By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Greek Dress - A Study of the Costumes Worn in Ancient Greece, from Pre-Hellenic Times to the Hellenistic Age
Author: Abrahams, Ethel Beatrice
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Greek Dress - A Study of the Costumes Worn in Ancient Greece, from Pre-Hellenic Times to the Hellenistic Age" ***

generously made available by Internet Archive (https://archive.org)

      Images of the original pages are available through
      Internet Archive. See

Transcriber's note:

      Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).

      Small capitals are represented in upper case as in SMALL CAPS.

      Footnotes have been numbered in a single series. Each footnote
      is placed at the end of the paragraph which includes its anchor.


A Study of the Costumes Worn in
Ancient Greece, from Pre-Hellenic
Times to the Hellenistic Age



With Illustrations

John Murray, Albemarle Street, W.



The object of this book is to give a continuous account of the dress
worn by the people inhabiting Greek lands, from the earliest times
of which we have any record down to the Hellenistic age. The first
chapter stands somewhat apart from the rest, since it deals with the
costume of the race which occupied the Ægean shores before the real
Hellenic races arrived on the scene, and of which we have abundant
remains in Crete and elsewhere within the Ægean area. The remains
found at Mycenæ, Tiryns, and other so-called Mycenæan sites, seem to
be the last efforts of this dying civilization, which was replaced in
the period of invasion and conquest recorded in the Homeric poems. I
have been unable to trace any continuous development from the dress
of this pre-Hellenic people to that of classic Greece, and the marked
difference in the type of costume between the two periods bears out
the theory of a difference of race.

I have endeavoured to show that the dress described in the Homeric
poems is of the same type as the dress of classic Greece, and of
this I have traced the historic development, classifying it into
two main divisions, namely, Doric and Ionic. The simple and severe
Doric dress contrasts with the more luxurious costume of the Ionian
Greeks, although there are many instances, from the fifth century
and onwards, in which the two styles are blended. I have noted also
the elements which probably came in from Northern Greece; these are
chiefly the chlamys and petasos.

The bulk of the following pages constituted a thesis approved for the
degree of Master of Arts in the University of London. In revising
the work for the press, however, some alterations and additions have
been made. The chief of these is the addition of the section on the
toilet; the illustrations have been carefully selected from extant

My sources for the chapter on pre-Hellenic dress have been mainly
the finds of Mr A. J. Evans at Knossos, which I had the opportunity
of seeing in the Candia Museum; these have been supplemented by the
figures found at Petsofa, in Crete, and by various Mycenæan objects,
notably rings and gems. The papers published by Mr Evans and Mr J. L.
Myres in the _British School Annual_ have been of very great value.

For the chapter on Homeric dress, my chief authority has been the
poems themselves; in the absence of contemporary monuments, I
have used the François vase to illustrate this section, since the
figures upon it seem to tally most closely with the descriptions
of dress found in the poems. Of modern literary authorities, the
most valuable has been Studniczka’s _Beiträge zur Geschichte der
Altgriechischen Tracht_.

For the dress of the classical period, the evidence from extant art
is abundant, and I have based my study chiefly upon it. Sculpture and
vase-paintings have furnished the majority of my illustrations. I
have noted many references to dress scattered up and down the ancient
authors, and a passage from the fifth book of Herodotus has furnished
a starting-point for the classification into Doric and Ionic dress.

My theory as to the shape and “cut” of the himation worn by the
archaic ladies in the Acropolis Museum at Athens is, I think, a
new one; it is based on a very careful examination of the statues,
supplemented by some practical experiments in draping a living model.

For the sections on head-dress, materials, and footgear, I have
referred to passages in ancient literature, and have used extant
remains for illustrations, chiefly vase-paintings; except in the case
of materials, for which I have cited the actual fragments of fabric
found in Greek tombs at Kertch, in the Crimea.

In describing individual garments, I have in each case suggested
dimensions and given diagrams, which, it is hoped, may be of
practical use to those who wish to make Greek dresses for themselves.

Throughout the work, in addition to ancient authorities, I have
consulted the various articles in the current classical dictionaries.
These include Pauly-Wissowa’s _Real Encyclopädie_, Daremberg and
Saglio’s _Dictionnaire des Antiquités grecques et romaines_, Smith’s
_Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities_, Gardner and Jevons’
_Manual of Greek Antiquities_, and the _Companion to Greek Studies_.
Other works, to which single references have been made, are mentioned
in the footnotes.

In addition to written authorities, I have received personal help
from several scholars and friends, to whom I should like to express
my thanks.

In the first place, I should like to acknowledge my indebtedness to
the Reid Trustees of Bedford College, who elected me to a Fellowship
in 1905, which enabled me to work for my second degree, and to spend
some months in Greece as a student of the British School at Athens.

The suggestion that a thesis on the subject of Greek Dress might
be of some value beyond getting me a degree, was due to Mr A. B.
Cook, of Cambridge, under whom I had already worked for three years
at Bedford College, and whose constant readiness to stimulate my
leanings towards Archæology encouraged me to continue my studies in
that direction. Mr Cook very kindly read this work in manuscript for
me, and gave me the benefit of his criticisms. I owe a very great
deal, also, to Professor Ernest Gardner, of University College,
London, whose M.A. courses I attended regularly for two years, and
from whom I constantly received help and guidance.

While in Athens, I devoted my attention chiefly to the dress of the
archaic statues in the Acropolis Museum, and had the opportunity
of discussing this subject with Mr R. C. Bosanquet, then director
of the British School. I must also thank Herr Fritz Röhrig, the
German sculptor, who placed his studio in Athens at my disposal,
and procured a model for me, for the purpose of making my first
experiments in reproducing the archaic style of draping the himation.

Special acknowledgments are due to Mr A. J. Evans, Mr J. L. Myres,
and the Committee of the British School at Athens, for their
courtesy in allowing me to reproduce subjects published by them in
the _British School Annual_; to the Trustees of the British Museum,
for permission to secure photographs of objects in the Museum for
publication; to Mr Cecil Smith, for giving me free access to the
library of the Department of Antiquities; and, particularly, to Mr H.
B. Walters, who went through the illustrations with me, and greatly
facilitated the task of securing suitable ones.

Lastly, my grateful thanks are due to Mr John Murray, for undertaking
to publish the book, and to Mr A. H. Hallam Murray, for his
constant courtesy and assistance during the progress of the work of

    E. B. A.

_July_ 1908.


     I. INTRODUCTION—PRE-HELLENIC                                 1

    II. HOMERIC                                                  15

   III. DORIC                                                    39

    IV. IONIC                                                    57

        IONIC HIMATION                                           73

    VI. MATERIALS AND ORNAMENTATION                              97

   VII. HAIR AND HEAD-DRESS                                     107

  VIII. FOOTGEAR                                                115

    IX. THE TOILET—CONCLUSION                                   120

        ENGLISH INDEX                                           129

        GREEK INDEX                                             133



  Fig.  1.—Cupbearer of Knossos                             _face_   6

  Figs. 2 and 3.—Snake Goddess and Votary                      ”    11

  Fig.  4.—Fresco of a Dancing Girl                            ”    12

  Fig.  5.—Statuette from Petsofa                              ”    12

  Fig.  6.—Studniczka’s Diagram                                     18

  Fig.  7.—(_a_) Vase—British Museum, (_b_ and _c_) Vase-
           paintings by Klitias and Ergotimos, Florence     _face_  26

  Fig.  8.—From the François Vase                              ”    30

  Fig.  9.—Diagram of the Doric Peplos                              43

  Fig. 10.—Metope from the Temple of Zeus, at Olympia       _face_  44

  Fig. 11.—Bronze Statue from Herculaneum, Naples              ”    45

  Fig. 12.—Vase-painting—British Museum                        ”    46

  Fig. 13.—Vase-painting in the Polygnotan Style—Louvre        ”    47

  Fig. 14.—Vase-painting by Hieron—British Museum              ”    49

  Fig. 15.—Terra-cotta Statuette—British Museum                ”    49

  Fig. 16.—Vase-painting by Euxitheos—British Museum           ”    50

  Fig. 17.—Vase-painting by Falerii—Rome, Villa Giulia         ”    50

  Fig. 18.—Athena of Velletri                                  ”    51

  Fig. 19.—Bronze Statuette—British Museum                     ”    53

  Fig. 20.—Vase-painting—British Museum                        ”    54

  Fig. 21.—The Doric Himation                                  ”    54

  Fig. 22.—Vase-painting by Euphronios—Munich                  ”    55

  Fig. 23.—The Chlamys and Petasos                             ”    55

  Fig. 24.—Diagram of the Chlamys                                   55

  Fig. 25.—Vase-painting from Lucania—British Museum        _face_  61

  Fig. 26.—Diagram of the Ionic Chiton                              61

  Fig. 27.—The Delphi Charioteer                            _face_  62

  Fig. 28.—Vase-painting—Munich                                ”    63

  Fig. 29.—Vase-painting by Brygos—British Museum              ”    66

  Fig. 30.—Diagram of the Sleeved Chiton with Overfold              66

  Fig. 31.—Archaic Statue—Athens, Acropolis Museum          _face_  75

  Fig. 32.—Archaic Statue—Athens, Acropolis Museum             ”    78

  Fig. 33.—Diagram of the Archaic Ionic Himation                    90

  Fig. 34.—Drapery in the Style of the Archaic Statues in
           the Acropolis Museum, Athens                     _face_  91

  Fig. 35.—Vase-painting—British Museum                        ”    93

  Fig. 36.—Vase-painting—Ionic Dress                           ”    94

  Fig. 37.—The Artemis of Gabii—Louvre                         ”    95

  Fig. 38.—Vase-painting—Dress with two Overfolds              ”    96

  Fig. 39.—Fragments of a Sarcophagus Cover from Kertch        ”   103

  Fig. 40.—Embroidered Fragment from Kertch                    ”   105

  Fig. 41.—(_a_ and _b_) Fragments of a Sarcophagus
           Cover from Kertch. (_c_) Embroidered Fragment
           from Kertch                                         ”   106

  Fig. 42.—Men’s Head-dress—Archaic                            ”   108

  Fig. 43.—(_a_) Head of Apollo from the Temple of Zeus,
           at Olympia. (_b_) Head of an Athlete—Athens
           Acropolis Museum                                    ”   110

  Fig. 44.—Archaic form of Petasos                                 111

  Fig. 45.—Women’s Head-dress                               _face_ 112

  Fig. 46.—Sandals and Shoes                                   ”   116

  Fig. 47.—Boot                                                    118

  Fig. 48.—(_a_) A Bronze in the British Museum.
           (_b_) Foot of the Hermes of Praxiteles (from a
           cast in the British Museum). (_c_) A Terra-cotta
           Flask in the British Museum                      _face_ 118

  Fig. 49.—Sandals                                                 119

  Fig. 50.—Diagram of an Aryballos                                 121

  Fig. 51.—Diagram of a Lekythos                                   121

  Fig. 52.—(_a_) A Pyxis in the British Museum.
           (_b_) A Toilet-box in the British Museum         _face_ 122

  Fig. 53.—(_a_) Bronze Box Mirror—British Museum.
           (_b_) Bronze Stand Mirror—British Museum         _face_ 124

  Fig. 54.—Diagram of an Alabastron                                125





In seeking to conjure up a vivid picture of the life of an ancient
people, it is the task of the archæologist to neglect no point that
can in any way throw light on the manners and customs which that
people practised from day to day, both in the exercise of their
public duties and in the privacy of their own homes.

Just as the habits and dress of an individual frequently give a
true impression of his character and type of mind, so the salient
characteristics of a nation are reflected in the external details of
their manners and their costume. In making a careful study of the
Greeks, therefore, whose innate feeling for beauty was part of their
very being, and whose sense of the fitness of things rarely if ever
played them false, we shall expect to find our efforts amply repaid,
both by the satisfaction given to the æsthetic sense and by the
knowledge we shall have gained of the development of the national
character. The study of costume has, moreover, an ethnological
significance which in itself justifies a detailed investigation of
the subject.

Professor Ridgeway, in _The Early Age of Greece_, has pointed out
that the civilization reflected in the Homeric poems differs in many
essential points from that which is revealed by the monuments found
at Mycenæan sites on the mainland of Greece and in the Ægean islands.
Confirmation has since been added to his convincing arguments by
the discoveries of Mr Arthur Evans in Crete, which prove that the
so-called Mycenæan remains were but the last efforts of a dying
civilization which stretched back at least as far as the third
millennium before our era. The culture revealed by the excavations at
Knossos and other sites in Crete presents a striking contrast to that
of the Greeks of the classic period; whereas the state of society
described in the Homeric poems seems to contain analogies with both

The palace of Alcinous and the house of Odysseus, as described in the
_Odyssey_, correspond in plan to the palace of Mycenæ excavated by
the Greek Archæological Society in 1886, which undoubtedly belongs
to the older stratum of civilization;[1] on the other hand, the
methods of disposing of the dead, and the underlying principles of
costume, are utterly different in the two cases. The Homeric heroes
burn their dead, whereas the remains found in Mycenæan graves prove
that in the state of society to which they belong burial was the
common method of disposing of the dead. The difference in costume is
equally striking; the women’s dress, illustrated by the Mycenæan gems
and the wall-paintings and faïence statuettes from Knossos, consists
of elaborately made garments, with tight jackets fitting closely to
the figures at the waist, and full and frequently flounced skirts;
there is no indication of fastening by means of brooches or fibulæ.
In Homer the brooch is almost invariably mentioned as an essential
detail of female costume, and the garments described are of a simple
character, and such that they can be spread out and used for other
purposes. For example, Aphrodite, when protecting Æneas from his
assailants, shields him from their weapons by drawing a fold of
her peplos over him (_Iliad_, v., 315); and again, at the funeral
rites of Hector, the body is covered, πορφυρέοις πέπλοισι μαλακοῖσιν
(_Iliad_, xxiv., 796), “with soft purple robes.”

  [1] J. L. Myres, _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, vol. xx. Cp.
  also, for general principles of ground plan, “The Palace at
  Knossos,” _British School Annual_, VIII.

The contrast between the forms of dress represented in Mycenæan art
and in the Homeric poems can only be explained by supposing that
there is a difference in race between the two peoples, and that the
older civilization was almost entirely swept away by a great series
of invasions carried out by men of a different race. The Homeric
dress is closely akin to that of the Greeks of the classic period,
whereas that represented on Mycenæan rings and gems belongs, as
will be shown later, to the stratum of civilization revealed by the
Cretan excavations.[2] We must suppose, then, that the Homeric heroes
belonged to the invading race, which was full of youthful vigour and
succeeded in superimposing its manners and customs upon those of the
older, decadent society, and in finally ousting the older inhabitants
from their homes altogether. The process was one which must have
lasted over some centuries, and it is probable that the Homeric poems
were composed whilst it was still incomplete, and that the siege
of Troy represents one incident in the long wars which were waged
between the two peoples. This view accounts for the fact that the
Homeric house belongs to the older civilization, while the costume
is that of the later. The invaders, having conquered or driven out
the inhabitants, finding their houses strongly built and luxuriously
decorated, would refrain from destroying them and settle themselves
peacefully and comfortably there, naturally retaining their own style
of dress and customs of disposing of their dead. Any new houses
built after their settlement would be constructed after their own
plans, and so the Homeric house would gradually give place to the
Hellenic. The absence of brooches and fibulæ from the graves on the
Acropolis of Mycenæ, and their presence in those of the lower city,
adds confirmation to this theory. The Acropolis graves are earlier
than the others, which in all probability belong to the time when the
invaders had already imposed some of their characteristic customs
upon their predecessors at Mycenæ and elsewhere in Greece. The use
of the fibula is common to the early peoples of Central Europe, from
which region it must have been introduced by the Achæan invaders into

  [2] Cp. Busolt, _Griechische Geschichte_, vol. i., 2nd ed., chap.

  [3] Ridgeway, _Early Age of Greece_, chap. viii.; S. Müller,
  _Urgeschichte Europas_, pp. 95, 96.

The earliest remains found on Greek soil are those which have been
unearthed by Mr A. J. Evans, in his series of excavations at Knossos,
in Crete. They represent earlier stages of that civilization which
has hitherto been known as Mycenæan. The costume revealed by the art
of this pre-Hellenic age forms a study in itself, since it presents a
striking contrast to that of the classic period in Greece, and also
to that of contemporary Asiatic peoples. The costume of the men is
simple; when not entirely nude, they wear sometimes a waist-cloth
rolled round a girdle, with a loose end hanging down like an apron in
front;[4] in a lead statuette of the same period found near Abbia,
in Laconia, the waist-cloth appears to take the form of a triangular
piece of material wrapped round the girdle, the apex of the triangle
being drawn up between the legs and tucked into the belt in front.
In some terra-cotta figurines from Petsofa,[5] a third garment
appears, consisting of a rectangular piece of material with the long
side tucked into the belt all round and the short sides hanging down
perpendicularly in front. In the later Mycenæan period, the garment
takes the form of short breeches reaching half-way down the thigh.
These are probably a development from the earlier waist-cloth.[6]

  [4] Fig. 1, Cupbearer of Knossos. Cp. also, Vaphio Cup, gems,
  Perrot and Chipiez, VI., 426. 21.

  [5] _British School Annual_, IX., pls. ix. and x.

  [6] Dagger blade from Mycenæ. Perrot and Chipiez, VI., pl.
  xviii., 3.

[Illustration: FIG. 1.—Cupbearer of Knossos.
  _Face page_ 6.]

In most cases the upper part of the body appears to be quite bare,
but in some instances a line is drawn at the neck and wrists which
may indicate the edges of a close-fitting, long-sleeved tunic. It
is more probable, however, that these lines are meant to represent
a necklace and bracelets, such as have been found in considerable
numbers in Mycenæan graves. On a siege scene represented on a
fragment of a silver vase from Mycenæ,[7] the majority of the
fighting warriors are represented quite nude; but in one case (at
the lower right-hand corner) a tunic and head-dress are worn; but in
this instance the tunic has sleeves reaching only half-way to the
elbow, as is also the case with the inhabitants, who are watching the
progress of the battle from behind the city wall; two figures, which
appear to be just leaving the city, wear square cloaks fastened on
the right shoulder and leaving both arms free; they do not appear
to be fighting, and probably represent heralds about to make
some proposal to the enemy. The covering here described as a cloak
has been regarded as representing an oblong shield (ἠΰτε πύργος);
but in view of the fact that the men carry no weapons and that both
arms are exposed, it seems more reasonable to suppose that a mantle
is intended. The warriors in front are fighting without protection;
and if any shield were represented, we should expect it to be of the
usual Mycenæan shape, which appears as a decoration on the upper
left-hand corner of the fragment. A fragment of a wall-painting
from Mycenæ represents a warrior wearing a short-sleeved tunic and
having a double bracelet at the wrist; it appears, then, that when
the pre-Hellenic man wore a tunic, it was not furnished with long
sleeves, and even when his clothing was of the scantiest possible
nature, he was not far enough removed from primitive barbarism to
prevent his adorning his person with bracelet and necklace.

  [7] Perrot and Chipiez, VI., fig. 365.

The indication of some kind of footgear is frequent: it is
represented on the Vaphio cups; and on a wall-painting from Tiryns
depicting the capture of a bull, it takes the form of pointed shoes
turned up at the toes and fastened by a series of bands above
the ankles. Such pointed shoes were common to the Assyrians and
the Hittites, and are worn to this day by Greeks and Turks, and
frequently also in other rocky countries.[8]

  [8] The characteristic Cretan boots may possibly be a direct

In the wall-painting from Tiryns, and on a Mycenæan intaglio (Perrot
and Chipiez, VI., 426. 21), a number of bands is indicated just below
the knee. Possibly the boots were fastened by leather laces crossed
round the legs and then passed two or three times round under the
knees. At present these bands have only been found in cases where the
wearer is engaged in some violent occupation, such as the bull-taming
scene; it has been suggested that they represent a leather thong
wound round the knees to act as a protection; on stony ground some
such guard would be necessary.

The head-dress, of conical shape, finished by a button or flattened
knob on the top, represents a helmet, made sometimes probably of
metal, as was the case in Assyria, but in some cases certainly of
felt or leather, covered with rows of overlapping boar’s tusks,
turned alternately in opposite directions. A large number of boar’s
tusks were found by Dr Schliemann[9] at Mycenæ, flattened on one side
and with several holes in them, which obviously served to fasten them
to some object; such a helmet is to be seen in an ivory fragment
from Mycenæ,[10] and would exactly correspond to that described in
_Iliad_, X., 261.

              ἀμφὶ δ᾽ οἱ κυνέην κεφαλῆφιν ἔθηκεν
    ῥινοῦ ποιητήν· πολέσιν δ᾽ ἔντοσθεν ἱμᾶσιν
    ἐντέτατο στερεῶς, ἔκτοσθε δὲ λευκοὶ ὄδοντες
    ἀργιοδόντος ὑὸς. Θαμέες ἔχον ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα
    εὖ καὶ ἐπισταμένως.

“And about his head he set a helmet made of leather; and inside it
was stiffly wrought with many thongs, and outside the white teeth of
a boar with shining tusks were set close together, this way and that,
well and cunningly arranged.”

  [9] Schliemann, _Mycenæ_, pp. 272, 273.

  [10] Perrot and Chipiez, VI., fig. 380; Ἐφημερίς Ἀρχαιολογική,
  1888, pl. viii.

In some cases the helmet presents a strikingly Egyptian appearance,
and may quite possibly have been derived from Egypt; evidence of
direct intercourse between the Cretans and Egyptians is not wanting;
indeed the clearest representation of the costume of the pre-Hellenic
inhabitants of the Ægean shores is to be found on an Egyptian tomb
fresco,[11] where the Kefts are depicted bringing vases as tribute
to the Egyptian monarch, their costume is identical with that of the
cupbearer from the Knossian fresco, and they are carrying vessels
of the same shapes as many which have been found in Crete and on
other Mycenæan sites. It has been pointed out by Mr H. R. Hall[12]
that the Keftiu were the people of the Ægean islands, including
Crete, and that sometimes the name was applied exclusively to the
Cretans. The Keftiu were formerly mistaken for Phœnicians; but their
whole appearance and costume on the Egyptian fresco is utterly
unlike anything Phœnician; so we are quite justified in considering
that they represent the Cretans faithfully as they appeared to the
Egyptians, especially in view of their similarity to the cupbearer
of the fresco at Knossos, a native product of Cretan art.

  [11] Perrot and Chipiez, III., fig. 303.

  [12] _British School Annual_, IX., “Keftiu and the Peoples of the

A striking analogy to the pre-Hellenic male costume is to be observed
in the Etruscan wall-paintings from the tombs at Corneto, now in the
British Museum. The waist-cloth, shoes, and head-dress are there
represented in a form almost identical with that found in Mycenæan
art. So little is known of the origin of the Etruscans, that it is
difficult to say whether this similarity of dress indicates any
racial connection between the two peoples; it is interesting to note
that among ancient authorities Hellanicus of Lesbos states that the
Etruscans were of Pelasgian origin, and modern writers have claimed
a Pelasgian origin for the Cretans; there is not sufficient evidence
forthcoming at present to determine whether they are right or wrong;
but in any case, it is not improbable that both the Etruscans and the
Cretans were branches of a common civilization, which spread itself
all round the shores of the Mediterranean Sea in pre-Hellenic times,
and that the Etruscans maintained some of their early characteristics
down to a later date than other peoples of the same race.[13]

  [13] Daremberg and Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquités_, _s.v._

Turning to the female costume of the pre-Hellenic age, we find we
have something far more complicated to deal with. The same style
of dress is found on the early faïence figures from Knossos and
Petsofa, and extends right on until quite late Mycenæan times.

[Illustration: FIGS. 2 and 3.—Snake Goddess and Votary. (_British
School Annual_, IX., figs. 54 and 56.)
  _Face page_ 11.]

It consists of a short-sleeved jacket, fitting closely to the figure,
and a full skirt, standing out round the feet in a manner suggestive
of the hoops of the early Victorian age. The juncture of the two
garments is hidden by a thick double girdle worn round the waist,
which is pinched into the smallest possible compass.

The snake goddess and her votary[14] from Knossos have, in addition,
a kind of apron reaching almost to the knees in front and behind,
and rising to the hips at the sides. The costume is completed by the
addition of a high hat or turban.

