previous next


PA´LLIUM At all periods of Greek life the characteristic outdoor garment, both of men and women, was a mantle or shawl, consisting of a rectangular piece of cloth. Such mantles were known generally as e)piblh/mata or περιβλήματα, or more specially as ἱμάτια. Ἱμάτιον is derived from the root ϝες or ἑς (cf. vestis). The cognate word εἷμα is used in Homer of clothes in general, and ϝέα occurs in the celebrated inscription from Gortyn in the same sense. The early form εἱμάτιον is found in an inscription from Andania (Dittenberger, No. 388, 16), with which ἑμάτιον in another inscription (Roehl, I. G. A 395 a) may be compared. The older sense of the word, meaning “raiment,” was retained in the plural at all periods of Greek literature.

Apart from the name, the use of the cloak or shawl is, as has been shown in the article PALLA as old as the art of weaving. The garments of men no less than women were woven on the domestic loom, τετυγμένα χερσὶ γυναικῶν, and all of the same rectangular shape. As a consequence the sole difference between the dress of men and that of women lay in the size and material, but not in the shape of their garments. The earliest method of wearing such clothes is undoubtedly as a cloak fastened round the body with a pin or clasp and a girdle. This was the dress of women in the Homeric age [PALLA], but men had already at that time adopted the linen shirt as an under-garment. Some attempt has of late been made to gather, from the representations on objects found at Mycenae and other early sites, the nature of pre-Homeric dress, but the Greek character of those which are clear enough to give definite information is too doubtful to allow of even the most general conclusions. Other attempts to settle the question by an appeal to Egyptian, Assyrian, and Phoenician monuments have been made, but have, at the present state of our knowledge, no claim to serious consideration. In Homer, the dress for men is a mantle, worn over a shirt of linen (χιτών; TUNICA),

Figure of Peleus, from a vase. (Helbig.)

which is called either χλαῖνα or (φᾶρος. The women, on the other hand, are clad in the πέπλος, but the veils which are worn over this cannot be classed as shawls or mantles. There can be no doubt that both the χλαῖνα and φᾶρος were rectangular pieces of cloth, worn without being altered in shape by any cutting or sewing.

The χλαῖνα [LAENA] was of wool, and had a thick nap (οὔλη, Il. 10.134). Those worn by great folk were dyed red (Il. loc. cit.; Od. 14.500, 21.118), or purple (Od. 4.115, 154; 19.225), but it was the dress of the poor man no less than the rich, for it was worn by the swineherd Eumaeus (Od. 14.529) and by the servants of Penelope's suitors (Od. 15.331). It was fastened round the neck with a brooch or pin (Od. 19.226), and, as the brooch is not always mentioned, it is possible that it may also have been worn without, simply wrapped round the body. Two forms of it are mentioned, the first the ἁπλοΐδες χλαῖναι (Il. 24.229), the latter the χλαῖνα διπλῆ (Il. 10.134; Od. 19.225). There can be little, if any, doubt that the latter form is the same as the δίπλαξ, a garment often mentioned (Il. 3.126, 22.440; Od. 19.245); the only difference between the δίπλαξ and the χλαῖνα being that the former is the latter doubled. That the older commentators were wrong in understanding the difference to be one of pattern is shown by a passage in the Odyssey (13.224)), where Athene, disguised as a youthful shepherd, is described as [p. 2.319]δίπτυχον ἀμφ᾽ ὤμοισιν ἔχων εὺεργέα λώπην, which shows that it lay in the folding. It might be thought perhaps that the δίπτυχος λώπη is a different garment, but there is no reason to suppose that it has any more definite meaning than the later λῶπος: it is in fact a general word for clothing. The δίπλαξ may have been larger than the simple χλαῖνα: but from the analogy of the use of shawls it seems reasonable to suppose that the same garment could be used either way. The larger size would be a simple explanation of the fact that the δίπλαξ was occasionally highly ornamented. Thus Helen (Il. 3.125): μέγαν ἱστὸν ὕφαινε
Δίπλακα μαρμαρέην: πολέας δ᾽ἐνέπασσεν ἀέθλους
Τρώων θ᾽ ἱπποδάμων καὶ Ἀχαίων χαλκιχιτώνων: and Andromache (Il. 22.440) wove a δίπλαξ with a pattern of θρόνα ποίκιλα, though what

δίπλαξ. (From François vase.)

these were it is impossible to determine.

