Dress

VIEW:68 DATA:01-04-2020

DRESS.—The numerous synonyms for ‘dress’ to be found in our EV [Note: English Version.] —‘apparel,’ ‘attire,’ ‘clothes,’ ‘raiment,’ ‘garments,’ etc.—fairly reflect a similar wealth of terminology in the original Hebrew and Greek, more especially the former. As regards the particular articles of dress, the identification of these is in many cases rendered almost impossible for the English reader by the curious lack of consistency in the renderings of the translators, illustrations of which will be met with again and again in this article. For this and other reasons it will be necessary to have recourse to transliteration as the only certain means of distinguishing the various garments to be discussed.
1. Materials.—Scripture and anthropology are in agreement as to the great antiquity of the skins of animals, wild and domesticated, as dress material (Gen_3:21 ‘coats of skin’; cf. for later times, Heb_11:37). The favourite materials in Palestine, however, were wool and flax (Pro_31:13). The finest quality of linen was probably an importation from Egypt (see Linen). Goats’ hair and camels’ hair supplied the materials for coarser fabrics. The first certain mention of silk is in Rev_18:12, for the meaning of the word so rendered in Eze_16:10; Eze_16:13 is doubtful, and the silk of Pro_31:22 (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ) is really ‘fine linen’ as in RV [Note: Revised Version.] .
2. Under Garments.—(a) The oldest and most widely distributed of all the articles of human apparel is the loin-cloth (Heb. ’çzôr), originally a strip of skin or cloth wrapped round the loins and fastened with a knot. Among the Hebrews in historical times it had been displaced in ordinary life by the shirt or tunic (see below). The loin-cloth or waist-cloth, however, is found in a number of interesting survivals in OT, where it is unfortunately hidden from the English reader by the translation ‘girdle,’ a term which should be reserved for an entirely different article of dress (see § 3). The universal sign of mourning, for example, was the ‘girding’ of the waist with an ’çzôr of hair-cloth (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘sackcloth’). Certain of the prophets, again, as exponents of the simple life, wore the waist-cloth as their only under garment, such as Elijah, who ‘was girt about with a loin-cloth (EV [Note: English Version.] ‘girdle’) of leather’ (2Ki_1:8), and John the Baptist (Mat_3:4, Mar_1:6). Isaiah on one occasion wore an ’çzôr of hair-cloth (Isa_20:2), and Jeremiah on another occasion one of linen (Jer_13:1 ff.).
The noun and the cognate verb are frequently used in figurative senses, the point of which is lost unless it is remembered that the waist-cloth was always worn next the skin, as e.g. Jer_13:11, Isa_11:5, the figure in the latter case signifying that righteousness and faithfulness are essential and inseparable elements in the character of the Messianic ‘Shoot.’
(b) The aprons of Act_19:12 were the Roman semicinctium, a short waist-cloth worn specially by slaves and workmen (see illust. in Rich, Dict. of Rom. and Gr. Antiq., s.v.).
(c) In early times the priests wore a waist-cloth of linen, which bore the special name of the ephod (1Sa_2:18), and which the incident recorded in 2Sa_6:14 ff.—David, as priest, dancing before the ark—shows to have been of the nature of a short kilt. By the Priests’ Code, however, the priests were required to wear the under garment described under Breeches. See, further, Hosen.
(d) In OT, as has been said, the everyday under garment of all classes—save for certain individuals or on special occasions—is the shirt or tunic (kuttoneth, a term which reappears in Greek as chitôn, and probably in Latin as tunica). The uniform rendering of EV [Note: English Version.] is coat, only Joh_19:23 RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ‘tunic’ A familiar Assyrian sculpture, representing the siege and capture of Lachish by Sennacherib, shows the Jewish captives, male and female alike, dressed in a moderately tight garment fitting close to the neck (cf. Job_30:18) and reaching almost to the ankles, which must represent the kuttoneth of the period as worn in towns. That of the peasantry and of most workmen was probably both looser and shorter, resembling in these respects its modern representative, the kamees (Lat. camisia, our ‘chemise’) of the Syrian fellahin.
As regards sleeves, which are not expressly mentioned in OT—but see RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] at Gen_37:3 (Joseph) and 2Sa_13:18 (Tamar)—three modes are found. An early Egyptian representation of a group of Semitic traders (c [Note: circa, about.] . b.c. 2000) shows a coloured sleeveless tunic, which fastens on the left shoulder, leaving the right shoulder bare. The Lachish tunics, above mentioned, have short sleeves reaching half-way to the elbows. This probably represents the prevailing type of tunic among the Hebrews of the earlier period at least, since a third variety, fitted with long and wide sleeves and reaching to the ground, was evidently restricted to the upper and wealthier classes. This is the ‘tunic of (i.e. reaching to) palms and soles’ worn by Joseph and the royal princess Tamar (see above), more familiar as the ‘coat of many (or diverse) colours,’ a rendering which represents a now generally abandoned tradition. In Josephus’ day the long white linen tunic, which was the chief garment of the ordinary priesthood, had sleeves which for practical reasons were tied to the arms (Jos. [Note: Josephus.] Ant. III. vii. 2). By this time, also, it had become usual even among the lower ranks of the people to wear an under tunic or real shirt (ib. XVII. v. 7; Mishna, passim, where this garment is named châlûk). In this case the upper tunic, the kuttoneth proper, would be taken off at night (Son_5:3).
The ordinary tunic was made in at least three ways. (1) It might consist of two similar pieces of woollen or linen cloth cut from a larger web, which were sewed together along the sides and top. (2) The material for a single tunic might be woven on the loom, and afterwards put together without cutting, in the manner of the Egyptian tunics described and figured in Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Antiq. 3 s.v. ‘Tunica’ (ii. 904). (3) As we know from the description of the chitôn worn by our Lord at the time of His Passion (Joh_19:23), and from other sources, a third variety was woven ‘without seam’ on a special loom (see Spinning and Weaving) and required no further adjustment.
The garment intended by the ‘coats’ of Dan_3:21; Dan_3:27 (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ) is uncertain. Most recent authorities favour mantles (so AVm [Note: Authorized Version margin.] ; RV [Note: Revised Version.] has ‘hosen,’ wh. see). For the ‘coat of mail’ see Armour, 2 (c).
3. The Girdle.—Almost as indispensable as the tunic was the girdle, which varied in material and workmanship from a simple rope (Isa_3:24 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ) to the rich and elaborate waist-belt of the priests, and the ‘golden girdles’ of Rev_1:13; Rev_15:6. Usually it consisted of a long strip of cloth, folded several times and wound round the waist above the tunic, with or without the ends hanging down in front. When work or a journey was in contemplation, the girdle was put on, and part of the tunic drawn up till it hung over in folds. Hence this operation of ‘girding the loins’ became a figure for energetic action. The girdle served also as a sword-belt (2Sa_20:8); through it was stuck the writer’s inkhorn (Eze_9:3; Eze_9:11), while its folds served as a purse (Mat_10:9 RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ). The special priests’ girdle, termed ’abnçt (Exo_28:4 and oft.), was a richly embroidered sash wound several times round the waist, according to Josephus, and tied in front, the ends falling to the ankles.
4. Upper Garments.—While the kuttoneth or tunic was the garment in which the work of the day was done (see Mat_24:18 RV [Note: Revised Version.] , Mar_13:16 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ), men and women alike possessed a second garment, which served as a protection against inclement weather by day and as a covering by night (Exo_22:26 f.). The two are sharply distinguished in the familiar saying of Jesus: ‘If any man sue thee at the law and take away thy coat (chitôn), let him have thy cloke (himation) also’ (Mat_5:40).
(a) The commonest name for this upper garment in OT is simlah or salmah. The simlah was almost certainly a large rectangular piece of cloth, in most cases of wool, in more special cases of linen. It was thus the exact counterpart of the himation of the Greeks, which we have seen to be its NT name, and the pallium of the Romans. Like them, it belonged not to the class of endumata or garments ‘put on,’ as the tunic, but to the periblemata or garments ‘wrapped round’ the body.
Since this view is at variance with that of acknowledged authorities on the subject (Nowack, Benzinger, Mackie in art. ‘Dress’ in Hastings’ DB [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] i. 625), who identify the simlah with the modern ‘aba, the coarse loose overcoat of the modern Syrian peasantry, the grounds on which it is based may be here briefly set forth. (1) If the parallel passages, Exo_22:26 f. and Deu_24:13; Deu_24:17 on the one hand, and Num_15:38 and Deu_22:12 on the other, are compared in the original, it will be found that three terms are used indiscriminately for the ordinary upper garment of the Hebrews, and, further, that this garment had four corners, to each of which a tassel had to be attached (see more fully Fringes)—a detail which suggests a plain four-cornered plaid like the himation, not a made-up garment like the chitôn or the ‘aba. (2) The incident of the sick woman in Mat_9:20 ff. and parallel passages, who reached forward in the crowd to touch the tassel of Jesus’ himation from behind, shows that the Jewish upper garment was still worn by being wrapped round the body, over the back from left to right, with one corner and its tassel falling over the left shoulder. (3) The shape of the simple oblong tallith or prayer-shawl of the modern Jews, with its four tassels, which is the direct descendant of the simlah and the more recent tallith of the Mishna, is in favour of the former having the shape now advocated. (4) The clear distinction in NT already referred to, between the two principal garments of the Jews, confirms the conclusion that the typical Jewish upper garment closely resembled, if it was not identical with, the garment known as the himation throughout the Greek-speaking world.
In our EV [Note: English Version.] the simlah is concealed from the English reader under a variety of renderings. Thus, to give but a few illustrations, it is the ‘garment’ with which Noah’s nakedness was covered in Gen_9:23, and the ‘clothes’ in which the Hebrews bound up their kneading-troughs (Exo_12:34); it is the ‘garment’ of Gideon in Jdg_8:25, and the ‘raiment’ of Ruth (Rth_3:3); just as the himation of NT is not only the ‘cloke’ of Mat_5:40, but the ‘clothes’ of Mat_24:18 (but RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘cloke’); the ‘garment’ of Mar_13:16, and so on.
(b) Another variety of upper garment, known as the me‘îl, is mentioned only in connexion with men of high social position or of the priestly order. It is the robe of Saul—the skirt (lit. ‘corner’) of which was cut off by David (1Sa_24:4 f.)—of Jonathan (1Sa_18:4), and of Ezra (Ezr_9:3; Ezr_9:5), the little ‘coat’ of the boy-priest Samuel (1Sa_2:19), and his ‘mantle’ at a later stage (1Sa_15:27). RV [Note: Revised Version.] has ‘robe’ for me‘îl throughout. Wherein did the me‘îl differ from the simlah? From its constant association with men of rank, we should expect it to be of a more elaborate and ornate description. The violet ‘robe of the ephod’ prescribed for the high priest (Exo_28:31 ff; Exo_39:22 ff.) had ‘a hole for the head in the midst thereof, as it were the bole of a coat of mail,’ and was trimmed with an elaborate ball-and-bell fringe. Now on the black obelisk of Shalmaneser, the bearers of Jehu’s tribute, nobles of Samaria doubtless, are represented wearing over their tunics a similar fringed and sleeveless garment, open at the sides, and resembling, if not identical with, the upper garment of Assyrian kings and dignitaries of state, which may with some confidence be identified with the me‘îl. The latter, then, seems to have been a piece of cloth of superior material and workmanship, in the shape of a magnified chest-protector, worn over the tunic like a priest’s chasuble, and reaching almost to the ankles. It probably came to the Hebrews from Babylonia through the medium of the Canaanites, and survives to-day in the ‘little tallith’ or arba kanphoth of the Jews (see Fringes). By the time of Josephus, the high priest’s me‘îl had become a sleeveless and seamless upper tunic (Jos. [Note: Josephus.] Ant. III. vii. 4).
(c) A third variety of upper garment, the ’addereth, appears to have been the distinctive garment of the prophets (see Zec_13:4 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘hairy mantle’). Elijah’s mantle, in particular, is always so named. The latter, according to the Gr. version of Kings, was made of sheepskin, with the wool outside (cf. 2Ki_1:8 RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] and Gen_25:25 ‘hairy garment’). It may, however, have been of goats’ or camels’ hair, as in the case of John the Baptist (Mat_3:4, Mar_1:6).
(d) Among the products of the domestic loom was a fourth garment, the sâdîn (Pro_31:24). From the Mishna we learn that it was a plain sheet of fine linen with tassels, which could be used as a light upper garment, as a curtain, and as a shroud. In this last respect it resembled the NT sindôn, the ‘linen cloth’ of Mat_27:59, Mar_15:46 RV [Note: Revised Version.] . It is probably as an upper garment of fine white linen for gala use (cf. Ecc_9:8) that the sâdîn is introduced in Jdg_14:12 f. (AV [Note: Authorized Version.] ‘sheets,’ RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘linen garments’) and Isa_3:23.
(e) Mention must also be made of the ‘scarlet robe’ (chlamys) in which Jesus was arrayed by the Roman soldiers (Mat_27:28; Mat_27:31). It is the paludamentum or military cloak worn over their armour by the superior officers of the Roman army. The ‘cloke’ finally, which St. Paul left at Troas (2Ti_4:13) was the Roman pœnula, a circular travelling cape. For the brooch or buckle by which an upper garment was sometimes fastened, see Ornaments, § 5.
5. Headdress.—(a) The Hebrews appear at first to have had no covering for the head, except on special occasions, such as war, when a leather helmet was worn (see Armour, 2 (b)). At most a rope or cord served as a fillet, as may be inferred from 1Ki_20:31 f., and as may be seen in the representations of Syrians on the monuments of Egypt. In cases of prolonged exposure to the sun, it is most probable that recourse would be had to a covering in the style of the modern keffiyeh, which protects not only the head but also the neck and shoulders. Jehu’s tribute-carriers, above mentioned, are depicted in a headgear resembling the familiar Phrygian cap. The best attested covering, however—at least for the upper ranks of both sexes—is the tsânîph (from a root signifying to ‘wind round’) or turban. It is the royal ‘diadem’ of Isa_62:3, the ladies’ ‘hood’ of Isa_3:23 (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘turban’), and the ‘mitre’ of Zec_3:5 (RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ‘turban or diadem’). A kindred word is used for the high priest’s turban, the ‘mitre’ of Exo_28:4, etc., for which see Mitre. A turban is also implied in Ezekiel’s description of a lady’s headdress: ‘I have bound thee with a tire of fine linen’ (Eze_16:10 RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ). The egg-shaped turban of the ordinary priests has been discussed under Bonnet (RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘head-tires’). The ‘hats’ of Dan_3:21 were probably a variety of the conical Babylonian headdress, although RV [Note: Revised Version.] gives ‘mantles.’ Antiochus Epiphanes, it is recorded, compelled the young Jewish nobles to wear the petasus, the low, broad-brimmed hat associated with Hermes (2Ma_4:12, RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘the Greek cap’).
In NT times, as may be learned from the Mishna, many forms of headdress were in use. One was named the sûdâr, from the Lat. sudarium (a cloth for wiping off perspiration, sudor), which is the napkin of Joh_11:44; Joh_20:7, although there it appears as a kerchief or head-covering for the dead (cf. below, 8).
(b) As regards the headdress of the female sex, we have seen that both sexes of the wealthier classes wore the tsânîph or turban. The female captives from Lachish wear over their tunics an upper garment, which covers the forehead and hair and falls down over the shoulders as far as the ankles. Whether this is the garment intended by any of the words rendered vail in AV [Note: Authorized Version.] , as that of Ruth, for example (Rth_3:15, RV [Note: Revised Version.] ‘mantle’), or by the ‘kerchiefs for the head’ of Eze_13:18 RV [Note: Revised Version.] , it is impossible to say. The veil, however, with which Rebekah and Tamar covered themselves (Gen_24:65; Gen_38:14), was more probably a large mantle in which the whole body could be wrapped, like the sâdîn of 4 (d) above. Indeed, it is impossible to draw a clear distinction in OT between the mantle and the veil. The only express mention of a face-veil is in the case of Moses (Exo_34:33).
6. Shoes and sandals.—Within doors the Hebrews went barefoot. Out of doors it was customary to wear either sandals or shoes, mostly the former. The simplest form of sandal consisted of a plain sole of leather, bound to the feet by a leather thong, the ‘shoelatchet’ of Gen_14:23 and the ‘latchet’ of Mar_1:7 etc. The Assyrians preferred a sandal fitted with a heel-cap, by which they are distinguished from Jehu’s attendants on the obelisk of Shalmaneser, who wear shoes completely covering the feet. In Ezekiel’s day ladies wore shoes of ‘sealskin’ (Eze_16:10 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ; but see Badgers’ Skins). The laced boot of the soldier may be referred to in Isa_9:5 (see RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] ). The sandals were removed not only in cases of mourning (2Sa_15:30) and of a visit to a friend, but also on entering a sacred precinct (Exo_3:5, Jos_5:15); the Jewish priests, accordingly, performed all their offices in the Temple barefoot.
7. It need hardly be said that the taste for ‘purple and fine linen’ was not peculiar to the days of Dives, as may be seen from the remarkable dress-list in Isa_3:18 ff. Richly embroidered garments are mentioned as early as the time of the Judges (Jdg_5:30 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ). King Josiah had an official who bore the title of ‘the keeper of the wardrobe’ (2Ki_22:14). The ‘change of raiment,’ however, several times mentioned in OT, were not so many complete outfits, but special gala robes, for which one’s ordinary garments were ‘changed.’ In the East, such robes have continued a favourite form of gift and expression of esteem from sovereigns and other persons of high rank to the present day.
For what may be termed accessories of dress, see Ornaments, Seal, Staff.
8. A special interest must always attach to the question of the outward appearance of the Man of Nazareth, so far as it is associated with the dress He wore. This must have consisted of at least six separate articles, not five, as Edersheim states (Life and Times of Jesus, i. 625). By the 1st cent. it had become usual to wear a linen shirt (châlûk) beneath the tunic (see 2 (d) above). In our Lord’s case this seems required by the mention of the upper garments (himatia, i.e. mantle and tunic) which He laid aside before washing the disciples’ feet (Joh_13:4). The tunic proper, we know, was ‘woven without seam’ throughout, and therefore fitted closely at the neck, with the usual short sleeves as above described. White linen was the favourite material for both shirt and tunic. Above the tunic was the linen girdle wound several times round the waist. On His feet were leather sandals (Mat_3:11). His upper garment, as has been shown, was of the customary oblong shape—probably of white woollen cloth, as is suggested by the details of the Transfiguration narrative in Mar_9:3—with the four prescribed tassels at the corners (see above, 4 (a)). To the form of His headdress we have no clue, but it may be regarded as certain—the traditional artistic convention notwithstanding—that no Jewish teacher of that period would appear in public with head uncovered. Probably a white linen ‘napkin’ (sudarium) was tied round the head as a simple turban, the ends falling down over the neck.
A. R. S. Kennedy.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