  [14] Figs. 2 and 3 from _British School Annual_, IX.

Looking at the snake goddess more in detail, we find that the jacket
is cut away into a V-shape from the neck to the waist, leaving both
the breasts quite bare; the two edges are laced across below the
breast, the laces being fastened in a series of bows. The jacket
is covered with an elaborate volute pattern, the apron with spots
and bordered with a “guilloche.” The horizontal lines on the skirt
probably represent stripes in the material, the edge being ornamented
with a reticulated band. The girdle of the goddess is composed of two
snakes intertwined. The head-dress here consists of a high turban,
probably made of cloth or linen wound round some kind of framework.
The principle of the costume is always the same, though the fashions
vary considerably in detail: for example, the skirt of the votary
is composed of a series of seven flounces, one above the other,
the lower edge in each case just covering the upper edge of the
flounce below, the whole being probably sewn on to a foundation. On
a fresco[15] representing a lady dancing, the skirt seems to consist
of three such flounces. On the same figure the breast is not left
bare, but a chemisette seems to be worn under the jacket, possibly
made of some fine linen material, the edge of which is distinctly
indicated at the neck. In one of the statuettes from Petsofa[16]
the jacket terminates at the back in a high “Medici” collar, and in
another fresco, from Knossos, a high sash appears on the back, the
loop reaching to the nape of the neck, and the fringed edge hanging
down to the waist; at first sight this sash recalls the Japanese
“Obi.”[17] The millinery of the Cretan ladies, as illustrated by the
terra-cotta fragments from Petsofa, exhibits an abundant variety of
styles. The hat seems to have consisted of a flat, circular, or oval
piece of material pinched up into any shape to suit the taste of the
wearer; sometimes it is fastened down towards the nape of the neck,
and curves round the head, rising high up in front over the face; in
one case[18] the brim has a wavy edge and is trimmed with rosettes
underneath; frequently it is done up into a large “toque” shape,
narrowing to a point in front; this form occurs also on late Mycenæan

  [15] Fig. 4, only a very small fragment of the skirt remains;
  but the painting has been restored. Reproduced from the _British
  School Annual_, VIII., fig. 28.

  [16] Fig. 5 from _British School Annual_, IX., pl. viii.

  [17] The large sash worn over the “Kimono” and tied rather high
  up at the back.

  [18] _British School Annual_, IX., pls. xi. and xii.

[Illustration: FIG. 4.—Fresco of a Dancing Girl.
  _Face page_ 12.]

[Illustration: FIG. 5.—Statuette from Petsofa.
  _Face page_ 12.]

On none of the examples of costume quoted above is there any
indication of fastening; the garments are obviously constructed by
an elaborate system of sewing, but the means by which they were held
in place on the figure is not represented, except in the case of
the bodices of the goddess and her votary, which are laced across
by cords. The use of fibulæ is nowhere indicated in art; and no
fibulæ have been found, except in the later Mycenæan graves, which
in all probability belong to the Achæan civilization introduced into
Greece by the invasions from Central Europe.[19] A fragmentary hand
from Petsofa has a bracelet represented in white paint, which is
clearly fastened by means of a button and loop; since this method of
fastening was known to the Cretans, it is probable that the ladies’
skirts were fastened at the waist by buttons and loops, the fastening
being concealed by the belt, as is the case with the modern blouse
and skirt costume.

  [19] On “fibulæ,” see Sophus Müller, _Urgeschichte Europas_, p.
  95. O. Montelius, _Civilization of Sweden in Heathen Times_.

It has been pointed out by Mr J. L. Myres[20] that this jacket and
apron type of dress is commonly worn at the present day by the
peasants of the mountainous districts of Europe, chiefly in Italy,
Switzerland, the Tyrol, Norway, and the Pyrenees. In Norway and
Switzerland, moreover, we find the addition of a fan-like head-dress
analogous to that represented in Minoan art. The appearance of the
same kind of costume in Crete in the third millennium before our era
merely serves to show that the type of dress need not necessarily be
a modern development, but may possibly claim greater antiquity than
has hitherto been supposed. The question of survival in the Ægean
is interesting; as late as Tournefort’s[21] time, the inhabitants
of some of the islands—for example, Mycone—appear to have worn
a dress composed of a tight jacket and flounced skirt, with the
addition of some Turkish elements; in the remoter islands there is a
possibility—but it is little more than a possibility—that this may be
a case of survival; in any case, the type seems to have disappeared
in the eighteenth or early nineteenth century.[22]

  [20] _British School Annual_, IX.

  [21] Tournefort, I., 109.

  [22] See also, Choiseul-Gouffier, _Voyage pittoresque de
  la Grèce_, Paris, 1809, where the women of the islands are
  represented wearing a tight corslet over a chemisette. A high
  head-dress, not unlike that of the Petsofa statuettes, was
  commonly worn by the island women as late as the eighteenth



Turning to the various passages in the Homeric poems which refer to
dress, we find that there is very little likelihood that they can
be intended to describe the kind of costume dealt with above under
the name of “Pre-Hellenic Dress.” The words used, and the accounts
of the process of dressing, have no meaning, unless we suppose
them to refer to the draped type of costume as opposed both to the
close-fitting jacket type and to the dressing-gown type, consisting
of a loose-sleeved garment opening down the front. The question of
the kind of dress actually worn by the Trojan and Achæan heroes is
not one to be entered into here; possibly it may have been the same
as that reflected in the art of the Minoan and Mycenæan peoples;
indeed, if the Trojans represent the older race which inhabited the
shores of the Ægean, and the Achæans the invaders who came down upon
them from the north, there is every probability that the former wore
the pre-Hellenic dress, and the latter introduced the new Hellenic
draped type. The use of the epithets βαθύκολπος and βαθύζωνος,
“deep-bosomed” and “deep-girdled,” in the Homeric poems perhaps has
some bearing on this point. Referring respectively to the deep hollow
between the breasts and to the girdle cutting deep into the figure,
they might well be applied to the wasp-waisted ladies of Knossos.
It is significant to notice that βαθύκολπος is used only of Trojan
women,[23] βαθύζωνος only of barbarian captives;[24] possibly the
poet may be unconsciously referring to the difference between the
dress of the older race and that of their Achæan conquerors.

  [23] _Iliad_, 18. 122, 389, 24. 215.

  [24] _Ibid._, 9. 594; _Odyssey_, 3. 154.

However that may be, in most cases Homer ascribes the same kind of
costume to Achæans and Trojans alike; he is singing of deeds that
happened many years, perhaps even two or three centuries, before
his day, and being no archæologist, he imagines his heroes to have
dressed as his own contemporaries did; he is acting no differently
from the Italian masters, who painted their Madonnas in mediæval

We find in Homer many differences in the nomenclature used when
speaking of men’s and women’s dresses respectively. The words χιτών
and χλαῖνα are applied exclusively to men’s costume, πέπλος and
κρήδεμνον exclusively to women’s, whereas the word φᾶρος is the only
one used indifferently for either; both men and women alike fasten
their garments with brooches or pins of some kind (περόνη, ἐνετή) and
with girdles (ζώνη, ζωστήρ). Many of the words applied to articles of
wearing-apparel are also used to signify coverings for beds, seats,
etc.: such are χλαῖνα, ῥήγεα, πέπλος, φᾶρος; the last is used also of
sails and of the shroud of Laertes.[25] This being the case, we must
infer that they were not made-up garments, but large square or oblong
pieces of material which could be used for other purposes besides
clothing; the Homeric dress, therefore, must belong to the draped
type rather than to any other.

  [25] _Odyssey_, xix., 137.

The men’s dress in Homer regularly consists of two pieces—the χιτών,
or under-garment, and a cloak called variously χλαῖνα, φᾶρος, or, in
one case, λώπη.[26] Warriors sometimes wore a skin instead of the
mantle. For example, in _Iliad_, x., 22, Agamemnon is described as
putting on a lion’s skin, and a few lines further on Menelaus appears
wearing a dappled leopard’s skin.

  [26] _Ibid._, xiii., 22.

The description of the process of dressing in the _Iliad_ is simple
and straightforward. Agamemnon[27] awakes in the morning, and
prepares to meet the assembly of the Achæans:

    ἕζετο δ᾽ ὀρθωθεὶς μαλακὸν δ᾽ ἔνδυνε χιτῶνα
    καλὸν νηγατέον, περὶ δὲ μέγα βάλλετο φᾶρος·
    πόσσι δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιταροῖσιν ἐδῆσατο καλὰ πέδιλα,
    ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ὤμοισιν βάλετο ξίφος ἀργυρόηλον.

“He sat upright and drew on his soft tunic, fair and new, and threw
around him his great cloak: and beneath his shining feet he bound
fair sandals, and around his shoulders he slung his silver-studded

  [27] _Iliad_, ii., 42.

[Illustration: FIG. 6. Studniczka’s Diagram. The dotted lines mark the
seams, the spaces A B, C D, E F being left open for arms and head

The χιτών was apparently, then, a garment which could be drawn on
(ἔνδυνε) while in a sitting position. No mention is made, either
in this or other similar passages, of pins or girdle to fasten the
χιτών, so we may infer that it was a rather narrow garment sewn up at
the two sides, with openings left for the head and arms.

Studniczka[28] gives a diagram of such a garment, which he describes
as a sack left open at the bottom, with openings in the top and
side-seams for head and arms.

  [28] _Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriechischen Tracht_, p. 13.

The words ἐνδύνω, ἐκδύνω, are commonly used for “to put on” and “to
take off” a χιτών, which seems to imply that the garment was drawn
over the head; although occasionally περί is used with the simple
verb δύνω instead of the compound ἐνδύνω.[29] In no case is there any
mention of pins or brooches in connection with the χιτών, so we are
justified in inferring that it was a sewn garment; and in _Odyssey_,
xxiv., 227, the χιτών of Laertes is actually described as sewn:

              ῥυπόωντα δὲ ἕστο χιτῶνα
    ῥαπτὸν ἀεικέλιον.

“He wore a sewn tunic, dirty and unseemly.”

  [29] _Odyssey_, xv., 60.

As a rule, the χιτών was worn ungirdled, except when the wearer was
engaged in vigorous action, when he is usually described as girding
himself for the purpose. For example, in the _Odyssey_,[30] when
Eumæus is going to slay pigs, he prepares himself by confining his
χιτών with a girdle:

    ὣς εἰπὼν ζωστῆρι θοῶς συνέεργε χιτῶνα.

  [30] xiv. 72.

Little mention is made in the Homeric poems of the length of
the χιτών, but the distinguishing epithet of the Ionians is
ἑλκεχίτωνες—with trailing chitons—so that trailing garments were
evidently customary only among the Ionians; warriors while fighting
and slaves occupied in active work would probably wear very short
garments reaching only to the thigh, as they are to be seen on the
earliest vase-paintings. The princes and elders of the people,
engaged in peaceful pursuits, in all probability wore them reaching
to the ankles. The word τερμίοεις, applied to the χιτών in _Odyssey_,
xix., 242, is usually taken to mean “reaching to the feet,” and to be
equivalent to ποδήρης, used by later writers.

With regard to the material of which the χιτών was made, the word
itself is connected with a Semitic root signifying linen;[31] and
from the various epithets applied to it in Homer, it is reasonable
to infer that the garment was ordinarily made of that material. It
is described as σιγαλόεις, “shining” or “glossy”; and although this
particular epithet need mean no more than “dazzlingly clean,” its
comparison for softness and brightness with the skin of an onion[32]
would hardly be very apt, if it were made of a stuff that did not
present a very smooth surface; a hand-woven woollen material might
possibly be called μαλακός, “soft,” but could hardly be described as
shining like the sun. Two passages in Homer show clearly that oil
was used in the weaving of linen, which would have the effect of
producing a shiny appearance. The maidens in the palace of Alcinous
are described as weaving linen from which the oil runs off:

    καιρουσσέων δ᾽ ὀθονέων ἀπολείβεται ὑγρὸν ἔλαιον.
                                     [_Odyssey_, vii., 107.]

“And from the close-woven linen the liquid oil runs off,” and in
_Iliad_, 596, the youths in the dancing place on the shield of
Achilles are described as wearing χιτῶνας ἐϋννήτους, ἦκα στίλβοντας
ἐλαίῳ, “well spun, shining softly with oil.”

  [31] Pauly-Wissowa, _Real Encyclopädie_, _s.v._ “χιτών,”
  Studniczka, p. 15 f.

  [32] _Odyssey_, xix., 232:

    τὸν δὲ χιτῶν᾽ ἐνόησα περὶ χροῒ σιγαλόεντα
    οἷόν τε κρομύοιο λοπὸν κάτα ἰσχαλέοιο
    τὼς μὲν ἔην μαλακὸς, λαμπρὸς δ᾽ ἦν ἠέλιος ὥς.

  “And I saw the shining tunic on his body, like the skin of a
  dried onion—so soft it was, and bright as the sun.”

The epithet στρέπτος applied to the χιτών[33] requires comment; it
was taken by Aristarchus, the grammarian, to mean a coat of chain
mail. There is no evidence to show that such a piece of defensive
armour was known to the early Greeks, and we find no reference to
it until Roman times; there is, therefore, no justification for the
inference that στρέπτος χιτών in Homer means a coat of mail.

  [33] _Iliad_, v., 113; xxi., 31.

The word στρέπτος means primarily “twisted,” and could be applied to
a coarse kind of linen whose texture showed very clearly the separate
threads of which it was woven; but other uses of the word in Homer,
and the second of the two passages in which it is applied to a χιτών,
suggest a different interpretation. In _Odyssey_, ii., 426, in the
description of the rigging of a ship, the expression εὐστρέπτοισι
βοεῦσιν occurs. The adjective here can very well retain its simple
meaning—“well-twisted”; the noun can mean nothing else but “ropes of
ox-hide”—that is to say, the whole expression will signify ropes made
of well-twisted thongs of leather.

The passage referred to in the _Iliad_ runs as follows:—

    δῆσε δ᾽ ὀπίσσω χεῖρας εὐτμήτοισιν ἱμᾶσι
    τοὺς αὐτοὶ φορέεσκον ἐπὶ στρεπτοῖσι χιτῶσι.
                                        [_Iliad_, xxi., 30.]

The subject is the sacrifice of the twelve boys at the funeral of

Achilles bound their hands behind them with the well-cut thongs which
they wore on their twisted chitons. The word ἱμᾶσι implies leather,
and the only kind of chiton which would be likely to have leather
thongs attached to it would be a jerkin made of leather, perhaps
plaited in some way and fastened by means of leather laces. Such
a garment might be worn in war under a metal breast-plate, or if
very stoutly made might even serve as defensive armour, without the
addition of any corslet; in any case, it would afford more protection
than an ordinary linen chiton such as was worn by those engaged in
the pursuits of peace.

Another garment worn by men is the ζῶμα, which appears at first
sight to mean simply a girdle, but in one or two passages signifies
something more. The word is obviously connected with the verb
ζώννυμι, “to gird on,” and means a “thing girt on.” The word might
well apply to a girdle, but it might also be used of anything put
on round the waist, and so of a waist-cloth; there can be little
doubt that it has this meaning in _Iliad_, xxiii., 683, where a
description is being given of the preparations for a boxing match;
and a few lines further on the participle ζωσαμένω, applied to the
wrestlers, in all probability means putting on their waist-cloths. In
other passages where the word occurs, its meaning is less obvious,
although here too there is nothing to render the same interpretation
impossible. In _Iliad_, iv., 186, a weapon is described as not
inflicting a mortal wound:

    εἰρύσατο ζωστήρ τε παναίολος ἠδ᾽ ὑπένερθεν
    ζῶμά τε καὶ μίτρη, τὴν χαλκῆες κάμον ἄνδρες.

“But the shining belt checked it, and the waist-cloth beneath, and
the kirtle which the coppersmiths fashioned.”

Here the ζωστήρ and the μίτρη are obviously pieces of armour, and the
ζῶμα is a garment worn under the ζωστήρ, and can very well bear the
meaning of a waist-cloth. Such garments were worn at all periods;
they formed the regular dress of the men of the pre-Hellenic age;
they occur also on vases of the classical period.[34] There is no
necessity, therefore, to suppose, as Studniczka does, that the word
here is synonymous with χιτών. Studniczka supports his interpretation
of this passage by another, _Odyssey_, xiv., 478 f., where Eumæus is
describing to Odysseus an occasion when he and comrades had to sleep
in the open air, and he felt the cold because he had foolishly left
his cloak behind him, and had only his shield and ζῶμα φαεινόν. The
expression could here maintain its signification of “waist-cloth”;
only, the simple meaning is obscured by a phrase some five lines
further on, when Eumæus continues:

        οὐ γὰρ ἔχω χλαῖναν· παρὰ μ᾽ ἤπαφε δαίμων
    οἰοχίτων᾽ ἔμεναι.

“I had no cloak: some god beguiled me to go with only a single

  [34] Cp. Fig. 7 (_a_); the human figure struggling with the

The simple meaning of οἰοχίτων is, “wearing only a chiton,” or
under-garment; but without stretching the meaning of the expression
very far, we can easily suppose its being applied to a man clad only
in a waist-cloth; so that even here it is not necessary to suppose
that ζῶμα is another word for χιτών.

We must next consider the over-garment worn by the Homeric heroes,
for which several words are used, the most common being χλαῖνα and

The χλαῖνα was used not only as an article of dress, but also as a
blanket to sleep under;[35] as a rug to cover couches and seats;[36]
a constant epithet is οὔλη, so that its material was evidently
woollen; and the adjectives ἀλεξάνεμος and ἀνεμοσκεπής, “warding off
winds,” show that it was worn for warmth, as a protection against
cold winds.[37] It was thrown off for exercise or when speed in
running was required.[38] The style in which the χλαῖνα was worn
varied somewhat; the verbs regularly used for the act of putting it
on are ἀμφιβάλλω and ἀμφιέννυμι, “to throw round”; περιβάλλω also
occurs, and sometimes it is described as being placed ἐπ᾽ ὤμοισι,
“upon the shoulders”; for taking it off, ἀποβάλλω and ἀποτίθημι
are used, and in one case ἐκδύνω occurs, though this word should
more correctly be applied to the χιτών. The constant use of ἀμφί,
“around,” shows that the χλαῖνα was not a garment which was drawn on
over the head, like the χιτών, but was a square or rectangular piece
of material wrapped round the figure or laid over the shoulders. We
read in Homer of the χλαῖνα ἁπλοΐς, “single cloak,” and the χλαῖνα
διπλῆ, “double cloak”; the former expression must mean a cloak worn
single, without being folded over; such a garment might possibly be
put on as the himation was in later time, one end being laid on the
shoulder, so that the mass of the material hung down towards the
back; this mass of material would then be drawn across the back under
the arm which was then left exposed, and across the chest, and the
end would be thrown over the shoulder towards the back. The garment
could easily be drawn up so as to cover both arms if the temperature
required greater warmth, or it might be worn over both shoulders
like a shawl, without being doubled, and the frequent mention of
the shoulders in connection with the χλαῖνα seem to point to this
style as the most common.[39] The χλαῖνα διπλῆ is mentioned twice in
Homer—once in the _Iliad_ and once in the _Odyssey_; in both cases it
is described as being fastened with a brooch:

    ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρα χλαῖναν περονήσατο φοινικόεσσαν
    διπλῆν ἐκταδίην.
                                         [_Iliad_, x., 133.]

“And about him he fastened a purple cloak, doubled, with no folds.”

    χλαῖναν πορφυρέην οὐλὴν ἔχε δῖος Ὀδυσσεύς,
    διπλῆν· αὐτὰρ οἱ περόνη χρυσοῖο τέτυκτο
    αὐλοῖσιν διδύμοισι.
                                     [_Odyssey_, xix., 225.]

“Goodly Odysseus had a purple cloak, woollen and doubled; and it had
a brooch wrought of gold, with a double groove for the pins.”

  [35] _Odyssey_, iii., 349.

  [36] _Ibid._, xvii., 86.

  [37] _Ibid._, xiv., 522.

  [38] _Iliad_, ii., 183.

  [39] See Fig. 7 (_a_), where the second figure from the right is
  represented wearing only the χλαῖνα ἁπλοΐς.

In these cases the χλαῖνα was obviously folded over double, though
in what way is not expressly stated; if the garment consisted of a
wide rectangular piece of material, it might be doubled along its
length horizontally and fastened with a brooch on one shoulder, like
Apollo’s himation in the Thasos relief.[40] This method, however,
is not found on the earliest vases, which, though not contemporary
with Homer, are yet the nearest monumental evidence obtainable;
moreover, the additional expression, ἐκταδίην, seems to be against
this interpretation; the meaning of ἐκταδίην seems to be “stretched
out straight,” and the word could hardly be applied to a garment
draped in such a way as to fall in many folds; it is reasonable,
therefore, to suppose that the χλαῖνα διπλῆ consisted of a large
square[41] of woollen material folded along the diagonal, so that two
opposite corners lay on each other; it would be laid on the shoulders
so that these two corners hung down in the middle of the back, no
folds being formed (ἐκταδίην), and the other two points hung down
one on each side of the front; a brooch would prevent the cloak from
slipping off the shoulders; this shawl-like method of wearing the
mantle is frequently represented on the black figured vases.[42] The
δίπτυχον λώπην, “double cloak,” which Athena wears, ἀμφ᾽ ὤμοισι, when
disguised as a shepherd,[43] is probably a garment worn in this same
fashion, and the δίπλακες which Helen and Andromache are described
as weaving in the _Iliad_[44] are perhaps intended for cloaks to be
so worn.

  [40] E. A. Gardner, _Handbook of Greek Sculpture_, p. 128.

  [41] Unless the garment were square, the diagonally opposite
  corners would not coincide when folded corner to corner; they are
  invariably represented on the vases as coinciding.

  [42] Fig. 7 (_b_) is taken from the “François” vase.

  [43] _Odyssey_, xiii., 223.

  [44] iii., 126; xxii., 440.

[Illustration: FIG. 7.—(_a_) Vase—British Museum. (_b_ and _c_)
Vase-paintings by Klitias and Ergotimos, Florence.
  Furtwängler and Reichhold, _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, I and II.
  _Face page_ 26.]

The place of the χλαῖνα is frequently taken by the φᾶρος, constant
epithets of which are καλὸν and μέγα, “fine” and “large,” so that
we may conclude that the φᾶρος was an ample and somewhat luxurious
garment. The word is used not only for an article of wearing
apparel, but also for the shroud of Laertes,[45] and for the sails
of a ship,[46] so that Studniczka’s conjecture that it was made of
linen is probably right, and the difference of material probably
constitutes the chief distinction between the φᾶρος and the χλαῖνα.
The φᾶρος is several times described as “white” and “well-washed,”
and the epithets ἀργυφεόν, λέπτον, χαρίεν, “silvery,” “fine,”
and “graceful,” which are used of the φᾶρος of Calypso, are more
applicable to a linen than to a woollen garment. Φᾶρος is the only
word used in Homer for the dress of both men and women. When worn by
men, the φᾶρος was in all probability draped in the same fashion as
the χλαῖνα, but the woman’s φᾶρος would be draped differently, as
will be shown later.

  [45] _Odyssey_, ii., 97; xix., 137.

  [46] _Ibid._, v., 257.

The χλαῖνα and the φᾶρος were not worn in battle, since they would
encumber the wearer too much; armour was put on over the chiton,
or in some cases warriors wore the skin of some wild beast slain
in combat; we hear, for example, of Agamemnon wearing a lion’s
skin,[47] and of Menelaus and Paris wearing leopards’ skins.[48] A
man’s costume was completed by sandals, πέδιλα, which we are told
were made of leather;[49] no mention is made of any head-covering
worn in the pursuit of peaceful occupations; if any protection were
needed, a fold of the mantle might easily be drawn up over the head;
in battle, of course, some kind of helmet was worn, which was made
usually of bronze, or sometimes of hide,[50] covered with boars’
tusks, such as have been found at Mycenæ.

  [47] _Iliad_, x., 22.

  [48] _Ibid._, 29; iii., 17.

  [49] _Odyssey_, xiv., 23.

  [50] _Iliad_, x., 261 f.

