Greek dress

by Ethel Beatrice Abrahams

[Face page 75.

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

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

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

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

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

Photo. by Mansell & Co.]

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

[Face page 78.