THE HOME LIFE OF THE
ANCIENT GREEKS.
[Illustration: A GREEK LADY’S TOILET (FIG. 88, _see_ p. 162).]
THE HOME LIFE
OF THE
ANCIENT GREEKS
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF
PROF. H. BLÜMNER
BY
ALICE ZIMMERN
_Late Scholar of Girton College, Cambridge_
With Numerous Illustrations
NEW AND REVISED EDITION
CASSELL AND COMPANY, LIMITED
_LONDON, PARIS & MELBOURNE_
1895
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
[Illustration]
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
The following pages do not claim to be an absolutely literal translation
of Dr. Blümner’s text. Such slight alterations have been made as the
different and more concise character of the English language seemed to
demand, assuming that, in a work of this character, the most faithful
translation is that which clearly presents the author’s meaning in the
different dress of another language. In one or two cases I have ventured
to make some slight alterations. Thus, on page 277, my translation of
the passage from Lucian (_Philopseudes_ 18) describing Myron’s
Discobolus differs slightly from Dr. Blümner’s, and, as a result, the
inference drawn as to the original position of the head is also
different. This interpretation is in accord with more recent criticism,
and has the support of Dr. Murray, Head of the Antiquities Department at
the British Museum. The list of authorities consulted is printed on
pages 533 to 536. The illustrations are taken from the German work, and
a list is given on pages xi to xv.
* * * * *
I take this opportunity to express my warm thanks to those friends who
have kindly helped me with the proof-sheets, and in particular to Mrs.
Henry Unwin for her very welcome assistance.
ALICE ZIMMERN.
_Tunbridge Wells, October, 1893._
CONTENTS.
PAGE
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xi
INTRODUCTION xvii
CHAPTER I. COSTUME 1
CHAPTER II. BIRTH AND INFANCY 78
CHAPTER III. EDUCATION 99
CHAPTER IV. MARRIAGE AND WOMEN 133
CHAPTER V. DAILY LIFE WITHIN AND WITHOUT THE HOUSE 175
CHAPTER VI. MEALS AND SOCIAL ENTERTAINMENTS 202
CHAPTER VII. SICKNESS AND PHYSICIANS, DEATH AND BURIAL 233
CHAPTER VIII. GYMNASTICS 265
CHAPTER IX. MUSIC AND DANCING 306
CHAPTER X. RELIGIOUS WORSHIP 323
CHAPTER XI. PUBLIC FESTIVALS 349
CHAPTER XII. THE THEATRE 392
CHAPTER XIII. WAR AND SEAFARING 450
CHAPTER XIV. AGRICULTURE, TRADE, AND HANDICRAFT 489
CHAPTER XV. SLAVERY 519
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
PAGE
1. Ancient Male and Female Costumes. Vase-painting from _Élite
céramographique_, II. 27 5
2. Antique Male _Chiton_ with _Himation_. Vase-painting from Gerhard.
_Etruskische und campanische Vasenbilder._ Plate 21 6
3. Antique Costumes (Dance) from the François Vase. From the _Wiener
archæologische Vorlegeblätter_. Series II. Plates 3 and 14 8
4. Costumes of the Fifth Century B.C. (Rape of Helen.) Vase-painting by
Hiero. From Gerhard. _Trinkschalen und Gefäsze._ Plates 11 and 12 10
5. Short Male Chiton with _Kolpos_. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_
2.) Plates 6 and 7 13
6. Warrior in _Exomis_. Relief on a Tombstone. From _Bulletin de
correspondence hellénique_, IV. Plate 7 14
7. Statue of Sophocles in the Lateran. From a Photograph 16
8. Citizen in Chiton and Himation. Terra-cotta from _Bull. de corr.
hell._, VII. Plate 12 17
9. Costume of Ephebos (Adoration of a Hermes). Vase-painting from
Schreiber. _Kulturhistorischer Atlas, Altertum._ Plate 14, 3 18
10. Dress of Attic Ephebos (Farewell of a Young Warrior). Vase-painting
from Baumeister. _Denkmäler des classichen Altertums._ Fig. 421 19
11. Antique Female Costumes from the François Vase. From _Wiener arch.
Vorlegebl._ 23
12. Antique Female Costume. Vase-painting by Exekias. From _Mon. d'Inst.
Archéol._, II. 22 24
13. Antique Female Costume. Vase-painting from Stephani. _Kampf des
Theseus and Minotaurus._ Plate I 25
14. Antique Female Dress, from the François Vase. (_See_ 3.) Plate
V 26
15. Antique Female Costumes. Vase-painting from _El. céram._, III. 36,
B 27
16. Ancient Female Costume with _Kolpos_. Vase-painting from Gerhard.
_Auserlesene Vasenbilder_, III. 727 29
17. Dress of the Fifth Century B.C. From a Vase-painting by Euphronios.
From the _Wiener arch. Vorlegebl._ Series V. Plate 7 31
18. Female Costume of the Fifth Century B.C. (Mænads), from a Vase by
Hiero. _Idem._ Plate 4 32
19. Female Costume of the Fifth Century B.C., from a Vase by Brygos.
From _Mon. d'Inst._, V. 14 34
20. Modes of arranging Chiton. V.-P. from Tischbein. _Vases Hamilton_,
I. 7 35
21. Putting on the Chiton and arranging the Bib. Bronze Statue from
Herculaneum. From a Photograph 36
22. Caryatid from the Erechtheum. From Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig.
535 37
23. High-girt Chiton with Himation. Statue of a Daughter of Niobe in the
_Museo Chiaramonti_ in the Vatican. From a Photograph 38
24. Ungirt Chiton with Himation. V.-P., Gerhard. (_See_ 2.) Plates 6 and
7 40
25. Open Chiton with Mantle. Vase-painting from the _Wiener arch.
Vorlegebl._ Series II. Plate 6, 2 41
26. Open Chiton with Mantle. Vase-painting from _El. céram._, III.
56 42
27. Lady in Walking Dress. Terra-cotta Figure from Stackelberg. _Gräber
der Hellenen._ Plate 67 41 and 45
28. Lady in Walking Dress. _Idem_ 46
29. Sandals. Collected from Works of Art (chiefly Vase-paintings) 49
30. Sandals with High Straps. _Idem_ 50
31. Antique Men's Shoes. _Idem_ 51
32. Men's and Women's Shoes. _Idem_ 52
33. High Boots (_Endromides_). _Idem_ 53
34. High Boots with Overhanging Lappets. _Idem_ 54
35. Various Shapes of the _Petasos_. _Idem_ 56
36. The Common Forms of _Petasos_. _Idem_ 57
37. Uncommon Forms of _Petasos_. _Idem_ 58
38. Youth in Travelling Costume. Vase-painting from Overbeck. _Gallerie
heroischer Bildwerke._ Plate 2, 1 59
39. _Exomis_ and _Pilos_. Statuette of Odysseus. From Winckelmann.
