is published in the Annales des Sciences Naturelles, tome xxiii. pp. 58-84.
An account of the wild silk-worms of China is to be found in the “Mémoires concernant l’Histoire, les Sciences, les Arts, &c., des Chinois,” compiled by the missionaries of Peking[61]. This account is principally derived from the information of Father D’Incarville, one of the missionaries. It coincides generally with the accounts already quoted from Du Halde and Breton. We extract the following particulars as conveying some further information:
[61] Tome ii. pp. 579-601. Paris, 1777, 4to. This Memoir is reprinted with abridgments as an Appendix to Stanislas Julien’s Translation of the Chinese Treatise on the Breeding of Silk-worms, Paris, 1837, 8vo.
“The Chinese annals from the year 150 B. C. to A. D. 638 make frequent mention of the great quantity of silk produced by the wild worms, and observe that their cocoons were as large as eggs or apricots.”
The following passage is also deserving of attention: “Le papillon de ces vers sauvages, dit le Père d’Incarville, est à ailes vitrées.” This information, if correct, would prove that there was at least one kind of wild silk-worms in China, which was a different species from the Phalæna Mori; for that has no transparent membranes in its wings, and would not be likely to receive them in consequence of any change in its mode of life.
We now proceed to take the Christian authors of the fourth and following centuries in the order of time.
thus speaks of the heathen gods:
They want the covering of a garment: the Tritonian virgin must spin a thread of extraordinary fineness, and according to circumstances put on a tunic either of mail, or silk[62].
[62] Adv. Gentes, l. iii. p. 580, ed. Erasmi.
The following passage contains, we believe, the earliest allusion to the use of silk in the services of the Christian Church.
Although this celebrated author was a native of Asia Minor, and had studied in Syria and Palestine, he appears to have known the silk-worm only from books and by report. His description of it in the following passage, in which we first find the beautiful illustration of the doctrine of a resurrection from the change of the chrysalis, is chiefly copied from Aristotle’s account as formerly quoted.
Τί φάτε οἱ ἀπιστοῦντες τῷ Παύλῳ περὶ τῆς κατὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἀλλοιώσεως, ὁρῶντες πολλὰ τῶν ἀερίων τὰς μορφὰς μεταβάλλοντα; ὁποῖα καὶ περὶ τοῦ Ἰνδικοῦ σκώληκος ἱστορεῖται τοῦ κερασφόρου· ὃς εἰς κάμπην τὰ πρῶτα μεταβαλὼν, εἶτα προϊὼν βομβυλιὸς γίνεται, καὶ οὐδὲ ἐπὶ ταύτης ἵσταται τῆς μορφῆς, ἀλλὰ χαύνοις καὶ πλατέσι πετάλοις ὑποπτεροῦται. Ὅταν οὖν καθέζησθε τὴν τούτων ἐργασίαν ἀναπηνιζόμεναι αἱ γυναῖκες, τὰ νήματα λέγω, ἃ πέμπουσιν ὑμῖν οἱ Σῆρες πρὸς τὴν τῶν μαλακῶν ἐνδυμάτων κατασκευὴν, μεμνημέναι τῆς κατὰ τὸ ζῶον τοῦτο μεταβολῆς, ἐναργῆ λαμβάνετε τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἔννοιαν, καὶ μὴ ἀπιστεῖτε τῇ ἀλλαγῇ, ἣν Παῦλος ἅπασι κατεπαγγέλλεται.—Hexahemeron, p. 79. A. Ed. Benedict.
What have you to say, who disbelieve the assertion of the Apostle Paul concerning the change at the resurrection, when you see many of the inhabitants of the air changing their forms? Consider, for example, the account of the horned worm of India, which (i. e. the silk-worm) having first changed into a caterpillar (eruca, or veruca), then in process of time becomes a cocoon (bombylius, or bombulio), and does not continue even in this form, but assumes light and expanded wings. Ye women, who sit winding upon bobbins the produce of these animals, namely the threads, which the Seres send to you for the manufacture of fine garments, bear in mind the change of form in this creature; derive from it a clear conception of the resurrection; and discredit not that transformation which Paul announces to us all.—Yates’s Translation.
When St. Basil says of the new-born moth, that “it assumes light and expanded wings,” the beauty of the comparison in illustrating the Christian doctrine of the resurrection is enhanced, when we consider that in its wild state the moth flies very well, although, when domesticated, its flight is weak and its wings small and shrivelled[63]: but still more beautiful does the figure become, if we suppose a reference to those larger and more splendid Phalænæ which produce the coarser kinds of silk in India, and probably in China also.
[63] The Phalæna Atlas, apparently a native of China, measures eight inches across the wings from tip to tip.
Basil is the first writer, who distinctly mentions the change of the silk-worm from a Chrysalis to a moth. In his application of that fact he addresses himself to his countrywomen in Asia Minor, and his language represents them sitting and winding on bobbins the raw silk obtained from the Seres and designed to be afterwards woven into cloth.
Between these two authors, Aristotle and Basil, we observe a difference of phraseology which appears deserving of notice. While they both describe the women, not as spinning the silk, but as winding it on bobbins, they designate the material so wound by two different names. Basil uses the term νήματα, which might be meant to imply that the silk came from the Seres in skeins as it comes to us from China: Aristotle, on the contrary, uses the term βομβύκια, which can only refer to the state of silk before it is wound into skeins. As it might appear impossible to convey it in this state to Cos, we shall here insert from the authorities already quoted, the Chinese Missionaries, an account of the process by which the cocoons are prepared for winding, and it will then be seen, that the cocoons might have been transported to any part of the world.
“To prepare the cocoons of the wild silk-worms, the Chinese cut the extremities of them with a pair of scissors. They are then put into a canvass bag, and immersed for an hour or more in a kettle of boiling lye, which dissolves the gum. When this is effected, they are taken from the kettle; pressed to expel the lye, and then laid out to dry. Whilst they are still moist, the chrysalises are extracted; each cocoon is then turned inside out, so as to make a sort of cowl. It is necessary only, to put them again into lukewarm water, after which ten or twelve of them are capped one upon another like so many thimbles, to insert a small distaff through them, when the silk may be reeled off.”
Basil, in one of his Homilies, (Opp. tom. ii. p. 53. 55. ed. Benedict.) inveighs against the ladies of Cæsarea, who employed themselves in weaving gold; and he is no less indignant at their husbands who adorned even their horses with cloths of gold and scarlet as if they were bridegrooms.
The author of a Treatise “De disciplinâ et bono pudicitiæ,” which is usually published with Cyprian, and which may be referred to the fourth or fifth century, thus speaks (Cypriani Opera, ed. Erasmi, p. 499.):
To weave gold in cloth is, as it were, to adopt an expensive method of spoiling it. Why do they interpose stiff metals between the delicate threads of the warp?
The same censure is implied in the following address of Alcimus Avitus to his sister.
The effect of such exhortations as the preceding, was to induce piously disposed persons to apply pieces of gold cloth to public and sacred, instead of private purposes. After this period we find continual instances of their use in the decoration of churches and in the robes of the priesthood.
Sericæ vestes, et auro intexta velamina, quibus divitis corpus ambitur, damna viventium, non subsidia defunctorum sunt.—De Nabutho Jezraelitâ, cap. i. tom. i. p. 566. Ed. Bened.
Silken garments, and veils interwoven with gold, with which the body of the rich man is encompassed, are a loss to the living, and no gain to the dead.
Here we think it not out of place to introduce the account of the silk-worm by Georgius Pisida, who flourished about A. D. 640, although he lived at Constantinople after the breeding of silk-worms had been introduced there. According to him the silk-worm pines or moulders almost to nothing in its tomb, and then returns to its former shape. The verses are however deserving of attention for their elegance, and for the repetition of Basil’s idea, which Ambrose has left out, of the analogy between the restoration of the silk-worm and the resurrection of man.