Φᾶρος is a word of disputed origin. Curtius derives it from φέρω, but Studniczka, following Krall, prefers to derive it from the old Egyptian phaar, meaning “a winding sheet,” while Fraenkel proposes the Semitic root far (or far), but these are from the nature of the case only conjectures. Whatever its derivation may be, the word is used in Homer in a general sense, referring to a textile fabric for women's garments, swaddling clothes, winding sheets, and as a substitute for sails (and in a more special sense for a man's garment). These different uses lead us irresistibly to the conclusion that the material was of linen, not wool; and this is fully confirmed by the epithets ἀργύφεος, λεπτός, νηγάτεος, and ἐϋπλυνὴς applied to it, all of which are appropriate for linen, but not for wool.

The description of the φᾶρος which Penelope weaves (Od. 24.147) is also only applicable to linen. As a man's garment it was worn in place of the χλαῖνα, by the princes and men of rank, never by the poor or ordinary folk. It is also worn by both Calypso and Circe, and it is a moot point whether this implies that ladies ever wore it. The epithet μέγα would seem to imply that it was larger than the χλαῖνα. It does not seem to have been worn double. It was dyed purple in Od. 8.221.

Of the way in which the mantle was worn in the ages which followed the Homeric, literature gives us but little information. The garments, however, mentioned in Hesiod and the Hymns, are the same as in Homer, and there is nothing to lead one to suppose that the fashion of wearing them had changed in any essentials. The sad want of any notices, except the most general, in the Lyric poems, is much to be lamented, for they lived in an age when great changes in costume were taking place, as may be learned from many protests against the growing luxury, and from the repressive enactments of early codes. It is not indeed until Thucydides that any clear account of the nature of this change is to be found. He, in his prefatory sketch of Greek civilisation (1.6), distinguishes broadly three periods: (1) that when weapons were worn in ordinary life (τοῦ σιδηροθορεῖν); (2) that of a leisurely mode of life, when ease and luxury were possible (τῆς ἀνειμένης διαίτης); (3) that of moderation in dress (τῆς μετρίας ἐσθῆτος). The Athenians, he says, were the first to give up wearing arms and to adopt the leisurely mode of life, while it was the influence of the Spartans that brought about the revolt against luxury and the return to simplicity of the third period,--a reform which took place in the middle of the fifth century; for he adds that it was not long since elderly gentlemen in easy circumstances gave up the long linen shirt (which the Ionian still wore) with the archaic head-dress--a remark which is borne out by the mockery in the Knights of Aristophanes (425 B.C.) of the ancient costume (Ar. Eq. 1323 and 1331). This of course only applies to the dress of men, but Herodotus (5.87, 88) informs us that about the middle of the sixth century the Athenian women gave up the old woollen shift and adopted the linen one.

In both cases it is very important to remember that the changes described took place only within a restricted area, some of them in fact only at Athens. Thus the old π́πλος of wool was still worn in the Peloponnese in the sixth century, and that of linen in Ionia during the fifth; while in the more out-of-the-way parts of Greece, in Aetolia and Thessaly, the costumes were probably almost the same as in the times of Homer and Hesiod. All these changes can be traced with the greatest distinctness in the monuments of the art of the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.

The most important of these remains, both as being the most numerous and as giving the best representations, are the vases of the blackfigured and early red-figured styles. Next to these come statuettes of bronze and terra-cotta, and reliefs in stone or metal plate. Least important are the statues in the round; for these, if male, are mostly nude, and, in any case, are of a too conventional type to be good evidence. In the earliest of these monuments we find the men clad either in a long shirt with a mantle, with its ends hanging in front at an equal length from each shoulder, or without shirt and in a mantle folded double and thrown over the shoulders in the same symmetrical way. The former is worn by old men generally, and by others in a time of peace; the latter is the costume of youths and warriors.

There can be little doubt that the long mantle is the χλαῖνα, most probably worn in the same way as in Homeric times. The doubled mantle may perhaps be the δίπλαξ, but this is by no means the way of doubling it. The Homeric χλαῖνα was fastened with a brooch or clasp, but nothing of the kind is shown by the vasepaintings. [p. 2.320]This, however, does not necessarily disprove its use, for it is very rare to find fibula of a woman's πέπλος shown, and yet it

Figures from Frieze of the Parthenon.

was absolutely indispensable. It is besides difficult to see in what other way than by a clasp the χλαῖνα can have been kept in place in this symmetrical style of wearing it.