_Monumenti mediti_, No. 154 60
40. Sailor's Costume. V.-P. from Welcker. _Alte Denkamäler_, III. Plate
39, 1 61
41. Lady with _Petasos_. Terra-cotta Figure from Kekulé. _Terra-cotten
von Sicilien._ Plate 33 62
42. Lady with Sunshade. V.-P. from Gerhard. _Vases grecs._ Plate
8 63
43 and 44. Antique Modes of Dressing the Hair. Vase-painting and Marble
Head from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate 85, 3 and 14 66
45 and 46. Antique Coiffures. Marble Heads from _Mitteilungen des
Deutschen archäologischen Instituts in Athen_, VIII. (1883.) Plate X.
12a and XI. 1 67
47. Antique Coiffure. Marble Head. _Idem._ Plate XII. 4a and 4b 68
48. Antique Coiffure. V.-P. by Euphronios. _Idem._ Plate XI. 5 69
49. Antique Coiffure. Bronze Head from Pompeii. From a Photograph 70
50. Antique Mode of Wearing the Beard. Relief from _Nuove memorie
dell'Inst. Archeol._ Plate 13 73
51 and 52. Female Coiffure. Terra-cotta Heads from Kekulé. (_See_ 41.)
Plates 161 and 22, 6 74
53 and 54. Female Coiffure. _Idem._ Plates 16, 5 and 162 75
55, 56, 57. Female Coiffure. _Idem._ Plates 17, 1; 18, 5;
