Chapter I: Costume (1)

Costumes, Stitched and Draped--The Chiton--The Himation or
Chlaina--Drapery--The Uniform Male Dresses of Sparta--The
Chlamys--Similarity Between Male and Female Costumes--The
Difference Between Doric and Ionic Garments--The Fashion at Athens
in the Fifth Century B.C.--The
Materials--Footgear--Leggings--Head-Coverings--Mode of Dressing the
Hair.

To obtain a complete insight into the life of former ages we require primarily a knowledge of the historical and geographical, political, and religious conditions of the people in question, as well as of its intellectual development in art and science. These, however, it is not our purpose to consider here. The second requisite for a vivid picture is a clear notion of the surroundings in which the people of that time lived: their dwellings, furniture, utensils, etc. And lastly, there is another point, the knowledge of which is no less indispensable in order to obtain a clear image of the past, and that is the costume. Our knowledge of the customs and habits of daily life appears far more real, and stands out more vividly, if we can also form in our minds a picture of the people of that time. Thus no one can expect to form a clear picture of mediaeval life without at least a general notion of the costume of that period. This is equally true of every epoch of civilisation, even of a period so little distant from us in time as the eighteenth century.

We therefore preface our description of Greek life with an account of the details of Greek costume, and of its historical development; and our reasons for going into greater detail here than in other domains is that there are so many wrong, or at any rate incomplete, notions extant concerning it. For when we speak to-day of Greek costume we may generally assume that the majority of people, if female dress is in question, think of the drapery of the magnificent female figures in the Parthenon marbles; while, as regards male costume, their minds will at once recur to the classic figure of Sophocles in the Lateran or of the Aeschines of Naples, and form their notion of Greek male costume accordingly. It is, however, absolutely wrong to regard these as typical of Greek dress. They represent neither the costume of all Hellas nor that of the whole Greek age. That “noble simplicity and quiet greatness,” which is as conspicuous in the dress of the age of Pericles as in its art, is, like the latter, the product of slow development through various phases, concerning which, with the exception of a few literary allusions, the monuments give us all the information we possess.

* * * * *

Generally speaking, we may distinguish, both in male and female Greek costume, two kinds of garments--those which are cut in a certain shape and partly stitched, and mantles of various shapes which are draped on the figure and only acquire their form by means of this draping. This distinction holds good with few exceptions throughout the whole history of Greek costume; and, generally speaking, it is the under garments which are stitched, while the upper garments are draped. Yet we must observe that, while male clothing is, as a rule, confined to two garments, we very often find in female costume a third, or even a fourth, belonging sometimes to the first and sometimes to the second of the above-mentioned classes.

The names which were used throughout almost the whole of Greek antiquity for the two chief articles of dress are, for the under garment, _chiton_; for the upper garment, _himation_. These terms are used for both male and female garments, but several other designations are used, and the word himation is not found in the Homeric period, but the cloak which is worn over the chiton is called _chlaina_.

We may treat first of male costume. As regards the chiton of the oldest period, we infer, from allusions in epic poetry, with which the oldest monuments agree (for the discoveries at Mycenae give us no distinct notion of pre-Homeric costume), that both the short and the long kinds were in use. The short chiton seems to be the usual dress of daily life; it was especially worn when free movement was required, and was therefore the suitable garment for war or hunting, for gymnastic exercises or manual labour. The long chiton, which was afterwards regarded as especially Ionic, and certainly maintained itself longer in Ionia and in Attica than in the rest of Greece, was not, however, unknown to the Doric races. It was the usual dress for men of advanced age and good position; it was also worn by young people on festive occasions. We therefore find on the monuments of the oldest style that not only the older gods wear a long chiton, but also that young men are clothed in it on festive occasions, or if they are in any way connected with religious functions, as, for instance, priests, harp-players, flute-players, charioteers, etc. This use of the long chiton remains up to the classic period. Thus, for instance, we see the figure known as the _Archon Basileus_ in the central group of the Eastern Parthenon frieze in this dress; and tragic actors, if they represented men of good position and in peaceful circumstances, also continued to wear the long chiton.

Epic poetry itself gives us no direct information about the shape of the chiton in the Homeric period. Helbig maintains, basing his assertions on some casual indications, and chiefly on the oldest monuments, that it differed from the dress of the classic period in being close-fitting and free from folds. It is true that the old vase paintings show us the short chiton fitting closely round the body and drawn quite firmly round the legs. It is girt fast round the hips, and as a rule does not go below the knee. However, it is not safe to draw conclusions of this kind from ancient pictures, for much which might be regarded as characteristic of ancient costume may be due only to the incompleteness of art, which was not yet capable of representing full garments with folds. Thus, in ancient works of art, the long chiton also appears quite narrow in the upper part, but then falls perpendicularly from the waist, sometimes gradually, but more often straight without any folds to the feet. (Compare the figure of Apollo in Fig. 1 and of Priam in Fig. 2.) Both the long and short chitons as a rule have no sleeves, but only an armhole; we sometimes find short sleeves not quite covering the upper arm. Unfortunately, we cannot form a clear notion from the pictures of the mode in which it was put on. It is, however, probable that the

_Luk de Binleail_ _A Roy. sc_

FIG. 1.]

short chiton was sewn together all round and thrown over the head, where there may have been an additional slit connected with this opening, and fastened with a pin. There are, however, no traces of this on the monuments, nor are fibulae or brooches mentioned in the Homeric descriptions in connection with the male chiton. Probably the long chiton was cut in the manner of a chemise. Helbig’s hypothesis that there was a slit down the middle of the front is just as uncertain as his similar assumption with regard to Homeric female dress.

