ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN PRODUCTION NOTE University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library Brittle Books Project, 2017.COPYRIGHT NOTIFICATION In Copyright. Reproduced according to U.S. copyright law USC 17 section 107. Contact dcc@librarv.uiuc.edu for more information. This digital copy was made from the printed version held by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. It was made in compliance with copyright law. Prepared for the Brittle Books Project, Preservation Department, Main Library, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign by Northern Micrographics Brookhaven Bindery La Crosse, Wisconsin 2017A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGAA STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA BY LILLIAN MAY WILSON A DISSERTATION submitted to the Board of University Studies of the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June, 1924 (Extract from a complete volume published by the Johns Hopkins Press) * BALTIMORE THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS 1924Copyright 1924, By The Johns Hopkins Press Baltimore, Md. Z$e Movb (gafttmore (prees BALTIMORE, MD., U. S. A.3? 1 INTRODUCTION The peculiar place which the toga held in Roman life and affairs, its symbolism, its long existence through many changes, all give it an interest and a significance beyond that of an ordi- nary article of clothing. Like the letters, S. P. Q. R., it was repre- sentative of Rome itself. It seems appropriate, therefore, to include this garment in the study of Roman life, history and liter- ature, and to determine as nearly as possible its various forms and the manner of wearing it. While a considerable amount of scholarly effort has been expended upon the problem of the toga, it has been, for the most part, in the nature of discussions of some one form. In the few instances where the discussion has been extended to include several forms, the reconstruction on the living model (the real test of a theory as to form) has been only partially undertaken. The object of the following study is to present a connected history of the toga, to trace the derivation of each succeeding form from those which preceded it, and to correlate the evidence afforded by the monuments with that contained in classical litera- ture. In doing this, an effort has been made to face every problem, and to present frankly the reconstruction of each form in detail. The assertion is constantly stressed that no form of the toga was ever absolutely and invariably fixed; and that a reconstruction, at best, can only give a close approximation to the general shape of each style. It is with this reservation that the results set forth in the following pages are presented. s js6 INTRODUCTION Owing to the disturbed conditions during the war, the arrange- ment and numbering of many museum collections do not now correspond with the previously published catalogues. Hence no attempt has been made to give the museum numbers of the statues and reliefs, but in nearly all cases where the monument is of importance, a reproduction of it is given. With three or four minor exceptions, the illustrations of works of art are from photographs in the writer's collection, many of which were made especially for her use; with a like number of exceptions, her study was made from the original monuments. In preparing the manuscript, the writer has tried to limit the use of italics, and to this end, the italicizing of certain Latin words is discontinued when their recurrence in the text becomes frequent. The writer extends her sincere thanks to all those who have assisted her in her work; to Dr. David M. Robinson of the Johns Hopkins University for careful, scholarly criticism of both the manuscript and the proof sheets; to Dr. Tenney Frank of the Johns Hopkins University, who read the original draft of the manuscript and made important corrections and suggestions; to Dean Gordon J. Laing of the University of Chicago, who first suggested this study and whose interest and encouragement during its progress have been unfailing. To Professor Gorham P. Stevens, Director of the American Academy at Rome, to Pro- fessor F. P. Fairbanks of the School of Fine Arts, and to the other members of the faculty of the Academy she is indebted for many courtesies and for assistance in getting access to private collections in Rome; also to Dr. Walther Amelung for securing for her photographs which are not easily obtainable; to Dr. and Mrs.INTRODUCTION 7 John Shapley of New York University for the loan of their large collection of photographs of ivory consular diptychs, and to M. Jean de Bardy of the University of Paris for assistance in getting special photographs made. It would be impossible to make full acknowledgment of all the courtesies extended to her by the Directors and members of the staff of the various museums which she has had occasion to visit, and for all of which she is deeply grateful. For special privileges and assistance, she is particularly indebted to Dr. Bartolomeo Nogara, Director of the Vatican Museums; Dr. Frederick Poulsen of the Ny-Carlsberg Museum of Copenhagen; Dr. Frederick Eichler and Dr. Arpad Weixlgartner of the History of Art Museum of Vienna; Dr. Miiller of the Albertinum, Dresden; Dr. Cecil H. Smith of the Victoria and Albert Museum, London; Dr. C. T. Currelly of the Royal Ontario Museum at Toronto, Canada; Halil Edhem Bey of the Royal Ottoman Mu- seum of Constantinople; Dr. Theodore Wiegand, Director of the Department of Classical Antiquities in the National Museum at