ARGUMENTS ADVERSE TO THE SUPPOSITION. 323 



appear to have been subjected to wear in other respects, 

 show any marks of hoof wear ; that is, still granting that 

 they could be fastened to the extremity of the limb. It 

 is well known that a horse's shoes, after being a short 

 time subjected to use on hard ground, become rounded 

 over at the toe, where the greatest amount of wear occurs ; 

 also that the foot-surface, even with the shoe firmly nailed 

 to the wall, becomes worn and channeled where any play 

 or friction takes place. This is well seen in an old horse- 

 shoe. No such evidences appear on the best-preserved 

 of these so-called sandals. On the contrary, the upper 

 surface of the sole is entirely free from traces of friction of 

 any kind, and the under or ground- surface is usually most 

 worn towards the middle, the extremities being sharp 

 rather than rounded over. There is not the faintest trace 

 of their having been worn at all by horses. No nation 

 ever offered any contrivance so unsuited to the object to 

 be attained as these so-called hippo-sandals, if we suppose 

 them to have been intended for horses' feet. There is 

 nothing at all reasonable in the supposition ; and in this 

 opinion I find I am supported by MM. Delacroix and 

 Q-uiquerez, antiquarians who have had abundant op- 

 portunities of studying this matter, and have availed 

 themselves of thema. M. Quiquerez writes : 'The many 

 excavations made by us in the Roman villas, camps, 

 and castles of the Bernese Jura have never afforded us 

 any of these calcece forrece, or hippo-sandals, with which 

 people would like to shoe the feet of Roman horses. 

 But we have seen plenty of these articles, without being 

 able to comprehend how a horse, starting at a gallop 

 on an uneven road, could, for an instant even, carry 



21* 



