 Hello, I would like to thank our three organizers who had this splendid idea of organizing this session where we can look at how ancient artists have treated textiles over the past, but also how ancient textile illustrations have been treated by scholars. The Aegean Neolithic is one of those periods for which we have some tentative illustrations of fabrics and clothing, but there are not any actual finds to be compared. For this reason, textile imagery becomes even more significant for the history of the earliest textile production and the pioneering use of fabric in southern Europe. The main source of evidence are assemblages of Neolithic figurings that give us information about the costume and painted ceramics, as well as some more decorated artifacts, such as seals providing information about the general aesthetic entrance. A topic often discussed in connection with Neolithic pottery styles, the imitation of textile patterns finds in the Neolithic art one of its best and most explicit expressions. Whole series of patterns appear to be inspired by woven fabrics, while sometimes they accurately represent textile patterns. Apart from a generic similarity observed on geometric motifs, there are repetitions of archetypal textile patterns known from entirely different periods and cultures. One of these characteristic patterns is the rhombus surrounded by tooth-like elements, a typical pattern of the Middle Neolithic period. Most of the patterns are straight lined of a digital type that is consistent of very simple or complex combinations of squares, sometimes giving the impression of a woven canvas or maybe a weaving cartoon. These ornaments are symmetrically arranged often in contrasting patterns in vertical, horizontal, or sloping zones, often covering the whole surface of the vessels like the ornaments of oriental killings. During an experimental approach to recreating these motifs, besides the regaining of the feel of Neolithic fabrics, we were able to see how they would have been woven and what was the degree of difficulty in weaving various patterns. Moreover, we have seen in practice something already presumed that this type of designs required counting of the threads in order to create accurately repeated motifs. Plus pottery illustrations led to conclusions about the weaving technologies, the aesthetics and the skills of the Neolithic weavers that we probably would not have had if some fabrics had been preserved. The inspiration from textile creations, even specific hints of the use of fabrics is a very characteristic and powerful element during the Aegean Neolithic. It is also reflected on some illustrations which are not only abstract transfers of motifs, but the realistic depiction of woven artifacts like fringe textiles, woven straps covering a vase, or an openly woven basket. While observing the evolution of the textile pattern phenomenon, we can see that simple symmetrical motifs appear already in the early Neolithic. In the middle Neolithic, they show more complex standardized varieties. The woven style culminates during the mini culture when extremely complex interlocking patterns are observed. The impression crystallized is that these intricate patterns are inconceivable without the existence of decorated textiles. In addition to this reflection, specific textile techniques can be identified such as band weaving and quilting as seen on some representations of connecting stitches. We can safely assume that there is a connection regarding colors. What we can see on the painted pottery that is a choice of one to three colors is restricted to the color range of the mineral garments used for pottery manufacture. But we can imagine that the Neolithic textiles were more colorful dyed with plant dyes. The potters sometimes seem to put effort to go beyond this natural limitation of by drawing rusted surfaces to create the illusion of polychromy. The second category of the Neolithic textile illustrations regards clothing and derives from the study of figurines. Unfortunately, there are not many dressed figurines and the ones available provide costume elements with a high level of abstraction. However, we can discern some fundamental elements of the apparel. First of all, we can see that Neolithic garments were not made of large pieces of fabric like those of the classical antiquity or the later T-shaped clothes, but they were made of small pieces of fabric. They were fitted to the body while features like necklines, sleeves, belts and aprons can be also discerned. Since the pattern of the different body parts often show a different direction, it seems more likely to have a combination of various clothing items and not all over dresses. In some cases, it seems that the pieces of fabric of the lower part had been sewn together in such a way that stripes made an ankle at the front, a tailoring technique known from many later periods. It seems that the bold, antithetic style was already a favorite element of the Neolithic look and is not only seen in cases of stripes but also on complex patterns such as the diamond weave as we will see next. The biggest surprise, however, during the study of the Neolithic dress is the fact that also