Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1851-03-15
= Jclrtt q ale ,
? ETTY VIC IL EE.
a PLEASING SKETCH, By PRETTY woMA

PLEASING SKETCH, BY A PRETTY WOMAN.
| have often wondered why there are no
proleSSed beauties nOW-a-days, while every
past age can boast lis pretty women.
We cannot open page Of any history
that does not record the fame Of some beau
ty; the Bible has its Rachel--so lovely
that twenty years of service was deemed a
light fee for her affections; the world was
lost for Cleopatra; the beautiful mistress of
the French kings ruled that world through
the hearts Of their imperial lovers: even
down TO the day of George the Fourth
there has always been some lady whose
charms have been more powerful than
| monarchS and prime mi minister's.
But think the problem may be solved {;
/ It is the difference Of dress-costume does
It all revive the robings of by gone ages,
and you will revive all the beauty and ugir
ness Of those days. For there must have
been good deal Of ugIiness, otherwise
beauty would not have been so torcibly ap-
! preCated; had there been more pretty girls
in the days of Troy, Helen would have
! had few suitorS and IIium might have been
standing yet.
She mast have been plain: SO must Sap
pho have ecn-Sappho Gf Divine heart
Bat what is beauty when contrasted with
genius! How many love fool for her
face!
But what | mean to say is this-in those
times people dressed SO unbpcominglv, that
unless their features We're perfect they
were literally nothing all the minor gra-
CeS which set off a mediocre person now
were totally unavailable under that system
of costume.
For instance, Helen must have worn a
loose robe, broad girtile, bare arms, san
dels on her feet, and her hair back in those
rich, magnificent braidS, termed TO this day
"Grecian piaits."
But Imagine for moment all yonr ac-
. quain;ances dressed in this way Would
not the majority be rightly! How few
faces, how few compeXions would stand
banding back of thick hair how few lock.
are thick enough so to band back how few
forms would show well beneath the simple
robe, without stays or stiff petticoats! how
few leet would be endurable in gandaIs
how few arms would bear the noon-day sur
ana the sharp winds, which would soon re
dnce them TO the pattern and form of
washerwoman's!
Perhaps the Jewish costume al Rebecc
and Rachael may have been a shade better
: but here was the same exposure of nee
and arms with the additional diSadvantag
OF robe that showed leg encased in bid
It eous boots and shoes, and that refused {
sweepsWth Greclan amplitude around tn
limbs Sthe fair wearers.
Cleopatra-who is represented as bot
dark and strong, could wear only the robe
: OF white or purple, the heavy diadem, tn
] strings OF pearls that Wore the allotted gar
OF Egyptian princes. How dark and no,
nncomely must have been the majority
g e. her countay women may be Judged from tt
]. sensation she made.
at The Roman ladies' were famed for the
m stately carriage and somewhat large. thouo
IN noble features; and when 10 these charm
were added those of regularity and delicac
and beautiful coloring, no doubt their sin
ct pie and peu coquette style of dress was e
n pecially becoming to them; but witho
u these latter qualifications, how gaunt ar
" coarse they must have appeared.
What can be more lovely than the fgu
of Agrippina, bending that stately he;
- above the ashes of Germanicus the roI
" falls IN long sweeping folds; the bare arr
paked TO the shoulder, supports the ur
lse har braided back, shows the perie