Besides the chiton, the older male costume also had a sort of loincloth or apron. It is not at all improbable that at one period the Greeks wore merely the apron and cloak, and no chiton. When the latter became universally fashionable (which, according to recent surmises, was due to Semitic influence) the cloth disappeared, or continued only as part of military dress.

The himation, or chlaina, appears on ancient monuments stiff and free from folds, like the chiton. This is a garment resembling a mantle, which appears in many archaic vase pictures in two distinct forms: either as a wide cloak covering the greater part of the body, or as a narrow covering lightly draped. The first form, corresponding to the later male himation, is most commonly combined with the long chiton. The cut of this cloak is four-cornered, probably oblong, and it is worn in such a way that the greater part of it falls behind and covers the back and part of the legs, while in front it is thrown over the shoulders and arms, and falls down over the body, two of its points falling within the arms and the other two without. The other form, which may be in general compared with the later _chlamys_, is found with both the long and the short chiton, and is also sometimes worn as the only covering, without any under garment. This may, however, be regarded as the ideal clothing, which does not correspond to real life, just as in later monuments we find the chlamys alone without the chiton. It is put on in such a way that the lower arm is left uncovered, and the two points fall down in front over the shoulder and upper arm, while behind it either covers only the upper part of the back, or else the cloak falls down so far that its edge is almost as low as the points in front. (Compare Fig. 3, representing a dance from the François vase.) We cannot pronounce with certainty on the shape of this cloak. It appears, however, to have been oval or elliptical, and to have ended in two points; it was folded in such a way that the folded part was worn inside, while the edges, which were ornamented with wide borders, fell outside. In Fig. 2, where the shape of the cloak is that of an ellipse cut through the long axis, the folding is also evident. I should therefore differ from Helbig in regarding this narrower chlaina as the garment called in epic poetry _diplax_. Neither kind of cloak is fastened, and they both differ from that of later periods in being worn open in front. In Homeric poetry another kind of chlaina is also mentioned, which corresponds more closely to the later one; since it is stated that the folded chlaina is fastened on the shoulder with a brooch. No proof of this, however, has as yet been found in the older monuments.

As a remnant of the most primitive dress, clothes made of skins, such as were afterwards worn only by country people, huntsmen and the like, still existed in the Homeric age. Homer several times mentions skins as the dress of soldiers; on the older monuments we see them drawn over a short chiton, and sometimes even fastened with a girdle.

How long this ancient dress continued in use we cannot determine with any certainty; but the majority even of vase pictures with black figures show a different dress. It is true, as we mentioned just now, that the long chiton still continued in use besides the short one, but the cut and the mode of wearing it changed.

The monuments of this period almost always show signs of drapery, and this is, moreover, of an artificial, exaggerated, and pedantic kind. It must have been the fashion at that time, that is, from the sixth till nearly the middle of the fifth century, to lay the folds of men’s dress, as well as of women’s, in symmetrically parallel lines. In pictures the lower edges of dresses and cloaks show various regularly cut-out points, while on the inner side there are many small zigzag folds arranged with laborious symmetry. (Compare Fig. 4, “The Rape of Helen,” after a vase picture by the vase painter Hiero.) This may be partly due to the artistic style, which at that period inclined to over-elaboration; yet it is impossible to doubt that we find here not only an expression of archaic art, but also the representation of a dress laboriously and artificially folded, stiffened, and ironed, in which the folds were produced by external aids, such as ironing, starching, pressing, even stitching of the stuff laid in folds, or sewing such folds on to the material. We cannot determine when this custom began in Greece. In works of art we find it comparatively late in the sixth century B.C.; yet, as Helbig remarks, it is by no means impossible that this fashion existed at a far more ancient period, since the custom of laying material in artificial folds by means of stiffening or ironing was already known in Egypt in 4000 B.C.; and it therefore seems extremely probable that the Phoenicians adopted the practice at a very early period, and introduced it into Greece. It is a very natural assumption that this mode of draping would in the first instance be adopted for linen material, and that it would therefore be introduced among the Greeks with the linen chiton, which took the place of the woollen one formerly worn.

On the other hand, however, it is probable that, as woollen clothing was afterwards worn as well as linen, they attempted to ornament this in similar fashion by artificial folds; the works of art, however, show that these folds were far less in quantity and less sharply defined in woollen clothing than in linen, which is naturally much better adapted for the purpose.