and 19, 5 76 and 77
58. Relief from a Tomb representing Child in Swaddling-clothes. From
_Ann. d'Inst._ 1830. Add. Plate, G 79
59. Hermes in the Cradle. V.-P. from _Arch. Zeitg._ for 1844. Plate
20 81
60. Child's Bed on Rollers. V.-P. from _Nuove mem. dell'Inst. Arch._
Plate 15, 2 82
61. Mother giving her Child the Breast. Terra-cotta Figure from Gerhard.
_Gesammelte Abhandlungen._ Plate 80, 2 83
62. Mother and Child. Relief from a Tomb at Athens. From a
Photograph 86
63. Boy with small Cart and Dog. V.-P. from Stackelberg. (_See_ 27.)
Plate 17 87
64. Child's Cart. Vase-painting from _Compte-rendu de la commission
archéologique de St. Pétersbourg_. 1871. Plate 5, 4 88
65. Child with Cart drawn by Dogs. V.-P. from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.)
Fig. 766 89
66. Jointed Doll. Terra-cotta Figure. From _Antiqu. du Bosph. Cimmér._
Plate 74, 8 90
67. Boy with Hoop. Vase-painting from _El céram._, I. 18 91
68. Toy Quiver. From _Compte-rendu de St. Pètersb._ for 1873. Plate
38 92
69. Girl flying a Kite. Vase-painting from _Arch. Ztg._ for 1895, p.
125 93
70. Boy with Wheel. V.-P. from Benndorf. _Griech. u. Sicil.
Vasenbilder_, p. 62 94
71. Woman with Wheel. Vase-painting from Gerhard, _Vases grecs._ Plate
10 95
72. Child's Swing. V.-P. from _Ann. d'Inst._ 1857. Add. Plate, A 96
73. See-saw. Vase-painting from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate 79, 6 96
74. See-saw on the Foot. V.-P. from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig.
834 97
75. Attic School Instruction. Vase-painting by Duris. From _Arch. Ztg._
for 1869. Plate 1 105
76. Ephebi racing on Horseback. V.-P. from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate
24, 9 125
77. Female Racer from Elis. Statue in the Vatican. From a
Photograph 131
78. Reception of Bride at Bridegroom's House. Vase-painting from
Stackelberg. (_See_ 27.) Plate 32 143
79. Women at the Well. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ 16.) IV. 308,
9 150
80. Woman Spinning. Vase-painting. _Idem_, IV. 302 and 3, M 3 153
81. Woman at the Loom (Penelope). V.-P. from _Mon. d'Inst._, IX. 42,
1 154
82. Women at Bath and the Toilet. Vase-painting from Stackelberg. (_See_
27.) Plate 33 155
83. Women Washing. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ 16.) III.
218 156
84. Folding-up Clothes. Vase-painting. _Idem_, IV. 301 157
85. Women's Toilet and Bath. V.-P. from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig.
220 158
86. Washing at the Well and Completion of Toilet. (Athene and Hera
before the Judgment of Paris.) V.-P. from _Mon. d'Inst._, IV. 18 160
87. Women's Public Bath. Vase-painting from _El. céram._, IV. 18 161
88. Toilet Scene. Vase-painting from _Gazette archéologique_ for 1879.
Plate 23 Frontispiece
89. Lady Arranging her Hair. Terra-cotta from Tanagra. _Idem._ 1878.
Plate 10 163
90. Lady (Bride?) at her Toilet. V-P. from Benndorf. (_See_ 70.) Plate
45, 1 164
91. Scene from the Life of Women. V.-P. from Gerhard. (_See_ 4.) Plate
14, 1 165
92. Toilet Scenes. From _Compte-rendu de St. Pétersbourg_. 1860. Plate
1, 3 168
93. Diagram of a Water-clock 187
94. Bronze Razors, from Helbig. _Das homerische Epos._ Fig. 49 188
95. Hair-dresser. Terra-cotta Group, from Tanagra. From _Arch. Ztg._,
XXXII. Plate 14 189
96. Men's Public Bath. Vase-painting from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate
21, 9 193
97 and 98. Drinking Scenes. V.-P. from _Mon. d'Inst._, III. 12 210
and 211
99. Female Juggler. Vase-painting from _Mus. Borbonico_, VII. 35 217
100. Female Juggler, from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig. 631 218
101. Cottabus. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, VII. 51, 2 222
102. Playing "Board-games." Terra-cotta Group from _Arch. Ztg._, XXI.
Plate 173, 1 224
103. Girl Playing Astragals. Terra-cotta Figure from Tanagra; from
Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig. 156 226
104. Morra Players. Vase-painting from _Arch. Ztg._, XXIX. Plate 56,
1 227
105. Cock-fighting. Vase-painting from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig.
695 228
106. Consequences of Intemperance. Vase-painting from _Arch. Vorlegebl._
Series VIII. Plate 5 229
107. Scene at a Nocturnal Comus (Hercules and Satyrs). Vase-painting
from Benndorf. (_See_ 70.) Plate 95 231
108. Funeral Lament. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, III. 60 247
109. Funeral Lament. V.-P. from _Ann. d'Inst._ 1869. Plate 299,
O.P .248
110. Burial. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, VIII. 4, 1b 252
111. Corpse in the Tomb. V.-P. from Stackelberg. (_See_ 27.) Plate
38 253
112. Extinguishing the Funeral Pile. V.-P. from _Mon. d'Inst._, IV.
41 256
113 and 114. Athenian Beliefs on Tombs. From _Arch. Ztg._, XXIX. Plates
43 and 44 257 and 259
115. Care of a Grave. Vase-painting from Stackelberg. (_See_ 27.) Plate
44 260
116. Care of a Grave. Vase-painting from Benndorf. (_See_ 70.) Plate
25 261
117. Relief from an Athenian Tomb. From a Photograph 263
118. Gymnastic Exercises. V.-P, from Baumeister. (_See_ 10.) Fig.
611 267
119. Exercise with Dumb-bells. Engraving from a Bronze Discus. From
_Ann. d'Inst._ Plate B 268
120. Racers. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, X. 48m 272
121. Runners and Jumpers. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ 16.) IV.
259 273
122. Armour Race. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, X. 48e, 3 274
123. Standing Discobolus of the Vatican. Marble Statue. From a
Photograph 276
124. Throwing Discobolus (after Myron) in the Vatican. Marble Statue.
From a Photograph 279
125. Discobolus after the Throw. Bronze Statue at Naples. From a
Photograph 280
126. Spear-thrower. Engraving. Reverse of Fig. 119 282
127. Running, Jumping, Spear-throwing, Boxing. Vase-painting by
Pamphaios, From _Mon. d'Inst._, XI. 24 283
128. Wrestlers. Marble Group in the Uffizzi at Florence. From a
Photograph 287
129. Wrestlers. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, II. 24 288
130. Wrestlers. Vase-painting. _Idem_, X. 48e, 1 289
131. Wrestlers. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ p. 4.) Plate
20 291
132. Boxers. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, 48e, 2 294
133. Boxers. Vase-painting from Benndorf. (_See_ 70.) Plate 31,
2a 295
134. Gymnastic Exercise with a Sphere. Bas-relief from Schreiber. (_See_
9.) Plate 23, 2 300
135. Archery. Vase-painting from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate 80,
7 301
136. Women playing Musical Instruments. V.-P. from _El. céram._, II.
86 310
137. Woman playing the Trigonon. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, V.
37 313
138 and 139. Flute player. Bronze Statuette from Dodona. From Carapanos.
_Dodone et ses ruines._ Plate 10 314 and 315
140. Flute-player. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, X. 10 317
141. Performance of a Flute-player. Vase-painting by Euphronios. From
_Wiener arch. Vorlegebl._ Series V. 4 318
142. Female Flute-player and Dancer with Castanets. Vase-painting by
Hiero. _Idem._ Series C. 5 319
143. Lustral Sacrifice. Vase-painting from Heydemann. _Griechische
Vasenbilder._ Plate 11, 3 331
144. Presentation of Sacrificial Offerings. Vase-painting from _Mon.
d'Inst._, VI. and VII. Plate 37 332
145 and 146. Presentation of Sacrificial Offerings. Vase-paintings from
Benndorf. (_See_ 70.) Plate 45, 2 333 and 334
147. Sacrificial Scene, Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, IX.
53 339
148. Leaden Tablet with Question addressed to the Oracle of Delphi. From
Carapanos. (_See_ 138.) Plate 36, 2 345
149. Putting Horses to a Chariot. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_
16.) IV. 249 and 250 355
150. Plan and Section of the great Theatre of Dionysus at Athens. From
the _Zeitschrift für Bildende Kunst_ for 1878, p. 193 393
151. Theatre of Syracuse in its present Condition. From a
Photograph 395
152. Theatre of Syracuse: Ground plan. From Strack. _Griechisches
Theater._ Plate V. 1 396
153. Theatre of Segesta, Reconstructed. _Idem._ Plate I 397
154 and 155. Tragic Mask. Terra-cotta from Vulci. From _Ann. d'Inst._
1881. Plate K 427
156 and 157. Comic Masks. _Idem._ Plate J 431
158. Comic Actor. Terra-cotta from _Arch. Ztg._ for 1854 Plate 69,
3 432
159. Comic Actor. Terra-cotta from Kekulé. (_See_ 41.) Plate 51,
5 433
160. Masks from the Andromeda-myth. Pompeian Wall-painting from _Arch.
Ztg._ for 1878. Plate 3 435
161 and 162. Tragic Actor. Ivory Statuette from _Mon. d'Inst._, XI.
13 437
163. Scene from Comedy (The Sick Chiron?) Vase-painting from _El.
céram._, II. 94 439
164. Scene from Comedy. (Adventure of Hercules.) Vase-painting from
_Arch. Vorlegebl._ Series B. Plate 32, a 441
165. Scene from Comedy. (Soldier and Parasite.) Pompeian Wall-painting
from _Mus. Borbon._, IV. 18 443
166. Military Chariot. Vase-painting from _Compte-rendu_ for 1874. Plate
5 453
167 and 168. Warriors putting on their Armour. From Gerhard. (_See_ 16.)
IV. 269 458 and 459
169. Murder of Dolon. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ 4.) Plate C,
1 460
170. Achilles binds up the Wounds of Patroclus. Vase painting from _Mon.
d'Inst._, I. 25 461
171. Farewell of Amphiaraus. _Idem_, III. 54 463
172. Equipment of a Warrior. Vase-painting by Duris. _Idem_, VIII.
41 464
173. 174, and 175. Ancient Greek Helmets. From Helbig. (_See_ 94.) Figs.
70-72 466
176. Warriors playing Draughts. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, II.
22 467
177. Death of Memnon. Vase-painting from Gerhard. (_See_ 4.) Plate
D 469
178, 179, 180, 181. Spear-heads from Dodona. From Carapanos. (_See_
138.) Plates, 57, 8; 58, 1; 3 and 5 471 and 472
182, 183, 184. Swords from Mycenae. From Helbig. (_See_ 94.) Figs. 90,
86 and 87 473
185 and 186. Swords from Italian Lake-dwellings. _Idem._ Figs. 88 and
89 474
187. Head of an Arrow from Megalopolis 477
188 and 189. Greek Spurs from Dodona. From Carapanos. (_See_ 138.) Plate
52, 1 and 2 479
190. Sailing Vessel. Vase-painting from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate 45,
11 481
191. Ship of Odysseus. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, I. 8 482
192 and 193. Antique Ships with Spurs at the Prow. Vase-painting from
Helbig. (_See_ 94.) Figs. 3 and 4 483
194. Ship with two Rows of Oars. V.-P. from Schreiber. (_See_ 9.) Plate
45, 12 484
195. Attic Trireme. Relief from _Ann. d'Inst._ 1861. Plate M, 2 485
196. Men Ploughing, Vase-painting from _Berichte der Sächsischen
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaft_ for 1867. Plate I. 1 494
197. Olive Harvest. _Idem._ Plate III. 2 495
198. Artisan in _Exomis_. Terra-cotta from _Bull. de corr. hell._, VII.
Plate 12 502
199. Shoemaker. Vase-painting. (_See_ 196.) Plate III. 5 503
200. Shoemaker's Workshop. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, XI. 28,
1 505
201. Smithy. _Idem._ Plate 28, 2 507
202. Brass Foundry. Vase-painting. (_See_ 196.) Plate V. 4 508
203. Vase Factory. From _Ann. d'Inst._ 1876. Plates D, E 509
204. Cook(?). Terra-cotta from Tanagra. From _Arch. Ztg._ for 1874.
Plate 14 511
205. Trade in silphium. Vase-painting from _Mon. d'Inst._, I. 47 515
206. Slave. Terra-cotta from _Bull. de cor. hellén._ 528
INTRODUCTION.
If the account of Greek life and customs given in this work does not
present all sides of life in due proportion, we must lay the blame on
the insufficiency of the sources whence a description of this kind is
derived. These are of three kinds: literary, artistic, and epigraphic.