Berlin; Sig. Alessandro Frattini, Director of the Doria Para- philia Collections at Rome, and to the Director of the Museo Archeologico at Florence. For permission to make photographs in the museums and for other favors, she extends her thanks to the Directors and members of the staff of each of the following mu- seums: the Musee du Louvre, the British Museum, the Museo* delle Terme and the Capitoline Museum at Rome, the Museo Nazionale at Naples, and the Museum at Ostia.THE LlSBARy OF THE UMmm OF ILLINOISFig. i. The Arringatore. Alinari. Florence... : , I. THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD The form of the outer garment worn by primitive people has usually been some sort of rectangular shawl or blanket. Such was the himation of the Greek, the tartan of the Gael and the blanket of the American Indian. Probably this too was the origi- nal shape of the toga of the Roman; but not until the Roman had advanced well beyond his most primitive state, do we have any definite information regarding his clothing. For the study of the toga, we have two sources of information. The first one, literature, valuable as it is for corroboration, is naturally vague. The references to dress or other ordinary and personal affairs in Latin and Greek literature were naturally casual, just as they are in the general literature of all races and all ages.1 Occasionally an author has undertaken to comment on dress, but such writings fall into two classes. In the first, the writer, like Quintilian, was writing for the people of his own age and naturally omitted the numerous details with which every one was then familiar, but of which we, at this distant day, are ignorant. His comments, therefore, do not enable us to visualize the garment he is discussing, much less to reconstruct it. The other class of writers, like Isidore and Dionysius of Halicarnassus, undertook to write for posterity, but the scientific method of his- torical research and writing had not been developed in their day, 1In our current literature there are numerous references to narrow dress skirts and short dress skirts but the reader of 2000 years hence will search in vain for an exp.licit statement in literature as to the exact length and breadth that was considered proper at any given period. 910 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA and they contented themselves with generalizations and with quotations from earlier authors, adding their own comments which may or may not be well founded. Our other source, the existing statues, relief sculptures and paintings of the Roman period afford us more positive evidence. Indeed, written in their own peculiar cipher, these monuments have preserved to us a fairly consecutive record of several centuries of toga existence. Neither of these two sources give definite information regard- ing the origin of the toga, though a few ancient writers have referred to it. Both Tertullian and Servius were cognizant of a tradition that the toga was of Lydian and Etruscan origin.2 But such traditions have so often proven erroneous, that, unsup- ported, they cannot be accepted as conclusive evidence. Pliny says that the toga was worn by kings, and mentions Tullus Hostilius and Servius.8 In the latter instance he evidently had in mind a wooden statue wearing a toga praetexta which once stood in the Temple of Fortune, and which he seems to have thought was a portrait statue of Servius; but this identification is by no means certain.4 He does not assert that the toga was of Etruscan origin, but says that the praetexta, the purple-bordered garment, originated among the Etruscans. The evidence from existing monuments is wholly negative. In early Etruscan reliefs and paintings, the usual large, draped mantle is rectangular. On later monuments, those dating from about the third century B. C., a circular garment like the early Roman toga occasionally appears, though less frequently than 2 See Tertullian, De Pallio, I, i; and Servius, Ad A en., II, 781. 3 See Pliny, Nat. Hist., VIII, 74 and IX, 63. 4 See Ovid, Fasti, VI, 569.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 11 the rectangular one. At the same period in Roman sculpture, however, this circular garment is the usual one on figures of Roman citizens. Apparently, therefore, the form of the Roman toga was of Roman and not Etruscan origin. But on very early Etruscan monuments, as well as later ones, there is a purple bor- der on the rectangular mantle, and so far as we know, the Etrus- cans may have been the first among Italian peoples to wear such a border. While the evidence from all sources is too slender to justify a positive statement, it is reasonable to assume that the Romans, like most other peoples, had, at a very early date, a rectangular blanket or shawl. Since this is the usual shape of all textiles as they come from the loom, there is no need to suppose that they derived it from any other people, unless it be that they learned weaving from the Etruscans or some other race, and acquired this garment as a natural result. The Etruscans, we know, had a rectangular mantle. The Romans called their own mantle a toga, and they probably applied the same name to the Etruscan garment. The Etruscan mantle was purple-bordered—a prae- texta. The Romans adopted the purple border, using a toga so decorated as an official garment of especial importance. At some time, either before or after adopting the purple border, the Romans appear to have made a slight change in the form of their mantle, giving the lower edge a curving shape. Accepting the foregoing theory, it is easy to account for a tradition of Etrus- can origin of the toga. In this connection, a remark of Dionysius of Halicarnassus is significant.5 The toga of Roman kings, he says, is like that worn 5 See Dionysius of Halicarnassus, III, 61, quoted in n. 16, this chapter. 