Page:Horse shoes and horse shoeing.djvu/125

 Douglas, in his ‘Nenia Britannica,’ throws great discredit on Chifflet's description, because of his not being present when the tomb was opened, and also because of the condition the various objects were in. When Douglas visited France in 1787, the shoe and some other articles were not to be found, which caused him to look with yet greater distrust on the whole account.

The Abbé Cochet, an accomplished antiquarian, is also suspicious of this fragment of iron, which was so oxidized that it fell into powder on the slightest touch, and has entirely disappeared, being the remains of a horseshoe; he is more inclined to think it must have been a portion of the iron-mounting of a box, although the skeleton of a horse was found in the tomb. He bases his doubts on the fact, that in no Frankish grave has anything been discovered at all resembling an iron nailed shoe, and he is of opinion that the Franks did not shoe their small and coarse-bred horses.

middle ages, it was not derogatory even for a king to ride a mule. Immediately before the battle of Navarette, he mentions King Henry 'mounted on a handsome and strong mule, according to the custom of his country,' riding through the ranks, paying his compliments to the lords and knights, and entreating them to exert themselves in defending his honour.—Chronicles of England, France, and Spain, vol. iii. p. 302. London, 1806.