The literary sources supply us with a large amount of detail for the
work in hand, but seldom give complete pictures or descriptions of
social conditions. Those writers of the Free Age of Greece whom we still
possess entirely, or in considerable fragments, are not all equally in a
position to touch on matters of private or domestic life. The Homeric
Epics give a good deal of insight into the life of those early times;
but after Homer epic poetry disappears from the ranks of available
testimony, and what remains to us of the Alexandrine Epic, which was
essentially a learned style of poetry, supplies no useful material, if
only because it seeks its subjects in the mythological period, and
describes them on essentially Homeric lines. The lyric poets, too,
afford little help; now and then they enable us to add a few details to
our picture, but, as a rule, the results are small, and not till we
reach the Alexandrine period, and there chiefly in bucolic and
epigrammatic poetry, do we obtain richer results in this domain. Here
the poems of Theocritus are of especial value. Unfortunately, very much
of this period, which would have thrown most interesting lights on
different aspects of Greek life, has been entirely lost, or survives
only in small fragments. Tragedy again, which usually takes its subjects
from mythology, cannot be considered at all. Ancient poetry possesses no
“middle-class epic” like modern poetry, which will assuredly some day
supply valuable material for the social historian. But ancient comedy is
of the greatest value for our purpose, and may indubitably be regarded
as the most fertile source of our knowledge of private life. The
comedies of Aristophanes deal with the immediate present, and, although
full of extravagant notions and fantastic inventions, yet treat of
actual circumstances, and thus supply a mine of wealth for the student
of Attic life. We can only judge, from numerous fragments of their
comedies, how valuable would have been the other poets of the so-called
“Older Comedy” of the fifth century B.C., who are, unfortunately, lost
to us. Even though we must exercise some caution in the use of these
authorities, distinguishing comic inventions and poetical exaggeration
from actual fact, yet in the majority of cases it will not be very
difficult to come to a decision on such questions. No less valuable,
perhaps even more useful, for our purpose would be the so-called “New
Comedy” of Menander and others, if we possessed more than a few
scattered fragments of it. The imitations of Plautus and Terence
compensate to some extent for the lost originals, yet even here we must
be on our guard, since the Roman poets in their adaptation often
introduced traits from Roman life. Still, as a rule they adhered to
Greek, or, rather, Attic manners, upon which the original comedies were
based.
Among prose writers we must chiefly consider the historians and orators.
The former are of comparatively little use. They deal with great
political and military events; the daily life going on around them gave
them no subjects for description; apart from the fact that it probably
never occurred to them that anyone in later ages would ever care to hear
about the social conditions of that time. A writer like Herodotus, who
introduces not only political history, but also geographical,
ethnological, and social information, directs his attention for this
very reason chiefly to foreign nations, and gives his countrymen a great
deal of information about the life and customs of the Egyptians,
Assyrians, and Persians; concerning the Greeks themselves he is
absolutely silent. It is quite natural that historians should only
mention by the way facts which we could use with advantage in a
description of Greek life. The orators, on the other hand, supply richer
material, not so much in political speeches as in private orations
dealing with law-suits, of which a considerable number have come down to
us. Here side-lights fall on many events of daily life, and we obtain an
insight into private affairs such as we seldom gain elsewhere.
Philosophical writings supply some material, though comparatively
little; especially those that take actual life as their basis and deal
with philosophical problems in connection with existing circumstances.
Among these may be included such writings as the “Characters” of
Theophrastus, and here we can but regret that we possess only mutilated
fragments of these admirable descriptions of character, based on much
accurate observation, and taken direct from real life.
The Greek literature of the Roman period can only be utilised in
selections and with care, to illustrate the period with which we have
to deal. After Greece came under Roman dominion, new manners and customs
took root there, unknown during the period of Greek freedom and the
Hellenistic epoch. This diminishes the value for our purpose of the
writings of Plutarch, and even more of Lucian, that excellent delineator
of the customs of the second century A.D. But even in this later
literature there is a good deal which we have a right to use in our
description, for some of its habits and customs obtained through the
whole of antiquity; besides which, the later writers often turned to
past centuries for descriptions, and sought their material in older
sources or old historians and other authors, on whose accuracy we
cannot, however, always depend. The same was the case with the materials
which we are able to use in Roman literature.
From all this it is plain that the account given here deals especially
with the real “classic” period of Greek antiquity from about the sixth
to the third century B.C. It is impossible to give a connected history
of the development of Greek civilisation from the beginning, if only on
account of the nature of our authorities and the incompleteness of
tradition. Between Homeric culture and that which we meet with
afterwards in the poets and prose writers of the best time, lies a
period of several centuries, about which we know very little, and that
little chiefly in a legendary form. We can only determine in a few cases
how the conditions of the sixth and fifth centuries gradually developed,
for instance in the rise of the constitution, while it is impossible for
us to trace the genesis of manners and civilisation. We shall,
therefore, not attempt to give a separate account of Homeric
civilisation, but content ourselves with introducing a few of its
details in appropriate places; nor shall we go beyond the period of
Hellenism, since even here foreign, and especially Oriental, influence
produced many alterations, while Roman influence afterwards made many
essential changes.
The artistic authorities are also chosen in accordance with this scheme.
The vase paintings, of which so many have been preserved to us, supply a
great quantity and variety of pictures of Greek life, and we have drawn
largely on this valuable source of information, which supplies most of
the pictures chosen as illustrations. Compared with this there is little
else of importance. The statues to which we have access are chiefly
figures of gods and heroes, or portraits. These we can only use to
illustrate Greek costume. But a few _genre_ pictures are preserved to us
in the artistic productions of the best Greek period, and some of these
we shall have occasion to discuss. For this purpose the small
terra-cotta figures are more useful, which often represent with vigorous
truth subjects from real life. Here, too, as in the case of the statues,
we must always remember the difference between Hellenic and Roman work,
and it is just this consideration which greatly limits our choice of
sculptures; for the great majority of those which would be suitable for
our purpose date from the Roman period, and usually represent Roman
life. For this reason mosaics and frescoes can scarcely be regarded,
since none have come down to us from the Greek period. Undoubtedly many
of them imitate Greek models, or, at any rate, those of the Alexandrine
epoch, but it is not always easy to decide in particular cases; and,
moreover, the greater part are mythological pictures. It is obvious that
works of Etruscan art, such as sarcophagi, pictures on mirrors, and the
like, cannot be regarded. Thus the works of art suitable for
supplementing our literary sources are limited in number. Of these the
vase paintings constitute the great majority, and this is entirely in
accordance with the chronological limits which we have set to our
description; for they almost all belong to the centuries mentioned
above, and only a few that would be suitable for our purpose are of
greater antiquity.