12 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA by the kings of Lydia and Persia. But the likeness was in the rich coloring. There was a difference in shape which he passes as a mere exception to the general resemblance. The tradition of Lydian origin, therefore, seems also to have been based on the color and not the shape of the toga.6 But whatever its origin, the toga is probably the earliest dis- tinctively racial garment, that is, the earliest garment which was both a necessary article in the wardrobe, and at the same time a badge of citizenship, or membership in a political organiza- tion. The privilege of wearing it, its color and decoration were prescribed by law as well as by custom. It was doubtless these facts which account for the long survival of the toga, despite its inconvenient form. While the toga retained its original name throughout its entire existence, it was subject to numerous changes in shape and in the manner of draping. These changes can hardly be said to consti- tute a development. They were the results of efforts to make the garment, first, more elaborate, and then less cumbersome, and at the same time to retain certain features which were apparently considered essential characteristics. Concerning the early form of the toga, literary references are most scanty. Isidore (evidently quoting the Scholia on Persius)7 is sometimes quoted. The paragraph in question states that the toga is so called because it envelopes the body and covers and conceals it; that it is a simple pallium, circular in shape and very copious with a flowing curve; that it comes under the right and passes over the left shoulder. The writer adds that we see 6 See also Miiller, Die Etrusker, II, 245 ff. for discussion of the origin of the toga. 7 Scholia on Persius, V, 14.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 13 imitations of this garment in the draperies on statues and in pictures,8 and that we call them togated statues. But Isidore (or the Scholiast) is not at all explicit as to the period to which the toga under discussion belongs, and the remarks quoted above would apply equally well to either an early or a very late form of the garment. Quintilian, discussing the dress of an orator, remarks that " in olden times there were no sinus; after that they were very short."9 From the vagueness of these literary references, we turn to the clearer and more definite evidence offered by the existing monuments—statues, relief sculpture and wall paintings. But even here it is necessary to proceed with caution, for one must discriminate carefully between details that are true to actual form and those which are due, either wholly or in part, to artistic license. It is therefore advisable, before beginning a discussion of the reconstruction of the toga on the living model, to determine what is to be considered proof of an accurate reconstruction, not only of one, but of all the forms of the toga. Without entering in detail into the question of the lines of drapery which are essential or characteristic and those which are incidental or arbitrary, it may be stated as an obvious fact that a given piece of drapery placed upon a figure will inevitably produce certain folds and lines. Let us suppose that a hundred shawls, of the same size and shape and of the same or similar 8 Isidore, Etymologiae sive Origines, XIX, 24, 3, " Toga dicta quod velamento sui corpus tegat atque operiat. Est autem pallium purum forma rotunda et fusiore, et quasi inun- dante sinu, et sub dextro veniens supra humerum sinistrum ponitur, cuius similitudinem in operimentis simulacrorum vel picturarum aspicimus, easque statuas togatas vocamus." 9 Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, XI, 3, 137, "nam veteribus nulli sinus, perquam breves post illos fuerunt."14 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA texture, be draped each upon a human figure and that these figures are about the same size. Manifestly, on no two of the figures will all the folds and lines of the shawl be absolutely and photographically identical in every detail. But it is equally obvious that each and every one of the one hundred shawls as it falls over the human figure, will produce in all its parts certain folds and lines, which, in a general way, closely resemble the corresponding parts of the other ninety-nine shawled fig- ures. It is likewise obvious that if the size and shape of any one shawl be changed and made different from the other shawls, its general lines and folds as it is placed on the figure, will differ materially from the corresponding folds and lines of the other shawls. These general lines and folds common to the one hundred figures are the characteristic or essential lines. The numerous other lines and folds which vary on each figure are casual or incidental. For an illustration of this resemblance and varia- tion of lines and folds of drapery, see the togated figures on the relief sculptures, Figs. 17a, b, c, d, and e. The sculptor's chief interest is in the characteristic lines. In proportion as he is able to recognize and successfully reproduce them, excluding those that are casual, he has achieved the simpli- fication of his subject. Artists vary in their ability to do this. Not only does the drapery on the living model have its casual or incidental folds, but