Aprons of figleaves were our first parents' earliest attempt at dress to clothe their shame (See ADAM, (See ABEL) (Gen_3:7; Gen_3:21); "God made coats of skin and clothed them," doubtless taken from animals slain in sacrifice at His command; type of the garment of righteousness provided by God through His Son's sacrifice, wherewith we, whose own faulty righteousness could not clothe our shame, are completely covered so as to stand before the all-searching eye of God (Isa_61:10). Such a coat of skin Elijah and the prophets commonly wore, 'addereth implying its amplitude. (1Ki_19:13; 1Ki_19:19; 2Ki_2:13; Zec_13:4; Mat_7:15, "false prophets come to you in sheep's clothing, but," etc.)
The kutoneth, or shirtlike inner vest, Greek chitoon, is inappropriately trans. "coat" (Mat_10:10; Joh_19:23). Those stripped of every garment but this are termed "naked," it being but a partial covering, our "undress": 1Sa_19:24 Saul to imitate the prophets; David (2Sa_6:20); Peter (Joh_21:7); Isa_20:2, the prophet's undress being a silent monition to repentance. Sackcloth, woven of hair, was the mourner's garment. So the king of Nineveh (Jon_3:6) laid aside his ample addereth for sackcloth. Cloth of camel's hair was John Baptist's garment, silently condemning the prevalent luxury (Mat_3:4). Cloth of goat's hair (the Roman cilicium) was the material used by the poor. The Israelites learned when bondmen in Egypt to fabricate fine linen (1Ch_4:21). The ketoneth or kutoneth is related to our word cotton.
The Syrian term for linen, butz, is the root of bussos, the Greek for "fine linen" (Luk_16:19; Rev_18:12; Rev_18:16). Shesh, the earlier term, was Egyptian, their linen being of the finest texture. Sadin, related to our word satin, was a fine linen for summer wear. A wrapper sometimes used as a nightshirt (Mar_14:51). Silk was of late introduction (Rev_18:12). The mixture of wool and flax was forbidden (Lev_19:19; Deu_22:11), the combination being reserved to the high priest alone (Exo_28:4), and that a combination of different threads, not of different materials in one thread, such as linsey woolsey. The general object of the prohibition was to symbolize simplicity and purity.
They were even in minute distinctions to be separated from the pagan, and to remember God is the God of order; and if so in small details, now much more will He disallow the confounding of the eternal distinctions of right and wrong (Gen_1:11; 1Co_11:10-15; Deu_22:5). White was the prevalent color of garments. It symbolized purity (Rev_3:4-5; Rev_7:9; Rev_7:13). Joseph's "coat (vest) was of many colors" (Gen_37:3). On the tomb of Chnoumhotep of the 12th dynasty, at Beni Hassan, the Semitic visitors are represented in patchwork garments of many colors. An Arab sheikh to this day wears an aba or garment composed of stripes of many colors, as emblem of his office. Jacob hereby marked Joseph, the firstborn of his darling Rachel, as successor to the primogeniture, birthright, and priesthood as head of the family, which Reuben by incest had forfeited (1Ch_5:1 confirms this).
"Cunning work" had the devices woven into the stuff; "needlework" had the devices cut out of other stuff and attached by the needle (compare Jdg_5:30, "needlework on both sides)." The brilliant colors of the Assyrian nobles spiritually seduced Israel; Eze_23:12, "clothed most gorgeously," lit. to perfection. The ampler robes and the finer texture distinguished the rich from the poor Hebrew. Women and men were forbidden to assume the dress characteristic of the opposite sex (Deu_22:5). The veil distinguished women. She was not to assume the signet ring, the staff, and the weapons of man. The ketoneth underneath was made of two pieces sewn together at the side. Jesus' "seamless tunic" was probably the meil or upper tunic without sleeves, reaching to the ankles, worn by kings, prophets, youths, and nobles (1Sa_24:4; 1Sa_28:14; 1Sa_2:19; Job_1:20), whereas the ketoneth reached only to the knee.
Joseph, Tamar, and the priests wore one reaching to the ankles and wrists (2Sa_13:18; Exo_28:31; 1Sa_15:27; 1Sa_18:4; Jdg_14:12-13). "Sheets," i.e. shirts, sedinim, clothes worn next the skin. Joh_21:7; Peter wore the linen coat which was worn by Syrian fishermen. The usual outer garment was a quadrangular woolen cloth; simlah; beged of a handsome kind, kesuth a covering; lebush a warrior's, priest's, or king's cloak (2Sa_20:8; 2Ki_10:22; Est_6:11). Malbush a state dress, court apparel (1Ki_10:5), or religious vestment (2Ki_10:22). Mad, the long cloak (Jdg_3:16). The Greek himation is the outer robe, stole" long robes" of rich amplitude and grandeur (Mar_12:38; Mar_16:5; Luk_15:22; Rev_6:11; Rev_7:9; Rev_7:13)
The chitoon, "coat," rather inner vest, is contrasted with the "cloak" or outer himation (Mat_5:40; Act_9:39). The outer beged might be wrapped round the body or the shoulders, with the ends hanging in front or covering the head, as 2Sa_15:30; Est_6:12. The ends had a fringe, and upon it a blue or purple riband, which continually being before their eyes, with its heavenly hue, would be a remembrance to them that they should "remember all the Lord's commandments" (Num_15:38). A girdle secured it around the waist; the fold made by the overlapping of the robe served as a pocket (2Ki_4:39; Psa_79:12; Hag_2:12). The ketoneth was worn by both sexes. Women's distinctive garments were the mitpachat, or shawl (Rth_3:15); Isa_3:22, "wimples," thrown over the head and body.
The maatapha, full tunic with sleeves and reaching to the feet, worn over the ordinary tunic (Isa_3:22). The tsaiph, a handsome ample summer cloak-like veil, thrown at pleasure over the head (Gen_24:65; Gen_38:14). The radid, "veils" (Isa_3:23), large enough to cover the head and person, distinct from the smaller "mufflers," or veils closely covering the face above, with apertures for the eyes, but loosely flowing below (harhhalot). The veil on the head marks the woman's subjection (1Co_11:3-10); "the woman ought to have power on her head," i.e. the head covering or veil, the emblem of her being under the power of man, her head. Radid, "a veil," is akin to radad, "subjection." The pethigil, "stomacher," or broad plaited girdle (Isa_3:24). In Dan_3:21, for "coats," sarbalin, translated as wide, long "pantaloons," such as the Babylonians wore (Herodotus i. 195).
For "hosen" (as stockings are not common in the East), translated patish inner "tunics." For "hats," translated karbla "mantles." In Mat_27:28 "robe," chlamus, is the military cloak of officers. In 2Ti_4:13 Paul's felonee, the Graecized poenula of the Romans, is the long, thick, sleeveless, traveling cloak, with only an opening for the head. Paul then, on the confines of two worlds, in this wanted a cloak to cover him from the "winter" cold (2Ti_4:21); in that world was about to be "clothed upon with his house from heaven," even as his soul was already covered with the righteousness of saints. A graphic touch, not unworthy of inspiration. The beged was often used as a coverlet at night, as the Bedouin uses his aba. The law, in mercy to the poor, forbade the creditor to retain it after nightfall (Exo_22:26-27).
Tearing it expressed grief, indignation, etc. (Job_1:20). Shaking it, renunciation (Neh_5:13; Act_18:6). Spreading it before another, loyal and joyful submission to his rule (2Ki_9:13; Act_21:8). Wrapping it around the head, reverent awe or grief (1Ki_19:13; 2Sa_15:30). The long outer robes needed girding up around the waist, when active work was needed; hence, metaphorically (1Pe_1:13), "gird up the loins of' your mind." Workers, pilgrims, runners, wrestlers, warriors, typify the Christian; they all needed girding. So Israel at the Passover (Exo_12:11, compare Luk_12:35). The feet were covered in reverence of the presence of a king (Isa_6:2). The readiness with which their loose garments were changed is noted in Jer_43:12; "he shall array himself with Egypt as (speedily and easily as) a shepherd putteth on his garment" (compare Psa_102:26).
Changes of raiment were a leading constituent of wealth in the East (Isa_3:6-7; Job_27:16; Mat_6:19; Jas_5:2) and a usual present (2Ki_5:5). To present one's own robe was a strong token of love (1Sa_18:4). The gift of a robe installed in office (Gen_41:42; Est_8:15). The presenting of the best robe was a special honor (Luk_15:22). In Isa_3:22, "changeable suits" are those reserved for special occasions. A princely host sometimes caused "the keeper of the wardrobe" (2Ch_34:22) to furnish robes to his guests (compare Mat_22:11). White being the ordinary color a spot was immediately visible (Jud_1:23; Rev_3:4).
Fausset's Bible Dictionary
By Andrew Robert Fausset, co-Author of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown's 1888.