Apart from the folds, the clothes now became wider and more comfortable, and were less closely girt round the hips. The chiton is still a garment made by sewing, and the long differs from the short only in length, not in shape. Both are, as a rule, so cut as to be sewn together regularly below the girdle; above the girdle they are sometimes provided with a slit on one side to facilitate putting on. They usually have sleeves, sometimes short, sometimes long; these are either fastened all round, or, as is also the case in female dress, open at the top and fastened by pins or buttons. In this case the chiton is sewn in such a manner as to be all in one above the girdle as far as the sleeve, and open at the top, so that the slits for the arms and neck are connected; the wearer puts the chiton over his head, draws up the sleeve on the upper arm, and thus supplies the opening for the neck. Besides this, there is often an ornamental arrangement such as we find in the female dress of the same period a puff of regular folds (_kolpos_), formed by drawing up the dress over the girdle and letting the piece drawn up all round fall again over the girdle; and, in addition, a bib falling over the breast in zig-zag folds, which appears, as a rule, to be a separate piece sewn on the dress at the opening of the neck. In Fig. 4 we observe the kolpos and bib over the short chiton of Hermes in the centre, the bib also over the long chiton of Paris (on the left), and of Tyndareus (on the right).

In this dress we already find the elements of the male costume common throughout classic Greece in the fifth century. It is modelled on the ancient elaborate style, and the sewing is reduced as much as possible, while the garment falls in regular free folds, and fits closely to the figure. According to Thucydides, it was at Sparta that it first became customary to adopt a uniform dress for the whole male population, and thus to do away with a distinction which had hitherto prevailed between the dress of poor and rich. This distinction, at any rate, held in so far that at Athens the richer people, as Thucydides states, wore the long linen chiton, the poorer people the short woollen one. At Athens and in Ionia the long linen chiton remained as the dress of older people till shortly before the time of Thucydides; but then it was universally discarded, or rather reserved for the classes mentioned above, and for festive occasions; while the short woollen chiton from that period became the universal dress. This is usually found in the form of a widish garment sewn together below the girdle, and above it divided into two parts, a front and back piece, put on in such a manner as to be fastened together by pins or fibulae on the shoulder. If the chiton was allowed to fall quite free it usually fell down about as far as the knees; but it was customary, especially when unimpeded and free movement was necessary, to draw up a part above the girdle and let it fall in folds below it. (Compare Fig. 5.) Workmen, countrymen, sailors, and others whose occupation required free movement of the right arm, used only to fasten the two pieces of the chiton on the left shoulder, then the points of the other side hung down in front and behind, and left the

right breast, shoulder, and arm exposed. This costume, of which the relief in Fig. 6 gives a representation, was called _exomis_. Strictly speaking, it is no actual garment, but only a particular way of wearing the chiton; but special tunics for labourers were made in

this fashion. Besides this, chitons were afterwards made with the upper part also sewn together, and with armholes or short sleeves, which, however, never covered more than a part of the upper arm. Long sleeves falling to the hand belong exclusively to barbarian costume. Yet the bib, which as late as the first half of the fifth century was worn with the male chiton also, is not a part of later costume.

From this time onward the name “himation” was used for the cloak worn with the chiton, while “chlaina” was only retained for a special kind, distinct rather by its material than by its shape. The himation was often worn in the oldest period in the way described above, that is, with two points falling on the two sides in front. (Compare the Hermes in Fig. 4.) But it became more and more common, and from the classic period onwards quite universal, to fold the cloak tightly round, and this was done as follows. One point was drawn from the back over the left shoulder and held fast here between the chest and arm, then the cloak was drawn round over the back in wide folds reaching to the shins, and from there back again to the front on the right side. This was done in two ways. If the right arm was to be kept free the himation was drawn through under the right shoulder and in front folded across the body and chest, while the last piece was thrown back across the left shoulder (compare the Paris in Fig. 4 on the left), or else over the left arm (compare the man on the right in Fig. 4). The other mode, and the one common in the dress of an ordinary citizen, was to draw the cloak over the right arm and shoulder, so that at most the right hand was exposed, and then to throw it back again over the left shoulder. This arrangement was facilitated by small weights of clay or lead sewn on

Statue of Sophocles in the Lateran. From a Photograph.]

the points, which helped to keep the cloak firm in its place. It was, however, a special art, which required practice, and probably also assistance, to produce a beautiful and harmonious drapery in this kind of dress; and the position of the wearer showed itself in the way in which he wore his himation, which ought neither to be drawn up too far, nor fall too low. It was also regarded as inelegant to wear the cloak from right to left. There is no nobler or more perfect example of this costume, in which the chiton is combined with the himation, than the portrait statue of Sophocles in the Lateran given in Fig. 7. Here the wide cloak with its many folds covers the form in such a way as not to hide the shape of the body, and the various folds caused by the position of the arm and the mode of draping the cloak are combined together in the most harmonious manner. A humorous counterpart of this ideal figure is Fig. 8 in terra-cotta, representing a vulgar citizen in chiton and himation.