the artist often introduces into the drapery on his statue casual folds of his own fancy; and indeed, some- times folds that are wholly arbitrary, that is, those which the actual drapery could not produce under the conditions shown on the statue. Moreover—and this point must be constantlyTHE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 15 borne in mind—neither the sculptors nor the painters were pro- ducing fashion plates. They had no thought of making an exact record of the precise form of the garments which appear on their statues. Some of them achieved a great degree of realism in the rendering of their draperies, others were content with producing only a generalized statement of them; whereas still others frankly aimed at nothing but artistic effect. For this reason an accurate reconstruction of any sculptured garment must be based on a study, not of a few, but of many representations of it, and, in order to gain exact knowledge, a large proportion of the representations which one studies must be—not photographs and drawings—but the actual monuments themselves on which the articulation and relative positions of all parts of the garment can be carefully studied. One must examine minutely the sculptor's manner of rendering drapery. To what extent is the rendering realistic and true to the behavior of actual draperies? Does the mass of sculptured fabric at any one point produce the folds on other parts of the figure which actual fabric would inevitably do? And are the folds properly accounted for by the mass of fabric gathered at any point or points? Do the folds and lines of the sculptured drapery on one part of the figure articulate, as actual drapery would do, with the lines and folds on other parts of the figure? Is the sculptured drapery so placed on the figure, that if it were actual fabric it would remain in place? By such investigation as this, the student will soon find that many statues and relief figures cannot be accepted as authority for the form and arrangement of their draperies, and much less for any especially peculiar detail which those draperies present.16 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA Fig. 2. The Venus Genetrix. Louvre. The several statues of the so-called Venus Genetrix are obvious illustrations of this point. (See Fig. 2, the Venus Genetrix of the Louvre.) The drapery which lies on the upper left arm can only be imagined as having this position for an instant as it slips from the shoulder. The curving folds which lie upon the right leg, melt away at the ends, and in no way ac- count for the depth of fabric which appears at the lowest point of the curves. The drapery is in no sense realistic but purely and deliberately artistic. In reproducing in actual textiles a drapery shown on a sculptured figure, one must discriminate between the folds which are inevitable or characteristic and those which are either casual or wholly arbitrary, and, pro- ceeding with the argument used in the case of the oneTHE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 17 hundred shawls, if a piece of drapery be placed orf a human figure in the same manner as that shown on a sculptured figure, and it produces in all its parts the essential lines and folds shown on the statue, then the drapery must have practically the same size and shape as that which the sculptor used on his model. Pieces of fabric of widely differing shapes may be so draped on the human figure that they will resemble certain parts of the toga as shown on statues and relief sculptures, but no form can be accepted as correct unless it closely approximates the garment on the sculptured figure in all essential parts. On this principle, then, we proceed to the reconstruction of the toga on the living model. As stated above, the origin of the toga antedates the historical period of Rome and belongs to a date more remote than that of any existing Roman sculpture. A considerable amount of sculpture, both in relief and in the round, belonging to the middle of the Republican period, or to about the 3rd century B. C., has been preserved. Many of these monuments show male figures simply draped in a garment whose upper edge is placed on the front of the body and brought over the left shoulder, allowing the end of the drapery in front to extend down well below the knees. The upper edge is then brought diagonally across the back, under the right arm-pit, thence diagonally across the breast and again over the left shoulder, the second end hanging down the left side of the back. The lower edge of the drapery is curving. The statues on which this drapery is represented are, as a rule, either mutilated, badly weathered, or so crudely ren- dered as to make a study of details impracticable. Fortunately, there exists a monument in an almost perfect state of preservation with which our study of the toga may begin.18 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA It is a bronze Etrusco-Roman statue known as the " Arringatore," and is in the Museo Archeologico in Florence. It is attributed to the 3rd century B. C. Artistically it is a model of simplifi- cation. The sculptor has excluded almost every fold that is not actually characteristic, and such details as he includes are clear and definite (see Fig. 1). The outer garment or mantle which this figure wears, so far as its shape and manner of draping are concerned, fulfills the requirements of the literary reference cited above and must be accepted as the earliest form of toga of which the monuments have preserved to us a clear example. This statue shows a tunic worn under the