trousers were worn, particularly by women. These were long and wide, narrowing towards the ankles. We do not know in which cases women wore the one or the other garment. Their relevant evidence comes mainly from figurings where humans are depicted with their legs apart. Such a figure is depicted on the iconic amulet from the Frankty Cave where a figure, perhaps in a dancing posture, wears pants shown from decorated fabrics joined together to create a contrasting pattern. The existence of trousers can also be assumed through some figurings with patterns that run around the legs. Let's note here that the main creation, for the main reason for a delayed recognition of clothes on figurings, was the traditional interpretation of their decorations as tattoos or body painting. This reading is, of course, possible but it cannot be applied when clear tailoring elements such as necklines, sleeves, belts, legs and, most significantly, the seams of clothing are recognized. We can see here a figuring on which even the draping details are given. The puzzle of seeing naked body parts with patterns is, I believe, due to the fact that artists of all periods often favor to represent anatomic details on dressed figures. Another element, often observed on Neolithic figurings, even on some very abstract ones, is the straps arranged like an X on the torso. This accessory made of fabric or leather would be perhaps useful to keep the garments close to the body, perhaps in the case of high mobility. Their presence in many other prehistoric cultures might indicate identity or status. The outfit of the Neolithic garment sometimes resembles the my known Mycenaean costume, which appears now closer to the Neolithic clothing traditions. The presence of both types of garments, skirts and trousers, is not entirely unknown in Mycenaean Greece since there are some rare indications of trousers on Mycenaean figurings. This fact lead us to the thought that the white garments of the Greek antiquity replaced the prehistoric dress which was made of smaller pieces of cloth. This view also provides a reasonable explanation for the long absence of loomweights in the Neolithic since the creation of these garments did not require a large warp-weighted loom. This iconographic indications lead us to a significant re-evaluation of the Neolithic tailoring and see the appearance of the trousers millennia earlier than thought. We should note that the first pants in the archaeological context come from China, while in Europe we see that Similaun Iceman was wearing a kind of trousers already from the beginning of the Bronze Age, challenging the traditional view that this type of garment did not appear before the Iron Age and it was first associated with horseback riding. The examples from the Aegean, though, are not an exception. In Neolithic cultures of Balkans, there is evidence showing that during the Vinci and Cucuteni periods, people wore trousers as well. Still quite enigmatic are the Cucuteni trousers showing patterns on anatomic details and clearer are those of Vinci where distinct locale element, a kind of garter, appears. Another important element for linking iconography with archaeological finds is the presence of jewels fixed on garments. At various parts of clothing, applied jewels like usually spherical oval, pointed oval, or ring-shaped can be seen. This look enormous, but we must consider that the scale is not right. Figuring makers did not portray the jewelry on a real scale because it would be challenging to attribute the correct proportions on such small objects, while if they did so, this would not be, would have been visible. This means that we are dealing with a conscious convention that increase the size of the jewels to make them discernible. The same might hold true for the woven patterns on clothes which in reality would have been much smaller. The shape repetition of these ornaments stimulates the challenge to identify them where their staff fabric ornaments that highlighted clothes with their bold size and shape or they were made of non-woven materials. A suggestion I would like to stress here is that these ornaments represent sea shells. Most probably, spondylous gedderopus, which is often found in Neolithic sites as jewels. Some examples with several tiny holes perhaps are perhaps testimonies of their attachment to clothing. The full round applications would represent hole or partly works shells while the rings shaped ones could represent spondylous rings. The same or similar jewels were also worn as pendants or belt buckles. To sum up, imagery on a gene and Neolithic ceramics and figurines providers with valuable information about textiles and clothing and a test sophisticated weaving techniques which reached the highest level of expertise in the conception and production of complex geometric motifs as well as tailoring techniques were very developed for this early period. Some of these traditions such as the tight, sleeved bodies with the deep decollete continue in the Bronze Age but they get lost with the beginning of the historical era when the use of a warp weighted loom is generalized and the garments get a much larger surface and plenty of folds. Thank you.