Dress. This subject includes the following particulars:
i. Materials;
ii. Color and decoration;
iii. Name, form, and mode of wearing the various articles;
iv. Special usages relating thereto.
1. Materials. ? After the first "apron" of fig leaves, Gen_3:7, the skins of animals were used for clothing. Gen_3:21. Such was the "mantle" worn by Elijah. Pelisses of sheepskin still form an ordinary article of dress in the East. The art of weaving hair was known to the Hebrews at an early period, Exo_25:4; Exo_26:7, and wool was known earlier still. Gen_38:12. Their acquaintance with linen and, perhaps cotton, dates from the captivity in Egypt, 1Ch_4:21, silk was introduced much later. Rev_18:12. The use of mixed material, such as wool and flax, was forbidden. Lev_19:19; Deu_22:11.
2. Color and decoration. ? The prevailing color of the Hebrew dress was the natural white of the materials employed, which might be brought to a high state of brilliancy by the art of the fuller. Mar_9:3. The notice of scarlet thread, Gen_38:28, implies some acquaintance with dyeing. The elements of ornamentation were ?
(1) weaving with threads previously dyed, Exo_35:25,
(2) the introduction of gold thread or wire, Exo_27:6, ff;
(3) the addition of figures.
Robes decorated with gold, Psa_45:13, and with silver thread, compare Act_12:21, were worn by royal personages; other kinds of embroidered robes were worn by the wealthy, Jdg_5:30; Psa_45:14; Eze_16:13, as well as purple, Pro_31:22; Luk_16:19, and scarlet. 2Sa_1:24.
3. The names, forms, and modes of wearing the robes. ? The general characteristics of Oriental dress have preserved a remarkable uniformity in all ages: the modern Arab dresses much as the ancient Hebrew did. The costume of the men and women was very similar; there was sufficient difference, however, to mark the sex, and it was strictly forbidden to a woman to wear the appendages, such as the staff, signet-ring, and other ornaments, of a man; as well as to a man to wear the outer robe of a woman. Deu_22:5. We shall first describe the robes which were common to the two sexes, and then those which were peculiar to women.
(1) The inner garment was the most essential article of dress. It was a closely-fitting garment, resembling in form and use, our shirt, though unfortunately translate "coat" in the Authorized Version. The material of which it was made was either wool, cotton or linen. It was without sleeves, and reached only to the knee. Another kind reached to the wrists and ankles. It was in either case kept close to the body by a girdle, and the fold formed by the overlapping of the robe served as an inner pocket. A person wearing the inner garment alone was described as naked.
(2) There was an upper or second tunic, the difference being that it was longer than the first.
(3) The linen cloth appears to have been a wrapper of fine linen, which might be used in various ways, but especially as a night-shirt. Mar_14:51.
(4) The outer garment consisted of a quadrangular piece of woollen cloth, probably resembling in shape a Scotch plaid. The size and texture would vary with the means of the wearer. It might be worn in various ways, either wrapped round the body or thrown over the shoulders like a shawl, with the ends or "skirts" hanging down in front; or it might be thrown over the head, so as to conceal the face. 2Sa_15:30; Est_6:12. The ends were skirted with a fringe and bound with a dark purple ribbon, Num_15:38 it was confined at the waist by a girdle. The outer garment was the poor man's bed clothing. Exo_22:26-27.
The dress of the women differed from that of the men in regard to the outer garment, the inner garment being worn equally by both sexes. Son_5:3. Among their distinctive robes we find a kind of shawl, Rth_3:15; Isa_3:22, light summer dresses of handsome appearance and ample dimensions, and gay holiday dresses. Isa_3:24. The garments of females were terminated by an ample border of fringe (skirts, Authorized Version), which concealed the feet. Isa_47:2; Jer_13:22.
The travelling cloak referred to by St. Paul, 2Ti_4:13, is generally identified with the Roman paenula. It is, however, otherwise explained as a travelling-case for carrying clothes or books. The coat of many colors worn by Joseph, Gen_37:3; Gen_37:23, is variously taken to be either a "coat of divers colors" or a tunic furnished with sleeves and reaching down to the ankles. The latter is probably the correct sense.
4. Special usages relating to dress. ? The length of the dress rendered it inconvenient for active exercise; hence the outer garments were either left in the house by a person working close by, Mat_24:18, or were thrown off when the occasion arose, Mar_10:50, or, if this were not possible, as in the case of a person travelling, they were girded up. 1Ki_18:46; 1Pe_1:13.
On entering a house, the upper garment was probably laid aside, and resumed on going out. Act_12:8. In a sitting posture, the garments concealed the feet; this was held to be an act of reverence. Isa_6:2. The number of suits possessed by the Hebrews was considerable: a single suit consisted of an under and upper garment.
The presentation of a robe in many instances amounted to installation or investiture, Gen_41:42; Est_8:15; Isa_22:21, on the other hand, taking it away amounted to dismissal from office. 2Ma_4:38. The production of the best robe was a mark of special honor in a household. Luk_15:22. The number of robes thus received or kept in store for presents was very large, and formed one of the main elements of wealth in the East, Job_22:6; Mat_6:19; Jas_5:2, so that to have clothing implied the possession of wealth and power. Isa_3:6-7.
On grand occasions, the entertainer offered becoming robes to his guests. The business of making clothes devolved upon women in a family. Pro_31:22; Act_9:39. Little art was required in what we may term the tailoring department; the garments came forth for the most part ready made from the loom, so that the weaver supplanted the tailor.
Smith's Bible Dictionary
By Dr. William Smith.Published in 1863

Styles of clothing varied among the different classes of people in Israel, and were often a means of showing a person’s status (Gen_37:3; Jos_9:5; 2Sa_13:18; Isa_3:18-23; Luk_16:19). Ceremonial clothing worn by people in high positions was often richly embroidered, sometimes with gold thread woven into the cloth (Exo_28:4; Exo_28:6; Exo_28:8; Exo_28:15; Exo_39:3; Psa_45:13). There were special garments for special occasions such as weddings and feasts (Isa_61:10; Mat_22:11; Luk_15:22; Rev_19:8; see ORNAMENTS). Practices that showed immoral tendencies, such as dressing in clothes of the opposite sex (transvestism), were forbidden (Deu_22:5).
From earliest times people used cosmetics and perfumes. Some of these developed from what were originally ointments. Most cosmetics were prepared from spices and vegetable oils, though some facial cosmetics were made from minerals (2Ki_9:30; Jer_4:30; Eze_23:40; see OIL; SPICES).
To express distress or mourning, people often tore their clothes, dressed in sackcloth, or put on cosmetics that made them look extra miserable (Gen_37:34; 2Sa_3:31; 1Ki_21:27; Job_1:20; Isa_58:3; Isa_58:5; Mat_5:16-18; Mat_26:65; Act_14:14; see SACKCLOTH). People taken captive were often humiliated by being made to walk barefoot or naked (Isa_20:4).
The Bible condemns the practice of making distinctions in the church through favouring those who are well dressed above those who are poorly dressed (Jam_2:2-5). It discourages God’s people from dressing extravagantly, and emphasizes that good conduct is more desirable than lavish dress (Jer_4:30; Luk_20:46-47; 1Ti_2:8-10; 1Pe_3:3-5; cf. Col_3:9-10).
Bridgeway Bible Dictionary by Don Fleming
PRINTER 1990.