The women on vases of this class are clad in the πέπλος, and wear a veil, which falls from the head symmetrically over the shoulders, and down the back is practically a shawl. Both this and the symmetrical mantles of the men are well shown on the Francois vase at Florence.

On vases rather later than these one finds that the women assume the mantle, probably owing to the adoption of the linen shift, which made a warm shawl an absolute necessity. The way in which the change came about is shown by the characteristic fashion in which the shawl appears fastened with a brooch or brooches, but only at one shoulder, leaving the other shoulder and arm free and the breast bare; the mantle being in fact a πέπλος with the brooch at the closed side loosened. This is by far the commonest costume on archaic statues and statuettes, in marble, terra-cotta, and bronze from Rhodes, Athens, Magna Graecia, Etruria, and in fact all the In places where objects of archaic art are found. It is peculiarly well-suited for the formal elegance of the period, the Ionic shift of linen showing at the bared breast and shoulder, in contrast with the folds of the woollen shawl, which hangs diagonally down in artificially arranged plaits. It is well seen in many of the statues discovered on the Acropolis in 1886 (Rhomaidis-Cavvadias, Les Musées d'Athènes), on the Athene of the Aeginetan East Pediment, and in countless vase-paintings. (Cf. Furtwängler in Roscher's Lexicon of Mythology, s. v Aphrodite.) In Graeco-Roman times, this costume is important, because adopted as an archaic trait by the archaistic artists of that time. Instances of its use in this way are very numerous: the Artemis from Pompeii (cf. Studnizcka, in Bulletino del Inst. 1888), the Dresden Pallas, and the Minerva from Herculaneum. It is generally known as the “Spes” costume, early archaeologists having wrongly imagined that it was as peculiar to Roman statues of that goddess.

Scarcely less characteristic of archaic and archaistic art is the symmetrical wearing of the χλαῖνα. This is seen on the Hermes Kriophoros of Wilton House, Oinomaos in the East Pediment from Olympia, on the figures of Athene on late Panathenaic vases, and of Poseidon on the various coins. It is also a common motive on the flying statues, and reliefs of the Hellenistic time, and is usually wrongly explained as being a χλαμύς.

Early in the sixth, if not in the seventh century B.C., the manner of wearing the cloak which prevailed in classical times begins to appear in works of art. In it the symmetrical fashion, in which the ends are thrown over the shoulders, has been given up, and the cloak is wrapped round the body, being thrown over the left shoulder across the back, and under or right arm, according to the desire of the wearer to cover or keep his arm free. At first this fashion was confined to men, but by the fifth century it had become almost universal for women. The cloak thus worn is generally own as the ἱμάτιον: but, as will be shown further on, this is but a very special use of the term, the sole difference between cloaks wrapped round the body in this fashion and cloaks worn in other fashions (e.g the τρίβων) being the immaterial one of size.

At this period, as indeed at every other, such a ἱμάτιον was the indispensable outdoor dress of the Greek; and to appear without it in one's under-garment was indecent, and anyone so dressed was spoken of as naked (γυμνός). In primitive times the cloak had probably been the sole garment of both sexes, and it remained so among some of the Dorians and the poorer working classes down to the close of Greek history. In Homer's time men of quality had already adopted a shirt (χιτών), and we have seen that women followed their example somewhere in the sixth century. By the fifth century, however, it had become so much the exception to wear a cloak without an undergarment that to do so (to be ἀχίτων ἐν ἱματίῳ, Diod. 11.26) was a sign either of great poverty or determined asceticism. This of course does not apply to warriors or hunters, who wore the old garb, even to late times.

In Athens much importance was attached to the nice adjustment and elegant wearing of the ἱμάτιον. Indeed the way in which it was worn was regarded as an infallible guide to the character of its owner. To leave the left shoulder free instead of the right was a true sign of a barbarian, as can be seen from the horror with which Poseidon in Aristophanes' Birds (1567) greets the outlandish god Triballos, who had put it on ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερα, instead of ἐπὶ δέξια. Even Plato, in the Theaetetus (p. 175), speaks of one who is not a gentleman as ἀναβάλλεσθαι οὐκ ἐπισταμένου ἐπὶ δεξιὰ ἐλευθέρως. The length it ought to be worn was considered a point of great nicety; and though Quintilian (11.3, 143) says that it was customary in antiquity to wear the cloak long enough to touch one's boots, vet Alcibades offended many by wearing it down to his ankles (Plut. Alc. 1; cf. Demosth. F. L. p. 442.314):. Theophrastus decides that it must come down low as the knees. In the time of the early Attic orators it was apparently the custom to keep the right hand wrapped in the folds of the ἱμάτιον when speaking, an attitude which is seen in the well-known statue of Sophocles. Aeschines says (c. Timarch. § 27) that the custom had disappeared in his time; Cleon [p. 2.321]being, according to Plutarch (Nicias), the first to disregard it.