toga, but according to Aulus Gellius, the Roman men at first were clothed only in the toga without tunics,10 which indicates that there was an earlier and more primitive period of toga history than that represented by the "Arringa- tore." Asconius is authority for the statement that Cato, when praetor, because he was oppressed by the heat of summer, used to enter the forum and give judgment without his tunic, wearing only a leather apron under his toga, and that he derived this from an ancient custom, according to which the statues of both Romulus and Tatius in the Capitol, and that of Camillus on the rostrum were clad in the toga without tunics.11 As Cato's prae- torship was fully a century after the probable date of the " Ar- ringatore " statue, it is evident that the custom of wearing the toga without the tunic was not confined to remote ages, though 10 Gellius, Nodes Atticae, VI, 12, 3. " Viri autem Romani primo quidem sine tunicis toga sola amicti fuerunt." 11 Asconius (ed. Clark), Ad Cic. in Scaurianam, 25. " Cato praetor iudicium, quia aestate agebatur, sine tunica exercuit campestri sub toga cinctus. In forum quoque sic descendebat iusque dicebat, idque repetierat ex vetere consuetudine secundum quam et Romuli et Tati statuae in Capitolio et in rostris Camilli fuerunt togatae sine tunicis."THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 19 •even in Cato's time it was rare enough to excite comment and ■criticism.12 The sculptured figures of children of the period to which this toga belongs are few, but in the cortile of the Museo delle Terrne there is a small sepulchral relief of the Republican period showing a little boy wearing this early form of toga. According to literary references, the toga in very early times was also worn by women as well as by men," and we shall see that the wearing of it by young girls was continued at least until about the beginning of the imperial period. But in later times the plain inference from literary passages is that the wearing of it was discontinued by women excepting those of the disreputable sort." The general shape of the toga which the " Arringatore " wears is obvious. The upper edge of the garment, which is brought diagonally across the breast and over the left shoulder and al- lowed to hang down the back, is straight. The lower edge of the garment is curved, but just how much it is curved or rounded admits of some discussion. On this point, as on nearly all others in connection with the actual reconstruction of Roman garments, literary references give us but little help. According to Isidore or the Scholiast, quoted in note 8, the garment is circular (rotunda). Quintilian discussing the dress of an orator says, " I should wish the toga itself to be rounding and cut to fit, for other- wise there are many ways in which it may be unshapely."15 The truth of the last phrase in the foregoing sentence will be strongly 12 See Plutarch, Cato, 6, and Plutarch, Coriolanus, 14. 18 Varro, Non. p. 540, 31, M. "toga non solum viri, sed etiam feminae utebantur." 14 See Juvenal, II, 68 and Martial, X, 52. 15 Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, XI, 3, 139, " ipsam togam rotundam esse et apte caesam -yelim, aliter enim multis modis fiet enormis."20 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA impressed upon any one who attempts an accurate reconstruc- tion of the toga. This remark of Quintilian together with a statement made by Dionysius of Halicarnassus,16 has been taken as proof positive that the toga was absolutely semi-circular." Quintilian, describing the shape as above, uses the same word as does Isidore, " rotunda " which certainly does not mean abso- lutely semi-circular, but round or rounding, and since obviously the toga was not round (a circle) the correct translation must be rounding. In note 16 I have given the full text of the passage from Dionysius. He is writing of the dress of Roman kings, and after enumerating several articles with a brief phrase de- scriptive of each, he continues, "and a bright, many-colored garment thrown around the body such as the kings of Lydia and Persia wear, excepting that it is not rectangular in shape as these are, but semi-circular." The sentence closes here; beginning the next sentence, he continues, "And garments of this sort the Romans call togas, the Greeks tebennos; whence it is derived I do not know." Dionysius has described a garment worn by Roman kings, which was rich in color and semi-circular in shape. Then he makes the general statement that the Romans,call gar- ments of this sort, togas. If, on such evidence, it is to be asserted that the shape of the toga must be an absolute semi-circle, then it can, with equal justice, be asserted that it must always be bright and many-colored, which is wholly contrary to other evidence. As a matter of fact Dionysius' statement is not precise. In the first place, the Romans did not call all circular cloaks togas; and 16 Dionysius of Halicarnassus, LII, 61. . . . teal irepipoXaiov iropvpovv ttoikIXov, ola At5<5p re Kal IIepcrcov eopovv oi (HaaiXeis, irXfyp oti rerpaycapov ye t$ icadairep iicelva jjv, aXX' Jj/jukvkXiov. ra dk roiavra r&v 'Pw/acuoi pkv r6yas, EXXijpcs de Tyfievvov icaXou- civ, ovk old1 diroOev fiaOovres. 17 See Leon Heuzey, Histoire du costume antique, pp. 231 and 239. Paris, 1922.