In the Hebrew and Greek there is a wonderful wealth of terminology having to do with the general subject of dress among the ancient Orientals. This is reflected in the numerous synonyms for ?dress? to be found in English Versions of the Bible, ?apparel,? ?attire,? ?clothes,? ?raiment,? ?garments,? etc. But the words used in the originals are often greatly obscured through the inconsistent variations of the translators. Besides there are few indications even in the original Hebrew or Greek of the exact shape or specific materials of the various articles of dress named, and so their identification is made doubly difficult. In dealing with the subject, therefore, the most reliable sources of information, apart from the meaning of the terms used in characterization, are certain well-known facts about the costumes and dress-customs of the orthodox Jews, and others about the forms of dress worn today by the people of simple life and primitive habits in modern Palestine. Thanks to the ultraconservatism and unchanging usages of the nearer East, this is no mean help. In the endeavor to discover, distinguish and deal with the various oriental garments, then, we will consider:
1. The Meaning of Terms
2. The Materials
3. The Outer Garments
4. The Inner Garments
5. The Headdress
6. The Foot-Gear
7. The Dress of Jesus and His Disciples
1. Meaning of Terms
There was originally a sharp distinction between classical and oriental costume, but this was palpably lessened under the cosmopolitanism of the Roman Empire. This of course had its effect both in the modification of the fashions of the day and upon the words used for articles of clothing in the New Testament.
(1) The terms most used for clothes in general were, in the Old Testament, ṣādhı̄n, simlāh, salmāh, and in the New Testament himátion (Mat_21:7; Mat_24:18; Mat_26:65; Luk_8:27) and énduma (Mat_22:11 f; compare Mat_7:15), plural, though the oldest and most widely distributed article of human apparel was probably the ?loin-cloth? (Hebrew 'ēzōr), entirely different from ?girdle? (Greek zō̇nē). Biblical references for clothes are nearly all to the costume of the males, owing doubtless to the fact that the garments ordinarily used indoors were worn alike by men and women.
(2) The three normal body garments, the ones most mentioned in the Scriptures, are ṣādhı̄n, a rather long ?under garment? provided with sleeves; kethōneth (Greek chitō̇n), a long-sleeved tunic worn over the ṣādhı̄n, likewise a shirt with sleeves (see Masterman, DCG, article ?Dress?); and simlāh (Greek himation), the cloak of the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American), used in the plural for ?garments? in general; and the ?girdle? (Greek zōnē; Arabic zunnar). The ?headdress? (two types are now in use, the ?turban? and the ?kufiyeh?) is never definitely named in the Bible, though we know it was the universal custom among ancient Orientals to cover the head.
(3) The simlāh (Greek himation) signifies an ?outer garment? (see below), a ?mantle,? or ?cloak? (see lexicons). A kindred word in the Greek himatismós, (translated ?raiment? in Luk_9:29, ?garments? in Mat_27:35, and ?vesture? in Joh_19:24) stands in antithesis to ηιματιον, himatioň. The Greek chitōn, Hebrew kethōneth, the ?under garment,? is translated ?coat? in Mat_5:40, ?clothes? in Mar_14:63. The Hebrew word me‛ı̄l, Greek stolḗ, Latin stola, stands for a variety of garment used only by men of rank or of the priestly order, rendered the Revised Version (British and American) ?robe.? It stands for the long garments of the scribes rendered ?long robes? (Mar_12:38; Luk_20:46) and ?best robe? in the story of the Prodigal Son (Luk_15:22). (For difference between me‛ı̄l and simlāh, see Kennedy, one-vol HDB, 197.) Oriental influences led to the adoption of the long tunic in Rome, and in Cicero's time it was a mark of effeminacy. It came to be known in its white form as tunica alba, or ?white tunic,? afterward in English ?alb.?
Other New Testament terms are πορφύραν, porphúran, the ?purple? (Luk_16:19); the purple robe of Jesus is called himation in Joh_19:2; léntion, ?the towel? with which Jesus girded himself (Joh_13:4, Joh_13:5); then othónion, ?linen cloth? (Luk_24:12; Joh_19:40); sindō̇n, ?linen cloth? (Mat_27:59); and bússos, ?fine linen? (Luk_16:19).
The primitive ?aprons? of Gen_3:7, made of ?sewed fig-leaves,? were quite different from the ?aprons? brought to the apostles in Act_19:12. The latter were of a species known among the Romans as semicinctium, a short ?waist-cloth? worn especially by slaves (Rich, Dict. of Roman and Greek Antiq.).
2. The Materials
Anthropology, Scripture and archaeology all witness to the use by primitive man of skins of animals as dress material (Gen_3:21, ?coats of skin?; compare Heb_11:37, ?went about in sheepskins, in goatskins?).
Even today the traveler will occasionally see in Palestine a shepherd clad in ?a coat of skin.? Then, as now, goat's hair and camel's hair supplied the materials for the coarser fabrics of the poor. John the Baptist had his raiment, enduma, of camel's hair (literally, ?of camel's hairs,? Mat_3:4). This was a coarse cloth made by weaving camel's hairs. There is no evidence that coats of camel's skin, like those made of goat's skin or sheep's skin have ever been worn in the East, as imagined by painters (see Meyer, Bleek, Weiss and Broadus; but compare HDB, article ?Camel?). The favorite materials, however, in Palestine, as throughout the Orient, in ancient times, were wool (see Pro_27:26, ?The lambs are for thy clothing?) and flax (see Pro_31:13, where it is said of the ideal woman of King Lemuel, ?She seeketh wool and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands?). The finest quality of ancient ?linen? seems to have been the product of Egypt (see LINEN). The ?silk? of Pro_31:22 the King James Version is really ?fine linen,? as in the Revised Version (British and American). The first certain mention of ?silk? in the Bible, it is now conceded, is in Rev_18:12, as the word rendered ?silk? in Eze_16:10, Eze_16:13 is of doubtful meaning.
3. The Outer Garments
(1) We may well begin here with the familiar saying of Jesus for a basal distinction: ?If any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat (Greek chitōn), let him have thy cloak (himation) also? (Mat_5:40). Here the ?coat? (Hebrew kethōneth) was the ordinary ?inner garment? worn by the Jew of the day, in which he did the work of the day (see Mat_24:18; Mar_13:16). It resembled the Roman ?tunic,? corresponding most nearly to our ?long shirt,? reaching below the knees always, and, in case it was designed for dress occasions, reaching almost to the ground. Sometimes ?two coats? were worn (Luk_3:11; compare Mat_10:10; Mar_6:9), but in general only one. It was this garment of Jesus that is said by John (Joh_19:23) to have been ?without seam, woven from the top throughout.?
(2) The word himation, here rendered ?cloak,? denotes the well-known ?outer garment? of the Jews (see Mat_9:20, Mat_9:21; Mat_14:36; Mat_21:7, Mat_21:8; but compare also Mat_9:16; Mat_17:2; Mat_24:18; Mat_26:65; Mat_27:31, Mat_27:35). It appears in some cases to have been a loose robe, but in most others, certainly, it was a large square piece of cloth, like a modern shawl, which could be wrapped around the person, with more or less taste and comfort. Now these two, with the ?girdle? (a necessary and almost universal article of oriental dress), were commonly all the garments worn by the ordinary man of the Orient. The ?outer garment? was frequently used by the poor and by the traveler as his only covering at night, just as shawls are used among us now.
(3) The common Hebrew name for this ?outer garment? in the Old Testament is as above, simlāh or salmāȟ. In most cases it was of ?wool,? though sometimes of ?linen,? and was as a rule certainly the counterpart of the himation of the Greek (this is its name throughout the New Testament). It answered, too, to the pallium of the Romans. It belonged, like them, not to the endúmata, or garments ?put on,? but to the periblḗmata, or garments ?wrapped, around? the body. It was concerning this ?cloak? that the Law of Moses provided that, if it were taken in pawn, it should be returned before sunset - ?for that is his only covering, it is his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep?... for I am gracious? (Exo_22:27). The Jewish tribunals would naturally, therefore, allow the ?inner garment? to be taken by legal process, rather than the outer one (Mat_5:40; Luk_6:29); but Jesus virtually teaches that rather than have difficulty or indulge animosity one would better yield one's rights in this, as in other matters; compare 1Co_6:7.
Some identify the simlāh of the ancient Hebrews with modern aba, the coarse blouse or overcoat worn today by the Syrian peasant (Nowack, Benzinger, Mackie in HDB); but the distinction between these two garments of the Jews, so clearly made in the New Testament, seems to confirm the conclusion otherwise reached, that this Jewish ?outer garment? closely resembled, if it was not identical with, the himation of the Greeks (see Jewish Encyclopedia, article ?Cloke? and 1-vol HDB, ?Dress,? 197; but compare Masterman, DCG, article ?Dress,? 499, and Dearmer, DCG, article ?Cloke?). In no respect has the variety of renderings in our English Versions of the Bible done more to conceal from English readers the meaning of the original than in the case of this word simlāȟ. For instance it is the ?garment? with which Noah's nakedness was covered (Gen_9:23); the ?clothes? in which the Hebrews bound up, their kneading-troughs (Exo_12:34); the ?garment? of Gideon in Jdg_8:25; the ?raiment? of Ruth (Rth_3:3); just as the himation of the New Testament is the ?cloak? of Mat_5:40, the ?clothes? of Mat_24:18 the King James Version (the Revised Version (British and American) ?cloak?), the ?garment? (Mar_13:16 the King James Version, the Revised Version (British and American) ?cloak?).
4. The Under Garments
(1) In considering the under garments, contrary to the impression made by English Versions of the Bible, we must begin with the ?loin-cloth? (Hebrew 'ēzōr), which unlike the ?girdle? (see GIRDLE), was always worn next to the skin. The figurative use made of it in Isa_11:5, and Jer_13:11, e.g. will be lost unless this is remembered. Often it was the only ?under garment,? as with certain of the prophets (Elijah, 2Ki_1:8; compare John the Baptist, Mat_3:4; Isaiah, Isa_20:2, and Jeremiah, Jer_13:1). In later times it was displaced among the Hebrews by the ?shirt? or ?tunic? (see TUNIC). The universal ?sign of mourning? was the girding of the waist with an 'ēzōr or ?hair-cloth? (English Versions, ?sack-cloth?). A ?loincloth? of ?linen? was worn by the priests of early times and bore the special name of 'ēphōdh (1Sa_2:18; compare 2Sa_6:14).
(2) The ordinary ?under garment,? later worn by all classes - certain special occasions and individuals being exceptions - was the ?shirt? (Hebrew kethōneth) which, as we have seen, reappears as chitōn in Greek, and tunica in Latin It is uniformly rendered ?coat? in English Versions of the Bible, except that the Revised Version, margin has ?tunic? in Joh_19:23. The well-known piece of Assyrian sculpture, representing the siege and capture of Lachish by Sennacherib, shows the Jewish captives, male and female, dressed in a moderately tight garment, fitting close to the neck (compare Job_30:18) and reaching almost to the ankles; which must represent the kethōneth, or kuttōneth of the period, as worn in towns at least. Probably the kuttōneth of the peasantry was both looser and shorter, resembling more the modern kamis of the Syrian fellah (compare Latin camisa, and English ?chemise?).
(3) As regards sleeves, they are not expressly mentioned in the Old Testament, but the Lachish tunics mentioned above have short sleeves, reaching half-way to the elbows. This probably represents the prevailing type of sleeve among the Hebrews of the earlier period. An early Egyptian picture of a group of Semitic traders (circa 2000 bc) shows a colored tunic without sleeves, which, fastened on the left shoulder, left the right bare. Another variety of sleeves, restricted to the upper and wealthy classes, had long and wide sleeves reaching to the ground. This was the tunic worn by Tamar, the royal princess (2Sa_13:18, ?A garment of divers colors upon her; for with such robes were the king's daughters that were virgins appareled?), ?the tunic of (i.e. reaching to) palms and soles? worn by Joseph, familiarly known as the ?coat of many colors? (Gen_37:3), a rendering which represents now an abandoned tradition (compare Kennedy, HDB). The long white linen tunic, which was the chief garment of the ordinary Jewish priest of the later period, had sleeves, which, for special reasons, were tied to the arms (compare Josephus, Ant., III, vii, 2).
(4) Ultimately it became usual, even with the people of the lower ranks, to wear an under ?tunic,? or ?real shirt? (Josephus, Ant., XVII, vi, 7; Mishna, passim, where it is called ḥālūḳ). In this case the upper tunic, the kuttōneth proper, would be removed at night (compare Son_5:3, ?I have put off my garment?).
The material for the tunic might be either (1) woven on the loom in two pieces, and afterward put together without cutting (compare Dict. of Roman and Greek Antiq., article ?Tunica?), or (2) The garment might be woven whole on a special loom, ?without seam,? i.e. so as to require no sewing, as we know from the description given in Joh_19:23, and from other sources, was the chitōn worn by our Lord just before His crucifixion. The garments intended by the Hebrew (Dan_3:21-27), rendered ?coats? the King James Version, have not been certainly made out. The King James Version margin has ?mantles? the English Revised Version ?hosen? the American Standard Revised Version ?breeches? (see HOSEN). For ?coat of mail? (1Sa_17:5) see ARMOR.
5. The Headdress
When the Hebrews first emerged into view, they seem to have had no covering for the head except on special demand, as in case of war, when a leather-helmet was worn (see ARMOR). Ordinarily, as with the fellah of Palestine today, a rope or cord served as a fillet (compare 1Ki_20:32, and Virgil, Aeneid (Dryden), iv.213: ?A golden fillet binds his awful brows?). Such ?fillets? may be seen surviving in the representation of Syrians on the monuments of Egypt. Naturally, in the course of time, exposure to the Syrian sun in the tropical summer time would compel recourse to some such covering as the modern kufiyeh, which lets in the breeze, but protects in a graceful, easy way, the head, the neck and the shoulders. The headgear of Ben-hadad's tribute carriers (see above) resembles the Phrygian cap.
The head covering, however, which is best attested, at least for the upper ranks of both sexes, is the turban (Hebrew cānı̄ph, from a root meaning to ?wind round?). It is the ladies' ?hood? of Isa_3:23, the Revised Version (British and American) ?turban?; the ?royal diadem? of Isa_62:3, and the ?mitre? of Zec_3:5, the Revised Version, margin ?turban? or ?diadem.? Ezekiel's description of a lady's headdress: ?I bound thee with attire of fine linen? (Eze_16:10 margin), points to a turban. For the egg-shaped turban of the priests see BONNET (the Revised Version (British and American) ?head-tires?). The hats of Dan_3:21 (the Revised Version (British and American) ?mantles?) are thought by some to have been the conical Babylonian headdress seen on the monuments. According to 2 Macc 4:12 the Revised Version (British and American) the young Jewish nobles were compelled by Antiochus Epiphanes to wear the pétasos, the low, broad-brimmed hat associated with Hermes. Other forms of headdress were in use in New Testament times, as we learn from the Mishna, as well as from the New Testament, e.g. the suddar (σουδάριον, soudárion) from Latin sudarium (a cloth for wiping off perspiration, sudor) which is probably the ?napkin? of Joh_11:44; Joh_20:7, although there it appears as a kerchief, or covering, for the head. The female captives from Lachish (see above) wear over their tunics an upper garment, which covers the forehead and falls down over the shoulders to the ankles. Whether this is the garment intended by the Hebrew in Rth_3:15, rendered ?vail? by the King James Version and ?mantle? by the Revised Version (British and American), and ?kerchiefs for the head? (Eze_13:18 the Revised Version (British and American)), we cannot say. The ?veil? with which Rebekah and Tamar ?covered themselves? (Gen_24:65; Gen_38:14) was most likely a large ?mantle? in which the whole body could be wrapped, like the ṣādhı̄n (see above). But it seems impossible to draw a clear distinction between ?mantle? and ?veil? in the Old Testament (Kennedy). The case of Moses (Exo_34:33) gives us the only express mention of a ?face-veil.?
6. Footgear
The ancient Hebrews, like Orientals in general, went barefoot within doors. Out of doors they usually wore sandals, less frequently shoes. The simplest form of sandal then, as now, consisted of a sole of untanned leather, bound to the foot by a leather thong, the shoe-latchet of Gen_14:23 and the latchet of Mar_1:7, etc. In the obelisk of Shalmaneser, however, Jehu's attendants are distinguished by shoes completely covering the feet, from the Assyrians, who are represented as wearing sandals fitted with a heel-cap. Ladies of Ezekiel's day wore shoes of ?sealskin? (Eze_16:10 the Revised Version (British and American)). The soldiers' ?laced boot? may be intended in Isa_9:5 (the Revised Version (British and American), margin). Then, as now, on entering the house of a friend, or a sacred precinct (Exo_3:5; Jos_5:15), or in case of mourning (2Sa_15:30), the sandals, or shoes, were removed. The priests performed their offices in the Temple in bare feet (compare the modern requirement on entering a mosque).
7. The Dress of Jesus and His Disciples
In general we may say that the clothes worn by Christ and His disciples were of the simplest and least sumptuous kinds. A special interest must attach even to the clothes that Jesus wore. These consisted, it seems quite certain, not of just five separate articles (see Edersheim, LTJM, I, 625), but of six. In His day it had become customary to wear a linen shirt (ḥālūḳ) beneath the tunic (see above). That our Lord wore such a ?shirt? seems clear from the mention of the laying aside of the upper garments (himátia, plural), i.e. the ?mantle? and the ?tunic,? before washing His disciples' feet (Joh_13:4). The tunic proper worn by Him, as we have seen, was ?woven without seam? throughout, and was of the kind, therefore, that fitted closely about the neck, and had short sleeves. Above the tunic would naturally be the linen girdle, wound several times about the waist. On His feet were leather sandals (Mat_3:11). His upper garment was of the customary sort and shape, probably of white woolen cloth, as is suggested by the details of the account of the Transfiguration (Mar_9:3), with the four prescribed ?tassels? at the corners. As to His headdress, we have no description of it, but we may set it down as certain that no Jewish teacher of that day would appear in public with the head uncovered. He probably wore the customary white linen ?napkin? (sudarium), wound round the head as a turban, with the ends of it falling down over the neck. The dress of His disciples was, probably, not materially different.
In conclusion it may be said that, although the dress of even orthodox Jews today is as various as their lands of residence and their languages, yet there are two garments worn by them the world over, the ṭallı̄th and the 'arba‛ kanephōth (see DCG, article ?Dress,? col. 1). Jews who affect special sanctity, especially those living in the Holy Land, still wear the ṭallı̄th all day, as was the common custom in Christ's time. As the earliest mention of the 'arba‛kanephōth is in 1350 ad, it is clear that it cannot have existed in New Testament times.
Literature
Nowack's and Benzinger's Hebrew Arch?ologie; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands; Rich, Dict. of Roman and Greek Antiq.; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 625, and elsewhere; articles on ?Dress,? ?Clothing,? ?Costumes,? etc., HDB, DCG, Jewish Encyclopedia (by N?ldeke) in Encyclopedia Biblica (by Abrahams and Cook); Masterman, ?Dress and Personal Adornment in Mod. Palestine,? in Biblical World, 1902, etc.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.