We must beware of assuming that the ἱμάτιον was a distinct garment, differing specifically from the χλαῖνα and other forms of cloak. The word originally was perfectly general, denoting clothes of all kinds; and even when its meaning grew more restricted in classical times, it only meant a cloak or over-garment as opposed to the shirt or under-garment. Fashion, however, only recognised one peculiar mode of wearing it as worthy of a gentleman, and this particular mode has in the usage of modern times usurped the name.

Among the specific garments worn at this time, the χλαῖνα [LAENA] is the most important. It was still made of thick woollen stuff (Arist. αϝ. 493), and was used as a winter cloak (ἱμάτιον χειμέρινον, Hesych.) or as a blanket, though it was finer than the σισύρα, which was also used for this purpose (Ar. Vespae, 1138; Ranae, 1459). It is frequently mentioned and its compounds are numerous.

The χλανὶς was a much finer garment and of Milesian wool; it was worn in hot weather by men, at other times by ladies, old men (Arist. Eccl. 848), and effeminate persons. It is first mentioned by Simonides, but χλάνδια (= χλανίδια, which are among the festival robes in Arist. Lys. 1188) and χλάνισκα are among the robes in the Komos of the Heraeum at Samos (cf. C. Curtius, Inschriften und Studien zur Geschichte von Samos).

The λῃδάριον was also a summer garment, as we see from Arist. Av. 715, where the swallow is said to announce ὅτε χρὴ χλαῖναν πελεῖν καὶ λῃδάριον πρίασθαι. The word is a diminutive of λῇδος (cf. λῄδιον in an Attic inscription, C. I. 155, 45).

The ξυστὶς was also a garment of fine quality worn by women of quality at festivals (Arist. Lys 1189), which would have been intended rather to complete a gorgeous costume than to form an essential part of it. In Theocr. 2.74, however, it is an ordinary over-garment. It was also worn by men (Arist. Nub. 70), especially on state occasions, and seems to have been used on the stage for the attire of heroic personages.

The ἐφεστρὶς was somewhat similar to the ξνστίς, and also worn by both men and women. In Xen. Symp. 4, 38, it has the epithet παχεῖα, from which it would appear that it was not so light as the ξυστίς.

The ἐφαπτίς, according to the Scholiast on Clemens Alexandrinus (4.128, ed. Klotz), is a more costly form of the χλαῖνα, was used by hunters and warriors, and is very probably the garment which is often seen wrapped round a hunter's arm. Polybius uses it (quoted by Ath. 194f) as a translation of the Latin sagum.

The ἀμπέχονον (Theocr. 15.39), ἀμπεχόνη, and ἀμπεχόνιον do not seem to refer to any special form of ἐπίβλημα or mantle, but to be quite general. The same is the case with λώπη and λῶπος.

Pollux (7.47) divides χλαῖναι into ἁπληγίδες and διπληγίδες (cf. C. I. Afr. 1.405). The varieties of the ἱμάτιον hitherto described come under the former head, while under the latter are grouped varieties in which the mantle was worn folded double and pinned by a clasp or brooch round the neck. Such forms were the natural dress of poor folk and those who led

Statue of Sophocles, in the Lateran.

an active life. Lycurgus (c. Leocr. § 40) tells how, in the panic which followed Chaeronea, aged citizens went about with their mantles doubled and pinned

Lady in outdoor dress. (From a terra-cotta in the British Museum.)

διπλὰ τὰ ἱμάτια ἐμπεπορπημένους). For the TRIBON see that article.

It is only necessary to mention in this place that the τρίβων, though not regarded strictly as a ἱμάτιον (inasmuch as it was not an over-garment, but a sole garment, supplying the place of χίτων and ἱμάτιον), yet belongs in form to the cloak and not to the shirt.