The nature of our authorities not only sets a limit of time, but also
one of space. When we speak of Greek life we ought to include in it not
only life in actual Greece or Hellas, but also that in the numerous
colonies on the Aegean and Black Seas, in Southern Italy, Northern
Africa, etc. But we know very little of the conditions in those Greek
settlements outside Greece, and even in Greece itself, where, in
consequence of the political and racial differences, these circumstances
are by no means everywhere identical, our knowledge is limited in many
ways. Even though the difference in manners and customs was greater in
early times than afterwards, when increase in trade and greater facility
of travel produced more equal conditions, yet certain local and national
peculiarities always prevailed. Life at Sparta differed in many respects
from that at Athens. The other large towns of Greece--Corinth, Sicyon,
Thebes, not to speak of the colonies of Miletus, Syracuse, and
Cyrene--doubtless showed many local peculiarities which are entirely
hidden from our knowledge. Our literary sources are for the greater part
Athenian. The majority of our monuments, too, are of Attic origin, or,
at any rate, influenced by it, though Southern Italy supplies some of
the vases, and in many cases the customs of Magna Graecia are
represented in these pictures. Most of our knowledge of Greek life,
then, refers to Athens, and to be quite accurate we ought to call our
description “Life in Ancient Athens.” Every now and then we are enabled
to enlarge our pictures by details from other parts of Greece. Still, we
must beg our readers to remember that most of the traits here introduced
relate to Athens between the sixth and fourth centuries B.C. We have
scarcely the remotest conception of the mode of life at that time in any
small Greek city or in the country.
Here the third class of our sources comes in to help us, viz., the
inscriptions. These not only give us most of our material for a
knowledge of political conditions, legal and religious antiquities,
etc., but they also supply interesting details of private life; and as
they are found not only in Attica, but all over Greece, the islands, and
the colonies, they supply much very valuable information about matters
which our literary sources entirely ignore. As in most cases the period
of the inscription can be ascertained by the character of the writing or
by other peculiarities, we are not so liable here to make chronological
mistakes and refer customs of a later period to earlier times. Compared
with our literary sources, the inscriptions are also far safer material;
for the accuracy of a writer may be sometimes called in question,
especially when his information is supplied at second-hand.
GREEK LIFE AT HOME.
CHAPTER I.
COSTUME.
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
[Illustration:
_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.
[Illustration: FIG. 2.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 4.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 5.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 6.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 7.
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 8.]
The “chlamys” was a special kind of cloak which originated in Thessaly,
but from the fifth century
[Illustration: FIG. 9.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 10.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 11.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 12.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 13.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 14.]
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
[Illustration:
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 16.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 17.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 18.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 19.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 20.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 21.]
(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.
[Illustration: FIG. 22.]
[Illustration: FIG. 23.]
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,
[Illustration: FIG. 24.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 25.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 26.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 27_a_.]
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
[Illustration: FIG. 27_b_.]
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.
[Illustration: FIG. 28.]
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.
As regards the material of the dresses, we mentioned above that when the
change described by Herodotus was made, the linen chiton was introduced,
but woollen materials were not on that account discarded; and as men
ceased to wear the chiton long, it became commoner to make it of wool.
The oldest sculpture as a rule represents two distinct materials when
once we get beyond the tight-fitting costume of the earliest period. One
of these shows fine and flat folds, while the other falls in large,
deep folds. We cannot always maintain with certainty that these are two
distinct materials, the former wool, the latter linen; sometimes it
seems as though there were only two qualities of the same material, one
being fine and thin, and the other coarse and thick. Yet the frequent
use of linen is proved by the regular parallel and zigzag folds so
common in the older art, which could only be produced in linen by
artificial means.
As a rule, they wore, as we do, lighter stuffs in the summer and heavier
ones in the winter; but though we very often find on archaic monuments
transparent garments showing distinctly the outline of the body (compare
Figs. 18, 24), we are scarcely justified in assuming a very widespread
use of really transparent garments. Even though such thin materials may
have been worn at that time, especially by hetaerae, their extensive use
in vase painting is probably due to the fact that the painters, not
knowing how to represent the outline of the body and the movements of
the limbs under the dress, and yet desiring not to hide them completely
by the clothes, resorted to this expedient of letting the outline appear
through the dress material. These thin stuffs were always common in the
dress of the hetaerae, but respectable women used them only as under
garments. We may, however, assume that this was also a matter of
fashion, since materials from the looms of the island of Amorgos, which
were especially noted for their fineness and transparency, were only
fashionable for a short time in the period of the older Attic comedy.
Later allusions to these stuffs are made chiefly by the learned, and do
not refer to actual reality. Moreover, it is natural that the
circumstances of the persons concerned played a part in the choice of
coarser or finer materials. The stuffs introduced from foreign parts,
such as cotton and muslin, could only be worn by the rich, as also silk,
which, even in the Alexandrine period, was very rare and expensive. On
the other hand, common men wore felt-like materials, and countrymen even
tunics of skin or leather.
[Illustration: FIG. 29.]
In Greek antiquity coverings for the feet were not so essential an
article of clothing as at the present day, at any rate not for the male
portion of the population. At home, and in summer, men as a rule went
barefoot; artisans and other members of the lower classes and slaves did
so out-of-doors also, as well as people who desired to harden their
bodies, like Socrates, or those who perhaps only affected an ascetic
mode of life, like some of the Cynic philosophers. At Sparta, where the
State took cognisance of the dress and food of the citizens, young men
were actually forbidden to wear shoes, and many adhered to this habit
even in old age, as, for instance, Agesilaus, who, even as an old man,
used to go without shoes and chiton, dressed only in his cloak. Still,
it was unusual for men to go out of doors in winter barefoot, as
Socrates is said to have done during his campaign in Macedonia.
[Illustration: FIG. 30.]
Generally speaking, the footgear of the Greeks was of two kinds:
sandals, that is, mere soles tied under the foot, and actual boots.
Between the two, however, there were a great number of transition
stages, so that it is sometimes impossible to say to which of the two
classes some kinds belonged. Sandals, which were probably the oldest
kind, and in Homer apparently the only one, were worn by men and women
alike, though far more commonly by the
[Illustration: FIG. 31.]
latter. They consisted of a sole made of several thicknesses of strong
leather, with sometimes a layer of cork; to this straps were fastened,
which passed across the foot and held them firm. For this purpose
(compare the selection in Fig. 29, taken from works of art) a pair of
straps passing over the instep and heel were often sufficient, and these
were either tied or fastened in such a way that another strap, passing
between the first and second toes, was connected with the other two,
which were fastened to the edge of the sole and buckled on the instep,
the buckle usually having the shape of a heart or a leaf. But these
straps were often more numerous, and so complicated as to cover almost
the whole foot, and thus resemble a perforated shoe. Sometimes they were
continued as far as the ankle, or even the shins (compare the examples
in Fig. 30), but this is only the case in men’s dress. Costly and
brightly-coloured leather, with gilt and other ornaments, made this
footgear, which was naturally simple, both ornamental and expensive.
[Illustration: FIG. 32.]
The boots were something like ours; they covered the whole foot, and
were laced or buttoned in front, over the instep, or at the side. In the
older period men’s boots generally went above the ankle, and at the
front edge had a more or less pointed tongue bent forward. (Compare
examples in Fig. 31, which also show us how this tongue gradually became
smaller, and at last disappeared entirely.) Afterwards, low shoes,
generally stopping short of the ankle, were the rule, especially for
women, if they did not wear sandals. Fig. 32 gives various examples of
this: they
[Illustration: FIG. 33.]
are usually pointed at the toes, and old Spartan reliefs even represent
shoes with points in front as part of female dress. Huntsmen,
countrymen, and the like, wore high boots reaching to the shins
(ἐνδρομίδες), laced or buttoned in front, as in Fig. 33.
[Illustration: FIG. 34.]