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 21 as already pointed out, togas were not always, nor even as a general rule " many-colored." Dionysius was writing a history and this particular part of it is concerned with the period of the Tarquins which was more than 500 years before his own time. His aim, in this paragraph, was merely to give, according to his lights, a general idea of the costume of Roman kings. It will be observed in Fig. 1 that the toga as it passes around the body and legs, forms practically a sheath or narrow skirt, and at the lower edge it is so scanty that were it not eased by the manner in which it is draped over the left arm, it would be too narrow for any free movement of the legs. As it is, the drapery permits free movement and has no unnecessary and inconvenient fullness. But a piece of cloth which is a complete semi-circle, when draped as a toga, produces a full ruffle on the left side of the body and greatly increases the folds to be carried on the left arm. The drapery will also dip much lower on the right side than it does on Fig. r, while the ends, both back and front, will hang in sharp, elongated points. These defects produce a drapery which is clumsy and ungraceful as compared with Fig. 1. The impossibility of properly draping as a toga, a piece of cloth which is a full semi-circle or even a complete segment of a circle, is still more apparent in the.later and more elaborate forms of the toga.18 A number of experiments made by the writer have resulted in the form of toga shown on the living model, Fig. 3, which reproduces the proportions and essential lines of Fig. 1. The form of this reconstructed toga is shown by diagram, Fig. 7. In the reconstruction of this toga as well as of all the forms discussed in this monograph, the unit of measurement is the ™ See n. 6, Chap. III.22 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA height of the model from the floor to the base of the neck in front. But in determining the length, we must also reckon with the girth measurement, since the required length of a toga is conditioned upon the slenderness or corpulence of the model as well as upon the height. The extreme length of this toga (the line AB) equals the girth measure plus twice the unit; the extreme width, cd is ij the unit; the portion CD of the lower edge is straight and is about equal to the unit; the ends Aa and Bb are also straight and each equals i the unit.19 See " Schedule of Proportions " I, Appendix. One can think of this toga as a rectangular piece of cloth with the corners rounded off by the curves aD and bC. But it must be borne in mind that the measurements and proportions of a draped garment like the toga in all its forms, are comparatively- flexible. For practical use, they need not be given with the exact- ness which would be required in giving the measurements and proportions of a tailored suit. (See note 19.) It is most im- probable that any two togas were ever absolutely identical in every curve and line. The diagrams which follow, illustrating the forms of the toga are developed from Fig. 7, the diagram of the Arringatore toga. Each succeeding form of the toga was developed from the pre- ceding form, which is the general rule in the evolution of all garments. The diagrams will, therefore, present graphically the successive changes in the form of the toga. 19The unit of measure used in the diagram is 56 inches; that is, the height of the model from the floor to the base of the neck in front was 56 inches. Naturally there will be, in some of the proportions, unwieldy fractions which may be varied slightly without mate- rially affecting the drapery as a whole. According to the extant monuments the straight edges Aa, Bb and CD varied in length in different togas, as did also the curvature of the lines aD and bC of diagram Fig. 7 and the succeeding diagrams. Similar variation in length occurs in line EF of the succeeding forms.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 23 The literary references concerning the draping of the toga, while leaving much to be desired in the way of information, are usually clear enough to enable one to reconcile them with the drapery appearing on the sculptured figures. Quintilian in the passage previously referred to says that " the front part of it should reach to the middle of the shin, the back part being higher in the same proportion as the girding."20 Girding ot girt used in connection with the costume, without other specification, meant to the Roman the girding of the tunic. In the paragraph immediately preceding the quotation in question, Quintilian gives instructions regarding the tunic. " He who has not the right to wear the broad stripe," he says, " should be so girded that the tunic in front will reach a little below the knee, in the back to the middle of the knees ..."21 That is, the tunic is to be girded so that it will be about two or three inches shorter in the back than in the front; and what Quintilian evidently means is that there should be the same difference between the front and back of the toga. 20 Quintilian, op. cit., 139-140, "Pars eius prior mediis cruribus optime terminatur, posterior eadem portione altius qua cinctura." The last word in the above quotation " cinctura" has sometimes been translated "girdle"; see this passage in Butler's translation of Quintilian in the Loeb Classical Library. The explanation which I have given, as well as the form of the word itself, seem fully to justify my translation. 