The subject of the costume of the ancient Hebrews is involved in much obscurity and doubt. The allusions to dress in the Scriptures form the only source of our positive information. They are often, indeed, obscure, and of uncertain interpretation; but they are invaluable in so far as they enable us to compare and verify the information derivable from other sources. These sources are?
1. The costume of neighboring ancient nations, as represented in their monuments.
2. The alleged costume of Jews as represented in the same monuments.
3. The present costumes (which are known to be ancient) of Syria and Arabia.
4. Tradition.

Fig. 153?Short tunic
1. The range of inquiry into monumental costume is very limited. Syria, Arabia, and Egypt, are the only countries where monuments would be likely to afford any useful information: but Arabia has left no monumental figures, and Syria none of sufficiently ancient date; and it is left for Egypt to supply all the information likely to be of use. The extent and value of this information, for the particular purpose, we believe to be far less than is usually represented. That we are not disposed to undervalue the information derivable from the Egyptian monuments for the purpose of illustrating Biblical history and antiquities, the pages of the present work will sufficiently evince; and its editor may indeed claim to have been the first in this country to work this mine of materials for Biblical illustration. But the rage for this kind of illustration has been carried to such preposterous lengths, that it may not be an unwholesome caution to remind our readers that the Egyptians and the Hebrews were an exceedingly different people?as different in every respect as can well be conceived; and that the climates which they inhabited were so very different as to necessitate a greater difference of food and dress than might be presupposed of countries so near to each other. It is true that the Jewish nation was cradled in Egypt: and this circumstance may have had some influence on ceremonial dresses, and the ornaments of women; but we do not find that nations circumstanced as the Jews were ready to adopt the costumes of other nations, especially when their residence in Egypt was always regarded by them as temporary, and when their raiment was of home manufacture?spun and woven by the women from the produce of their flocks (Exo_35:25). We find also that, immediately after leaving Egypt, the principal article of dress among the Hebrews was some ample woolen garment, fit to sleep in (Exo_22:27), to which nothing similar is to be seen among the costumes of Egypt.

Fig. 154?Sleeveless mantle
2. With respect to the supposed representation of Jews in ancient monuments, if any authentic examples could be found, even of a single figure, in the ancient costume, it would afford much satisfaction as tending to elucidate many passages of Scripture which cannot at present be with certainty explained. The sculptures and paintings supposed to represent ancient Hebrews are contained in?

Fig. 155?Fringed skirt
(a) A painting at Beni Hassan, representing the arrival of some foreigners in Egypt, and supposed to figure the arrival of Joseph's brethren in that country. The accessories of the scene, the physiognomies of the persons, and the time to which the picture relates, are certainly in unison with that event; and, though we must speak with hesitation on the subject, the conjecture is probably correct. The annexed cuts show the variety of costume which this scene displays. All the men wear sandals. Some of them are clad only in a short tunic or shirt, with close sleeves (fig. 153); others wear over this a kind of sleeveless plaid or mantle, thrown over the left shoulder, and passing under the right arm (fig. 154). It is of a striped and curiously figured pattern, and looks exceedingly like the fine grass woven cloth of the South Sea. Others have, instead of this, a fringed skirt of the same material (fig. 155). All the figures are bare-headed, and wear beards, which are circumstances favorable to the identification. The fringed skirt of fig. 155 is certainly a remarkable circumstance. Moses directed that the people should wear a fringe at the hem of their garments (Num_15:38), and the probability is that this command merely perpetuated a more ancient usage.

Fig. 156?Egyptian sculpture of Jews
(b) This fringe reappears, much enlarged, in the other Egyptian sculpture in which Jews are supposed to be represented. These are in a tomb discovered by Belzoni, in the valley of Bab-el Melook, near Thebes. There are captives of different nations, and among them four figures, supposed to represent Jews. The scene is imagined to commemorate the triumphs of Pharaoh-Necho in that war in which the Jews were defeated at Megiddo, and their king Josiah slain (2 Chronicles 35-36). It will be seen that the dress of these figures differs little, excepting in the length of the fringe, from that of the skirted figure in the earlier painting; and so far this is a corroborative circumstance in favor of both.

Fig. 157?An inhabitant of Syria
There is no reason to think that the dress of the Jews was in any important respect different from that of the other inhabitants of the same and immediately bordering countries. It is therefore fortunate that the Egyptian monuments offer such representations of the Canaanitish and neighboring nations, as enable us to see that the prevailing style of dress was a close tunic under a loose outer robe, the place of the latter being sometimes supplied by a large cape, as shown in the annexed figures (fig. 157 and fig. 158), which appears to represent inhabitants of Syria and Lebanon.

Fig. 158?An inhabitant of Lebanon
The evidence for the latter (fig. 158) is as conclusive as can be obtained, for not only is there the name Lemanon, but the persons thus attired are represented as inhabiting a mountainous country, and felling fir-trees to impede the chariots of the Egyptian invaders. The dresses are similar to each other, and this similarity strengthens the probability that the dress of the Jews was not very different. The figures are bearded, and the cap, or head-dress, is bound round with a fillet. The figures are arrayed in a long gown reaching to the ankles, and confined around the waist by a girdle and the shoulders are covered by the cape which appears to have been common to several nations, perhaps as an occasional or a summer substitute for the loose mantle which some other figures exhibit. The dresses are often of brilliant colors, sometimes in variegated patterns; and the outer mantle is seen to be sometimes lined, by the inside and outside being of different colors, such as yellow lined with blue, etc. The military dress was more compact than that in civil use; and among the accoutrements we readily recognize the helmet, and the military girdle so often mentioned in the Sacred Book.
Such is the amount of the information to be derived from ancient monuments.

Fig. 159?Monks and Pilgrims
That to be obtained from tradition is embodied?1. In the dresses of monks and pilgrims, which may be traced to an ancient date, and which are an intended imitation of the dresses supposed to have been worn by the first disciples and apostles of Christ. 2. The garb conventionally assigned by painters to Scriptural characters, which were equally intended to embody the dress of the apostolic period, and is corrected in some degree by the notions of Oriental costume which were collected during the Crusades.

Fig. 160?Scriptural characters
Let us now consider the modern sources of illustration. With the exceptions of the foreign Turkish costume, and the modifications thereof, and with certain local exceptions, chiefly in mountainous regions, it may be said that there is one prevailing costume in all the countries of Asia between the Tigris and Mediterranean, and throughout Northern Africa, from the Nile to Morocco and the banks of the Senegal. This costume is substantially Arabian, and owes its extension to the wide conquests of the Arabians under the first caliphs; and it is through the Arabians?the least changed of ancient nations, and almost the only one which has remained as a nation from ancient times?that the antiquity of this costume may be proved. This is undoubtedly the most ancient costume of Western Asia, and while one set of proofs would carry it up to Scriptural times, another set of strong probabilities and satisfactory analogies will take it back to the most remote periods of Scriptural history, and will suggest that the dress of the Jews themselves was very similar, without being strictly identical.
It is to be observed, however, that there are two very different sorts of dresses among the Arabians. One is that of the Bedouin tribes, and the other that of the inhabitants of towns. The distinction between these is seldom clearly understood, or correctly stated; but it is of the utmost importance for the purpose of the present notice. Instead therefore of speaking of the Arabian costume as one thing, we must regard it as two things?the desert costume, and the town costume.
If, then, our views of Hebrew costume were based on the actual costume of the Arabians, we should be led to conclude that the desert costume represented that which was worn during the patriarchal period, and until the Israelites had been some time settled in Canaan; and the town costume that which was adopted from their neighbors when they became a settled people.
This is a subject which, more than any other, requires the aid of pictorial illustration to render the details intelligible. Having provided ourselves with these, our further observations will most advantageously take the form of explanations of them, and of comments upon them.
Under the notion that the desert costume belongs to the patriarchal period, the precedence is here given to it. Only the outer articles of dress are distinctive, those which are worn underneath being similar to other articles worn by the town and peasant classes, and which as such will be hereafter noticed.

Fig. 161?1. A townsman. 2. A Bedouin. 3. A Hyke
The figure (fig. 161) represents, in #2, a Bedouin, or desert Arab, in the dress usually worn in Asia; and in #1 represents a townsman in a cloak of the same kind, adopted from the Arabs, and worn very extensively as an outermost covering in all the countries from the Oxus (for even the Persians use it) to the Mediterranean. The distinctive head-dress of the Bedouin, and which has not been adopted by any other nation, or even by the Arabian townsmen, is a kerchief folded triangularly, and thrown over the head so as to fall down over the neck and shoulders, and bound to the head by a band of twisted wool or camel's hair. We forbear at the moment from inquiring whether this was or was not in use among the ancient Hebrews. The cloak is called an abba. It is made of wool and hair, and of various degrees of fineness. It is sometimes entirely black, or entirely white, but is more usually marked with broad stripes, the colors of which (never more than two, one of which is always white) are distinctive of the tribe by which it is worn. The cloak is altogether shapeless, being like a square sack, with an opening in front, and with slits at the sides to let out the arms. The Arab who wears it by day, sleeps in it by night, as does often the peasant by whom it has been adopted; and in all probability this was the garment similarly used by the ancient Hebrews, and which a benevolent law, delivered while Israel was still in the desert, forbade to be kept in pledge beyond the day, that the poor might not be without a covering at night (Exo_22:27). This article of dress appears to have been little known to Biblical illustrators, although it is the principal and most common outermost garment in Western Asia. This singular neglect has arisen from their information being chiefly derived from Shaw and others, who describe the costume of the Arab tribes or Moors of Northern Africa, where the outer garment is more generally the bournoos (fig. 161, #3), a woolen cloak, not unlike the abba, but furnished with a hood, and which is sometimes strangely confounded even by well-informed persons with a totally different outer garment worn in the same regions, usually called the hyke, but which is also, according to its materials, quality, or color, distinguished by various other names. Regardless of these minute distinctions, this part of dress may be described as a large woolen blanket, either white or brown, and in summer a cotton sheet (usually blue or white, or both colors together). Putting one corner before over the left shoulder, the wearer brings it behind, and then under the right arm, and so over the body, throwing it behind over the left shoulder, and leaving the right arm free for action. This very picturesque mode of wearing the hyke is shown in #2 of the following figure (fig. 162).

Fig. 162?Head Protection
1. Over head for protection from sun or wind.
2. Picturesque mode of wearing hyke.
3. Another mode of wearing
Another mode of wearing it is shown in #3. It is sometimes thrown over the head as a protection from the sun or wind (#1), and calls to mind the various passages of Scripture in which persons are described as covering their heads with their mantles (2Sa_15:30; 1Ki_19:13; Est_6:12). This article of dress, originally borrowed from the nomads, is known in Arabia, and extends westward to the shores of the Atlantic, being most extensively used by all classes of the population. The seat of this dress, and of the abba respectively, is indicated by the direction of their importation into Egypt. The hykes are imported from the west (i.e. from North Africa), and the abbas from Syria. The close resemblance of the above group of real costume to those in which the traditionary ecclesiastical and traditionary artistic costumes are displayed, must be obvious to the most cursory observer. It may also be noticed that the hyke is not without some resemblance, as to the manner in which it was worn, to the outer garment of one of the figures in the Egyptian family, supposed to represent the arrival of Joseph's brethren in Egypt (fig. 155).
We now turn to the costumes which are seen in the towns and villages of south-western Asia.
In the Scriptures drawers are only mentioned in the injunction that the high-priest should wear them (Exo_28:42), which seems to show that they were not generally in use; nor have we any evidence that they ever became common. Drawers descending to the middle of the thighs were worn by the ancient Egyptians, and workmen often laid aside all the rest of their dress when occupied in their labors. As far as this part of dress was used at all by the Hebrews, it was doubtless either like this, or similar to those which are now worn in Western Asia by all, except some among the poorer peasantry, and by many of the Bedouin Arabs. They are of linen or cotton, of ample breadth, tied around the body by a running string, or band, and always worn next the skin, not over the shirt as in Europe.

Fig. 163?Day-time dress
It will be asked, when the poor Israelite had pawned his outer garment 'wherein he slept,' what dress was left to him? The answer is probably supplied by the figure (fig. 164), which represents slightly different garments of cotton, or woolen frocks or shirts, which often, in warm weather, form the sole dress of the Bedouin peasants, and the lower class of townspeople. To this the abba or hyke is the proper outer robe (as in #1, see fig. 164), but is usually, in summer, dispensed with in the daytime, and in the ordinary pursuits and occupations of life. It is sometimes (as in fig. 164, #2) worn without, but more usually with, a girdle: and it will be seen that the shorter specimens are not unlike the dress of one of the figures in the earliest of the Egyptian subjects which have been produced.