The women’s dress in Homer consists of two garments, the πέπλος and
the κρήδεμνον or καλύπτρη, called also in one case the κάλυμμα;[51]
the word ἑανός which is used sometimes as a substantive instead of
πέπλος, sometimes as an adjective, simply means “something to be

  [51] _Ibid._, xxiv., 93.

The principal garment of the women was the πέπλος. The derivation
of the word is uncertain; it is probably connected with some root
meaning to cover or wrap; the word is used in the _Iliad_ to signify
things other than dress; for the covering of a chariot[52] and for
the wrappings of the vessel which held the ashes of Hector;[53] the
πέπλος, therefore, like the χλαῖνα and φᾶρος consisted of a square
or rectangular piece of material which could be used for various
purposes. When worn as a garment, it was held in place by means of
brooches or pins (περόναι, ἐνεταί) and a girdle. A passage in the
_Iliad_[54] gives a description of an elaborate toilette made by Hera
when she is setting out to beguile Zeus:

    ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἀμβρόσιον ἑανὸν ἕσαθ᾽ ὅν οἱ Ἀθήνη
    ἔξυσ᾽ ἀσκήσασα, τίθει δ᾽ ἐνὶ δαίδαλα πολλά·
    χρυσείῃς δ᾽ ἐνετῇσι κατὰ στῆθος περονᾶτο,
    ζώσατο δὲ ζώνην ἑκατὸν θυσάνοις ἀραρυῖαν,
    ἐν δ᾽ ἄρα ἕρματα ἧκεν ἐϋτρήτοισι λοβοῖσιν,
    τρίγληνα μορόεντα· χάρις δ᾽ ἀπελάμπετο πολλή.
    κρηδέμνῳ δ᾽ ἐφύπερθε καλύψατο δία θεάων
    καλῷ νηγατέῳ, λευκὸν δ᾽ ἦν ἠέλιος ὥς.
    ποσσὶ δ᾽ ὑπὸ λιπαροῖσιν ἐδήσατο καλὰ πέδιλα.

“Then she clad her in her fragrant robe that Athena wrought
delicately for her, and therein set many things beautifully made, and
fastened it over her breast with clasps of gold. And she girdled it
with a girdle arrayed with a hundred tassels; and she set ear-rings
in her pierced ears—ear-rings of three drops and glistering—and
therefrom shone grace abundantly. And with a veil over all the
peerless goddess veiled herself, a fair, new veil, bright as the sun,
and beneath her shining feet she bound goodly sandals.”—LANG, LEAF,

  [52] _Ibid._, v., 194.

  [53] _Ibid._, xxiv., 795.

  [54] xiv., 178 f.

We gather from this passage that the garment was fastened on the
shoulders by brooches or pins inserted, κατὰ στῆθος, which Studniczka
rightly explains[55] as meaning “down towards the breast,” a method
of fastening which is represented on the François vase[56] and
elsewhere; the material is drawn from the back, and wraps over that
which covers the front; the pins are then inserted downwards, and
hold the two thicknesses of material together; the dress is held
in to the figure by a girdle worn round the waist, over which any
superfluous length of material could be drawn, forming a κόλπος or
pouch. No mention is made in Homer of the ἀπόπτυγμα, or overfold,
which is a common feature of the women’s dress in historic times; but
from its constant appearance on the earliest monuments, it is not
unreasonable to suppose that it formed an element in women’s costume
of the draped type from the very earliest times. It is formed by
folding over the upper edge of the garment before it is put on, in
such a way that a double thickness of material covers the figure from
the neck to a distance a little above the waist in front and behind.
The original purpose of this overfold may have been either to secure
greater warmth, or to prevent the dress from tearing at the points
where the brooches were inserted; such a thing might easily happen,
if only the single stuff were used, since the whole mass of material
hung down from the two points where it was secured on the shoulders.

  [55] p. 97 f.

  [56] Fig. 8.

[Illustration: FIG. 8.—From the François Vase.
  _Face page_ 30.]

Another question which arises in connection with the Homeric peplos
is as to whether it was worn open or closed at the side; a passage
which has been much discussed in this relation is the one which
describes the peplos given by Antinous to Penelope, with its twelve

    Ἀντινόῳ μὲν ἔνεικε μέγαν περικαλλέα πέπλον
    ποικίλον· ἐν δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔσαν περόναι δυοκαίδεκα πᾶσαι
    χρύσειαι, κληῗσιν ἐϋγνάμπτοις ἀραρυῖαι.
                                   [_Odyssey_, xviii., 292.]

“For Antinous, his henchman, bare a broidered robe, great and very
fair, wherein were golden brooches, twelve in all, fitted with
well-bent clasps.”—BUTCHER AND LANG.

The point in dispute is the purpose of the twelve brooches.
Studniczka maintains that two were used to fasten the dress on
the shoulders, and the remaining ten to hold it together down the
open side; he states in support of this theory that sewing was not
commonly practised by the Homeric women, although he has previously
pointed out that the men’s chiton was always sewn; this being the
case, it is only natural to suppose that the women applied the art
of sewing to their own garments also where necessary. There is no
example in early art of a peplos fastened in this way with brooches;
it is invariably joined round, the seam being covered by a band of
ornament either woven in the edge of the material or embroidered upon
it afterwards. In fifth century art we sometimes find representations
of the peplos worn open down the side; it may have been worn so also
in Homeric times; if the garment were wide, one edge could easily be
wrapped over the other and held in place by the girdle, so as not
to leave the figure too much exposed. It is more probable that the
twelve brooches in question were used to fasten the dress on the
shoulders and down the upper arms six on each side, forming a kind of
sleeve to the elbow. That the ample Ionic chiton was worn in this way
in later times is manifest from the numerous vase-paintings and other
monuments of the late sixth and early fifth centuries; it may have
been a fashion peculiar to the East in Homeric times, but Eastern
fashions and customs were not unknown to the author of the Homeric
poems. We read[57] of rich robes that were the work of Sidonian women
whom Paris brought from Sidon, and it is not unlikely that Antinous,
wishing to offer Penelope some rich gift, would choose a luxurious
garment brought from the East.

  [57] _Iliad_, vi., 289.

However, we must regard the use of twelve brooches as exceptional,
and consider that the peplos was ordinarily fastened with only
two, and with a girdle round the waist. That it was a fairly ample
garment and trailed on the ground behind, is proved by the epithets
τανυπέπλος and ἑλκεσιπέπλος, “with trailing robes,” frequently
applied to women. Athena finds it certainly too cumbersome to fight
in; for when she is preparing for battle, we are told that she
lets her peplos slip to the ground, and puts on the chiton of her
father,[58] Zeus. A very constant epithet of the peplos is ποικίλος,
or sometimes the intensified form, παμποίκιλος,[59] The meaning of
the adjective is, “bright, varied, covered with patterns.” Whether
these patterns were woven in the material at the loom or embroidered
is a question not easy to decide.[60]

  [58] _Ibid._, v., 733; viii., 385.

  [59] _Odyssey_, xv., 105; xviii., 292.

  [60] See section on “Materials and Ornamentation.”

In some cases they were apparently woven, in others probably

The silver-shining φᾶρος which Calypso puts on[61] takes the place
of the peplos, and was probably worn in the same way,[62] with the
overfold and girdle, over which the superfluous length was drawn,
forming the κόλπος, or pouch, which varied in depth according to
the wearer’s fancy. That it was sometimes fairly roomy is proved by
the fact that the nurse of Eumæus was able to hide three cups ὑπὸ
κόλπῳ[63] “under the folds of her dress.”

  [61] _Odyssey_, v., 230.

  [62] The passage is repeated word for word of Circe, _Odyssey_,
  x., 543.

  [63] _Odyssey_, xv., 469.

The material of which the girdle (ζώνη) was made is uncertain. We
hear of golden girdles of Calypso and Circe, and of a fringed girdle
of Hera with a hundred tassels, but these are exceptional. The
ordinary girdle may have been of metal, or cord, or leather; this
last material is suggested by the magic κεστὸς ἱμᾶς of Aphrodite,
which may have been a girdle; or, since we are told that the goddess
took it ἀπὸ στήθησφιν,[64] “from her bosom,” and that Hera received
it and ἑῷ ἐγκάτθετο κόλπῳ, “put it on her own bosom,” perhaps it was
something of the nature of Athena’s ægis, which also possessed magic
power. On a vase in the British Museum[65] a goddess is represented
wearing an ægis, and would naturally be interpreted as Athena,
were it not that the vase-painter has clearly written her name,
“Aphrodite,” by her side. It has been suggested that he has made a
slip, and meant to write “Athena”; but in all probability he knew
what he was doing, and it was his intention to represent Aphrodite
wearing her κεστὸς ἱμᾶς.

  [64] _Iliad_, xiv., 214.

  [65] B., 254.

The second garment which was essential to the completion of a woman’s
dress, at least when she appeared in public, was the κρήδεμνον or
καλύπτρη,[66] which served both as cloak and veil. It was probably
put on over the shoulders like a shawl, without being folded, in such
a way that it could be drawn over the head without difficulty, and
across the face, serving as a veil.[67] Sometimes it may have been
doubled corner to corner diagonally and laid on the shoulder. That
it was worn over the head is clear from _Odyssey_, v., 232, where
Calypso puts on her φᾶρος; κεφαλῇ δ᾽ ἐρύπερθε καλύπτρην, “and over
her head a veil.” From the description of Penelope, when she appears
among the suitors “holding her shining veil before her cheeks,” we
may gather that it was customary for women to veil themselves before
men.[68] No woman would think of leaving the house without her
κρήδεμνον. Helen, though she quits her house in haste, first veils
herself with shining linen,[69] ἀργεννῇσι καλυψαμένη ὀθόνῃσιν, and
it is only when they are far from the town and enjoying the quietude
of the river bank, that Nausicaa and her attendant maidens throw off
their veils for the ballplay.[70]

  [66] The κάλυμμα κυάνεον, “dark blue veil,” of Thetis (_Iliad_,
  xxiv., 93) is the same garment.

  [67] Hera is represented wearing it so on the François vase, Fig.
  7 (_c_), and although her head is not covered, yet, from the way
  in which the folds lie high upon the nape of the neck, it is
  clear that they could easily be drawn up over the head (cp. also,
  Aphrodite, on the same vase).

  [68] Thetis is represented in the François vase just about to
  veil or unveil her face; though the head is missing, it is clear,
  from the position of the arm, that the κρήδεμνον was worn over
  the head.

  [69] _Iliad_, iii., 141.

  [70] _Odyssey_, vi., 100.

From the constant use of the epithets λιπαρός and λαμπρός, “shining”
or “bright,” we may infer that the κρήδεμνον was usually made of
linen, and, in summer at least, it was probably a fine, light
garment, possibly even semi-transparent. In no case are any pins or
brooches mentioned in connection with it; and from the ease with
which it can be slipped off,[71] it is reasonable to infer that it
was worn without fastening of any kind, like a shawl or scarf. In
the passage where Andromache casts off her head-dress in her anguish
at the death of Hector,[72] Studniczka supposes that because the
κρήδεμνον is mentioned as falling off last, the other δέσματα must
have been worn over it and held it in place; this seems to be putting
a too literal and even prosaic interpretation upon the lines. There
is no occasion to suppose that the poet enumerated the various parts
of the head-dress in the order in which they fell; and if we read in
that spirit, we shall frequently find that the Homeric heroes put on
their cloaks before their undergarments; for more than once the φᾶρος
or χλαῖνα is mentioned before the χιτών.[73]

  [71] Cp. _Iliad_, xxii., 406, 470.

  [72] _Ibid._, xxii., 468 f.

  [73] _Odyssey_, xvi., 173; xxiii., 155, etc.

The various parts which composed this head-dress have given rise to
much discussion. The passage runs:

    τῆλε δ᾽ ἀπὸ κρατὸς βάλε δέσματα σιγαλόεντα,
    ἄμπυκα κεκρύφαλόν τε ἰδὲ πλεκτὴν ἀναδέσμην
    κρήδεμνόν θ᾽.
                                      [_Iliad_, xxii., 468.]

“And far from her head she flung the shining bonds, diadem and
kerchief, and meshy net and veil.”

The δέσματα σιγαλόεντα are explained by the words which follow, and
which stand in apposition. No question is raised as to the nature
of the ἄμπυξ; it was a metal diadem like the στεφάνη, worn across
the front of the hair. The κρήδεμνον has already been explained; the
κεκρύφαλος and the πλεκτὴ ἀναδέσμη need some comment. The former is
sometimes taken to mean a “net,” but it will be shown later that
this meaning is better applied to the πλεκτὴ ἀναδέσμη; the word
κεκρύφαλος is obviously connected with the verb κρύπτω to cover,
and therefore means “something which covers,” “a covering.” In all
probability, then, the κεκρύφαλος is simply a kerchief worn on top of
the head behind the ἄμπυξ. The ἀναδέσμη is obviously something which
serves to bind up (ἀναδέω) the hair and hold it in place, which is
the proper function of a net. The epithet πλεκτή, which Helbig[74]
has tried to explain as “folded,” means primarily “plaited”; it is
applied elsewhere in the Homeric poems to baskets,[75] which shows
its perfect appropriateness to the meshes of a net. We need give no
other meaning, then, to the πλεκτὴ ἀναδέσμη, but can easily explain
it as a net that confined the long hair behind. This completes the
head-dress proper, the κρήδεμνον being a separate scarf or shawl worn
over it.

  [74] _Das Homerische Epos_, p. 157, f.

  [75] _Iliad_, xviii., 40.

The women’s dress in Homer is completed by sandals, and for ornament
they wore, in addition to the brooches which fastened their clothes,
ear-rings and necklaces of varied workmanship; the γναμπταὶ ἕλικες
and κάλυκες of which we read[76] are perhaps spiral-shaped brooches
and ear-rings or necklaces in the shape of lilies, such as have been
found in the later Mycenæan graves.

  [76] _Odyssey_, ix., 247.

Few colours are mentioned in Homer in connection with dress. The
epithets “white” and “shining” are frequently applied to the chiton
and κρήδεμνον and to the φᾶρος. Φοινικόεις and πορφύρεος are
frequently used of the χλαῖνα and the δίπλαξ, the former meaning
“red,” and the latter probably “dark purple”; the word is used also
of the sea and of clouds. The veil of Thetis[77] is described as
κυάνεος, indigo, probably, or blue-black, since we hear immediately
afterwards that “no garment ever was blacker.” The dark veil may be a
sign of mourning; but in any case, the epithet might be used of the
garments of the sea-goddess, just as κυανοχαίτης, “blue-haired,” is
applied to Poseidon. Only once is yellow mentioned, and that in the
case of “saffron robed dawn.” The veil of Hera, that was “bright as
the sun,”[78] might have been yellow-gold. Yellow is a favourite
colour among the Greek peasant women of to-day for the kerchiefs
with which they cover their heads; and in the clear atmosphere and
brilliant sunshine of Greece, it is natural to wear bright colours.

  [77] _Iliad_, xxiv., 93.

  [78] _Iliad_, xiv., 182.

The embroidered robes of the women would naturally be worked in
various colours, among which red and blue probably predominated, as
they do on the sixth century statues on the Acropolis at Athens, and
also in more modern Greek embroideries.

Enough has been said on the subject of Homeric dress to show that
it differs entirely from the pre-Hellenic type of costume which
appears on the monuments from Knossos and elsewhere. The absence of
contemporary monumental evidence renders it impossible to make any
very definite statements as to the details of Homeric dress; but the
poems themselves afford sufficient proof of the fact that it was of
the draped type, and resembled Greek dress as we know it from the
monuments dating from historic times; the dress of the classical
period is simply a development of that described in the Homeric
poems, with the addition of some foreign elements which blended with
it and somewhat transformed it in its details, while still preserving
the main types unaltered.



When we come to the question of Greek dress during the classical
period, we find that the literary evidence is somewhat scanty;
however, in addition to the various casual references to dress that
are to be found chiefly in the plays, there are a few passages which
bear directly on the historical development of dress in Greece. The
most important of these is a passage in Herodotus,[79] in which he
describes a disastrous expedition against Ægina undertaken by the
Athenians during the first half of the sixth century, probably in
the year 568 B.C.; only one man returned alive to Athens, to meet
with an ignominious death at the hands of the wives of those who had
perished. Herodotus shall tell the story in his own words:

  Κομισθεὶς γὰρ ἐς τὰς Ἀθήνας ἀπήγγειλε τὸ πάθος· πυθομένας
  δὲ τὰς γυναῖκας τῶν ἐπ᾽ Αἴγιναν στρατευσαμένων ἄνδρων
  δεινόν τι ποιησαμένας ἐκεῖνον μοῦνον ἐξ ἀπάντων σωθῆναι,
  πέριξ τὸν ἄνθρωπον τοῦτον λαβούσας καὶ κεντεύσας τῇσι
  περόνῃσι τῶν ἱματίων εἰρωτᾶν ἑκάστην αὐτέων ὅ κῃ εἴη ὁ
  ἑωυτῆς ἀνήρ. Καὶ τοῦτον μὲν οὕτω διαφθαρῆναι, Ἀθηναίοισι
  δὲ ἔτι τοῦ πάθεος δεινότερόν τι δόξαι εἶναι τὸ τῶν γυναικῶν
  ἔργον. Ἄλλῳ μὲν δὴ οὐκ ἔχειν ὅτεω ζημιώσωσι τὰς γυναῖκας,
  τὴν δὲ ἐσθῆτα μετέβαλον αὐτέων ἐς τὴν Ἰάδα· ἐφόρεον γὰρ δὴ
  πρὸ τοῦ αἱ τῶν Ἀθηναίων γυναῖκες ἐσθῆτα Δωρίδα τῇ Κορινθίῃ
  παραπλησιωτάτην· μετέβαλον ὦν ἐς τὸν λίνεον κιθῶνα, ἵνα
  δὴ περόνῃσι μὴ χρεώνται. Ἔστι δὲ ἀληθεϊ λόγῳ χρεωμένοισι
  οὐκ Ἰὰς αὕτη ἡ ἐσθὴς τὸ παλαιὸν, ἀλλὰ Κάειρα, ἐπεὶ ἥ γε
  Ἑλληνικὴ ἐσθῆς πᾶσα ἡ ἀρχαίη τῶν γυναικῶν ἡ αὐτὴ ἦν τὴν νῦν
  Δωρίδα καλεῦμεν.

“When he came back to Athens bringing word of the calamity, the wives
of those who had been sent out on the expedition took it sorely to
heart, that he alone should have survived the slaughter of all the
rest; they therefore crowded round the man and struck him with the
brooches by which their dresses were fastened, each, as she struck,
asking him where he had left her husband. And the man died in this
way. The Athenians thought the deed of the women more horrible even
than the fate of the troops. As, however, they did not know how else
to punish them, they changed their dress, and compelled them to
wear the costume of the Ionians. Till this time the Athenian women
had worn a Dorian dress, shaped nearly like that which prevails at
Corinth. Henceforth they were made to wear the linen tunic, which
does not require brooches.

“In very truth, however, this dress is not originally Ionian, but
Carian; for anciently the Greek women all wore the costume which is
now called the Dorian.”—RAWLINSON.

  [79] v., 87.

He goes on to say that after this the Argive and Æginetan women, out
of rivalry with the Athenians, wore much larger brooches than before.

The importance of the passage is that it tells us of the two types of
dress worn by Greek women. We learn that down to the early years of
the sixth century all the Greek women wore the Dorian dress fastened
with pins of such size and strength that they could become dangerous
weapons in the hands of women excited by grief or passion. Later the
Athenian women adopted a different dress, which did not need these
large pins to fasten it, and which Herodotus calls the linen Ionic
chiton, afterwards correcting himself and explaining that this kind
of dress was really Carian in its origin.

The story of the slaying of the sole survivor of the Æginetan
expedition, and of the punishment meted out to the Athenian women,
seems in itself far-fetched and highly improbable; but there is
probably some foundation of truth in it. Possibly the tale was
invented by Herodotus, or, more probably, was current in his day
as an explanation of a change in the style of dress which actually
took place in Athens at the beginning of the sixth century, or more
probably even earlier. Among the sumptuary laws introduced by Solon
was one regulating women’s dress, and forbidding them to wear more
than three garments when they went out to funerals or festivals.[80]
The passing of such a law could only be necessary if the Athenian
women had already adopted a luxurious and extravagant style of
dress. Now, the essence of the Doric dress, as will be shown later,
is simplicity; it did not admit of great variety or elaboration. On
the other hand, that the Ionic dress was somewhat luxurious is clear
from Thucydides, i., 6; so we may infer that by the time of Solon’s
archonship, 594 B.C., the Athenian women had already adopted the
Ionic dress, and had perhaps elaborated it by some modifications
added by their own invention. If this is so, Herodotus’s story places
the change at least a generation later than its actual occurrence;
but as he is writing at a distance of more than a century from the
event, we need not be surprised if he is a generation or so out in
his dating.

  [80] Plutarch, “Solon,” 21.

The simple Doric dress mentioned by Herodotus as being universally
worn by Greek women down to the sixth century, finds abundant
illustration in early art, especially in the Attic black-figured
vases. It consists of a large oblong piece of material, in length
about 1 ft. more than the height of the wearer, in width about twice
the distance from elbow to elbow when the wearer’s arms are held out
horizontally at shoulder level. The additional foot in height is used
up by folding the upper edge over so that the material is double from
neck to waist. The garment is put on by folding it round the body and
pinning it on the shoulders at points a third of the distance from
the middle line and the edges respectively. A diagram will make the
arrangement clear.

[Illustration: FIG. 9.]

_a_, _b_, _c_, _d_ represents the original rectangular piece of
material, _ab_ being twice the wearers distance from elbow to
elbow—that is to say, about 5 ft. 9 in.—_ac_ being 1 ft. more than
the wearer’s height—namely, about 6 ft. 6 in.

After the upper edge _ab_ has been folded over to a width of about 1
ft., the dress is pinned on the shoulders at the points _e e′_ and
_f f′_; the part which covers the back is drawn slightly forward
over the front, so that there are four thicknesses of material where
the pins are inserted; the garment is then girded at the waist, the
position of which is indicated by the points _g_ and _h_, and any
superfluous length is drawn up over the girdle.

The distance between the points _a′ f_, _f e_, _e′ f′_, etc., varies
slightly, but is always approximately one-sixth of the whole width of
the material. In practice, a better effect is produced if the width
of stuff _e′ f′_, which covers the back of the neck, is shorter than
the other sections.

The garment is usually represented as being sewn up along the side,
sometimes along the whole length _ac_, _bd_, sometimes only along
the length from the waist to the feet—that is, along the edges _gc_,
_hd_; sometimes it is left open, being held in place only by the
girdle. On the black-figured vases it is usually the closed Doric
dress which is represented, probably because it offered the least
difficulty to a technique which necessarily imposed somewhat close
limitations on the artists who practised it. A good example is to be
found in the figures of the Fates from the François vase, which has
already been quoted in illustration of the Homeric peplos.

[Illustration: _Photo. by The English Photographic Co._
  FIG. 10.—Metope from the Temple of Zeus, at Olympia.
  _Face page_ 44.]

A freer and more realistic representation is to be found in the
sculptured metopes from the temple of Zeus, at Olympia. Athena in
the metope representing the cleaning of the Augean stables wears the
closed Doric dress; here the ἀπόπτυγμα, or overfold, falls slightly
below the waist, and below it the kolpos is clearly visible, the
slight pouch formed by drawing the superfluous length of the material
over the girdle.[81] On the vases the pouch is almost invariably
absent, and the girdle is always visible. This is also the case in
one of the archaic statues on the Acropolis at Athens, where the
Doric dress is worn over an Ionic chiton. A slight variation of the
dress is to be seen on the nymph of the Atlas metope at Olympia,
where the overfold hangs considerably below the waist and no girdle
or pouch is visible; here the additional length of the overfold
probably obviated the necessity of a pouch, and the girdle, which is
hidden, simply served to hold the dress in to the figure. A bronze
statuette from Herculaneum shows the dress sewn up only from the
waist downwards (Fig. 11).

  [81] Fig. 10.

[Illustration: _Photo. by Brogi, Naples._
  FIG. 11.—Bronze Statue from Herculaneum, Naples.
  _Face page_ 45.]