The “chlamys” was a special kind of cloak which originated in Thessaly, but from the fifth century

onwards became common in Greece. Originally it was a soldier’s or rider’s dress, and is, therefore, only seen on statues worn over armour. It is a short cloak of light material and oval shape, fastened by means of a brooch either in front at the neck, or more commonly on the right shoulder, thus covering the left arm and leaving the right free. (Compare Figs. 9 and 10, of which Fig. 9 shows the former mode of wearing the cloak, while in Fig. 10 the youth with the spear has his whole left side covered by the chlamys.) The chlamys was the common dress of youths as soon as they attained their majority ἐϕηβεία and entered the cavalry; till that age they wore no upper garment over the chiton in the ancient period, but in later times a wide himation, in which they usually enveloped themselves entirely. It was regarded as correct for modest boys not to have their arms exposed. Hermes also, the divine representative of youth, usually appears in the chlamys, but this is generally lightly folded and thrown over the left arm. Apollo too, except where he wears the long chiton as harp-player, is usually represented on works of art with the chlamys. It is, however, unusual in male dress, with the exception of military costume, and is never found in combination with the long chiton.

At home, as a rule, only the chiton was worn. It was, however, not considered correct to be seen thus in the street: only artisans or eccentric people went out without a cloak; but it was just as incorrect to appear without the chiton, only in the himation or chlamys. It is true this is very common on works of art: Zeus, Poseidon, and some other gods are represented without the chiton, and only in the himation, and Hermes and Apollo only in the chlamys; and even in representations of daily life we very often see in statues, reliefs, vase pictures, etc., men without under garments, clad only in the cloak (compare the youth in Fig. 9), and also in portrait figures. This is, however, a liberty taken by artists in order to avoid concealing the body entirely by the dress, but by no means corresponding to reality. Only those who specially desired to harden their bodies, and also poor people and certain philosophers who wished to proclaim their cynic principles by exceedingly scanty dress, went out, even in winter, in a cloak without an under garment. Shirt and trousers were unknown in Greek male dress; the latter are Oriental, and therefore only appear on monuments representing barbarous persons.

As regards female dress, it may be stated at once that the strong contrast found in modern times between the dress of men and women is foreign to Greek antiquity: both have essentially the same elements, sometimes even the same shape; and this similarity becomes greater the nearer we get to antiquity. This was not carried so far that a woman could simply have put on a man’s under garment; in fact, even the Homeric epics distinguish the woman’s _peplos_ from the man’s chiton. Unfortunately, both the shape and the mode of wearing the Homeric peplos are matters of dispute which cannot be satisfactorily settled by the words of the epic. According to Helbig, it was not essentially different from the long male chiton; like this, it descended to the feet, fitting closely and without folds to the figure, and was provided with an opening for head and arms. The girdle was worn rather low down, not immediately under the breast or round the waist, but round the hips, and fell down somewhat in front. The peplos was put on by means of a slit between the breasts, which often descended as far as the feet, and was fastened by a large number of fibulae, or hooks. Helbig thinks that this fashion was due to Oriental influence, since such openings are very commonly found on monuments representing Oriental nations.

There is much in favour of Helbig’s hypothesis, especially the circumstance that a dress similar in many respects appears to have maintained itself for several centuries. The vase pictures, as well as several works of art, show, as Boehlau has remarked, that in almost all the Greek states (especially Corinth, Chalcis, Athens, Megara, Sparta, as well as Ionian and Sicilian towns) a closely-fitting chiton was worn by women as late as the seventh, perhaps even the sixth, century. This was not drawn over the head, but put on like our dress of the present day, and open in front. Numerous monuments of the oldest style show that slit in front, and it appears to be seldom wanting in very ancient pictures of the deities. This chiton is provided with tight sleeves falling down to the elbows, and is generally adorned at all the edges (accordingly round the neck and armholes, as well as round the hem) with broad stripes and patterns of various colours; and as a further peculiarity it has folds drawn up over the girdle and falling on each side over the hips.

Helbig’s hypothesis concerning the Homeric peplos: that it had a long opening in front extending to the feet, has been energetically combated by Studniczka, who attempts to explain differently all the passages quoted from the epics in support of the other theory, and regards the strips down the front found on monuments as merely meant for ornamental purposes, and not a reminiscence of that opening. Studniczka, for his part, considers the Homeric female dress identical with the so-called Doric, which is described to us by writers as the oldest Greek female dress, in place of which the Ionic afterwards came. His first assumption, therefore, is that the dress was not sewn and arranged for slipping on, but rather consisted in a shawl-shaped piece of stuff fastened on the shoulders by means of pins. This is not the fitting place to discuss this controversy; we must therefore content ourselves with alluding to it, and refrain from deciding in favour of either opinion, since this would not be the purpose of our book.