21 Quintilian, op. cit138, " Cui lati clavi ius non erit, ita cingatur, ut tunicae prioribus oris infra genua paulum, posterioribus ad medios poplites usque perveniant." The word "poplites" is ambiguous, especially when we try to reconcile this passage with the existing monuments. It is variously translated " hams" (which on the human figure can only mean "thighs") and "knees." As the sculptures and paintings show the short tunic of civilians as reaching well over the lower part of the knee joint in front, and to about the middle of the joint in the back, it seems probable that "knee" is the better translation, and that Quintilian used the word " poplites " to avoid a repetition of the word " genua."24 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA He further says, " that part which is under the right shoulder is brought diagonally to the left like a sword belt, neither too tight nor too loose." 22 Quintilian was writing fully two hundred years after the probable date of the Arringatore statue, and the full text of his remarks show that he was discussing the toga of his own time, but, as we shall see, the passages quoted above are also applicable to the Arringatore toga. The method of draping the Arringatore toga is simple, but as it forms the basis of the more elaborate styles which follow, it seems best to illustrate it fully. The toga is placed upon the left shoulder so that it falls over the left side of the body and is supported on the left arm; the end Aa extends about half way between the knee and ankle, and hangs in front of, or between the legs. A few inches along the upper edge are gathered into folds which lie on the left shoulder. See Fig. 5. This roll of folds is then brought diagonally across the back, under the right arm, then diagonally across the breast to the left shoulder and is again supported by the left arm. See Fig. 6. The end hanging down the back corresponds approximately in its disposition to the part that is first put on the front of the body with the end hanging between the legs, excepting that the end of the garment in the back is about three inches higher above the floor than the corre- sponding end in front of the body. See Fig. 4. Three features of this drapery should be especially noticed: First—The end which hangs down the front of the body and in front of, or between the legs. See Fig. 5. Second—The double set of folds on the left shoulder; that is, first, the folds formed by the garment as it is first put on the 22 Quintilian, op. cit., 140, " Ille, qui sub umero dextro ad sinistrum oblique ducitur velut balteus, nec strangulet, nec flu at."B b Fig. 7. The Form of the Toga of the Arringatore. 2526 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA shoulder (Fig. 5) ; and second, the continuation of these folds which is brought diagonally across the breast and passes over the left shoulder above the first group of folds. See Fig. 6. Third—The supporting of the toga on the left arm. These three features of the drapery, with numerous modifications, occur in all, save one,23 of the various ways in which the toga was draped in the course of its long existence. Literary references to the material of the toga are scanty, but as wool was the usual material for outer garments, there can be no doubt that the toga at least at the period which we are now discussing was a woolen garment. Its texture, as we shall see, varied. Pliny says that the toga undulata was very popular at first: that the toga rasa and the toga Phryxiana are said to have come into use in the time of Augustus. But as the meaning of undulata and of Phryxiana is uncertain, excepting that they are evidently in contrast with rasa (smooth) the passage gives us but little help.24 On account of the nature and size of the toga, the fabric must always have been relatively light and flexible. Perhaps at no time during the period represented by the existing monuments, was the material heavier than the lightest homespun flannel of our ancestors of two or three generations ago, while the extremely large togas were much lighter and thinner in texture. This statement is based on a careful study of the nature of the folds and their quantity in the different forms of the toga to be found on existing statues. The toga shown on the Arringatore is probably of the heaviest fabric used in any toga of which we have an illustration in existing 23 See Fig. 71 b. 24 Pliny, Nat. Hist. VIII, 74.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 27 monuments. The ridges are stiff, and the folds are of the sort produced by relatively heavy, unpliable textiles. A few details in the rendering of the toga on this particular statue are of especial interest. There is a border about three inches in width on its lower edge. It has been assumed that this border was sewed to the edge of the toga, and as evidence, atten- tion is called to the ridge formed by its joining with the toga.25 On examining this statue, one finds that the edges of the toga— both the upper edge which comes diagonally across the breast, and the extreme lower edge of the border—are finished with a cord. The ridge already referred to along the upper edge of the border has the appearance of a braid, or of two parallel cords. The arm-hole and neck opening of the tunic are finished with a cord like that on the edge of the toga. An explanation of this detail is to be found on certain of the tunics from the Coptic graves now in the Musee des Tissus, Lyons, France, and the still larger collections of tunics in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, and in the Royal Ontario Museum of Archaeology, in Toronto. Several of these tunics are finished around the arm-hole and neck with this same sort of cord. In places on these ancient garments, this cord is broken and the strands untwisted, showing plainly that it is made of the threads of which the fabric is woven. The cord on the edge of the toga of the Arringatore has