A dictionary of Greek and Roman . e elbow, and sometimesnot so far. The sleeves were sometimes slit up,and fastened together with an elegant row ofbrooches (Aelian, V. H. i. 18), and it is to thiskind of garment that Bottiger {Kleine Schrift. vol. 56) incorrectly gives the name of ax^ros x^T(av-The Ionic Chiton, according to Herodotus (v. 87,88), was originally a Carian dress, and passed overto Athens from Ionia. The women at Athens ori-ginally wore the Doric Chiton, but were compelledto change it for the Ionic after they had killed, with the buckles or clasps of their dre
A dictionary of Greek and Roman . e elbow, and sometimesnot so far. The sleeves were sometimes slit up,and fastened together with an elegant row ofbrooches (Aelian, V. H. i. 18), and it is to thiskind of garment that Bottiger {Kleine Schrift. vol. 56) incorrectly gives the name of ax^ros x^T(av-The Ionic Chiton, according to Herodotus (v. 87,88), was originally a Carian dress, and passed overto Athens from Ionia. The women at Athens ori-ginally wore the Doric Chiton, but were compelledto change it for the Ionic after they had killed, with the buckles or clasps of their dresses, the singleAthenian who had returned alive from the expedi-tion against Aegina, because there were no bucklesor clasps required in the Ionic dress. The Musesare generally represented with this Chiton. Thewoodcut annexed, taken from a statue in theBritish Museum, represents the Muse Thalia wear-ing an Ionic Chiton. The Peplum has fallen off hershoulders, and is held up by the left hand. Theright arm holding a Pedum is a modern Both kinds of dress were fastened round themiddle with a girdle [Zona], and as the IonicChiton was usually longer than the body, part ofit was drawn up so that the dress might not reachfurther than the feet, and the part which was sodrawn up overhung or overlapped the girdle, andwas called koKtvos. There was a peculiar kind of dress, which seemsto have been a species of double Chiton, called hi-7rAois, SnrKotdLOv, and rf/jLiSLirXolSiov. Some writerssuppose that it was a kind of little cloak thrownover the Chiton, in which case it would be anAmictus, and could not be regarded as a Chiton ;but Becker and others maintain that it was not aseparate article of dress, but was merely the upperpart of the cloth forming the Chiton, which waslarger than was required for the ordinary Chiton,and was therefore thrown over the front and following cuts (Mus. Borbon. vol. ii. t. 4, 6) willgive a clearer idea of the form of this garment thanany d
Size: 1206px × 2071px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthorsmithwilliam18131893, bookcentury1800, bookdecade1840
