Among all the materials which the skill of man converts into comfortable and elegant clothing, that which appears likely to be the most extensively useful, though it was the last to be generally diffused, is the beautiful produce of the cotton-plant.

The properties of cotton strongly recommend it for clothing, especially in comparison with linen, both in hot and cold countries. Linen has, indeed, in some respects the advantage; it forms a smooth, firm, and beautiful cloth, and is very agreeable wear in temperate climates; but it is less comfortable than cotton, and less conducive to health, either in heat or in cold. Cotton, being a bad conductor of heat, as compared with linen, preserves the body at a more equable temperature. The functions of the skin, through the medium of perspiration, are the great means of maintaining the body at an equable temperature amidst the vicissitudes of the atmosphere. But linen, like all good conductors of heat, freely condenses the vapor of perspiration, and accumulates moisture upon the skin: the wetted linen becomes cold, chills the body, and checks perspiration, thus not only producing discomfort, but endangering health. Calico, on the other hand, like all bad conductors of heat, condenses little of the perspiration, but allows it to pass off in the form of vapor. Moreover, when the perspiration is so copious as to accumulate moisture, calico will absorb a greater quantity of that moisture than linen. It has therefore a double advantage,—it accumulates less moisture, and absorbs more.

From the above considerations, it is evident that in cold climates, or in the nocturnal cold of tropical climates, cotton clothing is much better calculated to preserve the warmth of the body than linen. In hot climates, also, it is more conducive to health and comfort, by admitting of freer perspiration[410].

Wool, as we have seen, was principally used for weaving in Palestine and Syria, in Asia Minor, Greece, Italy and Spain; hemp in the Northern countries of Europe; flax in Egypt (The history of the two last, hemp and flax, is given in Part IV. to which the reader is referred.); silk in the central regions of Asia[411]. In like manner cotton has always been characteristic of India. We find this circumstance distinctly noticed by Herodotus[412]. Among the valuable products, for which India was remarkable, he states, that “the wild trees in that country bear fleeces as their fruit, surpassing those of sheep in beauty and excellence; and the Indians use cloth made from these trees.” In the same book (c. 47.) Herodotus says, that the thorax or cuirass sent by Amasis, king of Egypt, to Sparta, was “adorned with gold and with fleeces from trees.” These substances were perhaps used in the weft to form the figures (ζῶα), which were woven into the thorax; but it appears equally probable that the gold only was thus employed, the cotton being used as an inside lining or stuffing: and in this case it is possible, that the down of the Bombax Ceiba, a tree allied to the Cotton-plant (Gossypium), may have been used, since, though not fitted for spinning or weaving, it has long been used in India for the stuffing of pillows and similar purposes, and would be included under the phrase employed by Herodotus, “wool” or “fleeces from trees.” The thorax may have been made in Egypt; but the materials, used to enrich it, were probably imported: for we have no proof, that either gold or cotton of any kind was found in that country as a native product in the time of Amasis.

Ctesias, the contemporary of Herodotus, seems also to have known the fact of the use of a kind of wool, the produce of trees, for spinning and weaving among the Indians. It is evident that Ctesias referred exclusively to cotton cloths, as may be inferred from the testimony of Varro, as we find it in Servius (Comm. in Virgilii Æn. i. 649.). “Ctesias ait in Indiâ esse arbores, quæ lanam ferant.”

The expedition of Alexander the Great into India contributed to make the Greeks better acquainted than before with cotton. Hence it is distinctly mentioned by Theophrastus, the disciple of Aristotle. He says, “The trees, from which the Indians make cloths, have a leaf like that of the Black Mulberry; but the whole plant resembles the dog-rose. They set them in the plains arranged in rows, so as to look like vines at a distance[413].” In a succeeding part of the same book (c. 7. p. 143, 144. ed. Schneider) he notices the growth of cotton, not only in India, but in Arabia, and in the island called Tylos, which he places in the Arabian Gulf, although it was probably in the Persian Gulf, near the Arabian coast[414]. According to his account in the latter passage, “The wool-bearing trees, which grew abundantly in this island, had a leaf like that of the vine, but smaller; they bore no fruit, but the capsule containing the wool, was, when closed, about the size of a quince, when ripe, it expanded so as to emit the wool, which was woven into cloths, either cheap, or of great value.”

Sprengel in his German translation (p. 150. vol. ii.) supposes the Broussonetia Papyrifera to be meant in the former passage. But he gives no good reason for this supposition, and he admits, that the Broussonetia Papyrifera grows in China, not in India. The expression of Theophrastus, ὥσπερ ἐλέχθη, which he employs in the latter passage (c. 9. p. 144. ed. Schneider), clearly proves, that he is speaking of the same plant in both passages, and Sprengel himself (p. 164.) supposes the Gossypium Arboreum of Linnæus, the Cotton Tree, to be meant in the latter, though not in the former. The description of Theophrastus is remarkably exact, if we consider it as applying, not to the Cotton Tree (Gossypium Arboreum), but to the Cotton Plant (G. Herbaceum), from which the chief supply of cotton for spinning and weaving into cloth has always been obtained.

Aristobulus, one of Alexander’s generals, made mention of the cotton-plant under the name of the Wool-bearing Tree, and stated that its capsule contained seeds, which were taken out, and that what remained was combed like wool[415].

The testimony of Nearchus, who was the admiral of Alexander, is also preserved to the following effect; “that there were in India trees bearing, as it were, flocks or bunches of wool; that the natives made linen garments of it, wearing a shirt, which reached to the middle of the leg, a sheet folded about the shoulders, and a turban rolled round the head; and that the linen made by them from this substance was fine and whiter than any other.” It is to be observed, that Nearchus, or rather the two later authors who quote him, viz. Arrian and Strabo, use the terms for linen in a general sense, as including all fine light cloths made of vegetable substances[416].

We read in the account of India by Pomponius Mela (L. iii. c. 7.), that the woods produced wool, used by the natives for clothing. He distinctly mentions the use of flax likewise. It has been conjectured, that he may have taken his account from Nearchus, or some other Greek writer, and that he may have intended to speak only of the use of cotton. But in reply to this it is to be observed, that Pomponius Mela here mentions flax in opposition to cotton, and that his assertion, so understood, was probably true, since we have other evidence to show that flax grows in India as well as cotton. (See Part IV.) Nevertheless it seems necessary to understand other authors of the same period as meaning cotton by the term λίνον, or linum. Thus Dyonisius Periegetes (l. 1116), speaking of the employments of the Indians, says, Οἱ δὲ ἱστοὺς ὑφόωσι λινεργέας, which probably meant “some weave muslins”. In the same manner we must interpret the assertion of Quintus Curtius, “Terra lini ferax, unde plerisque sunt vestes” i. e., The land produces flax, from which the greater part obtain garments. Soon after this Curtius says in terms more strictly proper,

Again, speaking of the dress of the King, he says,

In like manner, Lucan, describing the Indian nations, says,

Strabo says, (L. xv. c. 1. vol. vi. p. 153. ed. Sieb.)

Also the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea states, that the region about the Gulf of Barygaza in India was productive “of Carpasus and of the fine Indian cloths made of it[417].” These were what we now call India muslins. These muslins we are informed by Dr. Vincent, were imported into Egypt, and accordingly Pacatus[418] represents Antony’s army as wearing cotton in that country.

The term Carbasus, is evidently used by the five last-cited authors to signify cotton; for they employ it in describing the common dress of the Indians. As the Greeks and Romans became acquainted with cotton much earlier than with silk, we find that Carpas, the proper Oriental name for cotton, was also in use among them at a comparatively early period; and we shall now endeavor to trace the progress of this term from India, Westward. With little variation it is found in the same sense in the Sanscrit, Arabic, and Persic languages[419].

This word occurs once in the Hebrew Scriptures, viz. Esther, i. 6., and there evidently as a foreign term. The hangings, used to decorate the court of the royal palace at Susa on occasion of the great feast given by Ahasuerus, are thus described in the common version of the Scriptures:—

The word, corresponding to “green” in the original is Carpas (כרפס). It has been translated “green” by the authors of the common version on the authority of the Chaldee Paraphrase.

The earliest instance of the use of the oriental name in any classical author is the line from Statius Cæcilius, who died 169 B. C. as quoted by Nonius Marcellus (l. xvi.) from the Pausimachus of Statius:

As these words are all three Greek, and the play, in which the verse occurred, was also called by a Greek name, we cannot doubt, that Statius translated it according to his usual custom from one of the writers of the New Comedy. We may therefore infer with some confidence from this expression, that the Greeks made use of muslins or calicoes, or at least of cotton cloths of some kind, which were brought from India as early as 200 years B. C.

After some time the oriental custom of using cotton as a protection from the sun’s rays was adopted also by the Romans. Cotton was not only a cheaper and commoner article than silk, but it was particularly adapted for this purpose on account of its lightness, as well as its beauty and fineness; and, besides the instance already cited from the book of Esther, we may observe also, that where the Latin authors mention the use of “Carbasa,” it is sometimes for purposes of this kind. “Tabernacula carbaseis intenta velis,” i. e. “Tents with coverings of cotton,” were among the expensive novelties which contributed to the luxury of Verres, when Prætor in Sicily[421]. The same species of ornament was first displayed at Rome in the magnificent ædileship of P. Lentulus Spinther, at the Apollinarian games and in the year 63 B. C.

Lucretius apparently refers to the introduction by Lentulus Spinther of the cotton awnings above mentioned (vi. 108.), when he is theorising on the cause of thunder, and compares the clouds spread over the sky to the awnings of calico, which veiled the theatres and sheltered the spectators from the sun:

We now find frequent mention of cotton by the poets of the Augustan age and by many subsequent writers. As in the case of silk, these authors introduce cotton, not only historically, but for the purpose of embellishment; and, considering Carbasus as a poetical term, they often by a catachresis employ it where they mean to speak of linen. Also as was before observed in regard to silk (Part I. chapter II.), it may likewise be noticed here, that the wars against Mithridates and the Parthians may have contributed to make the Romans familiar with the use of cotton, although their chief supply of it was more probably through Egypt, than through Persia and Babylonia.

Catullus (64.), speaking of the black sail which Ægeus furnished for the ships of his son Theseus, calls it “Carbasus Ibera,” “an Iberian sail.” As, on the one hand, he here uses the proper term for cotton, without intending to describe the sail as cotton, so on the other hand he calls the sail Iberian merely because Iberia was a country adjoining Colchis, and from Colchis (as will be shown in Part IV.) the Greeks and Romans obtained a great supply of flax and sail-cloth.

Tibullus, or Lygdamus, entreats (iii. 2. 17.), in the contemplation of his death and funeral, that after his bones have been washed, first with wine, and then with milk, they may be dried “carbaseis veils,” with linen napkins. Although he uses the proper term for cotton, he probably did not intend to denote any preference for cotton rather than linen. His bones, after being wiped, were to be deposited in a marble urn.

Propertius seems to have aimed at a display of knowledge on these subjects (see Part First, chapter II.); and in the following passage (iv. 3.) he probably used Carbasa in its proper sense, as he is referring to Eastern habits:

In the last Elegy of the same Book he refers to the story of the young Vestal virgin, who, when the flame was extinguished upon the altar committed to her care, and when the scourge appeared to await her for her neglect, threw upon the ashes a fillet of muslin from her head, and saved her life by its ignition, which was supposed to be effected by the favor of the goddess:

The story is related by Valerius Maximus (i. 7.). Although we are not informed of the date of the event, it appears from his language that the fillet was of fine muslin: “Cum carbasum, quam optimum habebat, foculo imposuisset, subito ignis emicuit.” This description is well suited to the nature of cotton, than which nothing was more easily ignited.

The passage in Virgil’s Georgics, which mentions cotton, has been already quoted (See Part I. chapter II. p. 24.). By the Æthiopians, whose groves were “white with soft wool,” he probably intended those of Arabia; and we may suppose him to have referred to accounts, not so much of the Gossypium Herbaceum, to which the word “groves” (nemora) would not apply, as to groves of Gossypium Arboreum and Bombyx Ceiba. In the following passages of Æneid he mentions cotton under its proper name, though probably not intending to distinguish accurately between cotton and linen, and only using the term for the sake of ornament:—

This last passage is part of the description of the attire of Chloreus, the Phrygian, whose muslin chlamys may have rustled in consequence of being interwoven with gold.

OVID.

In all these passages Ovid uses carbasa in the improper sense: it was an easy transition from the idea of a cotton awning, with which the Romans had become familiar, to apply the term to the sail of a ship. To these examples we may add the following:

Statius also mentions “Carbasei sinus,” the folds of cotton in the chlamys of a Bacchanal (Theb. vii. 658.).

Valerius Flaccus also introduces muslin among the elegances in the dress of a Phrygian from the river Rhyndacus.

Also Prudentius, the Christian poet (See Part 1, chap. iii. p. 59.), in an elaborate account of Pride, depicts her in a garment of the same kind:

Apuleius mentions carbasina in conjunction with bombycina and other kinds of cloth[423]. He may consequently be presumed to use the word in its proper sense, to wit, as denoting calico or muslin. In the same manner cotton is distinguished from silk by Sidonius Apollinaris[424]. Also we may presume that cotton and not linen sails are to be understood in the following line of Avienus:

Here the writer not only professes to give geographical information, but he is describing the Indian seas and islands; and as in the present day, so also in ancient times, the sails used in the navigation of those seas were probably made of cotton.

Strabo uses the word καρπασίναι in describing the official dress of a certain class of priestesses among the Cimbri[425]. Although it is possible, that muslin may have been conveyed to them to be used on solemn occasions, it appears more probable that fine linen or cambric, which was manufactured at no great distance among the Atrebates, ought here to be understood.

Pliny mentions cotton in four different passages of his Natural History. Two of them are translated with some inaccuracies from the passages of Theophrastus. To his translation of one of these passages Pliny annexes the remark, derived perhaps from some other source, that the inhabitants of Tylos called their Cotton Trees gossympins, and that an island which was called the smaller Tylos, distant ten miles, was still more fertile in cotton than the larger island of the same name.

The third passage introduces cotton under its proper name, Carbasa. It would imply that cotton was first grown or manufactured at Tarraco in Spain, than which assertion nothing can be more inaccurate and groundless.

The fourth passage is also contrary to all previous evidence, inasmuch as it represents cotton to be the native growth of Egypt. It calls the Cotton Plant gossypion, and hence the name has been given to it by modern botanists. Supposing this last passage to be genuine, still we know not on what authority Pliny depended, or from what source he derived his information, nor can we tell to what extent he allowed himself to be inaccurate in transcribing or translating. Taken by itself, therefore, it appears to us that this passage is no better proof of the growth of cotton anciently in Egypt than the third passage is of its first discovery in Spain.

This passage seems however deserving of more consideration, when taken in conjunction with the following from the Onomastícon of Julius Pollux, who wrote 100 years later than Pliny:—

The description here given of the Cotton Tree or Cotton Plant, whichever was meant, is remarkably correct; indeed more correct than any account obtained since the time of the expedition of Alexander. The circumstance of the pericarp being three-cleft is agreeable to the fact, and is not noticed by any earlier writer. The comparison of it to a walnut in regard to size and form is also accurate. From this account, and from those of Theophrastus, Aristobulus, and Nearchus, we gather the following particulars, which are agreeable to the fact: that the cotton-plants are set in the plains, and in rows like vines; that the plant is three or four feet high, and is branched, spreading, and flexible, like a dog-rose; that the leaf is palmated like that of the vine; that the capsule is three-valved, about the size of a walnut, and, when it bursts, emits the cotton, resembling flocks of wool, in which the seeds are imbedded.

On the other hand, we have had no previous evidence respecting the use of cotton in the manufacture of cloth for the woof only, and it is doubtful whether this piece of information is correct, because we have no reason to suppose that cotton was used for weaving in any country in which flax was also spun and woven.

Tertullian in the third Chapter of his treatise De Pallio, enumerates nearly all the raw materials which were spun for weaving. He mentions the class of vegetable substances (cotton and flax) in the following terms:

Philostratus, who wrote in the third century, makes distinct mention of cotton in two passages[427].

Martianus Capella (l. ii. § 4. p. 99. ed. Goetz.) makes distinct reference to a tunic and shawl white as milk, and made either of cotton or fine linen.

Theophilus Presbyter, who wrote probably about A. D. 800, describes the use of cotton-paper for making gold-leaf. He calls it Greek parchment, made of tree-wool, Pergamena, or Parcamena Græca, quæ fit ex lanâ ligni[428].

From the travels of the two Arabians who visited China in the ninth century, we learn that at that time the ordinary dress of their countrymen was cotton: for they remark, that “the Chinese dressed, not in cotton, as the Arabians did, but in silk[429].” Probably the use of imported cotton might by this time have become not uncommon in Egypt, Syria, and other oriental countries; but we apprehend, that it was never generally employed in Europe either for clothing, or for any other purpose, until very lately.

It is unnecessary to further discuss the question as to whether cotton was or was not cultivated in Egypt in ancient times. This vexed question having been lately set at rest, by a discovery which reduces a great deal of the learning that has been expended upon it to the character of old lumber. The difficulty of ascertaining whether the mummy-cloths (of which the specimens are exceedingly numerous) were made of linen or cotton, has at length been overcome; and though no chemical test could be found out to settle the question, it has been decided by that important aid to scientific scrutiny, the microscope. (See Chapters I. and II. Part IV.)

The following observations of Dr. Robertson in his “Historical Disquisition concerning the knowledge which the Ancients had of India[430],” appear very just and important.