Herodotus informs us, concerning the female dress of the historic period, that the Athenian women in olden times wore the Doric dress, a woollen chiton fastened with fibulae, but afterwards, instead of this, adopted the Ionic dress, a stitched linen chiton. However simple this statement may sound, it is by no means so easy to trace this change of dress on the works of art. These show us female dresses in ancient times which appear to have been sewn rather than pinned together; while the chiton which we find in the classic period of Greek art may really be traced back to the Doric type. It is, therefore, comprehensible that attempts lately made, especially by Boehlau and Studniczka, to trace the transition from the ancient Doric to the later Ionic costume on works of art, should have led to very different results.

If we look at the female dress on the oldest vase pictures (compare Figs. 1, 3, 11-15), we almost always find a stiff chiton descending without folds to the feet (the Homeric name “peplos” gradually falls into disuse), which could, however, in no case be as narrow as it is depicted, else it would be impossible to walk in it; the feet as a rule are uncovered, but sometimes the dress is lengthened behind in the form

of a train, and there touches the ground. (Compare Fig. 15.) The girdle is regularly worn with this chiton, rather high up, and so as to be visible. There is also a second garment covering breast and shoulders, and falling down nearly as far as the girdle. How this

chiton was put on, and how the upper garment was connected with it, is not clear. When we see long borders descending from the girdle to the feet on some figures, and also continued above the girdle (as in the case of two women in Fig. 11), we might assume that here was an opening for putting on the dress; but we have already shown above that these borders are often of a purely ornamental character, and have no structural importance; and, indeed, they are entirely wanting on many chitons. It is, therefore, generally assumed that the garment represented here was sewn together below, and thus fastened all round, but above the girdle was open at the side, and that the bib was produced by making this upper part double, and fastening the folded ends on the shoulders with pins, thus corresponding to that style which is commonly called Doric. In fact, the point of the dress, passed from the back to the front, is often visible on the shoulder (compare Figs. 1, 3, and 11); sometimes even the long pin which fastened both points can be plainly recognised (Fig. 11); but in spite of this there is a great deal that this hypothesis does not explain. It is true we may reconcile with it the occasional appearance of different borders at the neck of the bib, for these might be sewn on, and thus this garment would be constructed ready for the wearer, while in the corresponding dress of the later period it rested with the wearer to draw down a shorter or longer piece of her chiton. But how are we to explain that upper part of the chiton in such a case as Fig. 12? Here it is closely fastened at the side. Clearly the artist wished to represent an armhole. These two facts are in opposition to the previous hypothesis, unless we assume that the upper part also was sewn together on one side, and its open side with the pins must be sought on the left side of the woman, which is not visible here. It is still more remarkable when, as in Fig. 13, the painter represents the lower part of the chiton with a pattern and the upper plain; or, as in Fig. 14, gives different patterns to the two parts. If we do not attribute this to the arbitrary fancy of the artist, or assume that the upper part of the chiton was ornamented with a different material behind, we are reduced to the opinion which, in view of similar developments in the dress of a later period, is not improbable--that this upper part was sometimes quite separate from the chiton, and was put on as a special garment.

With this costume we sometimes find an over garment, which must not, however, be confused with the himation. This is worn over the chiton, but fastened in by the girdle also, and is usually open on one side. (Compare Fig. 15.) This upper garment, which usually is only seen below the girdle, is sometimes made of the same material as the bib, sometimes of a different one, but it usually differs in colour and pattern from the garment worn under it. It is not very evident from the vase pictures how this was put on, but it seems to have been draped and not sewn, and worn over the chiton for more elaborate dress, and fastened together with it by means of the girdle.

With this antique costume the himation was worn as a cloak, which, both in its shape and in the mode of wearing, corresponded absolutely to the large himation worn by men; like this, it specially covered the back and fell over the arms in two points. There is, however, this distinction between the male and female costume, that the women often drew this cloak up so high as to cover the back of the head (compare Fig. 1), a fashion which also continued in later times.

The change which we see gradually produced in this costume on works of art has been often regarded as a real change in the fashion, but was probably

T. III PL. XXXVI D.

FIG. 15.]