These generally had broad toes and thick soles, but like the ordinary
shoes they had no heels. A common decoration of such boots were broad
zigzag lappets of leather, falling down from the upper edge, as in the
examples in Fig. 34. Between sandals and boots we find various forms of
low shoes, in which the foot is partly covered with leather and partly
with straps. Thus there was a kind of slipper covering the upper part of
the foot in front, while the back was covered with straps, and another
kind which left the toes quite free and covered the rest of the foot.
Probably the _crepida_, which only originated in the Alexandrine period,
but then became very common, belonged to this class, and was a shoe with
low leather sides, from which straps passed across the foot. Other kinds
of shoes we know only by their antique names. Thus there was an elegant
kind worn by guests invited to dinner (βλαυταί); and a coarser kind worn
chiefly by peasants (καρβατιναί) made of rough leather, and probably not
on a block, but roughly sewn together by the country people themselves.
In fact, the number of names for footgear used by the ancient writers is
very large, and we may thence conclude that the fashion changed
frequently. Thus in Greece there were shoes of the Persian fashion. At
Athens they wore Laconian shoes; Amyclaean, Sicyonian, Rhodian shoes,
and others which are also mentioned, probably refer more to the shape
than to the origin. There were also shoes called after celebrated men,
who probably made use of them, such as Alcibiades shoes, Iphicrates
shoes, etc.; but we cannot illustrate all these from works of art, in
spite of the rich variety supplied by them. They also distinguished
between shoes which, like our slippers, could be worn on either foot,
and those which were made on particular lasts for the right and left
foot. The latter were regarded as more elegant, for they laid great
stress on having shoes well-fitting and not too wide. They said of
people who wore too comfortable shoes that they “swam about” in them. It
was a mark of poverty or avarice to wear patched boots, and heavy nailed
shoes were only worn by soldiers or country people, and for others were
regarded as a mark of rusticity.
The material used was, as a rule, leather, but occasionally felt. They
were mostly black; but we also find coloured shoes mentioned, especially
for women, and sometimes see them represented on polychrome vases.
Stockings were unknown to antiquity, but sometimes in extreme cold it
was the custom to wrap fur or felt round the legs. Thus, in Homer, old
Laertes, when doing rough work in his garden wears gaiters of neat’s
leather, and also gloves to protect himself against the thorns. As a
rule, the latter were also unknown; only actors wore something of the
kind, but their object was, by apparent lengthening of the arms, to
harmonise them with the artificial increase in height.
[Illustration: FIG. 35.]
As a rule, men went bare-headed, or wore caps in bad weather. Generally
speaking, they distinguished, as we do, between hats and caps. The hat,
whose distinguishing mark was the brim, bore the name _petasos_. It
originated in Thessaly, but spread to other places, and at Athens was
regarded as the characteristic riding hat, and as such was worn with the
chlamys by youths. We see many in this dress on the Parthenon frieze.
Otherwise the petasos was essentially a part of travelling dress, and,
therefore, a usual attribute of Hermes as messenger of the gods. When
older men wore the petasos there was generally some distinct reason for
it. (Compare Figs. 9 and 10.) The shapes of the petasos on works of art
are so various that it is sometimes difficult to tell whether they ought
all to be included under the same name.
[Illustration: FIG. 36.]
Some of the hats are so very like caps that we can scarcely decide
whether they ought to bear the name of petasos. In the oldest period the
petasos almost always had a pointed, rather high crown, and a broad brim
turned up in front and behind. (Compare the examples in Fig. 35.)
Afterwards varieties were introduced; sometimes the crown was
semi-circular, sometimes flattened, now high, now low, or with a little
point like a button; the brim, too, was sometimes broad, shading the
whole face, sometimes quite narrow; now turned down, now horizontal; at
other times, again, turned up or bent round the head. Thus in the first
half of the fifth century, we find a very peculiar shape. The brim
projects in front in
[Illustration: FIG. 37.]
a narrow point, and at the back is turned up as far as the high conical
crown. (Compare Fig. 35.) The commonest shape is that of which examples
are given in Fig. 36; the crown is tolerably flat, generally not higher
than the skull; the brim, which is rather broad, and generally turned
down, is not circular all round, but cut out at several places--either
between the ears and the forehead, so that a point falls over the
latter, while the brim extends in semi-circular form round the back of
the head; or else this half is cut out in the same way as the front
part, so that the brim ends in four points, which generally fall over
the forehead, back of the head, and ears. Still, we sometimes find
instances where it is only cut out over the forehead, and the points
fall to the right and left of the face. This shape is very common in the
best period, that is, in the fifth and fourth centuries. Afterwards,
there were some very strange shapes, such as that in Fig. 37, on the
left, which is found on vase pictures of the best period and reminds us
of the hats pointed in front and behind worn at the beginning of this
century. The petasos was fastened under the chin with a cord; when it
was not wanted it was pushed down below the neck, where it was kept in
place by the cord; and we find it frequently in this position. (Compare
Fig. 38.)
[Illustration: FIG. 38.]
When, as sometimes happens, the petasos has a high crown, and a narrow
turned-up brim, it is often very like the _pilos_, a cap of leather or
felt, which was the common dress of workmen, especially smiths,
countrymen, fishermen, sailors, etc. Odysseus, as sailor, is almost
always represented with it; and so is Charon, the ferryman of the nether
world, Hephaestus, as smith, etc. Invalids who were obliged to protect
their heads from the weather, also wore such caps. These caps, too, were
of various shapes; semi-circular, fitting closely to the head, and
half-oval, projecting somewhat beyond the head, or of a more pointed
conical shape. (Compare that of Odysseus, Fig. 39, and the sailors, Fig.
40, where, as is often the case, it has a narrow, lower brim.) It is
evident from the drawing that the material must have been skin, which
was the commonest next to felt. These caps were often fastened with
strings below the chin, and there was sometimes a bow at the apex by
which they could be hung up.
[Illustration: FIG. 39.]
Women, who were seen out of doors much seldomer than men, had even less
need for head-coverings. Especially in the oldest period, where scarves
covering the greater part of the hair were in fashion, they probably
contented themselves with drawing the himation over their heads when
they went out. (Compare Fig. 4.) This was often done in later periods
also, as we see in terra-cotta figures (compare Figs. 27 and 28); but
even at that time women in the country, or travelling, often wore a
petasos similar to that of the men, though with a narrower brim. A
graceful Sicilian terra-cotta, represented in Fig. 41, shows a lady
wearing one of these, and it is very becoming to the face. On the other
hand, after the Alexandrine period, the _tholia_ is very common. This is
a light straw hat, with a pointed crown and broad brim, fastened by a
ribbon and balanced on the head--no doubt very convenient, since the
broad brim protected the wearer from the rays of the sun, but by no
means becoming. Terra-cotta figures from Tanagra give numerous examples
of this hat, which was evidently very common at the time, and is also
mentioned by writers.
[Illustration: FIG. 40.]
For further protection against the sun women often used sunshades, which
were made to fold up like ours. Such sunshades are common on old
[Illustration: FIG. 41.]
monuments, but, as a rule, ladies did not carry them themselves, but
were accompanied by a slave, who performed this office for them. The
sunshades were
[Illustration: FIG. 42.]
usually round (compare Fig. 42), but there are also examples of a
fan-shaped kind, which enabled the servant who walked behind to hold the
sunshade by its long handle comfortably over her mistress without going
too near her. Sometimes we even see men on vase pictures with sunshades.