Fig. 164?Chaluk
The shirt worn by the superior classes is of the same shape, but of finer materials. This is shown in the following figure, which represents a gentleman as just risen from bed. If we call this a shirt, the Hebrews doubtless had it?the sole dress (excepting the cloak) of the poor, and the inner robe of the rich. Such, probably, were the 'sheets' (translated 'shirts' in some versions), of which Samson despoiled thirty Philistines to pay the forfeit of his riddle (Jdg_4:13; Jdg_4:19). It is shown from the Talmud, indeed, that the Hebrews of later days had a shirt called chaluk, which it would appear was often of wool, and which is described as the ordinary inner garment, the outer being the cloak or mantle. This shows that the shirt or frock was, as in modern usage, the ordinary dress of the Jews, to which a mantle (abba, hyke, or bournoos) was the outer covering.

Fig. 165?Persons of superior class
In the annexed figures (fig. 167), representing persons of the superior class, we observe the shirt covered by a striped (sometimes figured) gown or caftan, of mingled silk and cotton. It descends to the ankles, with long sleeves, extending a few inches beyond the fingers' ends, but divided from a point a little above the wrist, so that the hand is generally exposed, though it may be concealed by the sleeve when necessary; for it is customary to cover the hands in the presence of a person of high rank. It is very common, especially in winter, for persons to sleep without removing this gown, but only unloosing the girdle by which it is bound. It is not unusual within doors to see persons without any article of dress outside this; but it is considered decidedly as an undress, and no respectable person is beheld out of doors, or receives or pays visits, without an outer covering. Hence persons clad in this alone are said to be 'naked' in Scripture?that is, not in the usual complete dress; for there can be no manner of doubt that this, or something like this, is referred to in Exo_28:40; Job_30:18; Isa_22:21, etc. A similar robe is worn by the women, as was also the case among the Israelites (2Sa_13:18-19; Son_5:3). It is in the bosom of this robe that various articles are carried, and hence the Scriptural expression of giving things 'into the bosom.'
The girdle worn over this, around the waist, is usually a colored shawl, or long piece of figured white muslin. The girdle of the poorer classes is of coarse stuff, and often of leather, with clasps. This leathern girdle is also much used by the Arabs, and by persons of condition when equipped for a journey. It is sometimes ornamented with workings in colored worsted, or silk, or with metal studs, shells, beads, etc. Both kinds of girdles were certainly in use among the Hebrews (2Ki_1:8; Mat_3:4; Mar_1:6; comp. Jer_13:1). It is known to all readers of Scripture how often the 'girdle' and the act of 'girding the loins' is mentioned. It seems from 2Sa_20:8 (comp. also the Syrian figure, fig. 157), that it was usual to wear a knife or poniard in the girdle. This custom is still general, and denotes not any deadly disposition, but the want of clasp-knives. Men of literary vocations replace it by an inkhorn, as was also the case among the Israelites (Eze_9:2).
Over the gown is worn either the short-sleeved gibbeh (#3), which is a long coat of woolen cloth; or the long-sleeved benish (#2), which is also of woolen cloth, and may be worn either over or instead of the other. The benish is, by reason of its long sleeves (with which the hands may be covered), the robe of ceremony, and is worn in the presence of superiors and persons of ranks. Over one or both of these robes may be worn the abba, bournoos, or hyke, in any of the modes already indicated. Aged persons often wrap up the head and shoulders with the latter, in the manner shown in #4.
This hyke or wrapper is usually taken by persons going on a journey, for the purpose of being used in the same manner as a protection from the sun or wind. This is shown in the annexed cut, representing a group of persons equipped for travel. The robe is here more succinct and compact, and the firm manner in which the whole dress is girded up about the loins calls to mind the passages of Scripture in which the action of 'girding up the loins' for a journey is mentioned.

Fig. 166?Turkish men
From this it is also seen that travelers usually wear a sword, and the manner in which it is worn is correctly shown. It would also appear that the Jews had swords for such occasional uses (Mat_26:51; Luk_22:36).

Fig. 167?Sleeves drawn up
The necessity of baring the arm for any kind of exertion, must be evident from, the manner in which it is encumbered in all the dresses we have produced. This action is often mentioned in Scripture, which alone proves that the arm was in ordinary circumstances similarly encumbered by the dress. For ordinary purposes a hasty tucking up of the sleeve of the right arm suffices; but for a continued action special contrivances are necessary. These are curious, as will be seen by the adjoining figure (fig. 170). The full sleeves of the shirt are sometimes drawn up by means of cords, which pass round each shoulder, and cross behind, where they are tied in a knot. This custom is particularly affected by servants and workmen, who have constant occasion for baring the arm; but others, whose occasions are more incidental, and who are, therefore, unprovided with the necessary cords, draw up the sleeves and tie them together behind between the shoulders (#2).
For the dress of females we must refer to the article Woman. See also the article Sandal.
The Popular Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature
by John Kitto.