in great part only a consequence of the development of art, which rendered it possible to represent a great deal which at an earlier stage could not be depicted. As in the case of male dress, the dresses on the vase pictures gradually become wider with fuller folds. At first, it is true, they are still so narrow that if a long step is taken the shape of the body becomes very distinct; but the cylindrical form, quite free from folds, which the earliest vase style gives to the woman’s dress below the girdle, disappears entirely. Besides this we find, instead of the outer wrap, a puffing, or _kolpos_, which henceforth is the characteristic of the female dress. This was arranged in various ways, though in later times it was sometimes dispensed with altogether. There are different modes of producing this kolpos: sometimes it belongs to the dress itself; the length of the dress then so far exceeds that of the body that, in order to prevent the hem from dragging on the ground, a piece must be drawn up above the girdle, which then falls down in folds below it, and in the fashion of the time, which we have first to deal with, often descends a long way, not, however, equally all round the waist, but only in front, and probably also behind. But as the vase pictures often represent this upper part as of an entirely different material from the under dress, it is possible that it was sometimes not connected with the chiton, but was a distinct garment worn over the under dress, and, like the chiton, fastened in by the girdle. (Compare Fig. 16.) If we remember that in the ancient dress of the previous period, the bib was sometimes a distinct garment, we may surmise that this gradually developed into the kolpos close round the waist, and that the fashion of constructing this girding by means of the chiton itself, and not by a separate piece, was a further stage in this development. With this costume we usually find longish sleeves, reaching below the elbow, as a rule wide and puffed, though very narrow round the armholes. It is evident that a chiton of this description, as well as the upper garment, if it was separate, was entirely constructed by sewing, and was put on over the head by passing the arms into the sleeves; for we nowhere find an opening above the girdle in this dress. We do, however, find, when the upper garment is separate, that the chiton has an opening on one side below the girdle. If we remember the remark of Herodotus previously quoted about the introduction of the stitched Ionic linen chiton, it is a natural assumption that this chiton, which was entirely put together by sewing, and worn without pins, was an Ionic garment; and in accordance with this we find this particular form of sleeve on Athenian reliefs as well as on those of Asia Minor.

Contemporaneously with this change in female dress, the elaboration of the folds mentioned above with cut-out corners and regular zigzag folds, produced by stiffening and ironing, becomes more and more apparent, especially round the hems of the lower garments. It is true we must not depend too much on the monuments, for we often observe on these that only the front hem of the garment has the zigzag folds, while the back hem is quite plain, with only a suggestion of the necessary stiff folds. (Compare Figs. 17 and 19.) It is evident, therefore, especially in the case of the vase painters, that this drapery is not so much an imitation of actual costume as a peculiarity of the artist’s style.

If we may draw any conclusion from the above-mentioned facts as to the differences between Doric and Ionic costume, these do not appear to be fundamental, affecting the shape and appearance of the whole dress, but rather to have depended essentially on the mode of wearing, for the Doric chiton was shaped by pinning, the Ionic constructed by sewing. There is, however, a difference of material, since the Doric chiton was woollen and the Ionic linen. Nor must we understand Herodotus to mean that the Doric dress disappeared entirely after the introduction of the Ionic, for the monuments show us clearly that both kinds existed side by side; so that just at the time of Herodotus the chiton, which, at any rate in its upper part, was not sewn, but fastened by pins or buttons, was the more common. It is true that fashion, which was just as important in antiquity as now, is apparent in various changes, and these are especially conspicuous in pictures by the vase painters of the fifth century, such as Hiero, Duris, Brygos, etc. On these monuments (compare Figs. 4, 18, 19) the female dress is much wider and fuller than before, the kolpos goes all round the

body, and falls down below the hips almost to the knees. There is a sort of mantle, which falls a little way below the breast; there are almost always sleeves, as there were in the previous fashion, but they are generally less puffed and have no narrow armhole, but a wide opening at the arms. The mode of putting on the chiton is also different, and corresponds to the Doric fashion; the sleeves are not sewn together all round, but have a slit at the top, so that when the chiton is put on it is quite open there. The drawing together of the sleeve openings by little fibulae or buttons fastens the chiton together at the neck, and gives the whole dress consistency. Fig. 17, a cithara player about to tie, or possibly to unloose, the girdle which fastens her upper garment, shows this method of putting on and fastening the upper garment very plainly. However, the bib, which is usually found, is absent here.

But if we look somewhat more closely at this costume, we find in it a sort of combination of the Doric and Ionic. The mantle is due to the former, the kolpos to the latter: the fastening with fibulae is characteristic of the former, the sewing of the latter. For we must regard a chiton like that worn by the Maenad on the left in Fig. 18 as one connected piece, one wide garment, more than twice the length of the body, sewn together round the sides, open at top and bottom, out of which the wearer constructed the bib and sleeves by drawing up the folds and letting them fall over the girdle, and by fastening or buttoning on the arms and shoulders. There is, however, reason to suppose that parts of this dress were sometimes separately constructed of different material. On the vase pictures of that period the various parts of the dress are sometimes characterised by different drapery. As a rule, the folds of the dress are marked by unbroken black lines: but, besides these, we sometimes find reddish brown, zigzag, or wavy lines (thus in Fig. 17, the upper part of the woman’s dress; in Fig. 18, the kolpos of the Maenad on the right; in Fig. 19, the kolpos and the sleeve). When we observe (as in Fig. 18) that in other figures the corresponding parts of the dress are all marked by the same lines, we find ourselves almost forced to the conclusion that the artists wished to represent distinct garments separately put on, especially as this distinction of unbroken and zigzag folds can also be traced in sculpture. It would be very easy to imagine it in such a dress as that in Fig. 17; for if in Fig. 16 the upper garment above the girdle is distinct, it might also be the case in Fig. 17. But such an assumption would be more difficult, nay, almost impossible, for Fig. 18. If we assume distinct material for the kolpos, the woman would be wearing three separate garments--the long chiton, which simply covers the whole body, the kolpos, and over that a distinct upper garment with sleeves. The dress in Fig. 19 would be no less complicated. It seems, therefore, that we ought not to lay too much stress on that treatment of the folds; probably the artists made use of it in order to distinguish sometimes between the wavy folds of full garments, sleeves, etc., and the stiff folds of the perpendicular skirt. For we may observe that the wavy folds are never found in these perpendicular garments, such as the chiton and the bib.