As time went on, the dimensions of the Doric dress became more ample,
or at least were represented so in art; both pouch and overfold
become deeper and the folds of the garment generally grow fuller; the
distance of the shoulder pins from the points which hang immediately
under the arms becomes proportionately larger, no longer being
an exact sixth of the whole width of the dress. The most perfect
examples in art of the Doric dress in its full development are to
be found in the maidens of the Parthenon frieze and the Caryatids
of the Erechtheum. Here the pouch is emphasized, and its graceful
curve dipping over the hips, though idealized, is at the same
time perfectly naturalistic, as can be shown at once by practical

The Munich copy of Cephisodotus’s Eirene holding the infant Plutus
presents a very good example of the closed Doric dress as it was worn
in the fourth century; it will be seen that the folds are more ample,
and the overfold and pouch fall to a distance considerably below the
waist, so that the garment must be larger than that originally worn,
if we are to accept early monuments as faithful representations of
the style of dress actually worn.

The simpler form of the Doric dress, namely, that which is unsewn
and left open down the side, is not found represented in art before
the fifth century; it becomes fairly common on red-figured vases,
where it is very frequently depicted ungirt.[82] Sometimes it is the
only garment worn; in other cases it is worn over an under-dress. A
sculptured example is to be found in an Artemis in Dresden,[83] for
the original of which Furtwängler claims Praxitelean authorship.
This was probably the dress worn by Laconian girls, to whom the
term φαινομηρίς, “showing the thigh,” was applied by some ancient

  [82] Fig. 12.

  [83] Furtwängler, _Masterpieces_, p. 324.

  [84] Pollux, II., 187.

[Illustration: FIG. 12.—Vase-painting—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 46.]

A variety of this dress appears in art about the middle of the
fifth century; it is sometimes known as the “peplos of Athena,”
because Pheidias chose it as the style in which to drape his statue
of the Athena Parthenos. The word “peplos” is usually reserved for
the Doric dress whether open or closed, the word “chiton” for the
Ionic, though the latter is frequently applied to the Doric, and
is invariably used of the under-dress, when the two styles became
confused. The “peplos of Athena” is similar to the ordinary open
Doric dress, except that the overfold is longer and reaches to the
thighs and the girdle is worn over it.[85] The material is pulled up
very slightly over the girdle, but not sufficiently to hide it in
front, the purpose of the slight pouch being merely to prevent the
dress from dragging under the arms, and from trailing on the ground
at the sides. The girdle is at first worn round the waist, but
later it is put on higher, until, on the Athena from the frieze of
the altar at Pergamon, it is worn immediately under the breasts. The
clearest representation in art is to be found in the Varvakeion copy
of the Athena Parthenos, and it occurs also in many representations
of Athena which were obviously influenced by Pheidias. In the Dresden
“Lemnia,”[86] the girdle is passed not only over the overfold, but
also round the ægis; in the “torso Medici”[87] this overgirt peplos
is worn over an under-dress of the Ionic type. The date of the
introduction of this style of wearing the Doric dress is a point of
some uncertainty. The question arises as to whether it was invented
by Pheidias or was already commonly worn and adopted by him as being
most appropriate for his great representation of the maiden goddess.
Certainly, in sculpture we have no example of it before the time
of Pheidias, unless we assign an earlier date to the little relief
of the “mourning Athena,” which seems improbable; the Iris of the
Parthenon frieze wears it; and among slightly later works the Victory
of Pæonius at Olympia is a good example, though here the dress is
slightly varied by being fastened only on one shoulder. Further
evidence is afforded by the vases, but even these do not give any
certain proof; the dress does not appear before the middle of the
fifth century, but after that date it becomes fairly frequent, and
is given not only to Athena but to other divine or mythological
personages, such as Persephone,[88] Nike, Cassandra, and also to
hand-maids attending on ladies in more elaborate costume. In some of
these vases the work is obviously post-Pheidian, but many of them
were probably made before the completion of the Athena Parthenos,
and the fact that the overgirt dress is so frequently represented on
slaves renders it likely that it was a style of dress actually worn,
and not merely the invention of the great sculptor’s imagination; it
was probably selected by him for the Parthenos because of its extreme
simplicity and the possibilities of statuesque dignity which it

  [85] Fig. 13.

  [86] Furtwängler, pl. ii.

  [87] _Ibid._, fig. 6.

  [88] B.M., E. 183.

[Illustration: FIG. 13.—Vase-painting in the Polygnotan Style—Louvre.
  _Face page_ 47.]

It has been mentioned incidentally that the Doric peplos is sometimes
found worn over another garment, but it is ordinarily the only
garment worn indoors, and for outdoor wear another is sometimes put
on over it. The overfold of the peplos could itself be used as a veil
by drawing the back part up over the head; it is so used by a woman
on a red-figured vase in the British Museum.[89]

  [89] E. 307.

[Illustration: FIG. 14.—Vase-painting by Hieron—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 49.]

The outer garment worn by women in classical times corresponds to
the Homeric κρήδεμνον and is called the ἱματίον, although this term
is applied by Herodotus to the Doric peplos. By derivation the word
simply means “a piece of clothing,” being connected with εἷμα and
ἕννυμι. It consisted of a large oblong piece of material about 7 or
8 feet in length, and in breadth about equal to the wearer’s height.
Considerable variety was possible in the arrangement of it. It
could be worn both as head covering and cloak, by placing the middle
of the upper edge over the head and letting the two sides fall down
over the shoulders like a shawl; it is often so depicted on the vases
both black- and red-figured; the figure of Eleusis wears it so on
the Triptolemus vase by Hieron in the British Museum.[90] It was
frequently worn over the shoulders in this fashion without covering
the head, and could easily be pushed back or drawn up over the head
at will. A second very common way of arranging the himation was to
draw one end over the left shoulder from the back towards the front,
so that it hung down in a point in front, then to pass the mass of
material across the back and under the right arm and throw the other
end over the left shoulder again, so that the second point hung
down towards the back: this was a very common style both for men
and women.[91] If additional warmth were required, it could easily
be obtained by drawing the cloak up over the right shoulder, so as
not to leave the right arm and chest exposed. A combination of these
two styles is seen in some of the Tanagra statuettes, where the
himation is put on over the head. Both shoulders are covered; but
instead of the two ends being allowed to hang down symmetrically one
on each side of the front, one is taken up and thrown over the other
shoulder, so that the whole figure is covered in the ample folds of
the cloak.[92]

  [90] Fig. 14, the figure to the right in the upper band.

  [91] See Fig. 20.

  [92] Fig. 15.

[Illustration: FIG. 15.—Terra-cotta Statuette—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 49.]

A rather exceptional variant of the second style of wearing the
himation is to be seen on a vase of Euxitheos in the British
Museum,[93] where Briseis is represented wearing it with one end
placed on the left shoulder, the mass of the cloak being drawn across
the back; the other end is passed under the right arm, but instead of
being thrown over the left shoulder again, is turned back over the
right shoulder, and so leaves the front of the figure exposed.

  [93] E. 258, fig. 16.

[Illustration: FIG. 16.—Vase-painting by Euxitheos—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 50.]

[Illustration: FIG. 17.—Vase-painting by Falerii—Rome, Villa Giulia.
  Furtwängler and Reichhold, _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, 17 and 18.
  _Face page_ 50.]

A third fashion is somewhat similar to the second, except that it
leaves the front of the figure exposed to the waist or a little
below. Instead of being drawn across the chest and thrown over the
left shoulder, the second end is simply thrown over the forearm and
held in place by the bend of the elbow.[94] A cloak worn in this
style would be very likely to slip, so another fashion was adopted,
which produced approximately the same effect, but which prevented
the possibility of slipping. Instead of throwing the end over the
left arm, the wearer secured it at the waist under the arm either
by a brooch or more probably by simply tucking it under the girdle.
To prevent the garment from hanging down too low and dragging on
the ground, a large corner was usually doubled over before it was
secured at the waist. The part thus fastened was sometimes passed
over the end which hung down from the left shoulder, sometimes under
it. The himation is so worn by Mausolus and Artemisia in their
portrait statues from the Mausoleum. A very good example is the
Athena of Velletri published by Furtwängler.[95]

  [94] Fig. 17.

  [95] _Masterpieces_, p. 142, fig. 18.

[Illustration: _Photo. by A. Giraudon._
  FIG. 18.—Athena of Velletri.
  _Face page_ 51.]

On many of the monuments of the Pheidian period and the time
immediately preceding it, we find that the Doric peplos is worn alone
or with a small cloak or shawl laid on the shoulders and hanging down
the back, as in the case of the maidens carrying sacrificial vessels
on the Parthenon frieze. This small shawl was perhaps worn more for
ornament than for the sake of warmth, and an ample peplos of warm
woollen material might be found sufficient protection.

It may be objected that in the majority of the examples chosen as
illustrations the himation is worn not over the Doric peplos, but
over the Ionic chiton, and it has indeed been sometimes regarded as
an element of the Ionic dress rather than of the Doric.

It does, however, appear over the Doric peplos, _e.g._, in Fig. 18
and on many black-figured Attic vases,[96] and it is not difficult to
trace its development from the Homeric κρήδεμνον worn symmetrically
over the head and shoulders. It is an easy step in advance to throw
one end of the cloak over the opposite shoulder, push it back off
the head, and bring one arm out free instead of letting it remain
covered. Fig. 15 might serve to illustrate an intermediate stage
between those represented in Figs. 14 and 17.

  [96] B.M., B. 331.

An attempt will be made later to show that the Ionic himation was
fastened with brooches, and had a different development. The wearing
of the unpinned himation over the Ionic chiton is an instance of the
blending of Doric and Ionic dress.

The Doric dress of men was similar to that of women, both with regard
to under-dress and cloak. The name χιτών is used for the under-dress,
as it was in Homer, the word peplos being restricted to women’s
garments. The outer garment of men as well as of women is called the

The Doric men’s chiton is fastened by brooches on the shoulders and
girt in at the waist. It was a short garment reaching midway down the
thighs, or to a distance just above the knees, had no overfold, and
was narrower than the women’s peplos. No kolpos was worn, there being
no superfluous length to dispose of. The side was sewn up so that the
garment before being pinned was cylindrical in shape. This somewhat
scanty garment was the only one worn by slaves, and men engaged in
active pursuits and workmen frequently wore it fastened only on
one shoulder, leaving the other bare and the arm quite free. When
worn in this way it was called the χιτὼν ἔξωμις or ἑτερομάσχαλος;
the god Hephaistos is usually represented wearing it in this way
in his capacity as craftsman. We learn from Pollux, vii., 47, that
the ἔξωμις was a περιβλῆμα as well as an ἔνδυμα, from which we may
gather that a small cloak was sometimes worn fastened on one shoulder
and girt round the waist, but left unsewn down the side. Fig. 19
represents the χιτὼν ἔξωμις.

Representations of Amazons and of Artemis the huntress are frequent,
wearing the χιτὼν ἔξωμις; but in these cases it is usually a longer
garment than that worn by men, and its superfluous length is drawn
up over the girdle, forming a pouch; and then a second girdle is
worn over this to prevent it from flapping in the wind. The Amazons
of the Mausoleum frieze wear the short Doric dress without overfold
and unsewn down the side; this, however, is perhaps merely a device
on the part of the sculptor to afford an opportunity of displaying
the physical forms, as well as the drapery. Various references in
literature show that the Spartan women wore more scanty clothing than
the Athenians; they are described as μονοχίτων, “wearing a single
garment,” and we learn from Pausanias that the girls who competed
in the running races at Olympia wore the short χιτὼν ἔξωμις. As
monumental testimony to the truth of this statement, we have the
statue of a girl runner in the Vatican Museum.

[Illustration: FIG. 19.—Bronze Statuette—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 53.]

The τρίβων worn by Spartans and people of austere or Laconizing
tendencies, like Socrates and the Cynic philosophers, was probably
a scanty Doric chiton made in some coarse homespun material; men
of leisure and elderly men preferred to wear a longer chiton with
sleeves either sewn or fastened with brooches; this was the case even
after the reaction against anything savouring of Orientalism which
followed the Persian wars. If we are to consider the monuments, both
sculpture and vases, as giving a realistic picture of Greek life,
we shall see that men frequently wore only the himation; but it is
difficult to believe that this was so, except, perhaps, in the height
of summer.

The methods of draping the himation were the same for men as for
women, except that after the period of the early black-figured vases
we do not find men represented wearing it laid on both shoulders like
a shawl; nor do they ever wear it drawn up over the head, although
in the sunshine of a southern summer some such protection against
the heat might be considered indispensable. The favourite style for
men was that of laying the one end on the left shoulder and drawing
the rest round the body from the back and throwing the other end
either across the left forearm or over the shoulder.[97] This was
called wearing the himation ἐπὶ δεξιὰ, presumably because it was
drawn closely round the right side of the body. It was considered a
mark of good breeding to throw it over the shoulder and let it hang
down in such a way as to cover the left arm completely.[98] To wear
it ἐπ᾽ ἀριστέρα, “over the left side,” was a mark of boorishness, as
we gather from Aristophanes _Birds_,[99] where Poseidon taunts the
barbarian Triballus for wearing it so.

  [97] Figs. 20 and 21.

  [98] Fig. 20.

  [99] i., 1567.

[Illustration: FIG. 20.—Vase-painting—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 54.]

[Illustration: FIG. 21.—The Doric Himation.
  _Face page_ 54.]

[Illustration: FIG. 22.—Vase-painting by Euphronios—Munich.
  Furtwängler and Reichhold, _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, 22.
  _Face page_ 55.]

[Illustration: FIG. 23.—The Chlamys and Petasos.
  _Face page_ 55.]

Another variety of over-garment worn by men is the χλάμυς, a cloak
used for riding or travelling. It is considered to be of Macedonian
origin,[100] another form of it being the ζειρά, a rough Thracian
riding-cloak sometimes depicted on Greek vases.[101] It
was probably brought into Greece from the north by the Dorian
invaders when they came down, and in its origin may have been no
different from the Homeric χλαῖνα. In classical times it was always
worn over the short chiton by travellers and riders, and was the
characteristic dress of Ephebi.[102] The Parthenon frieze affords
abundant illustration of the way in which it was worn. Like the
himation, it consisted of a rectangular piece of material, but was of
a slightly different shape, being rather more oblong; in fact, when
doubled it would form almost a perfect square. Its normal dimensions
would be about 6 to 7 feet long by 3½ feet wide. In putting it on,
the wearer would double it round him and stand inside it, so that
the middle line came along the back of the left arm and shoulder;
he would then fasten the two sides together with a brooch on the
right shoulder, close to the neck, at the points _e_ and _f_ in the
accompanying diagram; the corners _d_ and _b_ would hang down in
front and behind respectively at a distance of about 1 foot from the
ground, and the corners _a_ and _c_ would hang down together along
the right side; the left arm which held the reins in riding would
thus be covered, while the right would be free to hold spear or whip.
The left could easily be freed also by swinging the cloak round so
that the brooch came under the chin instead of on the shoulder; the
two corners _a_ and _c_ could then be thrown back over the arms. The
χλάμυς is frequently represented in art worn in this way, especially
in cases where the wearer is occupied in vigorous action.

  [100] Pauly-Wissowa, _Real Encyclopädie_.

  [101] Fig. 22.

  [102] Fig. 23.

[Illustration: FIG. 24.]



We must now turn to a consideration of the Ionic dress, which
Herodotus tells us was adopted by the Athenian women in the sixth
century B.C. According to his account, it was Carian in its origin;
our knowledge of the Carians is somewhat vague and indefinite.
We learn from Thucydides[103] that they originally inhabited the
Cyclades, but were driven out by Minos of Crete; and a little
later on[104] he speaks of them, together with the Phœnicians, as
islanders who practised piracy. Herodotus[105] gives a slightly
different account, saying that the Carian inhabitants of the islands
were subjected by Minos and used by him to man his ships, and were
not driven out until later by the Dorian and Ionian immigrants. He
also mentions the belief of the Carians themselves that they were
autochthonous in Caria, and attributes to them various inventions
afterwards adopted by the Greeks. According to Thucydides, their
method of burying the dead seems to have differed from that of the
Greeks; and from the various accounts of the two historians, we may
gather that their race was different, although possibly they were
soon hellenized by their Ionian neighbours. If, as Herodotus tells
us, the Greeks adopted some Carian inventions, it is not unlikely
that they may also have adopted the Carian dress, or at least may
have modified their own by assuming some Carian elements.[106]

  [103] i., 4.

  [104] i., 8.

  [105] i., 171.

  [106] According to Ridgeway, _Early Age of Greece_, the Carians,
  like the Leleges, were a Pelasgian people.

In his account of the assumption of the Ionic dress by the Athenians,
Herodotus speaks only of the women; but we know that it was worn by
men also, partly from the evidence of the monuments and partly from
Thucydides, who tells us[107] that not long previously to the time
at which he is writing the elder men of the wealthy classes gave
up wearing linen chitons and fastening their hair with the τέττιξ,
“cicala,” a luxurious mode of dress common to them and their kinsfolk
the Ionians. The Ionic dress was probably discarded by the Athenians
shortly after the outbreak of the Persian war, when a reaction set in
against Orientalism and a tendency towards greater simplicity began
to manifest itself; Thucydides is writing more than a generation
after the Persian wars, but his expression, οὐ πολὺς χρόνος, “no
great length of time,” is sufficiently vague, and he probably
recollected the change which took place in his youthful days;
moreover, he speaks only of the elder men of the wealthy classes,
who would naturally be of conservative tendencies and the last to
adopt any change in their mode of life or dress. The exact period at
which the Athenians adopted the Ionic dress is unknown; the Æginetan
expedition of 568 B.C., of which Herodotus makes use in dating the
change, is too late, for we know that already in Solon’s days luxury
in dress had reached such a pitch as to necessitate the passing of a
sumptuary law to regulate it, and such luxury could hardly have been
reached so long as the simple Doric dress was retained. It may not
be unreasonable to assume, then, that constant intercourse with the
Ionians in the islands on the coast of Asia Minor led the Athenians
to adopt their dress at some time towards the end of the seventh

  [107] i., 6.

[Illustration: FIG. 25.—Vase-painting from Lucania—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 61.]

The Ionic chiton differed from the Doric in length, material,
and method of fastening. We read in Homer already of the Ἰάωνες
ἑλκεχίτωνες, “long-robed Ionians,” and Pollux tells us of the λινοῦς
χιτών ὅν Ἀθηναίοι ἐφόρουν ποδήρη, καὶ αὖθις Ἴωνες,[108] “the linen
tunic which the Athenians wore reaching to the feet, and the Ionians
too.” This χιτών ποδήρης is a long chiton reaching to the feet; that
its material was linen is testified by Thucydides and Pollux, as
well as other writers.[109] The story of Herodotus shows that its
fastening was different from that of the Doric, since the Athenian
women were forced to adopt it, ἱνα δὴ περόνῃσι μὴ χρεώνται, “so as
not to need brooches.” This expression is usually taken to mean that
the characteristic difference between the Doric and Ionic chitons is,
that the Doric is fastened by means of pins or brooches, the Ionic
is always sewn on the shoulders. That this is not invariably the
case is proved by many examples both in sculpture and vase-painting,
where a chiton is represented, which, from its length and fulness and
the fine texture of its material, is clearly Ionic, but which is not
sewn on the shoulders, but fastened together down the upper arm by a
series of small round brooches; this fastening forms a kind of loose
sleeve which reaches frequently to the elbow. It is the formation
of this sleeve, whether sewn or pinned, which, apart from size or
material, distinguishes the Ionic from the Doric chiton, which is
sleeveless. The Ionic chiton in its simplest form is cylindrical in
shape, and varies considerably in length, but is always longer than
the height of the wearer; the superfluous length is drawn up through
the girdle to form a kolpos, which varies in depth according to the
length of the chiton. The Mænad vase of Hieron gives a good idea of
the size to which this kolpos sometimes attained.[110] Being made of
a fine linen material, the Ionic chiton is naturally fuller than the
coarser woollen Doric garment, and its folds are consequently more
numerous and more delicate; it is the greater width of the garment
which necessitates the formation of the sleeve, as a single fastening
from the shoulder would leave too great a mass of material hanging
down under the arms. The sleeve is made by joining the two top
edges of the garment together and gathering them up so as to form
regular folds; an opening is left in the middle for the neck and one
at each end for the arms. The arm-holes were probably not formed,
as some believe, by lateral openings in the side-seams, since this
method produces a clumsy effect in practice; and moreover, in many
vase-paintings[111] the ornamental border which runs along the neck
and upper arm passes also round the arms without being continued down
the side, which shows that it was embroidered or woven along the top
edge of the chiton before the sleeves were made.

  [108] _Poll._, vii., 49.

  [109] Studniczka has pointed out that the word χιτών is of
  Semitic origin, and connected with a root signifying “linen,”
  _Beiträge_, p. 17 f.

  [110] Cp. Fig. 14, the second figure to the right in the lower

  [111] _E.g._, B.M., E. 73; cp. Fig. 25, the two male figures.

[Illustration: FIG. 26.]

A diagram will best show how the sleeves were formed, and the
position of the openings for neck and arms: _ab_ represents the upper
edge of the chiton, along which a border is frequently woven or
embroidered; _ef_ represents the space for the neck, through which
the head is thrust; _ad_ and _bc_ represent the arm-holes, which hang
down parallel to the wearer’s sides when the arms are held down in a
normal position; the side-seams _ag_ and _bh_ are sewn along their
whole length; the distances _de_ _fc_ are joined and gathered to
form the full sleeve. The fulness is frequently held close to the
figure by the addition of cross-bands, either crossing both in front
and behind and attached to the girdle at the sides, or crossing only
at the back and passing round the front of the shoulders. A very
excellent sculptured representation of this, the simplest form of
the Ionic chiton, is to be found in the famous Delphi charioteer,
where the gathering of the sleeves is very clearly marked.[112] In
cases where the sleeve is not sewn, the spaces _de_ and _fc_ are
joined by a series of brooches, varying in number from four to six
on each side. The fulness is produced by taking up a little group of
folds at each fastening and leaving the spaces between quite plain;
the two edges are usually parted in these spaces, so as to show the
arm through. These groups of folds are perhaps more effective than
the continuous row of gathers which we get with the sewn sleeve. The
Euxitheos vase reproduced above[113] will furnish an illustration of
the chiton with pinned sleeves. A short chiton, with sleeves pinned
in several places, was frequently worn by men, as is proved by many
vase-paintings. We sometimes find women represented wearing a full
chiton without overfold, fastened only once on each shoulder, like
the Doric dress. This is one of the many modifications which the
Ionic dress underwent when introduced into the mainland of Greece.
We frequently find on vases figures in rapid motion wearing the long
Ionic chiton with many folds, represented by fine close lines,
in which the lower edge of the chiton in front is drawn up to an
angle on one or often more places. It was supposed by Böhlau[114]
that this was meant to indicate that the garment had been cut at the
bottom in a series of points. The object of this cutting is difficult
to see, and on examination it will be found that wherever the lower
edge of the chiton is so drawn up, immediately above it the kolpos
hangs down deeper over the girdle; the figures are usually in rapid
motion, and the lower edge of the back of the garment, which shows
behind the feet, is represented by a continuous curve, without
being drawn up anywhere.[115] It is obvious, then, that the artist
intended to indicate that the wearer had drawn the dress up through
the girdle, so as not to impede progress. Anyone who has ever moved
about freely wearing a chiton of this kind, will know that unless the
girdle is uncomfortably tight the dress has a habit of slipping down,
so that it is necessary to pull it up sometimes, so as to prevent
treading on it in front.

  [112] Fig. 27.

  [113] Fig. 16.

  [114] _Quæstiones vestiariæ._

  [115] Fig. 28.

[Illustration: FIG. 27.—The Delphi Charioteer.
  _Face page_ 62.]

[Illustration: FIG. 28.—Vase-painting—Munich.
  Furtwängler and Reichhold, _Griechische Vasenmalerei_, 33.
  _Face page_ 63.]

A feature of the Ionic chiton not very easy to understand is the
overfold, which occurs very frequently, especially in vase-paintings
of the severe red-figured class; it is not a normal feature of
the Ionic chiton, and may very possibly have been added by the
Athenian women when they adopted the dress, since they had always
been accustomed to wearing it with the Doric peplos. The view that
Herodotus (v., 87) is wrong, and that the Athenian women never
wore the Doric dress at all, is hardly tenable in the face of such
evidence as the François vase and others like it, which are certainly
of Attic workmanship.