This, however, was regarded as effeminate luxury. The stick belonged to
the ordinary equipment of a man. Old people walked with the help of a
heavy knotted stick, or leant on it as they stood, like the Athenian
citizens on the Parthenon frieze; and young people also used them. They
seem always to have used natural sticks; but the Laconian canes, with
curved handles, were considered specially convenient, and were used at
Athens by those who liked to imitate Spartan manners and customs. In the
fourth century the use of sticks seems to have become less common.
* * * * *
The last heading to be considered is the fashion of wearing the hair;
and, although the writers and statues give us considerable information,
there are several difficulties here which have not yet been solved.
In the heroic period long curly hair was regarded as a suitable ornament
for a man. This is proved by the favourite epithet, “The curly-haired
Achaeans,” and by other quotations from epic poetry; various indications
prove that the curls were not always left to fall naturally, but that
artificial means were sometimes adopted for facilitating and preserving
their regular arrangement. When the “effeminate Paris” is said to
rejoice in his “horn” (κέρᾳ ἄγλαε), old commentators state that this
horn was a twisted plait. It is possible that this might be produced by
the mere use of stiffening pomades or other cosmetic means, which had
been introduced from the East in the Homeric period; but the statements
in the Iliad about the gold and silver “curl-holders” of the Trojan
Euphorbus clearly point to artificial aids. The oldest sculptures and
vase pictures give sufficient proof that this mode of wearing the hair
in regular curls continued for a long time, for they almost always
represent hair falling far down the neck, generally in regular stiff
locks with horizontal waving, while small curls surround the forehead,
arranged with equal accuracy. As to the means employed for producing
these curls, Helbig’s opinion is that the spirals of bronze, silver, or
gold wire found in old graves in several parts of the Old World were
used as a foundation for the curls, which were twined around them.
Certainly these spirals have often been found in Etruscan graves, near
the spot where the head rested, and generally one on each side. This
might, however, be explained by the other interpretation that they were
a kind of primitive ear-ring. Perhaps the “gold and silver” with which
Euphorbus “bound together” his locks, according to Homer, was not a
particular kind of adornment, but only flexible gold and silver wire.
The monuments as well as the writers teach us that men wore their hair
long, in the next period also, down to the fifth century; we sometimes
find hair of such length and thickness depicted that it seems almost
incredible that a man’s hair could have been so much developed, even by
the most careful treatment. However, it did not often hang quite loose,
but it was tied back somewhere near the neck by a ribbon, and, unlike
the Homeric head-dress, where each curl is separately fastened, the
whole mass of hair was bound together, and then spread out again below
the fastening, and fell down the back. Sometimes the hair, after being
tightly tied together in one place, was interwoven with cords or ribbons
lower down, so that it fell in a broader mass than where it was tied
together, but by no means hung loose. Another kind of head-dress is that
in which the hair is tied together in such a manner as to resemble a
broad and thickish band, something like our head-dress of the last
century. The hair falls a little way below the neck, and is then taken
up again and tied in with the other piece by a ribbon in such a manner
that the end of the hair falls down over this ribbon. Here, too, we find
variety, for the hair sometimes fell some way down the back, sometimes
was fastened up again at the back of the head. An example of the former
kind is the bronze head from Olympia represented in Fig. 44; of the
latter, Fig. 43, from a vase painting of the fifth century.
[Illustration: FIG. 43.]
[Illustration: FIG. 44.]
Most commonly, however, in the sixth and fifth centuries men plaited
their long hair and laid the plaits round their head. There were two
distinct modes of doing this. One was to take two plaits from the back
of the head in different directions and fasten them like bandages round
the head; the other was to begin the plaits at the ears, turn them
backwards so that they crossed each other at the back of the head, then
bring them round to the front and knot them together over the centre of
the forehead. This is the head-dress of the figure on the Omphalos known
as Apollo (Fig. 45), and the head of a youth (Fig. 46). There are also
many other differences in detail; sometimes
[Illustration: FIG. 45.]
[Illustration: FIG. 46.]
the two plaits were laid across the hair from the parting to the
forehead in the form of a fillet holding the hair fast, as in the marble
head (Fig. 47); but sometimes the front hair is laid across the ends of
the plait fastened together in front, as in the head from a vase
painting represented in Fig. 48. The head in Fig. 47 also shows a
peculiar mode of treating the back hair. The lower part of this is
plaited, and the plait turned up again and fastened where the other two
braids cross each other. Other plaits also fall from behind the ears in
regular arrangement over the shoulders in front, often reaching as far
as the breast. The hair on the forehead is dressed with equal care. With
this fashion also the regular little curls, arranged in one or more rows
round the forehead, are very common. Sometimes they are in spiral form,
sometimes in that of “corkscrew” curls, as on the archaic bronze head
from Pompeii represented in Fig. 49 and in Fig. 48.
[Illustration: FIG. 47.]
These are the principal archaic modes of wearing the hair found on the
monuments, but they by no means exhaust the varieties which might be
observed. The writers, however, only mention one ancient head-dress.
Thucydides, in the passage already quoted, which describes the long
chitons formerly worn by the Athenians, also tells us that at the same
time that this old-fashioned dress was abandoned, the Athenians gave up
the old way of dressing their hair in the _crobylus_ (κρωβύλος), into
which they fastened golden grasshoppers. It has not yet, however, been
possible to determine with any certainty which of the head-dresses found
on the statues corresponded to this crobylus, which seems to be
identical with the _corymbus_ (κόρυμβος) mentioned in other places; nor
has it been possible to find any traces of the grasshoppers.
Consequently almost all the head-dresses above described have been
claimed for the crobylus, even the double plaits behind the ears; and
the grasshoppers have been explained sometimes as the above-mentioned
spirals, sometimes as hair-pins or fibulae. Perhaps some day a fortunate
discovery may throw light on this difficult question.
[Illustration: FIG. 48.]
It would be scarcely possible to assign a chronological order to all
these various archaic head-dresses. However, in the latter half of the
fifth century they all disappear, and here we have another proof of the
increasing aesthetic sense noticeable in all domains of life in the
classic period. The allusions in Aristophanes show that in his time it
was only old-fashioned people, who probably also went about in long
chitons, who still wore the grasshoppers. From the time of Pheidias, the
elaborate head-dresses entirely vanish; and though they are continued
for a longer period on the vase paintings, that is probably because
painting adhered longer than sculpture to the old forms and fashions,
since its free development in style was also of later growth. After this
time the long, flowing hair of the men, and the pigtail disappear; and
though only youths and athletes wore their hair quite short, yet the
men’s hair was also shortened, and owed its chief beauty to nature,
which has granted the gift of graceful curl to Southern and Oriental
nations. The portrait heads of this and the following period depict the
hair as simply curled, soft, and not too abundant. This seems to have
continued during the following centuries; at any rate,
[Illustration: FIG. 49.]
the monuments show no trace of a return to the artificial head-dresses
fashionable in ancient times. Just as wigs, powder, and pigtails have
disappeared for ever among us, so antiquity, when it had once recognised
the beauty of hair in its natural growth, never returned to the stiff
and laborious head-dress of the past. Of course, there were various
fashions in the mode of wearing the hair and having it cut; in fact,
there are a number of different names for the modes of cutting it, such
as the “garden,” the “boat,” but we do not know what these were like,
since the monuments afford no clue. Probably it was only dandies who
laid any stress on such matters. It is but natural that there should
have been many local variations in the mode of wearing the hair, as in
the dress, and probably these were of some importance in the oldest
period; but we know very little about them. At Sparta it was the custom
at the time of the Peloponnesian War to shave the hair quite close to
the head, but as the Spartans wore long, carefully-curled hair at the
time of the Persian wars, a change in the fashion must have taken place
at Sparta in the course of the fifth century.