If the vase painters are to be relied on, especially in the arrangement of the girding, the fashion at Athens in the middle of the fifth century B.C. was still rather heavy and awkward. It was not until the excessive fulness of the girding was limited that it developed that regular and truly noble dress which we admire in the female figures of classic art and the following period. Still the dress is by no means uniform, for the same chiton can be worn in various ways, according to the arrangement of the girding and bib. The vase picture in Fig. 20 gives examples of this. There were, in particular, two methods. The one was to cover the body from the feet to the shoulders with a piece of stuff, and to fasten this by drawing the points of the folded back piece over the shoulders and hooking them to the points of the front piece, which was also doubled

back. Then the extra piece fell down at the back and front, and the girdle was passed over it. The stuff was then drawn up a little over the girdle, while the ends of the garment fell down over the hips. Strictly speaking, the kolpos here fell over the bib. (Compare the figure on the left.) The second plan was to take a longer piece of the chiton than was required below the girdle, so that the remainder fell on the ground; the upper part was drawn up to the shoulders and fastened there by fibulae, either in such a way that these were visible (in that case the doubled pieces were fastened together), or so that the pins were hidden by the front piece

(then the doubled piece at the back was fastened to the under layer of the front piece, as in Fig. 20). The bib then fell freely over the breast and back till a little above the waist, the superfluous piece below was drawn up over the girdle. The manner of arranging this kind of dress, which is the commoner, is very clearly seen in the bronze statue from Herculaneum represented in Fig. 21. The girl, who is in the act of dressing herself, has already girded the chiton, and is now arranging the bib; she has fastened it on the left shoulder and is now drawing the folded back piece over the right shoulder with her right hand, in order to pin to it the front piece, which she holds in her left hand in such a way that the back piece may fall over the front piece. The points of both then fall over the hips to right and left a little more than half-way down the front breadth. To complete her dress, the girl will then draw up part of the garment, which is too long for walking, over the girdle, and this will appear below the bib. In the dress of the best period this puffing does not fall as low as before (or as that on Fig. 20). It is so arranged that the folds fall lower on the sides than in the middle, so that its lines may follow the outline of the bib, the points of which fall lower at the sides. Thus originated that beautiful costume, inspired by a truly artistic spirit, which we admire in the best Attic works of the age of Pheidias. As an example of this, compare Fig. 22, a Caryatid, from the Erechtheum at Athens.

With this dress sleeves, like those above described, are sometimes, but not always, worn. They are usually half-sleeves, with openings fastened by buttons or fibulae, not pieces separately sewn on, but part of the actual chiton.

The last-described form of the chiton, which formed the kolpos and bib by means of the girdle and pins, continued in the next period, and seems not only to have extended throughout Greece, but also throughout later Greek antiquity down to the Roman period. But there were also several other styles of dress, distinguished partly by their shape, partly by the manner of wearing. Thus, for instance, the general form of the chiton was retained, but the dress was made more comfortable by the separate construction of the bib, which, as we observed, was probably the case at an earlier period too, and by sometimes omitting it altogether. Sometimes, again, only a light chiton was worn without any kolpos or bib, either with a girdle which was sometimes worn above the waist (compare Fig. 23, “A Daughter of Niobe”), or sometimes falling quite freely (compare Fig. 24). Afterwards it was not unusual for the bib to fall below the girdle, while the kolpos was entirely absent (compare Fig. 25), or else fell above the bib (compare Fig. 20). In the graceful female figure in Fig. 26 there is another peculiarity. Here, as in Fig. 25, the chiton is open at one side, even below the hips, which was not the case with the ordinary dress, especially that worn out of doors. It is probable that this was the original form of the so-called Doric chiton, for it is thus that the Doric maidens were dressed, and on this account were mockingly described as “showing their hips.” In the ideal figures the chiton of Artemis and the Amazons,

though shorter, is of the same kind. The form of the chiton fastened together all round originated so early that we only find the kind open at the side in rare instances on the oldest monuments. This chiton corresponds in shape most closely to the short male chiton; like this, it often only extends to the knees, and is fastened on the shoulders by pins without forming the bib. The dress with regular sleeves is also found in the later costume, either connected with the under garment or specially constructed so as to cover only the upper part of the body. It was fastened together all round, and opened at the sleeves, which were constructed by buttons.