The dress of the common people was probably not very different from this, but often consisted of skins or of the ἐξωμίς. The ἐξωμὶς is a hybrid garment, at once cloak and shirt (χιτὼν ὁμοῦ καὶ ἱμάτιον, Hesych.), worn by men in much the same way as the Doric shift or πέπλος [TUNICA] was by women, only being much shorter, barely reaching to the knees. The right arm, however, [p. 2.322]was left free by loosing the clasp at the shoulder. On this account it has been generally described as a χιτὼν ἑτερομάσχαλος, in contrast to the ordinary χιτών, which was ἀμφιμάσχαλος. It was essentially the garb of servants (σχῆμα οἰκετῶν: cf. Arist. Vesp. 444), whereas the χιτὼν ἀμφιμάσχαλος was the garb of freemen (σχῆμα ἐλευθερῶν, Poll. 7.47). An immense number of εξ̓ωμίδες were exported from Megara (cf. Blümner, Gewerbliche Thätigkeit, p. 71, n. 4). In art the ἐξωμὶς is, after the fourth century, the characteristic garb of Odysseus, Hephaestos, and Daedalus, and at all periods is peculiar to handicraftsmen, labourers, seafaring folk, and beggars. In such cases the πῖλοςis generally worn with it. [EXOMIS]

Other names for mantles denote colour and texture, but apparently no characteristic difference in the manner of wearing. The κροκωτὸς is a good instance of this; it is an over-garment worn exclusively by women (Arist. Thesm. 253; Eccles. 1332); and when it is adopted by men, as by Agathon in the Frogs (Arist. Ran. ), a joke is always intended. The βατραχίς, a frogcoloured cloak, was on the contrary a man's garment.

Of the cloaks and shawls worn in the Hellenistic age but little that is definite can be said, for, though the material is not scant, no writer of authority has treated of the subject. The old Greek χλαῖνα, ἐξωμίς, τρίβων, and χλαμὺς still survived, doubtless in much the same forms as before, but they were no longer fashionable, except perhaps with philosophic Romans, who were more Greek than the Greeks themselves. The cosmopolitan spirit of the age had led to the adoption of many foreign garments; and where Roman dress was not worn, Oriental was to be found. The Greeks had, even in the time of Aristophanes, a liking, for Persian dress, but it was not until the third century that garments like the Lydian μανδύη or the καπυρὶς ἀκταῖα or σαραπὶς of Persia were adopted wholesale from the East, and nationalised all over the Greek world. With the exception of the terra-cottas and a few reliefs which unfortunately have, as yet, not been systematically studied, the art of this age gives only the faintest idea of the costume actually worn. In sculpture the love of the nude figure was continually growing, and, with it, the drapery became more and more conventional. On the vases, on the other hand, the costumes, though varied and elaborate, are only too evidently theatrical or idealised. Next to the terra-cottas, which are a perfect mine for garments of every conceivable size and shape, worn in the most diversified ways, the Pompeian wall-paintings are perhaps the most useful guides, though the information they give is rather as to the gaudy colours which were regarded as tasteful, than the actual shape of the dresses. In Rome itself the Greek mantle never became naturalised, though, under the name pallium, it was well known to them as the distinctive mark of a Greek. Indeed palliatus is used as meaning Greek, in opposition to togatus, meaning Roman, not only in the well-known division of comedies into palliatae and togatae, but apparently in ordinary speech. Conservative Romans regarded it as beneath their dignity to wear a pallium, and we find it cast up as a reproach against Scipio Africanus (Liv. 29.19) and Rabirius (Cic. pro Rab. 9, 25) that they did so. Cicero speaks with indignation of Verres (in Verrem, 5.33, 86), “stetit soleatus praetor populi Romani pallio purpureo tunica talari,” and even under the Empire Germanicus offended some people by adopting a “par Graecis amictus” (Tac. Ann. 2.59).

Palliolum is frequently used as an equivalent for πρίβων or ἐξωμίς, but is also found in the more general sense.

(See Hermann--Blümner, Lehrbuch Pt. iii.; Iwan Müller, Handbuch, 1887, Pt. iv. p. 396 seq.; Baumeister, Denkmäler, s. v Himation; and for Homeric and early history of subject, Studniczka, Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriechischen Tracht, Vienna, 1886, the main results of which have been incorporated by W. Helbig in the 2nd edition of Das homerische Epos, 1887.)


hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: