Scanned text contains errors.
conical form, though bent forwards and downwards. By some Asiatic nations *it was worn erect, as by the Sacae, whose stiff .peaked caps Herodotus describes under the name of The form of those worn by the Armenians <$>6poi 'ApjUeyfoj, Brunck, Anal. -ii. :146) is shown on various coins, which were struck in the reign of Verus on occasion of the successes of the Roman army in Armenia, a. d. 161. It is sometimes erect, but sometimes bent downwards or truncated. The truncated conical hat is most distinctly seen on two of the Sarmatians in the group at page 213.
Among the Romans the cap of felt was the emblem of liberty. When a slave obtained his freedom he had his head shaved, and wore instead of his hair an undyed pileus (irtAeov AeuKoy.. Diod. Sic. Eocc. Leg. 22. p. 625, ed. Wess. ; Plant. Ampliit. i. 1. 306 ; Persius, v. 82). Hence the phrase servos ad pileum vocare is a summons to liberty, by which slaves were frequently called upon to take up arms with a promise of liberty. (Liv. xxiv. 32.) The figure of Liberty on some of the coins of Antoninus Pius, struck a. d. 145, holds this cap in the right hand.
In contradistinction to 4he various forms of the felt cap now described, we have-to consider-others more nearly corresponding with the hats worn by Europeans in modern times. The Greek word Treraffos, dim. irerd&iov., derived from Trerawufu, ** to expand," and adopted by the Latins in the form petasus., dim. petasunculus^ well expressed the distinctive shape of these hats. What was taken from their height was added to their width. Those already described had no brim: the petasus of every varietj1" had a brim, which was either exactly or nearly circular, and which varied greatly in its width. In some cases it is a circular disk without any crown at all, and often there is only a depression or slight concavity in this disk fitted to the top of the head. Of this a beautiful example is presented in a recumbent statue of Endymion, habited as a hunter, and sleeping on his scarf: this statue belongs to the Townley Collection in
the British Museum, and shows the mode of wearing the petasus tied under the chin. In other instances, it is tied behind the neck instead of being tied before it. (See the next woodcut.) Very frequently we observe a boss on the top of the petasus, in the situation in which it appears in the woodcuts, pages 259, 379. In these woodcuts and in that here introduced the brim of the petasus is surmounted by a crown. Frequently the crown is in the form of a skull-cap ; we also find it surrounded with a very narrow brim. The Greek petasus in its most common form agreed with the cheapest, hats of undyed felt, now made in England. On the heads of rustics and artificers in our streets and lanes we often see forms the exact counterpart of those which we most admire in the works of ancient art. The petasus is also still commonly worn by agricul fcural labourers in Greece and .Asip, Minor. In ancient times it was preferred to the skull-cap as a protection from the sun (Sueton. Aug. 82), and on this account Caligula permitted the Roman senators to wear it at the theatres.. (Bion Cass. lix. 7.) It was used by shepherds (Callim. Frag. 1?5), hunters, and travellers. (PJai\t. Amphitr. Prol. 143, i. 1. 287, Pseud, ii. 4. 45, dv. 7. 90 ; Brunck, Anal. ii. 170.) The annexed woodcut is from a fictile vase belonging to Mr. Hope (Costume^ i. 71), and it represents a Greek soldier in his hat find pallium. The
ordinary dress of the Athenian ephebi, well bited in the Panathenaic Frieze of the Parthenon, now preserved in the British Museum, was the hat and scarf. [chlamys.] (Brunck, Anal. i. 5, ii. 41 ; Philemon^p. 367, ed. Meineke ; Pollux, x. 164.) Among imaginary beings the same cos-tume was commonly attributed to Mercury (Arnob. adv. Gent. vi. ; Martianus Capella, ii. 176 ; Ephip-pus ap. Athen. xii. p. 537. f), and sometimes to the Dioscuri.
Ancient authors mention three varieties of the petasus, the Thessalian (Dion Cass. /. c.; Callim. Frag. 124 ; Schol. in Soph. Oed. Col. 316), the Arcadian (Brunck, Anal. ii. 384 ; Diog. Lae'rt. vi. 102), and the Laconian (Arrian. Tact p. 12, ed. Blancardi) ; but they do not say in what the dif-