The himation continued to be the usual upper garment. In the older costume of the sixth and fifth centuries it is often treated as a scarf in the manner above described, with two points falling down in front over the shoulders (compare Figs. 4 and 24), but afterwards women began to wear the himation in the same way as men, either enveloping the arms entirely or leaving the right arm free (compare Fig. 23). A third mode of wearing the himation, which, however, is commoner in older than in later costume, is to draw it from the right shoulder across the breast to the left hip, leaving the left breast uncovered, and letting the points fall down on the right

side of the body. In the pictures it often looks as though the himation were fastened on the shoulder by pins, or even stitched together. We also find a light kind of shawl, put on something in the manner of the scarf worn by ladies some forty or fifty years ago. In fact, there seem to have been many varieties of female dress in the Alexandrine period, but we are not intimately acquainted with the details, as our principal authorities, the vase pictures, at that time no longer confined themselves as strictly as in the older periods to the prevailing fashion. In one of Theocritus’ idylls a woman puts on first her chiton, then a _peronatris_ (a robe fastened by clasps) of costly material, and over that an _ampechonion_. It is not clear what sort of garment this peronatris was. On the other hand, the terra-cottas of that period often represent graceful female forms in walking dress, that is, in the chiton and himation. Thus in Fig. 27, _a_ and _b_, we see a woman in a long dress with a train, wearing over it a cloak drawn over her head in such a manner that only her face is visible. To promote freedom of motion her cloak is drawn up over both arms, which are closely enveloped. In a similar matron-like dress is the lady represented in the terra-cotta figure, No. 28. She holds up her long himation daintily with both hands, to enable her to walk more easily.

We cannot with certainty prove the existence of a chemise, since those expressions which are generally thus interpreted appear to relate to different kinds of chitons. Sometimes we see in vase pictures representing scenes from the baths short garments with little sleeves, which cannot well be anything but chemises, worn under the actual chiton. We must not, however, assume that these were universally worn; far commoner was the band called _strophion_, corresponding to the modern corset, used to check the excessive development of the breasts, or to hold them up when the firmness of youth was gone.

We know very little about the colour and pattern of the dresses. The clothing worn by men, or, at any rate, those of the lower classes who laboured in the workshop or in the field, was certainly dark, either of the natural colour of the wool or dyed brown, grey, etc. Otherwise the commonest colour for the chiton and himation was white, and, as such garments naturally soon got dirty, they were often sent to the fuller, who washed them and gave them fresh brightness by means of pipeclay and similar methods. On festive occasions gaily-coloured dresses were usually worn, and then even simple people indulged in the luxury of bright colour; though, as a rule, to display this in ordinary, every-day life was regarded in the better ages of Greek antiquity as a mark of vanity or characteristic of a dandy. Naturally, women were more inclined to

bright hues, and they were especially fond of saffron-coloured dresses, and also of materials with coloured borders and rich designs. Generally speaking, we may infer from the works of art that bright colour and rich ornamentation were most popular in the oldest period, and afterwards again in the epoch of declining taste; while the classic period made but a sparing use of either. The older vase pictures almost always represent materials with coloured patterns, either purely ornamental designs (compare Figs. 10, 11, 13), or with representations of figures. Sometimes whole scenes full of figures in coloured embroidery were part of the dress, and this was sometimes arranged in rows, like the decorations on pots in ancient art. (Compare Fig. 12.) This is quite natural if we consider that in the more ancient costume there was scarcely any drapery; both the chiton and the cloak were drawn tightly round the figure, and, therefore, the pictures could be fully developed and seen without any interruption from folds. Purely ornamental patterns are also very common, and show great variety, but very seldom good designs. Checks and diamonds were especially popular.

As the fashion in dress changed, so did the use of materials with patterns; for garments worn at religious ceremonies, or by actors, the coloured embroidery was retained; but in ordinary life the men, and even women, gradually discarded it, or at any rate reduced it to moderate proportions compared with the rich fulness of ornament in the older fashion, which almost concealed the real colour of the dress. This is especially noticeable in the chiton when it falls in free folds, while the old-fashioned chiton, which had very few folds, bore bolder designs. It is also the case with the himation, which even in the classic period, when it no longer fell stiff and straight over the back, but was drawn round the body in plentiful drapery, was often richly adorned with embroidery. The reason is probably because such shawl-like garments are more loosely related to the body, and therefore the introduction of a pattern which weakened the impression of the figure is less disturbing here than in the chiton. However, these bright-coloured cloaks were exceptional luxuries. The fashion of the better period shows its classic sense of beauty in forming chiton and cloak from materials of one colour, and merely introducing ornaments at the seams and edges, and these such as are of especial beauty and noble simplicity.

In the fourth century B.C. a gradual decline is again observable, and after the time of Alexander the Great rich designs, sometimes introducing figures, become commoner, even in purely Hellenic dress. Numerous examples on works of art show us the unaesthetic and absurd side of this fashion. The elaborate patterns give a disturbing appearance to the whole figure; the outline of the body is completely hidden by the dress; and when the drapery is disturbed or folded, in the case of borders or materials covered with figures, the result is sometimes very ridiculous.