exactly the same appearance as that on the tunic; and since the cord on the tunic is explained by the Coptic garments, we can safely assume that the cord on the edge of the toga of the Arringatore was pro- duced in the same way. That the border of this toga was, in all 25 See Daremberg et Saglio, Diet, des Antiq. V, p. 350; Heuzey, Histoire du costume antique, pp. 246 ff.28 A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA probability, attached in the weaving is fully demonstrated by an actual experiment on a hand loom;26 and the cord on the upper edge of the border, or along its joining with the toga, was pro- duced in the weaving by a process similar to that used in making the cords above mentioned. On the tip end of this toga in the back, there is a loop formed by threads left in the weaving. There was doubtless a similar loop on the front end, but it has been broken away. We find such loops similarly placed on togas for more than three cen- turies following the date of the Arringatore. Latin literature mentions but two kinds of bordered toga, the toga praetexta 27 and the toga trabea. So far as we know, these two togas differed only in color; the toga praetexta being of one color (sometimes white, sometimes dark, pulla) with a purple border, while the toga trabea was party-colored and purple- bordered. To one or the other of these two classes therefore the Arringa- tore toga must belong, and the statue presents an unusual detail which seems to offer a possible clue to the solution. This detail consists of a number of stripes worked into the bronze. One of these stripes is under the right arm, or midway between the two ends of the toga and evidently extends from its upper edge to the border. There are indications of two and possibly three transverse stripes which would cross this under-arm stripe at right angles, and extend the length of the toga. The first of these stripes can be traced a few inches above the knee; a second appears near the middle of the body, and there are indications of a possible third in the folds on the breast. The bronze has 26 See discussion of the toga praetexta, Chap. II. 27 See discussion of the toga praetexta, Chap. II.THE TOGA OF THE REPUBLICAN PERIOD 29 suffered from exposure so that these stripes cannot be traced clearly throughout their entire supposed length. They are about an inch or a little more in width, and consist of a rounded ridge, and on either side of the ridge and about f of an inch from it, an incised line. Fig. 8 gives approximately the contour of a cross section of this stripe. The stripe over the shoulder of the tunic is indicated by incised lines similar to those which outline these stripes on the toga. As there are extant bronze statues on which the stripe on the tunic, worked in this way, retains traces "V--^ *>-1- Fig. 8. of paint,28 it is wholly probable that the stripes on both the tunic and toga of this statue were originally painted. These stripes bring to mind passages in literature referring to a toga trabea. As usual, these literary references do not enable us to identify the garment in question. Servius states that Suetonius in his book on the kinds of garments says " there are three kinds of trabea; one consecrated to the gods which is wholly purple; another for kings which is purplish; it has, however, some white. The third belonging to augurs is purple and scarlet mixed." 29 Again he states that the trabea is the toga of augurs and is of scarlet and purple.30 Another comment is to the effect that 28 See a bronze statue known as the " Camillus " in the Capitoline Museum; Von Mach, A Handbook of Greek and Roman Sculpture, pi. 326. 29 Servius, Ad Aen.s VII, 612. "Suetonius in libro de genere vestium dicit tria genera esse trabearum; unum diis sacratum, quod est tantum de purpura; aliud regum, quod est purpureum, habet tamen album aliquid; tertium augurale de purpura et cocco mixtum." 30 Servius, op. cit., VII, 188. " Succinctus trabea; toga est augurum de cocco et purpura."A STUDY OF THE ROMAN TOGA the curule chair and trabea are the insignia of authority among the Romans.81 Dionysius describing the Salii says that in their festivals they put on a brooch-fastened, purple-bordered garment called a trabea, which, he adds, was a Roman garment and held in highest honor.32 While the above passages agree as to the rich colors of the trabea, they make no mention of stripes. The generally accepted theory of the origin of the word trabea is that it is derived from trabes (the beams of a building) and that the name was applied to the garment because it was woven with stripes or bands which resembled trabes.*3 Numerous casual references might also be cited, all to the effect that the trabea was the garment of royalty, or at least of persons of distinction, and that it was worn on ceremonial occasions,84 but no further or more definite description of it has been brought to light. So, from the literary references we can neither prove nor disprove that the toga of the Arringatore is a trabea, nor can we even be sure that the trabea was always in the form of a toga. Mr. F. Courby defines it as a circular cloak,85 and Dionys- ius says it was broach-fastened so that he evidently thought it a cloak. It is quite probable that the name was given at different periods to garments of varying shapes. However, we have on the Arringatore a striped toga, and literature tells us nothing of 81 Servius, op. cit., XI, 334. "Romanorum enim imperatorum insigne fuit sella curulis et trabea." 32 Dionysius, II, 70 (R.) "... Kal Ttjfiewas efxireTropinjixevoi irepiiroptpvpovs 0iviK07rapv-