The Ionic chiton with overfold is really, then, an instance of the
blending of the two types of dress, which later became so complete
that it is frequently difficult to decide whether a particular
garment should more correctly be called Doric or Ionic.

In some instances the overfold of the Ionic chiton is formed
in exactly the same way as that of the Doric dress, only it is
frequently shorter: it is turned over before the garment is put on,
then back and front are fastened together along the arm, either by
sewing or by brooches. In this latter case the only distinction from
the Doric dress, in addition to those of size and material, is that
instead of being pinned only once on each shoulder, and so being
sleeveless, it is pinned along from shoulder to elbow, so as to form
sleeves. An example of this is to be seen in a figure of Aphrodite
from a vase-painting in Paris reproduced by Miss Harrison.[116] This
style of dress, with the sleeves sewn instead of pinned, is found on
the first of the so-called Fates of the Parthenon pediment, and on
one of the Nereids from the Nereid monument, on a torso at Epidaurus,
and on many vase-paintings. Although not always represented in art,
shoulder-cords or cross-bands were probably actually worn with this
dress, as a general rule, since without some such contrivance it
would slip inconveniently.

  [116] _Prolegomena to Greek Religion_, p. 292.

[Illustration: FIG. 29.—Vase-painting by Brygos—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 66.]

A type of dress very commonly found on vases is that which has full
sleeves to the elbow and an overfold covering the chest and back,
and passing under the arms without covering the sleeves, as was
the case in the chiton described above. The Mænads on the famous
Hieron vase are represented wearing this kind of dress, and numerous
examples could be quoted from other vase-paintings.[117] Some such
effect might be produced with the ordinary cylindrical-shaped
chiton with overfold, if shoulder-bands were worn such as those
worn by the Delphi Charioteer and by one of the so-called Fates of
the east pediment of the Parthenon; but in actual practice such an
arrangement would produce a somewhat clumsy mass of folds under
the arm, and could not be managed at all unless the overfold were
considerably deeper than that usually represented on the vases. We
must look, therefore, for some other explanation; and it will not
be far to seek, if we allow the Ionian women and their Athenian
imitators a freer use of scissors and needle than their Doric sisters
were accustomed to make. A close examination of the monuments will
show that although the sleeve of the Ionic chiton was frequently
formed in the manner described above, yet in a very large number of
cases, in almost all of which the overfold is present, the sleeve
is more like our modern notion of a sleeve—that is to say, it fits
closer to the arm, as though shaped to some extent, while the rest
of the garment fits closer to the figure. The vase-painter Brygos
is fond of depicting women in this kind of dress: the accompanying
illustration[118] is taken from his representation of Hera and Iris
pursued by Silenoi. This dress is obviously not composed simply of a
cylindrical piece of material folded over at the top and fastened on
the arms, for the rather deep overfold leaves the sleeves quite free,
and covers only the body of the wearer. This effect could be produced
in two ways, in both of which, however, the sleeve-pieces must be
sewn in separately. In the first method, we may suppose that two
rectangular pieces of material are taken, equal in size and shape,
represented in the diagram as _abcd_.

  [117] Cp. Fig. 29.

  [118] Fig. 29.

[Illustration: FIG. 30.]

These are sewn together along the sides up to the points _e_ and _f_
at a distance of about 5 feet from the lower edge; when the dress is
worn, these points will come immediately under the arms. We may next
suppose that two rectangular pieces of material measuring about 18
by 20 inches are taken for the sleeves; these are folded double,
so that the longer sides lie upon each other, and then sewn on to
the body of the chiton at the points _f_, _h_, _g_, and _e_, so
that the fold lies in the position indicated by the lines _fl_ and
_el′_ in the diagram; the openings _kl_ and _k′l′_ will form the
arm-holes; that part of the chiton _abgh_ which still extends above
the sleeve-pieces is then folded over, so that it hangs down in the
position _gha′b′_. The line _kk′_ now represents the upper edges of
the garment, which are fastened together (leaving the space _mn_ for
the neck) either by sewing and gathering or by groups of folds held
in place by a series of brooches. The front and back part of the
overfold would then hang down separately, but they could be joined
together under the arms, provided that the space round the shoulder
were left free for the arm to pass through into the sleeve.

The second method of making this dress is nothing but a modification
of the first. It consists of taking two smaller rectangles in the
first place, _ghcd_, to form the body of the chiton; two pieces
_abgh_ are sewn on back and front, after the sleeve-pieces, to form a
sort of false overfold, which will have exactly the same effect as if
it were in one piece with the rest of the chiton.

It is possible to conceive of the sleeve-pieces being originally in
one piece with the rest of the chiton, which would then be a dress
composed of two cross-shaped pieces of material sewn together along
the edges _dfl_ and _cel′_; it is more reasonable to suppose,
however, that the sleeve-pieces were sewn on separately. That such
sleeve-pieces were attached to the ordinary Ionic chiton without
overfold seems likely from many vase-paintings. The addition of
sleeves was certainly not unfamiliar to the Greeks, for we find
slaves wearing a narrow, ungirt chiton, with tight sleeves reaching
to the wrists. A familiar example of this is to be found in
Hegeso’s attendant on the well-known grave relief in Athens. In an
inscription, dating from the middle of the fourth century,[119] and
recording a large number of garments dedicated to Artemis Brauronia,
the expression χειριδωτός occurs, which can only mean “sleeved.” In
the same inscription special mention is frequently made of the fact
that the chiton, or χιτωνίσκος, is ἐμπλαισίῳ, “oblong,” from which we
may infer that it was not always so. Now, the ordinary simple Ionic
chiton would be oblong in shape when not worn, so that we may take
the others, which are not described as oblong, to be chitons with
separate sleeve-pieces attached.

  [119] _C. I. A._, ii., 754.

The false overfold was sometimes attached also to the simple
cylindrical Ionic chiton. In these cases it covered the chest only,
leaving the arms covered only by the sleeves; it was probably simply
sewn on at the neck in front only. Kalkmann has collected and stated
the evidence for this false overfold to the chiton in an article
in the _Jahrbuch_, vol. xi., where he shows that it was sometimes
applied to the over-garment also. Very clear examples of it are to
be seen in some of the archaic female statues on the Acropolis at
Athens, especially in those cases where the himation is worn like a
shawl over both shoulders.[120]

  [120] Nos. 687 and 688.

That the long Ionic chiton with sleeves was worn by men as well as
women, is abundantly evident from the monuments. On the vases, Zeus
and Dionysus and other gods are almost invariably represented wearing
it; and in sculpture also, kings, priests, and others are represented
so dressed. Together with the himation, it probably constituted a
sort of state dress for priests and other officials, even after it
had been discarded for daily use, as being too luxurious.

A short chiton, with or without sleeves, and made of some fine
material, is to be found on the vases worn by men engaged in active
pursuits. It sometimes has an overfold; although, with the long
chiton, this feature is usually confined to women. A good example of
the men’s short chiton with overfold is to be seen on the vase of
Brygos representing the exploits of Theseus.

The cross-bands and shoulder-cords already mentioned are, strictly
speaking, an element of the Ionic chiton, though they are sometimes
represented in art over the Doric peplos. Their object is to hold the
ample folds of the full chiton close to the figure, and to prevent
the sleeves from slipping or flapping about with every movement of
the wearer. The cross-bands are usually attached to the girdle and
can be of one piece with it; their place is sometimes taken by a
second girdle, worn rather high over the kolpos, as is the case with
the Artemis of Gabii reproduced below (Fig. 37).

This high girdle was known as the ταινία, or ἀποδέσμος, whereas the
low girdle was called περιζῶμα. A broad band, known as the στρόφιον,
was sometimes worn by women under the breasts, to serve the purpose
of modern corsets.[121]

  [121] B.M., Vase, E. 230.

A word or two must be said about the diminutives of χιτών—namely,
χιτώνιον, χιτωνάριον, and χιτωνίσκος. We should naturally expect
the words to mean a small or short chiton, but this does not seem
always to be the case. The χιτώνιον and χιτωνάριον are frequently
described as διαφανές, “transparent,”[122] and Eustathius (iii.,
1166) explains the words as referring to a fine and luxurious dress
worn by women. In the inscription to Artemis Brauronia[123] we read
more than once of a χιτώνιον ἀμοργῖνον—that is, a garment made of
linen from Amorgos, which we know was very fine and expensive; we
may infer, then, that the diminutives χιτώνιον and χιτωνάριον refer
to fineness of material rather than to shortness of cut. The case of
the χιτωνίσκος is somewhat different; it is not referred to as being
transparent, and is usually described in the inscription cited above
as being very ornate. Women are frequently represented on vases[124]
wearing over the long Ionic chiton a short and sometimes very ornate
garment, which cannot be described as a himation. Possibly this short
over-chiton is the garment indicated by the name χιτωνίσκος.[125] A
similar garment was worn by musicians over the long ungirt chiton
(ὀρθοστάδιος).[126] Another instance of a special dress worn for a
special purpose is the costume worn by actors; it had long sleeves,
and was probably padded to complete the impression of increased size
produced by the high masks and buskins.

  [122] _Ar. Lys._, 48; _Menander Meineke. frag. incert._, 141.

  [123] _C. I. A._, ii., 754.

  [124] _Jahrbuch_, i., pl. 102_a_; Gerhard, _Auserlesene
  Vasenbilder_, 79, 80; Dumont and Chaplain, pl. 8; _Journal of
  Hellenic Studies_, 1890, pl. 12.

  [125] Cp. Amelung in Pauly-Wissowa’s _Real Encyclopädie_, _s.v._
  “Chiton,” p. 2322.

  [126] B.M., E. 270.

The himation worn over the Ionic chiton presents considerable variety
of shape and arrangement. In very many cases we find that the Doric
himation is worn, whether over both shoulders or only over one.
In the Harpy monument, where we might have looked for Ionic dress
in its purest form, we find the Doric himation worn over the fine
linen-sleeved chiton, and on very many of the red-figured vases of
the severe style this is the case. There is one set of monuments,
however, which may be considered as Ionic in origin, or at least
of Ionizing tendencies, where a far less simple garment takes the
place of the Doric himation. This set includes the archaic female
statues and flying victories of the Acropolis Museum at Athens, and
a large number of small painted terra-cotta statuettes in the same
museum, the sculptures of the Treasury of the Cnidians at Delphi, and
a number of other statues and reliefs from Athens, Eleusis, Delos,
and elsewhere. The dress presents a somewhat complicated appearance
at first sight, and has given rise to a considerable amount of
discussion. The following section is based upon a careful study of
the original monuments and of the literature already written on the




The problem of the drapery of the archaic female figures in the
Acropolis Museum has been considered by various archæologists, but
has not yet been satisfactorily solved in all its details by any of
them. The questions to be decided are: Firstly, are we to suppose
that the draperies of the statues give us a faithful and realistic
reproduction of a costume actually in fashion among the Athenian
ladies at the close of the sixth century, or must we take into
account the fact that the work is still archaic and the artists have
not yet sufficiently mastered their material to be able to reproduce
exactly what they saw before them? Secondly, what are the separate
garments which constitute the elaborately complicated whole? And
thirdly, how are these garments arranged so as to produce the effect
seen in the statues?

The answer to our first question is to be found in a compromise lying
somewhere between the two hypotheses suggested. The early artist,
struggling with the technical difficulties of his art, is always
ready, as soon as he has solved one problem to his satisfaction,
to pass on to something which presents still greater difficulties
and demands the exercise of still greater skill. The makers of the
Acropolis maidens have advanced so far as to be able to infuse some
sort of life into their work;—witness the lively expression on some
of the faces. Moreover, in the modelling of some parts of the human
figure they have reached a high degree of excellence. In the few
cases in which the feet of the statues are preserved, a great degree
of delicacy and refinement is displayed, which shows that the artists
had attained some considerable power over their material. Having
advanced so far, they feel themselves equal to facing the problem of
representing drapery in sculpture. It is not to be supposed that at
this stage of artistic development they would invent difficulties
which did not naturally present themselves, nor would they attempt
to represent anything that they had not actually seen; therefore,
we must conclude that the Athenian ladies of the period actually
wore a dress corresponding closely to that reproduced in art. At
the same time, it must be remembered that the Greek artist in all
probability did not work with a model constantly before him, so that
we must expect some slight differences in detail on that account;
furthermore, we must make some allowance for archaism; for example,
in all the statues under discussion, the drapery does not fall freely
away from the figure, but follows the lines of the form beneath in
a manner impossible in real life.

[Illustration: _Photo. by English Photographic Co., Athens._
  FIG. 31.—Archaic Statue—Athens, Acropolis Museum.
  _Face page_ 75.]

Having determined that the artists have represented a dress which
was actually worn, we must proceed to consider the character of
the dress as a whole, and of the parts of which it consisted. In
giving a general description it will be best to take an example
which exhibits all, or nearly all, the characteristics that can be
collected from the various statues. No. 594 will serve our purpose.
(Perrot and Chipiez, pl. xii.; Lechat, _Au Musée de l’Acropole_, fig.
16.)[127] The under-garment which appears on the neck and left arm is
represented by a series of fine wavy lines, running parallel to one
another, which give a crinkled appearance, and may possibly be meant
to indicate a material which has undergone some special treatment
in the making. This garment is finished at the neck and down the
upper part of the arm by an ornamental border, originally painted,
but from which the colour has now almost entirely disappeared. The
lower part of the figure is covered by a very long and ample garment,
which I shall hope to prove to be the same as that which covers the
left shoulder and upper arm. This garment is ornamented with a broad
and elaborate meander pattern down the middle of the front; and if
the statue were not broken, we should probably see another border
round the bottom. So far, the costume is comparatively simple; but
above this under-garment is worn a cloak which passes under the left
arm and is drawn up to the right shoulder, where it is fastened so
as to hang in heavy vertical folds down the right-hand side of the
figure, back and front; in most cases we shall find that the cloak
is fastened by a series of buttons along the upper part of the arm,
as far as the curve of the elbow. The example before us now has an
additional wrap, which conceals the fastening down the right arm. The
rest of the cloak, passing under the left arm, hangs in a series of
oblique but almost vertical folds, running parallel to a box-pleat
which starts from the shoulder. These folds are apparently held in
place by a band passing under the left arm and fixed on the other
shoulder. The upper edge of the cloak hangs over this band in a sort
of little frill with a zigzag edge. The mass of folds lying close to
the figure under the left arm represents the material which forms the
sleeve of the chiton. The additional wrap seen in one or two of the
statues is a very simple matter; it consists of a large scarf worn
over the shoulders, hanging down to a point on the left-hand side; it
leaves the left arm uncovered, passes round the back, and over the
right shoulder. Instead of hanging straight down to a point in the
right-hand side, the end of the scarf is turned up and thrown over
the arm. The end is broken away in No. 594, but appears in another
instance (No. 684, Acropolis Museum; Perrot and Chipiez, fig. 297, p.
592). Both cloak and scarf are bordered with patterns, of which the
colour still remains to some extent.

  [127] Fig. 31.

Many theories have been advanced as to the various garments which
compose the costume. It will be well to give a brief summary of
them, and to point out wherein they fall short, and, if possible, to
substitute one that is more satisfactory.

The chief point at issue is whether the skirt part of the drapery
belongs to the chiton—that is to say, to the garment which appears on
the neck and left arm—or whether it is part of the cloak which passes
under the left arm and is fastened on the right shoulder. Collignon
even distinguishes three garments; he believes that the skirt is
the chiton proper, and that the crinkled texture of the piece which
appears above the himation is meant to represent some sort of woollen
jersey worn over the chiton, which he calls the “chitoniscus.”

The difference in texture comes out very plainly in those cases where
the himation is worn over the shoulders like a shawl, or where it is
omitted altogether; for example, in Nos. 670 and 671.[128]

  [128] Lechat, figs. 8 and 9; Perrot and Chipiez, 290 and 292.

At first sight it appears as though two separate garments were
intended, but on close examination it will be found that the curved
line which terminates the wavy lines of the upper section has not
the appearance of an edge, but appears rather to turn under and to
represent a pouch, formed by pulling the garment up through the
girdle. Moreover, in some cases these parallel wavy lines appear on
the skirt as well, and cover the whole surface with the exception
of the mass of folds hanging down the middle of the front. This can
clearly be seen in No. 687 (Lechat, p. 161), in a small statue of
the same type from Eleusis, now in the National Museum, Athens, and
in the relief of the Charites in the Acropolis Museum (Lechat, pl.
3). Again, the same technique is found sometimes introduced into
the rendering of the himation. Frequently on the shoulder, when the
cloak is fastened, a succession of these wavy parallel lines begins
to appear, then stops suddenly, and the rest of the garment presents
a smooth surface.[129] There can be no question here of a difference
of material, nor of a separate piece of drapery, so that we must
look for some other explanation of the different treatment. Lechat
has offered one which is satisfactory and which finds confirmation
in other monuments. He says “the difference in the appearance of the
upper and lower part of the same garment is due to this: that in the
lower part, all the superfluous material is gathered together in a
single mass, and the rest is drawn tightly across the legs; while
in the upper part, the material, being left free, falls in regular
folds all round the body.” He further suggests that the regularity of
the folds may be meant to represent some artificial treatment of the
dress, such as is applied to the modern _fustanella_. The archaism of
the work, however, is sufficient to account for this regularity
in representing a series of very full folds in a fine material held
in rather closely to the figure. The same kind of treatment appears
on many of the red-figured vases of the best period. One from a vase
by Euphronios is reproduced by Kalkmann (_Jahrbuch_, vol. ix.); it
occurs also on the well-known Troilus vase by the same artist, and
in numerous other instances (Klein, _Euphronios_, p. 215). Above the
girdle the folds are represented by fine parallel wavy lines drawn
very close together below by straight lines. In these cases there is
no questioning the fact that only one garment is intended, so that
we may conclude that in the case of the Acropolis statues too, there
is no need to suppose that the difference in texture represents two
separate garments of different materials.

  [129] See Fig. 32.

[Illustration: _Photo. by Mansell & Co._
  FIG. 32.—Archaic Statue—Athens, Acropolis Museum
  _Face page_ 78.]

It has been suggested that there may be an intention on the part of
the artist to indicate some kind of material that had a crinkled
texture, such as that of some of the modern Greek stuffs; but if this
were so, we might reasonably expect to find the same technique all
over the garment, and the comparison with the vases shows that the
supposition is not necessary.

We may conclude, then, that in those cases where the himation is
omitted altogether, the figure is draped in a single garment, namely,
the long Ionic chiton described above.

In the case of these statues, the chiton is exceptionally long;
there is still some material left trailing on the ground after the
formation of the deep “kolpos,” which necessitates the skirt being
held up in one hand, so as not to impede walking. We are at once
reminded of the Ἰάονες Ἑλκεχίτωνες of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo.

We have next to consider those cases—and they are in the
majority—where another garment is worn over the chiton; and it is on
this point that archæologists are at variance. Many maintain that the
chiton only appears on the upper left-hand side of the figure, and
that a very large cloak is worn over it, which covers the whole of
the rest of the chiton, and has a deep overfold at the top and trails
on the ground behind, being held up in front and drawn aside in the
left hand. Studniczka supports this view, and calls the garment an
“ionisirende Peplos.” Holwerda, in an article in the _Jahrbuch_ for
1904, gives some drawings of some practical experiments he has made
in draping a model in a garment of this kind. He supposes that it
is cylindrical in shape, with a deep overfold, which is shorter on
the shoulder than elsewhere, and so produces a zigzag line along its
lower edge when draped; a girdle is worn underneath the overfold,
through which the superfluous length left by shortening the overfold
on the shoulder can be drawn. He supposes that the garment was drawn
tightly round under the left arm, and that its upper edge formed the
frill which we see in many of the Acropolis statues. A comparison
between his finished model and the statue which he reproduces beside
it serves to show the points wherein his theory falls short; it in
no way accounts for the vertical folds of the cloak, nor for the
tight band which appears passing under the left arm and fastened
on the right shoulder. Amelung, writing in Pauly-Wissowa’s _Real
Encyclopädie_, and Professor E. A. Gardner, in his _Handbook of
Greek Sculpture_, maintain that the garment is simply a Doric peplos
fastened on one shoulder instead of both, and held in place by a
tight band, under which the width of the peplos is arranged in
vertical folds. The main objections to this theory are that the Doric
peplos is invariably fastened in one place only on the shoulder,
whereas the fastening of the garment in question is continued by a
series of brooches down as far as the elbow; the result would be to
leave a very heavy and cumbersome mass of material hanging from the
right arm, which would seriously impede any active motion. Moreover,
it leaves out of account a piece of material which appears almost
invariably in front, below the zigzag edge, where it is drawn up
highest.[130] Holwerda takes it to be a girdle, but it has not the
appearance of a girdle; it hangs over the material that falls from
below it, and does not cut into the soft stuff in the way in which a
girdle would. That the makers of these statues knew how to represent
a girdle is plain from No. 679,[131] where the Doric peplos is worn
over the Ionic chiton. In this case the peplos is considerably
shorter than the chiton, so that the latter garment is plainly seen
below the peplos, which only hangs down to a distance somewhat above
the ankles. The Caryatid of the Cnidian Treasury at Delphi has the
girdle clearly represented below the box-pleat by two parallel,
horizontal, incised lines. On the frieze of the same building some
of the figures are represented wearing the Doric peplos as an
over-garment; in these cases also it is shorter than the chiton,
which invariably appears below it at the feet. An archaic statue from
Rhamnus, in Attica, now in the British Museum, has the crinkly chiton
showing at the feet, and over it a himation with a deep overfold
reaching considerably below the waist; in addition to this overfold
a pleated frill appears over the breast, but no band is visible; the
frill, however, is deeper than is usually the case in the Acropolis
statues, and might be intended to conceal a band. This over-dress is
sewn up at the side, and in that respect resembles the Doric peplos.
It is significant that in this case, where the garment might with
more reason be regarded as a Doric peplos let down from one shoulder,
the chiton is seen appearing below it at the feet, and the over-dress
does not reach to the ankles. In the few cases where the feet of the
Acropolis statues are preserved, it will be noticed that the skirt
is held up fairly high towards one side, so as to display the ankle.
If a long under-garment were worn, we should expect its lower edge
to be seen here; but in no instance is that the case, so that we
may conclude that the skirt itself is the under-garment. Those who
maintain that the skirt belongs to the upper garment support their
opinion by the fact that very frequently the ornamentation on the
two different parts is the same; the natural colour of the marble is
left as a ground, and the decoration consists of coloured borders and
patterns dotted somewhat sparsely over the surface. The part of the
dress which appears on the left shoulder is frequently painted all
over, and we might have expected that if the skirt belonged to the
same garment it would also be painted all over. But before accepting
this argument as conclusive, it will be well to consider the nature
and purpose of polychromy as applied to Greek sculpture.

  [130] Perrot and Chipiez, VIII., pls. 5 and 12; Lechat, 22, 29,
  30, etc. This feature comes out clearly in fig. 31.

  [131] Perrot and Chipiez, VIII., fig. 303; Lechat, fig. 31.