No special ornaments were worn in the hair by men after they gave up the
old-fashioned curl-holders and the mysterious grasshoppers. The “band”
or fillet laid round the forehead, which Dionysus commonly wears in
works of art, was only actually used as the reward of victory in
gymnastic or other contests. The diadem is a token of royal dignity,
and, therefore, unknown in free Greece.
The change of fashion in the mode of wearing the beard can also be
traced in Greek antiquity. There is no direct account of it in the
Homeric poems, but probably some indirect hints. A well known simile in
Homer mentions the razor. As the Achaeans wore their hair long, and
certainly were not smooth shaven, the question arises, what use they
could have made of the razor. Helbig points to the analogy of the
Egyptian and Phoenician custom, which had considerable influence on
Hellenic culture, and also shows, by means of old Greek monuments, that
very probably the Ionians of the Homeric period shaved the upper lip;
as, in fact, the Dorians also did in older times. It is true this period
must have been preceded by an older one unacquainted with this custom,
for the gold masks found in graves at Mycenae bear a moustache; and the
best example of these is treated in such a way as to point to the use of
some stiffening pomade, as well as the artificial cutting of the
moustache.
The monuments also show us that the custom of shaving the upper lip
continued for some time in the following centuries; but it was not the
only prevailing one, for we also find whiskers, beard, and moustache. It
is but natural that in the period when the hair was elaborately dressed,
special care was taken also with the treatment of the beard. It was not
only regularly cut, and usually in a point (compare Fig. 50), but it was
also cut short at certain places, especially between the lower lip and
the chin, so that the part thus treated presented a different appearance
from the rest of the beard. They also curled the moustache, and arched
it upwards; and if we may believe the testimony of archaic monuments, we
must assume that curling-irons were sometimes used for the artificial
arrangement of the beard. It was not till the latter half of the fifth
century that the beard was allowed to fall naturally and simply, at the
time when they began to treat the hair in a
[Illustration: FIG. 50.]
similar manner. The beard, although not entirely abandoned to its
natural growth, since it was cut into a shape corresponding to the oval
of the face, instead of the former point, at any rate was no longer
treated by artificial means, such as pomades, elaborate curling, etc.
The portrait type of Pericles or Sophocles (compare Fig. 7) shows us the
finest example of a simple and dignified mode of wearing the beard,
while the ideal head of Zeus from Otricoli, with its artificially parted
beard, in spite of the grandeur of the treatment, is far removed from
the classic simplicity of the age of Pheidias. After Alexander the Great
and his successors it became the custom to shave the whole face. The
portrait statues show us that old men especially, who had formerly
allowed their beard to grow, now almost always shaved it off. Aristotle,
Menander, Poseidippus, the princes of the Alexandrine age, etc., have
smooth-shaven faces. Youths and middle-aged men at that period
sometimes let their beard grow, but old men only did so when they wished
to indicate, by a long, ragged beard, that they were followers of the
Cynic school; for even down to the time of the Empire the long beard was
the distinguishing mark of the philosopher.
[Illustration: FIG. 51.]
[Illustration: FIG. 52.]
The head-dress of women also underwent many changes. We do not know how
their hair was bound up and arranged in the Homeric period, when it was
treated with sweet-scented oils and pomades, which were, in fact, very
common during the heroic period. Mention is especially made of a
cap-like arrangement of the hair, and a plaited braid connected with it.
Helbig believes he has recognised the same fashion in the women’s
head-dress on old Etruscan pictures, on which it is possible to
distinguish a high-pointed cap and a band laid over it. However this may
be, Andromache’s head-dress, as described by Homer, has a distinctly
Oriental character. In the next period the works of art are again our
best guide. They show us that, apart from external ornament, the
head-dress of men and women in ancient times was essentially similar. We
find the long hair either falling freely or in single plaits down the
back (compare Figs. 11 and following); curls falling on the shoulders;
and little ringlets surrounding the forehead; we find the hair tied up
at the back of the neck, or the mode described above of tying it up in
band-like fashion in several places. (Compare also the peculiar
hair-knot in Fig. 11.) We also find that arrangement of double plaits
laid several times round the back of the head, which has been claimed as
the crobylus, although this is only mentioned as a male head-dress. This
last fashion is even found in the graceful Caryatides of the Erechtheum,
but here it is probably a reminiscence of the old custom, natural in
these female figures, which are, as it were, in the service of the
goddess. Otherwise none of these fashions continue beyond the last
quarter of the fifth century, either for women or men.
[Illustration: FIG. 53.]
[Illustration: FIG. 54.]
About the middle of the fifth century the fashion
[Illustration: FIG. 55.]
[Illustration: FIG. 56.]
of wearing many-coloured kerchiefs, covering the greater part of the
hair, must have been very prevalent. Polygnotus paints his women thus,
and we find the same fashion in the pediments of Olympia, and on some of
the female figures on the Eastern Parthenon frieze, and on numerous vase
paintings of that period. (Compare Fig. 17, where the kerchief even
seems to develop into a cap, with a bow at the apex.) But at the same
period, when the men began to emancipate themselves from the stiff
head-dresses, and to wear their hair in a natural manner, a simple and
beautiful fashion also became commoner among the women. The hair was
usually parted in the middle and either fell in slight ripples loosely
down the back or else was drawn up into a knot at the back of the head.
(Compare Figs. 20 and 24.) The latter fashion, which we still call the
“Greek knot,” is the commonest and most beautiful in the next period
too. Sometimes the knot fell far down the neck (compare Figs. 51 and
52), which was certainly the most graceful, or else it was higher up the
head (compare Fig. 53), where the hair is combed upwards from the face,
or else (compare Fig. 54) the knot developed into a flattened nest or
wreath. A simple ornament frequently found is a narrow band or fillet
entwined with the hair or laid around the hair and forehead. (Compare
Figs. 16, 20, 24, and 52.) Kerchiefs were also much worn afterwards,
sometimes put on in such a way as to cover almost the whole hair
(compare Figs. 55 and 56), sometimes only a part, so that the hair at
the back of the head is visible beneath it. (Compare Fig. 25.) There
were also a variety of metal ornaments, which were fastened into the
hair either to keep it firm or else for decorative purposes--golden
circlets or diadems (compare Fig. 57), pins, etc. Detailed consideration
of these ornaments show us that the age of Pericles and that immediately
following it, were the periods when the style and technique attained
their highest development and artistic beauty. Thus dress, hair, and
ornament all combined harmoniously to represent the people of that age
in surroundings corresponding in the fullest degree to the poetic and
artistic attainments of the epoch.
[Illustration: FIG. 57.]