In the early days when inferior materials were used for sculpture,
colour was applied to them to conceal the poverty of the stone and
to produce a more pleasing surface than that offered by the rough
material at the artist’s disposal. These coarser materials were not
capable of such careful finish, or of producing such a lively play
of light and shade, as the marbles later used, and the only way to
give them animation was by the application of colour all over the
surface. It became, therefore, a regular practice for early Greek
sculptors to paint their statues. When, however, they began to use
more beautiful materials, such as marble, they recognised that it
was a pity to conceal its texture by the extensive application of
colour. They therefore adopted the practice of submitting the surface
of the marble to a process of polishing, and adding colour only in
parts, the effect being that the beauty of the marble is enhanced
by the contrast between its polished surface and the coloured parts
of the statue. The range of colours used is somewhat limited and
conventional. For example, in the early pediment groups from the
Acropolis, we find red used for human flesh; and the colours used
in the draperies of the Acropolis female statues are limited to
red and blue. Both eyes and hair are invariably red. We may infer,
therefore, that colour was not added with a view to reproducing
nature faithfully, but simply to decorate the statues. If, therefore,
the artist felt that a white surface of marble with a few patterns
sprinkled over it produced a more pleasing effect than a surface
coloured all over, he would use this method of decorating his work,
even if it were not realistic; and he would prefer to treat large
surfaces of drapery in this way, rather than colour them all over.
When, therefore, in these statues, we find that the small surface of
the chiton which appears on the upper part of the figure is coloured
all over, we need not conclude that the skirt belongs to another
garment because it is differently ornamented; had so large a surface
been painted all over, the effect would have been far less pleasing.
The difference in the decoration of different parts of the same
garment need in no way surprise us; it occurs very frequently in the
black-figured vases, where we get purple used for the upper part of a
garment and black for the lower, simply with the object of producing
variety. The argument from the application of coloured ornament will
not help us, then, in this case, especially when we find that it can
be used to support either view. Professor Baldwin Brown has pointed
out that some terra-cotta figures[132] in the Acropolis Museum,
which are draped in the same style as the archaic statues, have the
under-garment covering the shoulder and the skirt painted in one
colour, and the part which passes round the figure under the left arm
in another, and he uses this fact as a piece of evidence to show that
the skirt is part of the chiton and the rest a separate garment.[133]
It will be safer, therefore, in considering the different garments
which constitute the dress, to leave the question of colour out of
account altogether, and to base our arguments only on their form.
Many who maintain that the skirt is part of the chiton, are of the
opinion that the upper garment is the ordinary himation with a small
overfold, fastened on the shoulder and down the arm. Lechat supposes
that the upper edge is taken up and drawn from beneath and folded
over on itself, so as to form a sort of thick pad at the top, and he
suggests that the pleats were folded before the cloak was put on,
and perhaps even ironed; but this arrangement would not produce the
vertical folds which we find in almost all the statues.

  [132] Cp. _Jahrbuch_, 1893; Arch. Anz., H. 519; Winter.

  [133] Another possibility which suggests itself is that the
  sculptor may not have painted the statue himself, but may have
  handed it over to a painter who did not understand how the
  drapery was constituted.

Kalkmann[134] calls the garment a “stilisirte himation,” and suggests
that the vertical lines are continued round the figure because the
artist had great difficulty in representing the transition between
the vertical folds which hang down from the arm and the horizontal
ones of the overfold. This explanation, however, does not account
for the frill-like edge which appears at the top of the himation.
Professor Baldwin Brown[135] has published some good photographs of a
model draped in this Ionian himation, but has not given a very full
or satisfactory explanation of how the effect was produced. He says
that the secret of the dress is that “the upper edge of it, with all
the folds, is tightly rolled over so that it is shortened in the
front, while at the same time the folds are kept in their places.”
He admits that the folds will only keep in place on a “motionless
wearer of imperturbable patience,” and therefore supposes that the
dress was evolved for use on the wooden xoana. It seems unlikely that
a special dress of such an elaborate nature should have been evolved
to drape these early wooden images, and there is no reason to suppose
that the series of Acropolis statues are merely reproductions of
such images. They appear much rather to represent the grand Athenian
ladies who dedicated themselves symbolically to their patron goddess
by setting up statues of themselves in her honour. Since the statues
were probably intended to be set up permanently in a conspicuous
place, it is natural that the votaries would like to see themselves
appearing in their best clothes.

  [134] _Jahrbuch_, xi.

  [135] _How Greek Women Dressed._

A careful study of the statues themselves and a consideration of all
the evidence bearing on the question leads to the conclusion that
the complete costume consists of two garments, a long under-dress,
which may be regarded as the usual indoor costume of the Athenian
ladies of the sixth century, and a mantle worn over it for out
of doors; occasionally a scarf or shawl is worn as well over the
mantle, perhaps for additional warmth, perhaps only for ornament.
The under-dress consists of the long linen Ionic chiton, a wide
cylindrical garment fastened by brooches or sewn down both arms
so as to form sleeves; a girdle is worn round the waist, and the
superfluous length of the material is drawn up over this girdle so
as to form a deep pouch; sometimes this pouch is worn all round the
figure, sometimes, as is apparently the case in a large seated figure
of Athena, the pouch is formed only in front. On some occasions[136]
we find that the chiton, in addition to the pouch, has an overfold
from the neck resembling the ἀπόπτυγμα of the Doric peplos. This
overfold sometimes only covers the chest and sometimes hangs down
considerably lower. Such an overfold is very frequently found on
vases; in some cases its material may be of one piece with that of
the rest of the chiton, as it appears on one of the Nereids from the
so-called Nereid monument; but in those many cases where it only
appears between the shoulders and does not extend also along the
arms, it is quite possible that it may be a separate piece of stuff
sewn on to the chiton at the neck. It is probably the edge of such
an overfold that appears at the waist below the himation on the
Acropolis statues; no other satisfactory explanation of this detail
of the costume has at present been suggested. It is unlikely that
it represents the “kolpos,” because in all cases, with one possible
exception (No. 676; Lechat, fig. 29), a border is painted on it,
indicating that it is an edge and not a pouch. It has been suggested
that this overfold was sometimes made of a different kind of material
from the chiton on to which it was sewn, and that this material was a
silk or linen of a crinkled texture, indicated by the wavy parallel
lines which appear on the statues. The fact that this treatment
appears sometimes also on the skirt and on the upper part of the
mantle, diminishes the probability of this hypothesis, and makes it
appear more likely that this kind of technique was simply used to
represent very full folds in a fine material. Such a treatment may
have been suggested to the artist by familiarity with some material
of a crinkled texture, such as that used for sheets and table-cloths
in some Greek villages to-day.

  [136] _E.g._, Lechat, fig. 12.

With regard to the ornamental patterns which adorn the chiton, we
find borders at the feet and at the edge of the overfold, also strips
of ornamentation running round the neck and along the arms and round
the arm-holes, and almost invariably a broad band running vertically
down the front of the lower part of the chiton. In addition to
these strips and borders we also get stars or small floral designs
scattered over the whole garment. The bands which appear at the
edges are easy to understand; they were either woven in the material
of which they were made, or, more probably, embroidered on to it
afterwards; but in those cases where the overfold is worn and a
pattern appears at its edge and also along the neck and arms, we must
suppose that this latter was applied after the sleeves were formed
and the overfold attached. Possibly, also, the vertical band on the
lower part of the chiton represents a separate strip of embroidery
sewn on to the garment. The Greek women probably occupied a large
proportion of their time in embroidery; and since a good piece of
embroidery lasts for very many years, it is quite possible that when
the original garment was worn out, they may have cut off the strip
of still good work, and sewn it on to a new dress. The only other
explanation of the numerous patterns which appear on the statues, is
that the artist simply applied ornamentation wherever it pleased his
fancy to do so; this is less satisfactory than to suppose that he was
representing something which he actually saw.

[Illustration: FIG. 33.]

Turning to the himation or mantle worn over the chiton, the simplest
method of producing the effect seen in the Acropolis statues was
found by experiment to be by taking a piece of material between 5
and 6 yards long and about 18 or 20 inches wide. This was folded
double, as in the diagram at the point _a_, so that the points _b_
and _b′_ met. Then at the points _c_ and _c′_, at equal distances
from the corners, and cutting off at little less than one-third of
the wide length of the stuff, the two upper edges were fastened
together on the model’s right shoulder, a few pleats or gathers being
taken in the material on each side. A series of such fastenings was
made along the upper arm, as far as the points _d_ and _d′_, which
reached to the model’s elbow; the rest of the stuff, as far as the
points _b_ and _b′_, was allowed to hang down from the elbow. The
part of the material _c_ to _c′_ passed under the left arm and was
arranged in a series of regular oblique folds running parallel to
the box-pleat, which formed itself naturally at the first fastening
on the shoulder—that is to say, at the points _c_ and _c′_; these
folds were held in place by a band passing under the left breast,
drawn rather tightly round the figure and secured firmly on the right
shoulder. In order to make the lower edge of the cloak rise in the
middle, as it does invariably in the statues, it was found necessary
to draw the folds up over the band and let the upper edge fall over,
forming a kind of frill. The frill, however, hung down too low, and
it was this fact that suggested cutting the upper edge of the
cloak out in a curve, or rather in two curves, one at the back and
one at the front, leaving the part under the left arm longer than
that in front and behind. When these curves were cut out and the
garment once more arranged in its pleats, the little frill-like edge
hung of itself over the band, just in the way in which it appears in
some of the statues. The band alone held the folds fairly well in
place; but in order to prevent the possibility of their slipping, the
Athenian ladies probably had them stitched on to the band. It would
be quite easy to slip the garment on and off over the head without
even unfastening it on the shoulder.[137]

  [137] Figs. 34, _a_ and _b_, are photographs of a model draped in
  this manner.

[Illustration: FIG. 34.—Drapery in the Style of the Archaic Statues
in the Acropolis Museum, Athens.
  _Face page_ 91.]

The variations in detail which appear in the different statues can
easily be produced by arranging the folds in a slightly different
fashion. In some cases, as for example in No. 674 (Lechat, pl. 1),
the folds hang quite upright instead of obliquely, and the box-pleat
appears in the middle instead of hanging from the shoulder; this can
easily be produced by turning the folds first in one direction and
then in the opposite. The folds of the frill sometimes hang in the
opposite direction to those of the main part of the mantle; this is
simply a mistake on the part of the artist. Occasionally the frill
does not appear at all, for example in No. 686 (Lechat, fig. 37), but
the cloak hangs straight down from the broad band. In this instance
we must suppose that the overhanging mass of material has been cut
away entirely before the folds were attached to the band.

Sometimes the two ends were sewn together along the lines _be_ and
_b′e′_, and in this case the last fastening, indicated by the letters
_d_ and _d′_, approached nearer to the points _b_ and _b′_, so as to
leave an opening only sufficient for the arm to pass through.

The detail of the cloak which presents most variety is the little
frill-like edge which falls over the band. Sometimes it appears to be
a natural continuation of the vertical folds which hang down below
it, and it falls over the band so as almost to hide it; sometimes
it is shorter, and reveals the band and forms a sort of leaf-like
pattern above it; in other cases it disappears entirely. Its most
realistic representation is in one of the Victories in the Acropolis
Museum, where the corners _c_ and _c′_, formed by cutting the curves,
are actually indicated on the shoulder, and the frill lies in an
irregular zigzag, almost exactly as it was found to fall in practice.

In two cases in the Acropolis Museum at Athens, and in a statue at
Delphi, the band does not pass under the arm, but from shoulder
to shoulder, and the cloak covers both arms symmetrically, being
fastened down both alike with a series of brooches. In these cases
the box-pleat falls in the middle, and the curve must necessarily
have been considerably smaller, since the upper edge lies much higher
up towards the neck. When the cloak was worn in this way, it was
probably sewn up down both sides, and the curves for the neck,
back and front, were naturally equidistant from the two side-seams.
The openings for the arms would come at the ends of the top edge, as
in the case of the Ionic chiton.

[Illustration: FIG. 35.—Vase-painting—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 93.]

The style of dress represented by this set of monuments is certainly
the most luxurious which we find in Greek art at any period. Now the
date of the Acropolis maidens can be fixed at some period certainly
not later than the last quarter of the sixth century. Solon’s
sumptuary law regulating women’s dress must have been enacted during
the first years of the sixth century, so that we may conclude that
these dainty ladies with their chitons, cloaks, and scarfs represent
the height of luxury in dress which was possible after the passing of
that law: their self-satisfied smile seems to be inviting approval of
the degree of elegance to which their ingenuity could attain, even
though a stern law-giver had limited the number of their garments to

This style of dress seems to have passed out of fashion at the end of
the sixth century, or in the early years of the fifth, for we find it
only in the early works of sculpture already mentioned. An attempt to
render it is frequently made by the artists of the early red-figured
vases—sometimes with some success; but more often the attempt results
in a confusion between this somewhat elaborate style of cloak and
the simpler development which it took later. Fig. 35 shows a fairly
successful attempt to represent the dress. Here we have the band
passing round the right shoulder and the vertical folds falling from
it, but the frill and the fastening down the right arm are omitted.
Possibly they taxed the artist’s skill too greatly; possibly the
style had already passed out of fashion in real life. But he would
be moderately familiar with the maidens on the Acropolis, although
perhaps not sufficiently so to be able to reproduce their costume
in detail. Working daily in his little shop down below in the
Cerameicus, perhaps he did not very frequently mount the citadel,
where he might study the art treasures that adorned it. Possibly
even the vase is not earlier than 480 B.C., and the picture is but a
reminiscence of the statues that the artist had seen on the Acropolis
previous to their burial at the coming of the Persians. Very often on
the vases we find the vertical folds represented falling from beneath
a series of horizontal folds obviously formed by turning over the
top of the cloak before fastening it on the shoulder. Here the band
and fastening down the arm are omitted.[138] The place of the frill
is taken by an overfold of the cloak before it is put on, and it is
fastened by a single brooch on the shoulder; the material is allowed
to hang in natural folds, and the necessity of cutting a curve in
the upper edge is obviated by the fact that no band is worn, and the
stuff is not arranged in artificial vertical folds. This style of
cloak appears already on the figure of Apollo, on the relief from
Thasos in the Louvre; it is seen most clearly in the Artemis
of Gabii.[139] It was probably developed from the earlier and more
elaborate form of cloak by gradual stages, first by omitting the
artificial folds and the band which held them in place, and then by
omitting the numerous fastenings on the arm. This would necessitate
an alteration in the shape of the cloak; it would naturally become
more square. Kalkmann, in the article already referred to, fig. 17,
represents an intermediate stage in this development, where a large
cloak is worn without band or frill, and is fastened by a series of
several brooches down one arm. Were it not for this representation
of the transition stage, we might be inclined to class the cloak of
the Artemis of Gabii as a development of the Doric peplos, which it
resembles in having an overfold and being fastened by a single large
brooch on the shoulder; and indeed these two elements are probably
due to the influence of the Doric dress, and we should therefore,
perhaps, more rightly call the final form of the cloak a blending of
the two styles rather than a development of either the one or the

  [138] Fig. 36.

  [139] Fig. 37.

[Illustration: FIG. 36.—Vase-painting—Ionic Dress.
  _Face page_ 94.]

[Illustration: _Photo by Mansell & Co._
  FIG. 37.—The Artemis of Gabii—Louvre.
  _Face page_ 95.]

As early as the beginning of the fifth century we find the two styles
becoming confused and mingled together. The Doric peplos is worn as
an over-dress over the Ionic chiton, even by one of the “Maidens”
of the Acropolis, and later on the commonest form of outdoor dress
for women was the Ionic chiton with the Doric himation over it. This
combination appears in the so-called Fates of the Parthenon pediment.
Frequently we find this blending of the two styles in a single
garment; we find also on vases the overgirt Doric peplos with sleeves
formed by a number of brooches;[140] and again, with cross-bands,
which belong properly to the Ionic chiton.[141] Some authorities,
pinning their faith entirely to Herodotus, consider that the brooch
is an element which belongs strictly only to the Doric dress; they
therefore regard the chiton with pinned sleeves as a mixture of the
two. An over-garment not very simple in form, which can be regarded
as neither Doric nor Ionic, but a mixture of both, is illustrated by
Fig. 38. Kalkmann regards it as a number of overfolds or flounces
sewn separately on to the chiton. It seems more reasonable, however,
to regard the part of the dress which appears on the arms and at
the feet, and which is made of a plain material, as the chiton,
and the rest which is ornamented with a pattern, as a separate
over-garment. This garment has three edges, at the waist, hips, and
ankles, so that it is obviously not merely an ordinary rectangular
himation, nor a simple Doric peplos with overfold. It seems simplest
to explain it as a Doric peplos with deep overfold, ungirt, having a
short false overfold to the waist sewn on over the real one at the
neck. Such over-garments never occur in sculpture and only rarely
on the vases, and may possibly be an error or invention on the part
of the vase-painter; if commonly worn, they would probably be more
frequently represented in art.

  [140] B.M., E. 336.

  [141] Athens Central Museum, 1285.

[Illustration: FIG. 38.—Vase-painting—Dress with two Overfolds.
  _Face page_ 96.]



The fabrics in use for Greek dresses presented considerable variety.
The commonest materials were naturally woollen, but linen and silk
were used for more luxurious garments, and a kind of leather jerkin
known as διφθέρα[142] was sometimes worn by peasants.

  [142] Aristophanes, _The Clouds_, 72; Plato, _Crito_, 53 D.

That the woollen materials used themselves varied considerably in
texture, is proved by some fragments actually found in a tomb at
Kertch in the Crimea, and published in the _Comptes rendus_ in 1878.
These date for the most part from the fourth century B.C., but one
at least probably goes back to the fifth century. They are in most
cases rather loosely woven, so that the separate threads are clearly
visible, and a bright object could be seen through the material.
The oldest piece is composed of such fine threads that it is almost
transparent; other pieces have a texture not unlike that of woollen
crêpe. A somewhat coarser piece, the threads of which are very
strong, has a portion of a seam remaining, which is oversewn with
strong woollen thread. In addition to very finely woven woollen
materials, the more luxurious of the Greeks wore also many varieties
of linen, and in some cases even silk. Pollux tells us that the
long linen chiton was worn by the Athenians and Ionians, and many
references are to be found in ancient literature to different kinds
of linen, coming from places usually in Asia or the more easterly of
the Ægean islands. Of these the most commonly mentioned are ἀμόργινα,
garments made of linen from the flax of Amorgos, and βύσσινα,
made of βύσσος, a yellowish kind of flax, coming especially from
India and Egypt. We learn from Aristophanes[143] that the χιτώνιον
ἀμόργινον was transparent, so that we may conclude that the linen
from which it was made was very fine indeed; perhaps it resembled
a very fine cambric. That βύσσος was a linen of some kind, we are
told by Pausanias,[144] and Pollux gives us the information that
it came from India. That it was known in Egypt also, is testified
by Herodotus,[145] who tells us of its use for mummy-cloths. It
was probably rather a mark of luxury when worn by the Greeks, for
Simætha[146] tells us that she wore a χιτών of it when going out on a
festive occasion.

  [143] _Lys._, 150.

  [144] VI., 21.

  [145] II., 86.

  [146] Theocritus, II., 73.

Of materials which come under the heading of silk, three kinds were
known to the ancients. We read in Latin authors of _vestes coæ_,
_bombycinæ_, and _sericæ_, and these were also known to the Greeks.
Aristotle[147] is the first of the ancient writers who tells us
anything of the production of silk. After describing the various
changes undergone by the worm before becoming a moth, he gives us the
following information:—

  Ἐκ δὲ τούτου τοῦ ζῴου καὶ τὰ βουβύκια ἀναλύουσι τῶν
  γυναικῶν τινές ἀναπηνιζόμεναι, κἄπειτα ὑφαίνουσιν· πρώτη δὲ
  λέγεται ὑφῆναι ἐν Κῷ Παμφίλη Πλάτεω θυγάτηρ.

“Some women undo the cocoons of this creature, winding off the
silk, and then weave it; and Pamphile, daughter of Plateus, is said
to have been the first to weave it in Cos.” This implies that the
manufacture of silk was carried on in Cos, but no information is
given as to whether the worm was reared in that island or whether
the raw silk was imported. Pliny[148] tells us more on the subject;
he seems to distinguish the three kinds of silk mentioned above. Of
these three, only “sericum” is, strictly speaking, silk—that is to
say, a material made by unwinding the cocoon of the silkworm reared
on the mulberry tree. This worm is first mentioned by Pausanias.[149]
It was the Chinese who discovered this method of procuring the silk,
and it was apparently unknown to the Greeks and Romans. The “coa” and
“bombycina” were procured by piercing and carding the cocoon instead
of unwinding them entire; the result was a substance coarser and less
brilliant than silk. Pliny draws a distinction between “coa” and
“bombycina,” telling us that the latter was a product of Assyria and
came from the ordinary mulberry worm, whereas the worm from which
coan silk was procured was reared on other trees, notably the oak,
ash, and cypress.[150]

  [147] _Hist. Anim._, v., 19.

  [148] _Hist. Nat._, xi.

  [149] VI., xxvi., 6.

  [150] For silk generally, see Daremberg and Saglio, _s.v._ “coa”;
  Smith, _Dictionary of Antiquities_, _s.v._ “sericum”; Yates,
  _Textrinum Antiquorum_, pp. 160 f.; Pariset, _Histoire de la
  Soie_, Part I., chap. i.

_Coæ vestes_ are frequently mentioned by the Latin poets, chiefly
Horace, Tibullus, and Propertius, and from them we learn that
they were chiefly worn by _Hetairæ_ and were of a transparent
texture;[151] sometimes they were purple and had gold threads
interwoven or embroidered.[152] One piece of silk was found amongst
other materials at Kertch. In colour it is a bronze-gold, and is
woven in a lozenge pattern.

  [151] Propertius, I., 2; Horace, _Satires_, I., ii., 101.

  [152] Horace, _Odes_, IV., xiii.; Tibullus, II., 6.

If Greek dress lacked variety of cut and material, the deficiency
was to some extent made up by considerable gaiety of colour and
ornamentation. Probably none but slaves and artisans would wear
garments of one colour without pattern or ornamentation of any kind,
and even they would sometimes have their dresses adorned with a
simple border, such as a broad stripe. From the numerous references
scattered up and down through extant literature, it appears that the
favourite colours were purple, red, and yellow. Pollux[153] gives
us a list of the colours most commonly used. This list includes
green (βατραχίς) and gray (κίλλιον, ὀνάγρινον), in addition to those
mentioned above, but strangely enough no mention is made of blue. The
word κυάνεος, “dark blue,” is seldom if ever applied to garments,
yet it is scarcely likely that the colour was unknown to the Greeks.
Possibly some shades described as πορφύρεος approached a violet,
or blue, as distinguished from ἁλοῦργος, “true purple.” For red we
find the word φοινίκεος, “dark red,” used especially of the military
cloak of the Lacedæmonians,[154] and κοκκοβαφής, “scarlet”; for
yellow κροκωτός and θάψινος. Βατραχίς, “frog-coloured,” is the word
applied to a green garment, and this is probably the colour described
as ὀμφάνικος, “like unripe grapes.” Pollux[155] tells us that for
mourning the Greeks wore φαιὸν καὶ μέλαν ἀλλήλοις ἔγγυς, “gray and
black, very like each other.” From this we learn that φαιός was a
very dark colour, probably gray or dun.

  [153] Chap. lviii.

  [154] Aristophanes, _Pax_, 1173; _Lys._, 1140.

  [155] 58.

The ornamentation applied to dress by the Greeks was very varied in
character; it is comparatively rare to find on Greek vases a dress
that is entirely free from decorations, and the patterns represented
are very numerous. Sometimes the ornament consists of a simple
border, often of a pattern distributed all over the dress, and these
designs are frequently of a very elaborate character, including
animal and even human forms. In sculpture, too, this feature was
not neglected; the maidens of the Acropolis at Athens all have some
pattern on their draperies added in colour, and one of them has no
less than seven different designs distributed over her costume. We
know that the himation of the Olympian Zeus by Pheidias was richly
decorated, and the fragment from Damophon’s great group at Lycosura
will serve as a later example of sculptured drapery highly ornamented
with patterns in relief. This has not only geometric and floral
designs as borders, but the whole surface is covered with fantastic
dancing figures of human and hybrid forms.

References in literature are not very frequent; the most noteworthy
occurs in the _Iliad_,[156] where Helen is described as working at a
great loom:

                      ἣ δὲ μέγαν ἱστὸν ὕφαινεν
    δίπλακα πορφυρέην, πολέας δ᾽ ἐνέπασσεν ἀέθλους
    Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ Ἀχαιῶν χαλκοχιτώνων.

“She was weaving a great purple web of double fold, and over it she
spread many battles of horse-taming Trojans and bronze-clad Achæans.”

  [156] iii., 125.

The epithet ποικίλος, applied to dress, undoubtedly means “richly
decorated,” and the ἀνθινά, “flowered garments,” frequently mentioned
in inscriptions, presumably refers to garments ornamented with floral
designs. In connection with the passage in Homer, the question has
been raised as to whether these complex designs were woven into the
material or embroidered afterwards. It seems hardly likely that they
were woven in, unless the work were a heavy tapestry, such as would
hardly be suitable for a costume; moreover, the word ἐμπάσσω means
“to sprinkle on,” and is more easily applicable to the distribution
of a design over a piece of material already woven than to the
formation of a pattern in the course of the weaving. The words μέγαν,
ἱστὸν, and ὔφαινεν would still be applicable, because when the
garment was at this stage, it would still be regarded as incomplete,
and the designs, however applied, would probably be at least sketched
out while it was still on the loom.

[Illustration: FIG. 39.—Fragments of a Sarcophagus Cover from Kertch.
  _Face page_ 103.]

Among the fragments of materials found at Kertch were some which
were embroidered, others which had simple geometrical designs woven
into the borders; in addition to these there were some considerable
fragments of a large sarcophagus cover, the ornamentation of which is
strongly reminiscent of Greek vase-painting of the fourth century.
The ground is black and is covered with designs in red and light
terra-cotta; the ornamentation is divided into bands, and consists of
battle scenes with chariots, and birds and beasts scattered about the
field of the design; the bands are separated by different patterns,
many of which are frequently met with on vases. These include the egg
and dart pattern, ivy and laurel wreaths, large palmettes, and many
others.[157] Names are inscribed against some of the figures, among

  [157] Figs. 39 and 41 _a_ and _b_.

These designs are not embroidered, nor are they produced in the
course of weaving the cloth; they are apparently drawn out by means
of some pigment applied after the material was woven. Herodotus
tells us[158] that the people of the Caucasus used to paint animals
on their clothes with some vegetable pigment which they mixed with
water. Some such procedure, then, must have been practised by the
Greeks of the fourth century, which is the date assignable to the
fragment in question, on the evidence of the inscriptions.

  [158] I., 203.

The designs applied to Greek dresses presented abundant variety, as
is evidenced by extant monuments, especially by the vases; they may
be roughly classed as geometric, floral, and those containing animal
and human forms. Of the geometric designs some are rectilinear,
others curvilinear. The favourite rectilinear borders are broad
lines, parallel rows of zigzag lines, the mæander or key pattern
in very many forms varying from the simple running mæander to a
complicated double fret, broken at intervals by stars or chequers.
In addition to these borders we frequently find a chequer pattern
covering the whole surface of a garment. A kind of net pattern,
often seen on vases, was very probably used in dresses also. Of
the curvilinear designs the most common are the “guilloche” or
plait-band, the simple spiral, and the κυμάτιον or wave pattern. On
the black-figured vases a kind of scale pattern frequently occurs
covering a wide surface.

A very great variety of floral designs was used by the Greeks for
ornamentation of all kinds; they are very frequent as part of the
scheme of decoration of vases, especially of those of Ionic origin.
A favourite pattern is a simple laurel wreath like that depicted
in Fig. 39; the ivy also forms the basis of more than design.
Sometimes it takes the form of a row of leaves on either side of a
straight line; more often the leaves alternate with tendrils and
berries. By far the commonest and the most beautiful of floral
designs are those made up of lotus buds and flowers and palmettes.
Sometimes we find the lotus alone forming the motive of the design,
sometimes it alternates with palmettes. A very graceful pattern is
composed of oblique palmettes turned in opposite directions and
connected by spirals.[159] That these designs so commonly used for
the decoration of pottery were employed also in the textile arts is
proved by some of the fragments found at Kertch. Quite considerable
remains were found of a piece of woollen material elaborately
embroidered with a large floral design (Fig. 40), the main motive
of which is a graceful palmette, from the base of which spring
spirals terminating in heart-shaped leaves and flowers. The design is
executed in gold and green on a violet ground.[160]

  [159] For patterns generally, see H. B. Walters, _History of
  Ancient Pottery_, ii., 209-235; Riegl, _Stilfragen_.

  [160] For colouring, see _Comptes rendus_, 1878.

[Illustration: FIG. 40.—Embroidered Fragment from Kertch.
  _Face page_ 105.]

Animal and human forms are naturally less common than geometric and
floral designs. Mention has already been made of the wonderful diplax
woven by Helen, in which she represented scenes of battle between
Trojans and Achæans. In art we find that goddesses are frequently
depicted wearing garments covered with elaborate ornamentation
of this kind. The François vase will afford several examples,
and in later art the dress of Demeter on the Triptolemus vase by
Hieron,[161] and the sculptured drapery from Damophon’s group at
Lycosura, may be quoted. That mortals also indulged in such luxurious
ornamentation is proved again by the Kertch fragments. One of the
most charming pieces found there had a very naturalistic design of
ducks embroidered in gold and green on a dark-brown ground (Fig. 41
_c_); another piece had a figure of an Amazon riding on horseback;
and mention has already been made of the sarcophagus cloth covered
with battle scenes.

  [161] British Museum, E. 140. Fig. 14, above.

[Illustration: FIG. 41.—(_a_ and _b_) Fragments of a Sarcophagus
Cover from Kertch. (_c_) Embroidered Fragment from Kertch.
  _Face page_ 106.]



The manner of wearing the hair seems to have varied considerably at
different periods, both for men and women. In pre-Hellenic times it
was, for the most part, if not invariably, allowed to grow long.
On the frescoes from Knossos we find the cupbearer and other male
figures represented wearing their hair in long, wavy tresses reaching
to the waist or thereabouts. On Mycenæan gems and rings, where
warriors are represented wearing helmets, the hair is frequently
concealed, so that it is impossible to determine whether it was worn
short or bound up in some manner, so as to be out of the way. The
ivory statuettes of athletes from Knossos have long hair,[162] so
that in all probability that was the prevailing fashion among men in
Crete. Among women in pre-Hellenic times, the fashion was to wear the
hair long; the snake goddess and her votary have hair that reaches
far past the waist, and in almost all extant art of the period the
hair of the women is represented as being abundant. It is frequently
worn in long tresses down the back (compare the dancing girl, Fig.
4) and arranged rather elaborately in front in curls, which sometimes
suggest artificial treatment; sometimes the hair is done up at the
back or top of the head, in modern fashion.

  [162] See _British School Annual_, 1901-2, VIII., 72, fig. 37.

In the Homeric poems we read of the “long-haired Achæans,”[163] so
that the sight of men with long hair was obviously familiar to the
poet. From the passage which describes Andromache’s swoon,[164]
however, it is clear that the women of the poet’s day bound their
hair up, using nets and kerchiefs and other appurtenances both useful
and ornamental.

  [163] _Iliad_, ii., 443, 472.

  [164] _Ibid._, xxii., 468 f.

[Illustration: FIG. 42.—Men’s Head-dress—Archaic.
  _Face page_ 108.]

Coming down to historic times, we find that before the Persian
wars both men and women wore their hair long. After the middle of
the fifth century a change took place, the men cutting their hair
short for the most part, the women binding it up. The story of the
Lacedæmonians combing their long hair when the Persians were close
upon them is familiar (Herodotus, VII., 208). Extant monuments show
us that before the Persian wars the men adopted various methods of
disposing of their long hair: sometimes we see it worn loose with a
simple fillet tied round the head;[165] sometimes the long ends are
turned up and tucked in under the fillet;[166] sometimes they are
turned up and held together by an additional band. This is the case
with a bronze head from Olympia,[167] where, however, some locks
seem to have been left free on the neck. A relief in Athens,
representing a Discobolus holding the “discus” behind his head,[168]
shows the hair probably divided and twisted together in two coils
fastened tightly at a little distance from the end by a ribbon, or
possibly by a metal spiral.[169] The golden τέττιξ mentioned by
Thucydides (I., 6) was obviously some kind of ornament inserted
in the hair to hold the “chignon” in place. It has been shown by
Helbig[170] that this was probably a metal spiral or series of rings
used to bind together the ends of the long hair; such a style is
frequently represented in the art of the end of the sixth century and
beginning of the fifth. The bands represented in Fig. 42 (_c_) are
possibly intended for such metal rings. Helbig’s view is supported
and confirmed by Studniczka.[171]

  [165] Fig. 42 (_a_).

  [166] Fig. 42 (_b_).

  [167] Fig. 42 (_c_).

  [168] Fig. 42 (_d_).

  [169] The hair of Euphorbus, described in _Iliad_, xvi., 52, was
  possibly dressed in this fashion.

  [170] _Das Homerische Epos_, 166-170; cp. _Mittheilungen des
  Deutschen Instituts in Athen_, vi., pl. 7, p. 186.

  [171] _Jahrbuch des kaiserlich Deutschen Instituts_, xi., 1896,
  pp. 284-291.

Probably the knot of hair bound up on the nape of the neck, as in
the above examples, represents the κρωβύλος or κόρυμβος mentioned
in Thucydides and elsewhere in literature. In later times this name
was applied to the knot of hair on the top of the head which occurs
so frequently in statues of Apollo; but there is no evidence to show
that it was worn in this position before the fourth century at the

A style very commonly exemplified by extant statues of Apollo, dating
from the early part of the fifth century, is to tie a fillet round
the head and roll the long hair tightly over it, tucking the ends
in usually behind the ears.[172] These ends are, however, sometimes
allowed to hang down on the neck. Athletes very frequently disposed
of their long hair by braiding it into two plaits from behind; these
they crossed or brought round the head, fastening the two ends
together in front.[173] Sometimes the short hair in front was combed
down over the plaits, so as to conceal their union.

  [172] Fig. 43 (_a_).

  [173] Fig. 43 (_b_). It is interesting to note that little
  Athenian schoolgirls of to-day wear their hair in this fashion.

[Illustration: FIG. 43.—(_a_) Head of Apollo from the Temple of Zeus,
at Olympia. (_b_) Head of an Athlete—Athens Acropolis Museum.
  _Face page_ 110.]

The date of the change of fashion is impossible to fix. We find the
athletes of Myron and Polycleitus represented with short hair, but
long-haired Apollos are found considerably after their date. The
change took place, in all probability, shortly after the Persian
wars; it then became the fashion for Ephebi to cut off their
long hair, which they consecrated to Apollo and Artemis or to a
river god.[174] When once the change had come about, long hair
was considered, in Athens at least, as a mark of affectation or
effeminacy. In _The Wasps_ of Aristophanes,[175] Amynias, the typical
fop, is designated by the name of οὑκ τῶν Κρωβύλου, “he of the
‘chignon,’” and in _The Clouds_ the wearing of the τέττιξ is spoken
of as a fashion quite out of date, or, as we might say, antediluvian.
There is some uncertainty as to whether the Lacedæmonians wore their
hair short or long; some authorities state that even in the fourth
century they still wore it long as a mark of freedom, and since they
were more conservative than the rest of the Greeks, it is quite
possible that this was the case. With this possible exception, the
custom of wearing the hair short continued, though Alexander probably
set the fashion of wearing rather long and mane-like hair.

  [174] Pausanias, I., xxxvii., 2; _Æsch. Choeph._, 6.

  [175] 1267.

[Illustration: FIG. 44.]

A covering for the head was rarely worn by men, except when riding
or travelling long distances; in these cases the πέτασος was worn as
a protection against sun and rain. This consisted of a felt hat with
broad brim, which could be turned up or down. Figs. 44, 22, and 23
represent its various shapes, Fig. 44 being the earliest form. The
πέτασος, like the χλάμυς, which it almost invariably accompanies,
probably came originally from Northern Greece, Thrace, or Thessaly,
where more protection was needed against cold and inclement weather.
Another head-covering, worn by sailors and by the god Hephaistos, is
the πῖλος, a felt cap of conical shape resembling the modern fez.[176]

  [176] Fig. 19.

[Illustration: FIG. 45.—Women’s Head-dress.
  _Face page_ 112.]

Extant monuments show that before the Persian wars women for the
most part wore their hair down, although instances occur where it is
fastened up with bands or fillets. When worn down it was usually held
in place by a fillet, and frequently a metal ornament, rather high
in front and narrowing towards the back, was added. This was known
as the ἄμπυξ, or στεφάνη, and was probably made of gold; almost all
the “Maidens” of the Acropolis wear it, and in several instances it
is adorned with floral patterns.[177] The high πόλος or crown worn
by Hera (Fig. 45 (_a_)) was probably also made of metal. Sometimes
when the hair was worn down, the ends were prevented from flying in
the wind by being tied together in a kind of little bag,[178] which
reminds one of the many fashions adopted by men in the Georgian
period in England. Sometimes, like the men, the women tucked the long
ends up under the fillet, and let them hang out over it at the back.
The fillet itself frequently assumed the dimensions of a scarf, the
ends of which were tucked up at the sides and allowed to hang down
behind the ears. When the hair was done up, the “chignon” was at
first worn low on the nape of the neck and held in place by bands
variously arranged.[179] Sometimes the στεφάνη alone was worn,[180]
and very often the hair was held up by a kerchief or snood (μίτρα,
σάκκος). The styles in which it was worn present abundant variety:
sometimes it covered the hair completely,[181] except for a curl or
two allowed to escape in front of the ears; sometimes it left the
hair visible over the forehead only;[182] sometimes over the forehead
and on the crown of the head, and the ends of the kerchief might
be tucked through at the side and allowed to hang down in front of
the ears.[183] Fig. 45 (_f_) gives an example of the στεφάνη worn
in addition to the snood. In the fourth century fashion seems to
have dictated that the “chignon” should be worn higher up at the back
of the head, and a small kerchief was used to hold it up, folded in
such a way that it narrowed almost to a point over the forehead.[184]
Apparently a net was sometimes worn over the back of the hair. Fig.
45 (_l_), from the Meidias vase, furnishes an illustration of this.
In Hellenistic and Roman times the styles of dressing the hair became
very numerous. The snood seems to have been discarded altogether,
and adornment by means of artificial waving and curling apparently
took its place. The modes of “coiffure” of the Alexandrian Greeks
are as varied as those of modern Europe. Probably cosmetics were
used for the hair and paint and powder for the face; for we learn
from Xenophon’s _Œconomicus_ that as far back as his date, not only
hetairæ but married women resorted to artificial means of beautifying
the complexion.

  [177] Fig. 32.

  [178] Fig. 45 (_b_).

  [179] Fig. 45 (_c_ and _d_).

  [180] Fig. 45 (_e_).

  [181] Fig. 45 (_g_).

  [182] Fig. 45 (_h_).

  [183] Fig. 45 (_i_ and _j_).

  [184] Fig. 45 (_k_).

More than one allusion is made in literature to some kind of hat worn
by women; in Theocritus (_Idyll_, xv., 39), Praxinoa, when going out
to the festival of Adonis, asks her maid for her wrap and hat (θολία).

In the _Œdipus Coloneus_[185] Antigone recognises Ismene from a
distance by the Thessalian hat which she wears as a protection
against the heat of the sun. The words used are κυνῆ Θεσσαλίς, which
seem to imply that the hat was made of some kind of skin, probably
felt, and resembled the men’s “petasos,” which originated in
Thessaly or Thrace; its shape may have been slightly different. The
Tanagra statuettes frequently represent women wearing a broad-brimmed
hat with high pointed crown.[186]

  [185] 313.

  [186] Fig. 15.



The practice of covering the feet seems to have varied somewhat among
the Greeks. In all probability it was the custom to go barefoot
indoors, and the habit prevailed among certain classes of going
always unshod in the street also. It was a mark of hardihood in the
Spartan youths always to go barefoot, and at Athens, in addition to
the lower orders, who probably never wore shoes, philosophers and
those who affected a simple life were in the habit of going unshod.
That Socrates rarely covered his feet is proved by more than one
reference in Plato’s Dialogues;—Phædrus[187] speaks of him as ἀεὶ
ἀνυπόδητος, “always unshod,” and in the _Symposium_[188] we learn
that for the occasion of Agathon’s banquet Socrates has washed and
put on his shoes, ἃ ὀλιγάκις ἐποίει, “which he seldom did.”

  [187] Plato, _Phædrus_, 229 A.

  [188] 174 A.

Other references in literature show that he was not the only
philosopher who preferred to have his feet untrammelled.[189]

  [189] Aristophanes, _The Clouds_, 103; Theocritus, XIV., 6.

The normal fashion, however, for people of good breeding was to wear
sandals or shoes out of doors, and we learn from Aristophanes[190]
that the Athenians at least were particular about the fit;—to “swim
about” in large boots was a mark of boorishness. Xenophon[191]
notices the division of labour in the shoemakers’ trade, where he
mentions at least four different hands employed in making a pair of

  [190] _Knights_, 321.

  [191] _Cyropædia_, xviii., 2, 5.

[Illustration: FIG. 46.—Sandals and Shoes.
  _Face page_ 117.]

The simplest form of footgear was the sandal, the πέδιλον of Homer,
the ὑπόδημα of later times; this consisted of a leather sole cut
to the shape of the foot and fastened on by means of straps or
thongs, passing sometimes round the instep, sometimes between the
toes and round the heel and ankle.[192] At times a piece of skin was
attached to the sandal at the back, so as to cover the back of the
heel, or even to wrap round the instep entirely, leaving only the
toes bare;[193] from this form of sandal the ἔμβας, or slipper, was
probably developed. This is described by Pollux[194] as εὐτελὲς μὲν
ὑπόδεμα, Θράκιον δὲ τὸ εὕρημα, “a cheap shoe, of Thracian invention.”
Its name suffices to show that the foot was inserted into the ἔμβας,
in contradistinction to the sandal, which was bound under the foot;
and the epithet signifies that it covered the foot completely.
This description could be applied to many varieties of shoes and
boots represented in extant art. Fig. 46 (_e_ and _f_) gives two
examples of shoes—_e_ being an ordinary soft shoe covering the
foot completely to the ankle, _f_ is turned up at the toes, like a
modern Greek shoe, and reaches above the ankle at the back. A vase
at the British Museum represents a woman cleaning a shoe of this
shape. We learn from Aristophanes[195] that shoes were cleaned with
blacking made of pitch and applied with a sponge; they were usually
black, except when the leather was allowed to retain its natural
colour. The word ἔμβας seems to have been used for various kinds of
foot-covering; in Aristophanes it refers sometimes to a kind of easy
slipper worn by old men,[196] and in other instances it is used of
any ordinary shoe or boot. The mention by Pollux of its Thracian
origin perhaps refers to the high boot turned over at the top,
frequently represented on vase-paintings as being worn by horsemen
with the Thracian cloak and petasos.[197] Different varieties of this
kind of boot are to be seen in Fig. 46 (_g_, _h_, _i_, and _j_).

  [192] Fig. 46 (_a_ and _b_); Fig. 48 (_c_).

  [193] Fig. 46 (_c_ and _d_).

  [194] VII., 85.

  [195] _The Wasps_, 600.

  [196] _The Wasps_, 274; _The Clouds_, 719.

  [197] Fig. 22.

An article in Daremberg and Saglio’s _Dictionnaire_ suggests an
Asiatic origin, and indeed the resemblance between Greek boots and
those represented on Assyrian monuments is striking. A comparison is
actually made by Herodotus[198] between Assyrian boots and Bœotian

  [198] I., 195.

It is quite possible that boots of this kind may have come to Greece
from the East by way of Thrace, and the fact that Dionysus is very
frequently represented wearing them seems to add confirmation to
this conjecture.

[Illustration: FIG. 47.]

A variety of the ἐμβάδες is to be found in the ἐνδρομίδες, a kind of
boot worn by runners, as also by Hermes, Artemis, and the Amazons.
They seem to have had no flap at the top, and to have been laced over
a tongue either through holes or round buttons.[199] Another kind
seems to have consisted of strips of cloth or leather, or possibly
felt, wound round the legs like the modern puttees.

  [199] Figs. 47 and 48 (_a_).

The word κρηπίδες is frequently used of some kind of foot-covering,
and we learn from Theocritus[200] and from Pollux[201] that these
were worn by soldiers. The κρῆπις was probably some kind of sandal
with a thick sole and stout straps interlacing one another in such a
way as to form a protection for the heel and instep.[202] Pliny[203]
tells us that sometimes they had nails in them.

  [200] XV., 6.

  [201] VII., 85.

  [202] Figs. 48 (_b_) and 49 (_a_ and _b_).

  [203] XXXV., 25.

[Illustration: FIG. 48.—(_a_) A Bronze in the British Museum. (_b_)
Foot of the Hermes of Praxiteles (from a cast in the British Museum).
(_c_) A Terra-cotta Flask in the British Museum.
  _Face page_ 118.]

Many varieties of shoes or boots are mentioned by Pollux[204] and
other ancient writers. We read of ἀρβύλαι, ἀρβυλίδες, a cheap kind
of boot worn on journeys; βλαυταί, light sandals with latchets,
called also κονιπόδες, from the fact that they allowed the feet to
get covered with dust; εὐμάριδες, Persian slippers of yellow kid;
Περσικαί, cheap white shoes worn by women, especially by hetairæ;
Λακωνικαί, distinguished by their red colour—these were probably
the same as the Ἁμυκλαί mentioned by Theocritus. One of the archaic
female statues in the Acropolis Museum at Athens wears red shoes.
Wood was sometimes used for sandals. Pollux tells us that κρουπέζια
were a special kind of wooden sandal used for dancing, and that
Pheidias represented Athene Parthenos wearing Τυρρηνικά, sandals with
high rectangular wooden soles and gold latchets.

  [204] VII., 84-93.

[Illustration: FIG. 49.]

Other shoes are too numerous to mention, and cannot be identified
with certainty.




The toilet of the ancient Greeks was quite as elaborate as that of
any modern people, and much time and care was bestowed upon it. That
of the men was usually performed at the barber’s shop (Κουρεῖον),
which became, as we gather from frequent allusions in Aristophanes,
a regular resort for lounging and picking up news and scraps of
gossip of all kinds. A fashionable Athenian would probably spend a
whole morning at the barber’s shop, where, in addition to having his
hair cut and beard clipped or shaved, he could submit to the various
operations of manicure and chiropody. An epigram in the palatine
anthology[205] gives a list of barber’s implements, some of which
have survived in a few examples, and may be seen in our museums. The
list includes: scissors (ψάλις), razor (ξυρόν), some sharp, pointed
instrument for paring and cleaning the nails (στόνυξ). Mention is
also made of a scraper (ψήκτρα), which was probably used after
bathing. An ancient razor differs from a modern one, in that it is
crescent shaped.

  [205] _Anth. Pal._, vi., 307.

In addition to these implements, various ointments were used, one
of which, ψίλωθρον, containing arsenic, was employed for removing
superfluous hairs.

[Illustration: FIG. 50.]

When repairing to the wrestling school or the gymnasium, a Greek
would invariably be provided with an oil-flask (ἀρύβαλλος, λήκυθος)
and a strigil (ξύστρα). The aryballos (Fig. 50) was a small globular
vessel, with an opening just large enough to allow the oil to trickle
slowly out, the lekythos being a long narrow bottle with a foot and
a narrow neck.[206] Both were used to carry the olive oil with which
athletes were accustomed to anoint themselves. The strigil was a
curved metal instrument used for scraping the oil and sand from the
body after wrestling. The famous statue of the Apoxyomenos in the
Vatican Museum represents an athlete engaged in this operation.

  [206] Fig. 51.

[Illustration: FIG. 51.]

The processes and requisites of the feminine toilet were many
and various, and toilet scenes are frequently represented in
vase-paintings. Sometimes we may see the process of the bath: an
attendant slave pouring water from a large vessel over the crouching
figure of the bather; in other instances we find a lady engaged in
binding her hair with a fillet, tying her girdle, or fastening her
sandal. There is almost invariably a maid in attendance, who assists
in the operations, holding a scent-bottle, or a casket from which her
mistress selects jewels.[207] One vase-painting shows a lady applying
powder or colour to her cheeks with a brush.

  [207] Fig. 52 (_a_).

Many allusions in literature, and especially in Aristophanes, show
that paint and cosmetics of various kinds were in use in Athens in
the fifth century B.C. It is not surprising to learn that hetairæ
made use of these artificial aids to beauty; but from a passage in
Xenophon’s _Œconomicus_[208] we gather that the wives and daughters
of respected citizens did not despise such means of enhancing and
preserving their appearance. The passage describes how Ischomachus
found his young wife ἐντετριμμένην πολλῷ μὲν ψιμυθίῳ ὅπως λευκοτέρα
ἔτι δοκοίη εἶναι ἢ ἦν, πολλῇ δ᾽ ἐγχούσῃ ὅπως ἐρυθροτέρα φαίνοιτο
τῆς ἀληθείας, ὑποδήματα δ᾽ ἔχουσαν ὑψηλά, ὅπως μείζων δοκοίη εἶναι
ἢ ἐπεφύκει, “with much white lead rubbed into her skin, to make her
look fairer than she was; and with much rouge, to make her appear
rosier; and wearing high sandals, to add to her natural height.”

  [208] x., 2.

Ischomachus persuades her to give up these vanities, asking her if
she will like him better if he goes about μίλτρῳ ἀλειφόμενος καὶ τοὺς
ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑπαλειφόμενος, “anointed with red ochre, and with pigment
under his eyes.”

[Illustration: FIG. 52.—(_a_) A Pyxis in the British Museum. (_b_) A
Toilet-box in the British Museum.
  _Face page_ 122.]

White lead was commonly used for producing a fair complexion; it was
prepared by laying lead in vinegar, scraping off, powdering, and
heating the white rust thus formed.[209] Various substances were used
for producing rouge—some mineral, some vegetable; of the latter,
the root of a plant (ἔγχουσα or ἄγχουσα), certain kinds of seaweed
(φῦκος), and mulberry juice (συκάμινον), were common. That some kind
of pigment was used for darkening the eyelids is further testified
by Pollux[210] and Aristophanes.[211] Lamp-black and a sulphuret of
antimony (στίμμις), were used for blackening eyebrows and eyelids.
Perfumed powders and unguents were used for skin and hair, scented
with myrrh or roses or other products. The simplest and most common
unguent was, of course, olive oil. In addition to artificial
complexions, we learn that false hair and wigs (πηνίκη, προκομίον),
were not unknown, and that these came from the East.[212]

  [209] _Theophr. de Lapidibus_, 56.

  [210] VII., 95.

  [211] Fragment 695.

  [212] See Xenophon’s _Cyropædia_, I., iii., 2.

Many examples have survived of the various articles pertaining to
the equipment of a Greek lady’s toilet-table. Combs, hair-pins,
mirrors, boxes, and bottles are numerous in our museums. Combs are
usually made of ivory or bone, with a double row of rather fine
teeth. Hair-pins of bone, ivory, or metal consist of a single pin
with an ornamental head. Mirrors are of highly polished metal,
usually bronze, though some have been found in silver. The mirrors
may be divided into two classes—disk-mirrors and box-mirrors. The
former consists of a single disk polished on one side, the reverse
being usually engraved. The disk is furnished with a handle, which
is sometimes so constructed that it can serve also as a foot; the
mirror can so be made to stand on a table. The handle of a mirror of
this kind very frequently takes the form of a human figure.[213] The
box-mirror consists of two disks, the lower one, with its polished
upper surface, serving as the mirror, the upper one as a cover to
protect it. The two are sometimes quite separate and fit closely on
to one another, but more often they are joined by a hinge; the cover
is usually ornamented with relief work, a favourite subject being
Aphrodite and Eros, although other mythological scenes are also

  [213] Fig. 53 (_b_).

  [214] Fig. 53 (_a_).

[Illustration: FIG. 53.—(_a_) Bronze Box Mirror—British Museum. (_b_)
Bronze Stand Mirror—British Museum.
  _Face page_ 124.]

Of the various receptacles used for containing trinkets, hair-bands,
cosmetics, and so on, the commonest is the pyxis, although we find
also baskets and little square caskets represented in vase-paintings
and on the Attic grave reliefs. A box for cosmetics in the British
Museum is in the shape of a bird.[215] The pyxis is a circular box
with a lid; its sides are sometimes straight, but more often concave,
and it is frequently raised on a foot. Its material was originally
boxwood, hence its name, πύξις; but the majority of those which
are extant are terra-cotta, though they are known also in ivory,
alabaster, and precious metals. A common subject on a terra-cotta
pyxis is a toilet scene or a marriage procession.[216]

  [215] Fig. 52 (_b_).

  [216] Fig. 52 (_a_).

[Illustration: FIG. 54.]

The alabastron used to contain unguents or perfumes is a long narrow
bottle with a spreading neck and small opening; it has no foot, and
is round at the bottom, so that some kind of stand must have been
necessary to hold it upright when not in use.[217] It was usually
made of stone, alabaster, or terra-cotta. The lekythos also was
sometimes used for the same purpose.

  [217] Fig. 54.

That Greek ladies wore abundant jewellery is proved by frequent
representations both in sculpture and vase-paintings, as also by
actual finds of jewellery, notably in the Greek graves of the fourth
century at Kertch. These objects have been described and discussed by
Mr A. B. Walters, in his book on _The Art of the Greeks_.[218] Rings,
bracelets, necklaces, brooches, and ear-rings, were commonly worn,
as well as ornamental hair-pins and metal diadems for the hair. Many
examples of goldsmith’s work are extant including some gold ornaments
set with precious stones.

  [218] Page 259 ff.

       *       *       *       *       *

In summing up the results of the foregoing enquiry, we find that
the nature and development of the costume of the Greeks is entirely
in accordance with what we know of the nature and development of
the national character. The chief characteristics of the Doric
dress, which was probably worn in early days by all the inhabitants
of the mainland alike, is a certain broad simplicity; that of
the Ionic dress, which was worn by the Asiatic Greeks, and for a
short period at least by the Athenians also, is graceful elegance.
These characteristics distinguish the Doric and Ionic temperaments
as exhibited in art also, notably in architecture, and to some
extent also in sculpture. Athens appears to have occupied a middle
position between the Peloponnese and Ionia. The Peloponnesians seem
to have clung throughout their history to the Dorian dress, as the
Ionians probably did to the Ionic; but in Athens we find change and
development most strongly marked. In very early days the Athenians
wore the Doric dress; then in the course of the seventh and sixth
centuries their intercourse with the East brought them into contact
with Eastern ideas and Eastern customs, and they appear to have
caught something of the luxury which was characteristic of the East.
At any rate, for a time at least they adopted the Ionic dress,
and carried it to a great degree of luxury and extravagance. Then
with the Persian wars came a reaction against anything savouring
of Orientalism, and a return to greater simplicity. This led to a
resumption of the Doric dress, with certain modifications and the
retention of some Ionic elements.

It can hardly be questioned that the freedom and simplicity of their
dress was to a great extent the cause of the development of the
splendid physique which the Greeks undoubtedly enjoyed. Their loose
draperies allowed their limbs perfect freedom, and their bodies
were unhampered by constraint of any kind. In the palæstra and the
gymnasium, air and sunlight were allowed to exercise their salutary
influence, for the Greeks were not “ashamed of their own naked skin,”
and so discarded their clothing when in pursuit of their athletic
occupations. The healthy state of body thus preserved no doubt had
its share in fostering that healthy state of mind to which are due
the sanity and sobriety that characterise all Greek thought, whether
expressed in literature, art, or philosophy.


  Abbia, statuette from, 5

  Achæans, 5, 13, 15, 16, 17, 102, 105, 108

  Achilles, 21;
    shield of, 20

  Acropolis of Athens, 38, 78;
    archaic statues from, 44, 69, 71, 73-96, 101, 112, 119

  Actor’s dress, 71

  Ægean islands, 2, 9, 14, 98

  Ægina, 39, 41

  Ægis, 33, 34, 47

  Agamemnon, 17, 28

  Alabastron, 125

  Alcinous, palace of, 2, 20

  Alexander, 111

  Amazons, 53, 106, 118

  Andromache, 27;
    head-dress of, 35, 108

  Antinous, 31, 32

  Aphrodite, 3, 33, 34, 64, 124

  Apollo, 26, 80, 94, 109, 110

  Apron, 5, 11, 13

  Argive women, 40

  Aristarchus, 20

  Aristophanes, 54, 98, 101, 110, 115, 116, 117, 120, 122, 123

  Aristotle, 98, 99

  Arsenic, 121

  Artemis, Brauronia, 68, 70;
    in Dresden, 46, 53;
    of Gabii, 70, 95

  Artemisia, 50

  Aryballos, 121

  Assyria, 7, 8, 99, 117

  Athena, 26, 29, 32, 33, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51, 87, 119

  Athenians, 39, 40, 41, 42, 53, 57, 58, 59, 63, 65, 73, 74, 86, 91,
    98, 116, 120, 126

  Barber, 120

  Bombycina, 99

  Boots, 8, 116, 117, 118, 119

  Bottles, 121, 123

  Bracelets, 6, 7, 13, 125

  Breeches, 6

  Briseis, 50

  Brooches, 3, 4, 16, 18, 25, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32, 35, 37, 40, 41, 52,
    53, 56, 60, 62, 64, 67, 81, 87, 92, 94, 95, 125

  Brygos, 66, 69

  Bull-taming, 7, 8

  Buttons, 13, 76

  Calypso, 27, 33, 34

  Carians, 40, 41, 57, 58

  Cassandra, 48

  Charites, relief of the, 78

  Chiton, Homeric, 18, 21, 22, 27, 31, 32, 37;
    Doric, 51, 52, 53, 60;
    Ionic, 19, 32, 41, 44, 46, 51, 58, 59-70, 76, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82,
      84, 87, 89, 93, 96, 98

  Chitoniscus, 77

  Chlamys, 54

  Circe, 33

  Cloak, 6, 7, 17, 24, 26, 34, 49, 52, 55, 76, 77, 78, 80, 92, 93, 95

  _Coa_, 99

  _Coæ vestes_, 98, 100

  Colour, applied to sculpture, 83, 84, 85

  Colours, 37, 100, 101

  Combs, 123

  Corsets, 70

  Cos, silk from, 99

  Cosmetics, 113, 122

  Crete, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 14, 57, 107

  Crossbands, 62, 64, 69, 70, 96

  Cupbearer of Knossos, 3, 9, 107

  Delphi charioteer, 62, 65

  Demeter, 106

  Dionysus, 69, 117

  Doric dress, 39-56, 59;
    blended with Ionic, 52, 64, 95

  Draped type, 15, 17, 38

  Dressing-gown type, 15

  Ear-rings, 29, 37, 125

  Egypt, 9, 98;
    tomb fresco from, 9

  Eirene and Plutus, 45

  Eleusis, 49, 72, 78

  Embroidery, 31, 32, 38, 61, 89, 100, 102, 103

  Ephebi, 55, 110

  Etruscans, 10

  Euphronius, 79

  Eustathius, 70

  Euxitheos, 50, 62

  False hair, 123

  Fibulæ, 3, 4, 5, 13

  Fillets, 108, 110, 111, 112, 122

  Flounces, 3, 12, 14, 96

  Footgear, 7, 115-119

  Frills, 76, 80, 82, 86, 90, 91, 92, 94, 95

  Fringes, 12, 29, 33

  Fustanella, 78

  Girdles, 5, 11, 16, 19, 22, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50,
    53, 62, 63, 70, 77, 79, 80, 81, 87, 122

  Gold, 29, 31, 33, 34, 100, 112, 119, 125

  Hair nets, 36, 37, 108, 113

  Hair-pins, 123, 125

  Hats, 11, 12, 111, 113

  Head-dress, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 28, 36, 37, 107-114

  Hector, 3, 28, 35

  Helen, 27, 35, 102

  Hellanicus of Lesbos, 10

  Helmets, 8, 9, 28, 107

  Hephaistos, 52, 111

  Hera, 29, 33, 37, 66, 112

  Hermes, 118

  Herodotus, 39, 41, 42, 48, 57, 58, 59, 64, 96, 98, 103, 108, 117

  Hieron, 49, 60, 65, 106

  Himation, Homeric, 24, 25;
    Doric, 48-52, 54, 95;
    Ionic, 52, 69, 71, 73-96

  Hittites, 7

  Homeric civilization, 2

  Homeric dress, 4, 15-38

  Homeric house, 4

  _Iliad_, 3, 8, 17, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37,
    102, 108, 109

  India, 98

  Ionians, 19, 57, 58, 59, 65, 98, 126

  Ionic dress, 40, 42, 51, 57-72, 73-96

  Jacket type, 3, 11, 12, 13, 15

  Jewellery, 122, 125

  Kefts, 9

  Kerchief, 36, 38, 113

  Kertch, fragments of fabrics from, 97, 103, 105, 106;
    jewellery from, 125

  Kimono, 12

  Knossos, 2, 3, 5, 10, 11, 12, 16, 38, 107

  Kolpos, 44, 52, 60, 63, 70, 80, 88

  Laertes, 18; shroud of, 17, 27

  Leather, 8, 9, 21, 28, 33, 97, 98, 116, 117

  Lekythos, 121, 125

  Linen, 11, 12, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27, 35, 40, 41, 58, 59, 60, 70, 88,
    97, 98

  Materials, 19, 60, 70, 75, 79, 88, 97-99, 100, 105

  Mausoleum, 51, 53

  Mausolus, 50

  Medici collar, 12

  Menelaus, 17, 28

  Men’s dress, pre-Hellenic, 5-10;
    Homeric, 17-28;
    Doric, 52-56;
    Ionic, 58-72

  Minoan art, 13, 15

  Mirrors, 123, 124

  Modern Greeks, 7, 38

  Mourning, 37, 101

  Mycenæan dress, 3, 7, 107

  Mycenæan remains, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, 15, 28, 37, 107

  Mycone, 14

  Nausicaa, 35

  Necklaces, 6, 7, 37, 125

  Nereids, 64, 87

  Nike, 48, 103

  Obi, 12

  Odysseus, 23;
    house of, 2

  Odyssey, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 37

  Oil-flasks, 121

  Ointments, 121

  Olive-oil, 121, 123

  Open Doric dress, 31, 44, 46

  Ornamentation, 101-106

  Overfold, 30, 33, 44, 45, 46, 48, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 80,
    82, 85, 87, 88, 89, 94, 96

  Pæonius, 47

  Paris, 28, 32

  Parthenon, 45, 47, 51, 55, 64, 65, 95

  Patroclus, funeral of, 21

  Patterns, 11, 32, 33, 61, 75, 77, 83, 88, 89, 96, 100-106, 112

  Pausanias, 53, 98, 99, 110

  Pelasgians, 10, 58

  Penelope, 31, 32, 34

  Peplos, 3, 28-33, 44, 48, 51, 52, 63, 69, 80, 81, 82, 87, 96;
    of Athena, 46, 47

  Perfume, 123

  Pergamon, 47

  Persephone, 48

  Petasos, 111, 114, 117

  Petsofa, terra-cottas from, 6, 11, 12, 13, 14

  Pheidias, 46, 47, 102, 119

  Phœnicians, 9, 57

  Pigments, 104, 122, 123

  Pins, 16, 18, 28, 29, 30, 35, 43, 45

  Plaits, 110

  Plato, 115

  Pollux, 46, 52, 59, 96, 100, 101, 116, 118, 123

  Poseidon, 37, 38, 54

  Powder, 113, 122

  Pre-Hellenic dress, 1-14, 15, 23, 38, 107

  Pyxis, 124

  Razors, 120, 121

  Red ochre, 122

  Rouge, 122, 123

  Rings, 4, 109, 125

  Sandals, 17, 28, 29, 37, 116, 118, 119, 122

  Sash, 12

  Scarf, 37, 76, 87, 93, 112

  Scissors, 65, 120

  Scraper, 120

  Seaweed, rouge prepared from, 123

  Sericum, 99

  Sewn garments, 12, 18, 31, 52, 60, 64, 66, 67, 87, 91, 96, 97

  Shoes, 7, 10, 115, 116, 117, 119

  Silk, 88, 97, 98, 99

  Silkworm, 99

  Skins, 17, 27

  Skirt, 3, 11, 12, 13, 83, 88

  Sleeves, 6, 11, 32, 53, 60, 61, 62, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 71, 87

  Slippers, 116, 118

  Snake-goddess, 11, 107

  Snood, 113

  Socrates, 53, 115

  Solon, 41, 42, 59, 93

  Spartans, 53

  Strigil, 121

  Sulphuret of antimony, 123

  Sumptuary laws, 41, 59, 93

  Survivals, 8, 13

  Tanagra statuettes, 49, 114

  Theocritus, 98, 114, 115, 118, 119

  Thessaly, 111, 114

  Thessalian cloak, 54

  Thetis, 34, 37

  Thrace, 54, 111, 116, 117

  Thucydides, 42, 57, 58, 59, 109

  Tiryns, wall-painting from, 7

  Toilet, 120-125

  Toilet-boxes, 123, 124

  Toilet scenes on vases, 121, 122, 125

  Trojans, 15, 16, 102, 105

  Tunic, 6, 7, 17

  Turks, 7

  Unguents, 123

  Vaphio cups, 7

  Veil, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 48

  Velletri, Athena of, 51

  Victory, 47, 92

  Waistcloth, 5, 6, 10, 22, 23

  White lead, 122, 123

  Wigs, 123

  Women’s dress, pre-Hellenic, 10-14;
    Homeric, 28-38;
    Doric, 39-52;
    Ionic, 57-96

  Woollen garments, 24, 25, 26, 27, 51, 60, 97, 98, 105

  Xenophon, 113, 116, 122

  Xoana, 86

  Zeus, 29, 32, 44, 69, 102


  ἄγχουσα, 123

  ἀλεξάνεμος, 24

  ἁλοῦργος, 101

  ἀμοργῖνον, 70, 98

  ἄμπυξ, 36, 112

  ἀμφιβάλλω, 17, 24

  ἀμφιέννυμι, 24, 29

  ἀνεμοσκεπής, 24

  ἀνθινά, 102

  ἁπλοΐς, 24

  ἀποβάλλω, 24, 36

  ἀποδέσμος, 70

  ἀποπτύγμα, 30, 44, 87

  ἀποτίθημι, 24

  ἀρβύλαι, 118

  ἀρβυλίδες, 118

  ἀρύβαλλος, 121

  βαθύζωνος, 15, 16

  βαθύκολπος, 15, 16

  βατραχίς, 100, 101

  βλαυταί, 118

  βύσσινα, 98

  βύσσος, 98

  δέσματα, 35

  διαφανές, 70

  δίπλαξ, 27, 37, 102

  διπλῆ, 24, 25, 26

  διπτύχον, 26

  διφθέρα, 97

  ἕανος, 28, 29

  ἔγχουσα, 122, 123

  εἷμα, 48

  ἐκδύνω, 18, 24

  ἐκταδίην, 25, 26

  ἕλικες, 37

  ἑλκεσιπέπλος, 32

  ἑλκεχίτωνες, 19, 59, 80

  ἔμβας, 116, 117, 118

  ἐμπάσσω, 102

  ἐμπλαισίῳ, 68

  ἐνδρομίδες, 118

  ἔνδυμα, 52

  ἐνδύνω, 17, 18

  ἐνετή, 16, 29

  ἕννυμι, 48

  ἔξωμις, 52, 53

  ἑτερομάσχαλος, 52

  εὐμάριδες, 118

  εὐστρέπτοισι βοεῦσιν, 21

  ζειρά, 54

  ζῶμα, 22, 23

  ζώνη, 16, 29, 33

  ζώννυμι, 22, 29

  ζωστήρ, 16, 29, 23

  θάψινος, 101

  θολία, 113

  ἵμαντες, 21

  ἱματίον, 39, 48

  κάλυκες, 37

  κάλυμμα, 28

  κάλυπτρη, 28, 34

  κατὰ στῆθος, 29

  κεκρύφαλος, 36

  κεστὸς ἱμᾶς, 34

  κίλλιον, 100

  κοκκοβαφής, 101

  κόλπος, 30, 33

  κονιπόδες, 118

  κόρυμβος, 109

  κουρεῖον, 120

  κρήδεμνον, 16, 28, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 48, 51

  κρηπίδες, 118

  κροκωτός, 101

  κρουπέζια, 119

  κρωβύλος, 109, 110

  κυάνεος, 37, 101

  κυανοχαίτης, 37

  κυμάτιον, 104

  κυνῆ Θεσσαλίς, 113

  λαμπρός, 29, 35

  λιπαρός, 35

  λήκυθος, 121

  λώπη, 17, 26

  μαλακός, 20

  μίτρη, 23, 112

  μονοχίτων, 53

  ξυρόν, 120

  ξύστρα, 121

  ὀθόνη, 20, 35

  οἰοχίτων, 23

  ὀμφάκινος, 101

  ὀνάγρινος, 100

  ὀρθοστάδιος, 71

  οὔλη, 24, 25

  παμποικίλος, 32

  πέδιλον, 17, 28, 29, 116

  πέπλος, 16, 17, 28, 29, 31

  περιβάλλω, 17, 24

  περιβλῆμα, 52

  περιζῶμα, 70

  περόνη, 16, 29, 31, 39, 59

  περσικαί, 118

  πέτασος, 111

  πηνίκη, 123

  πῖλος, 111

  πλεκτὴ ἀναδέσμη, 36

  ποδήρης, 19, 59

  ποικίλος, 32, 102

  πόλος, 112

  πορφύρεος, 3, 25, 37, 101, 102

  προκομίον, 123

  πύξις, 124

  ῥήγεα, 17

  σάκκος, 112

  σιγαλόεις, 19, 36

  στεφάνη, 36, 112

  στίμμις, 123

  στόνυξ, 120

  στρέπτος χιτών, 20, 21

  στρόφιον, 70

  συκάμινον, 123

  ταινία, 70

  τανυπέπλος, 32

  τερμίοεις, 19

  τέττιξ, 58, 109, 110

  τρίβων, 53

  τυρρηνικά, 119

  ὑπόδημα, 116

  φαινομηρίς, 46

  φαιός, 101

  φᾶρος, 16, 17, 24, 27, 28, 33, 35, 37

  φοινίκεος, 101

  φοινικόεις, 25, 37

  φῦκος, 123

  χειριδωτός, 68

  χιτὼν, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 23, 24, 35, 52, 59, 70, 98

  χιτῶν ἔξωμις, 52, 53

  χιτωνάριον, 70

  χιτώνιον, 70, 98

  χιτωνίσκος, 68, 70, 71

  χλαῖνα, 16, 17, 23, 24-28, 35, 37, 55

  χλάμυς, 54, 56, 111

  ψάλις, 120

  ψήκτρα, 120

  ψίλωθρον, 121

  ψιμυθίον, 122




      *      *      *      *      *      *

Transcriber's note:

  * Original spelling was kept, but variant spellings were made
    consistent when a predominant usage was found.

  * Obvious printer errors have been silently corrected.

  * Illustrations have been slightly moved so that they do not
    break up paragraphs while remaining close to the text they

  * Throughout the text, “Fürtwängler” has been replaced by
    “Furtwängler” and “ἀπλόϊς” by “ἁπλοΐς”.

  * Other emendations made:

    page   7:         “ἤυτε” → “ἠΰτε”
    page   8:       “ἰμᾶσιν” → “ἱμᾶσιν”
    note  10:     “Ἐφήμερις” → “Ἐφημερίς”
    page  16:       “χαλῖνα” → “χλαῖνα”
    page  19:  “ἑλκεχιτῶνες” → “ἑλκεχίτωνες”
    page  20:    “εὐννήτους” → “ἐϋννήτους”
    page  21:   “στρέπτοῖσι” → “στρεπτοῖσι”
    note  32:         “κατά” → “κάτα”
    page  29:   “εὐτρήτοισι” → “ἐϋτρήτοισι”
    page  29:      “λαμπρὸν” → “λευκὸν”
    note  54: “xiv., 175 f.” → “xiv., 178 f.”
    page  31:  “εὐγνάμπτοις” → “ἐϋγνάμπτοις”
    page  34:      “v., 229” → “v., 232”
    note  74:        “_Die_” → “_Das_”
    page  59:  “ἑλκεχίτῶνες” → “ἑλκεχίτωνες”
    page  80:  “Ἑλκεχιτῶνες” → “Ἑλκεχίτωνες”
    note 170:        “_Die_” → “_Das_”
    page 115:       “ἔποίει” → “ἐποίει”
    page 122:        “πόλλῳ” → “πολλῇ”
    note 212: “_Cyropædeia_” → “_Cyropædia_”
    page 133:  “ἑλκεχιτῶνες” → “ἑλκεχίτωνες”

*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Greek Dress - A Study of the Costumes Worn in Ancient Greece, from Pre-Hellenic Times to the Hellenistic Age" ***

Doctrine Publishing Corporation provides digitized public domain materials.
Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians.
This effort is time consuming and expensive, so in order to keep providing
this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties,
including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files. We designed Doctrine Publishing
Corporation's search system for use by individuals, and we request that you
use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort
to Doctrine Publishing's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a
large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of
public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Keep it legal -  Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for
ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because
we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States,
that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries.
Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we
can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is
allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Doctrine Publishing
means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world.
Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.