Dress
(does not occur in Scripture in the sense of clothing, but only in the older acceptation of preparing or tilling). SEE COSTUME.
1. Materials. — These were various, and multiplied with the advance of civilization. The earliest and simplest robe was made out of the leaves of a tree (תְּאֵנָה, "A.V. fig-tree" — and comp. the present Arabic name for the fig, tin), portions of which were sewn together so as to form an apron (Gen_3:7). Ascetic Jews occasionally used a similar material in later times. Josephus (Life, 2) records this of Banus (ἐσθῆτι μὲν ἀπὸ δένδρων χρώμηνος); but whether it was made of the leaves or the bark is uncertain. After the Fall, the skins of animals supplied a more durable material (Gen_3:21), which was adapted to a rude state of society, and is stated to have been used by various ancient nations (Diod. Sic. 1:43; 2:38; Arrian, Ind. 7, 3). Skins were not wholly disused at later periods: the adde'reth (אִדֶּרֶת) worn by Elijah appears to have been the skin of a sheep or some other animal with the wool left on (in the Sept. the word is rendered μηλωτή, 1Ki_19:13; 1Ki_19:19; 2Ki_2:13; Sopa, Gen_25:25; and δέῤῥις, Zec_13:4; and it may be connected with δορά etymologically, Saalchutz, Archaeol. 1:19; Gesenius, however, prefers the notion of amplitude, אָדִר, in which case it = אֶדֶרof Mic_2:8; Thesaur. page 29). The same material is implied in the description of Elijah (אַישׁ בִּעִל שֵׂעָר; Sept. ἀνὴρ δασύς; A.V. "hairy man," 2Ki_1:8), though these words may also be understood of the hair of the prophet; and in the comparison of Esau's skin to such a robe (Gen_25:25). It was characteristic of a prophet's office from its mean appearance (Zec_13:4; comp. Mat_7:15). Pelisses of sheepskin still form an ordinary article of dress in the East (Burckhardt's Notes on Bedouins, 1:50). The sheepskin coat is frequently represented in the sculptures of Khorsabad: it was made with sleeves, and was worn over the tunic: it fell over the back, and terminated in its natural state. The people wearing it have been identified with the Sagartii (Bonomi's Nineveh, page 193). The addereth worn by the king of Nineveh (Jon_3:6), and the "goodly Babylonish garment" found at Ai (Jos_7:21), were of a different character, either robes trimmed with valuable furs, or the skins themselves ornamented with embroidery. The art of weaving hair was known to the Hebrews at an early period (Exo_26:7; Exo_35:6); the sackcloth used by mourners was of this material SEE SACK-CLOTH, and by many writers the addereth of the prophets is supposed to have been such. John the Baptist's robe was of camels' hair (Mat_3:4), and a similar material was in common use among the poor of that day (Joseph. War, 1:24, 3), probably of goats' hair, which was employed in the Roman cilicium. At what period the use of wool, and of still more artificial textures, such as cotton and linen, became known, is uncertain: the first of these, we may presume, was introduced at a very early period, the flocks of the pastoral families being kept partly for their wool (Gen_38:12): it was at all times largely employed, particularly for the outer garments (Lev_13:47; Deu_22:11; Eze_34:3; Job_31:20; Pro_27:26; Pro_31:13). SEE WOOL.
The occurrence of the term ketoneth in the book of Genesis (3:21; 37:3, 23) seems to indicate an acquaintance, even at that early day, with the finer materials; for that term, though significant of a particular robe, originally appears to have referred to the material employed (the root being preserved in our cotton; comp. Bohlen's Introd. 2:51; Saalchutz, Archaeol. 1:8), and was applied by the later Jews to flax or linen, as stated by Josephus (Ant. 3:7, 2, Χεθομένη μὲν καλεῖται. Λίνεον τοῦτο σημαίνει, χέθον γὰρ τὸ λίνον ἡμεῖς καλοῦμεν). No conclusion, however, can be drawn from the use of the word: it is evidently applied generally, and without any view to the material, as in Gen_3:21. It is probable that the acquaintance of the Hebrews with linen, and perhaps cotton, dates from the period of the captivity in Egypt, when they were instructed in the manufacture (1Ch_4:21). After their return to Palestine we have frequent notices of linen, the finest kind being named shesh (שֵׁשׁ), and at a later period buts (בּוּוֹ), the latter a word of Syrian, and the former of Egyptian origin, and each indicating the quarter whence the material was procured: the term chur (חוּר) was also applied to it from its brilliant appearance (Isa_19:9; Est_1:6; Est_8:15). It is the byssus (βύσσος) of the Sept. and the N.T. (Luk_16:19; Rev_18:12; Rev_18:16), and the "fine linen" of the A.V. It was used in the vestments of the high-priests (Exo_28:5 sq.), as well as by the wealthy (Gen_41:42; Pro_31:22; Luk_14:19). SEE LINEN.
A less costly kind was named bad (בִּד; Sept. λίνεος), which was used for certain portions of the high-priest's dress (Exo_28:42; Lev_16:4; Lev_16:23; Lev_16:32), and for the ephods of Samuel (1Sa_2:18) and David (2Sa_6:14): it is worthy of notice, in reference to its quality and appearance, that it is the material in which angels are represented (Eze_9:3; Eze_9:11; Eze_10:2; Eze_10:6-7; Dan_10:5; Dan_12:6; Rev_15:6). A coarser kind of linen, termed ώμολινον (Sir_40:4), was used by the very poor. The Hebrew term sadin' ( סָדַין= σινδών, and satin) expresses a fine kind of linen, especially adapted for summer wear, as distinct from the sardaballa, which was thick (Talmud, Menach. pages 41, 1). What may have been the distinction between shesh and sadin (Pro_31:22; Pro_31:24) we know not the probability is that the latter name passed from the material to a particular kind of robe. Silk was not introduced until a very late period (Rev_18:12): the term meshi' (מֶשַׁי; Sept. τρίχαπτον; Eze_16:10) is of doubtful meaning. SEE SILK. The use of a mixed material, shaatnez' (שִׁעִטְנֵז; Sept. κίβδηλον, i.e., spurious; Aquila, ἀντιδιακείμενον; Ven. Gr. ἐριολινον), such as wool and flax, was forbidden (Lev_19:19; Deu_22:11), on the ground, according to Josephus (Ant. 4:8, 11), that such was reserved for the priests, or as being a practice usual among idolaters (Spencer, Leg. Hebrews Rit. 2:32), but more probably with the view of enforcing the general idea of purity and simplicity. SEE DIVERSE.
2. Color and Decoration. — The prevailing color of the Hebrew dress was the natural white of the materials employed, which might be brought to a high state of brilliancy by the art of the fuller (Mar_9:3). Some of the terms applied to these materials (e.g. שֵׁשׁ, בּוּוֹ, חוּר) are connected with words significant of whiteness, while many of the allusions to garments have special reference to this quality (Job_38:14; Psa_104:1-2; Isa_63:3): white was held to be peculiarly appropriate to festive occasions (Ecc_9:8; comp. Horace, Sat. 2:2, 60), as well as symbolical of purity (Rev_3:4-5; Rev_4:4; Rev_7:9; Rev_7:13). It is uncertain when the art of dyeing became known to the Hebrews; the כְּתֹנֶת פִּסַּים, ketho'neth passim' worn by Joseph (Gen_37:3; Gen_37:23) is variously taken to be either a "coat of divers colors" (Sept. ποικίλος; Vulgate polymita; comp. the Greek πάσσειν, II. 3:126; 22:441), or a tunic furnished with sleeves and reaching down to the ankles, as in the versions of Aquila, ἀστραγάλειος, καρπωτός, and Symumachus, χειριδωτός, and in the Vulg. (2Sa_13:18) talaris, and as described by Josephus. (Ant. 7:8, 1). The latter is probably the correct sense, in which case we have no evidence of the use of variegated robes previously to the sojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt, though the notice of scarlet thread (Gen_38:28) implies some acquaintance with dyeing, and the light summer robe (צָעַי; Sept. θέριστρον; A.V. "veil") worn by Rebekah and Tamar (Gen_24:65; Gen_38:14; Gen_38:19) was probably of an ornamental character.
The Egyptians had carried the art of weaving and embroidery to a high state of perfection, and from them the Hebrews learned various, methods of producing decorated stuffs. The elements of ornamentation were, (1) weaving with threads previously dyed (Exo_35:25; compare Wilkinson's Egyptians, 3:125); (2), the introduction of gold thread or wire (Exo_28:6 sq.; (3) the addition of figures, probably of animals and hunting or battle scenes (comp. Layard, 2:297), in the case of garments, in the same manner as the cherubim were represented in the curtains of the tabernacle (Exo_26:1; Exo_26:31; Exo_36:8; Exo_36:35). These devices may have been either woven into the stuff, or cut out of other stuff and afterwards attached by needlework: in the former case the pattern would appear only on one side, in the latter the pattern might be varied. Such is the distinction, according to Talmudical writers, between cunning-work and needlework, or as marked by the use of the singular and dual number, רַקְמָה, needlework, and רַקְמָתִיַם, needlework on both sides (Jdg_5:30), though the latter term may after all be accepted in a simpler way as a dual = two embroidered robes (Bertheau, Comm. in 1.c.). The account of the corslet of Amasis (Herod, 3:47) illustrates the processes of decoration described in Exodus. Robes decorated with gold (מַשְׁבְּצוֹת, Psa_45:13), and at a later period with silver thread (Josephus, Ant. 19:8, 2; comp. Act_12:21), were worn by royal personages: other kinds of robes were worn by the wealthy both of Tyre (Eze_16:13) and Palestine (Jdg_5:30; Psa_45:14). The art does not appear to have been maintained among the Hebrews: the Babylonians and other Eastern nations (Jos_7:21; Eze_27:24), as well as the Egyptians (Eze_27:7), excelled in it. Nor does the art of dyeing appear to have been followed up in Palestine dyed robes were imported from foreign countries (Zep_1:8), particularly from Phoenicia, and were not much used on account of their expensiveness: purple (Pro_31:22; Luk_16:19) and scarlet (2Sa_1:24) were occasionally worn by the wealthy. The surrounding nations were more lavish in their use of them: the wealthy Tyrians (Eze_27:7), the Midianitish kings (Jdg_8:26), the Assyrian nobles (Eze_23:6), and Persian officers (Est_8:15), are all represented in purple. The general hue of the Persian dress was more brilliant than that of the Jews: hence Ezekiel (Eze_23:12) describes the Assyrians as לְבֻשֵׁי מַכְלוֹל, lit. clothed in perfection; according to the Sept. εὐπάρνφα, wearing robes with handsome borders. With regard to the head-dress in particular, described as טְבוּלַים סְרוּחֵי(Sept. τιάραι βαπταί; A "dyed attire;" comp. Ovid, Met. 14:654, mitrapicta), some doubt exists whether the word rendered dyed does not rather mean flowing (Gesen. Thesaur. page 542; Layard, 2:308).
3. The Names, Forms, and Mode of wearing the Robes. — It is difficult to give a satisfactory account of the various articles of dress mentioned in the Bible: the notices are for the most part incidental, and refer to a lengthened period of time, during which the fashions must have frequently changed; while the collateral sources of information, such as sculpture, painting, or contemporary records, are but scanty. The general characteristics of Oriental dress have indeed preserved a remarkable uniformity in all ages: the modern Arabs dress much as the ancient Hebrews did; there are the same flowing robes, the same distinction between the outer and inner garments-the former heavy and warm, the latter light, adapted to the rapid and excessive changes of temperature in those countries; and there is the same distinction between the costume of the rich and the poor, consisting in the multiplication of robes of a finer texture and more ample dimensions. Hence the numerous illustrations of ancient costume, which may be drawn from the usages of modern Orientals, supplying in great measure the want of contemporaneous representations. With regard to the figures which some have identified as Jews in Egyptian paintings and Assyrian sculptures, we cannot but consider the evidence insufficient. The figures in the painting at Beni Hassan, delineated by Wilkinson (Ancient Egypt. 2:296), and supposed by him to represent the arrival of Joseph's brethren, are dressed in a manner at variance with our ideas of Hebrew costume: the more important personages wear a double tunic, the upper one constructed so as to pass over the left shoulder and under the right arm, leaving the right shoulder exposed: the servants wear nothing more than a skirt or kilt, reaching from the loins to the knee. Wilkinson suggests some collateral reasons for doubting whether they were-really Jews; to which we may add a further objection that the presents which these persons bring with them are not what we should expect from Gen_43:11. Certain figures inscribed on the face of a rock at Behistun (q.v.), near Kermanshah, were supposed by Sir R. K. Porter to represent Samaritans captured by Shalmaneser: they are given in Vaux's Nineveh, page 372. These sculptures are now recognized as of a later date, and the figures evidently represent people of different nations, for the tunics are alternately short and long. Again, certain figures discovered at Nineveh have been pronounced to be Jews: in one instance the presence of hats and boots is the ground of identification (Bonomi, Nineveh, page 197; compare Dan_3:21); but if, as we shall hereafter show, the original words in Daniel have been misunderstood by our translators, no conclusion can be drawn from the presence of these articles. In another Instance the figures are simply dressed in a short tunic, with sleeves reaching nearly to the elbow, and confined at the waist by a girdle, a style of dress which was so widely spread throughout the East that it is impossible to pronounce what particular nation they may have belonged to: the style of head-dress seems an objection to the supposition that they are Jews. These figures are given in Bonomi's Nineveh, page 381.
The costume of the men and women was very similar; there was sufficient difference, however, to mark the sex, and it was strictly forbidden to a woman to wear the appendages (כְּלַי; Sept. σκεύη), such as the staff, signet-ring, and other ornaments, or, according to Josephus (Ant. 4:8,43), the weapons of a man; as well as to a man to wear the outer robe (שַׂמְלָה) of a woman (Deu_22:5): the reason of the prohibition, according to Maimonides (Mor. Neboch. 3:37), being that such was the practice of idolaters (comp. Carpzov, Appar. Page 514); but more probably it was based upon the general principle of propriety. (See Mill, Dissertt. select. page 196 sq.; Carpzov, De mundo muliebri viris inderdicto, Rost. 1752.)
a. Robes common to the sexes.
(1.) The ketho'neth (כְּתֹנֶת, whence the Greek χίτων) was the most essential article of dress. It was a closely-fitting garment, resembling in form and use our shirt, though unfortunately translated “coat" in the A.V. The material of which it was made was either wool, cotton, or linen. From Josephus's observation (Ant. 3:7, 4) with regard to the meil (that it was οὐκ ἐκ δυοῖν περιτμημάτων), we may probably infer that the ordinary kethoneth or tunic was made in two pieces, which were sown together at the sides. In this case the seamless shirt (χίτον ἄῤῥαφος) worn by our Lord (Joh_19:23) was either a singular one, or, as is more probable, was the upper tunic or meil. The primitive kethoneth was without sleeves, and reached only to the knee, like the Doric χίτεν; it may also have been, like the latter, partially opened at one side, so that a person in rapid motion was exposed (2Sa_6:20). Another kind, which we may compare with the Ionian χίτων, reached to the wrists and ankles: such was probably the kethoneth passim worn by Joseph (Gen_37:3; Gen_37:23) and Tamar (2Sa_13:18), and that which the priests wore (Josephus, Ant. 3:7, 2). It was in either case kept close to the body by a girdle (q.v.), and the fold formed by the overlapping of the robe served as an inner pocket, in which a letter or any other small article might be carried (Joseph. Ant. 17:5, 7). A person wearing the kethoneth alone was described as עָרֹם, naked: we may compare the use of the term γυμναί as applied to the Spartan virgins (Plut. Lyc. 14), of the Latin nudus (Virgil, Georg. 1:299), and of our expression stripped. Thus it is said of Saul, after having taken off his upper garments (בְּגָדָיו, 1Sa_19:24); of Isaiah (Isa_20:2) when he had put off his sackcloth, which was usually worn over the tunic (comp. Jon_3:6), and only on special occasions next the skin (2Ki_6:30); of a warrior who has cast off his military cloak (Amo_2:16; comp. Livy, 3:23, inermes nudique); and of Peter without his fisher's coat (Joh_21:7). The same expression is elsewhere applied to the poorly clad (Job_22:6; Isa_58:7; Jam_2:15).
The annexed wood-cut (fig. 1) represents the simplest style of Oriental dress, a long loose shirt or hethoneth without a girdle, reaching nearly to the ankle. The same robe, with the addition of the girdle, is shown in fig. 4. In fig. 2 we have the ordinary dress of the modern Bedouin; the tunic overlaps the girdle at the waist, leaving an ample fold, which serves as a pocket. Over the tunic he wears the abba, or striped plaid, which completes his costume.
(2.) The sadin' (סָדַין) appears to have been a wrapper of fine linen (Sept. σινδών), which might be used in various ways, but especially as a night- shirt (Mar_14:51; comp. Herod. 2:95; Schleusner's Lex. in N.T. s.v.). (The Hebrew term is given in the Syriac N.T. as = σουδάριον, Luk_19:20, and λέντιον, Joh_13:4.) The material or robe is mentioned in Jdg_14:12-13 ("sheet," "shirt"), Pro_31:24, and Isa_3:23 ("fine linen"); but in none of these passages is there anything to decide its specific meaning. The Talmudical writers occasionally describe the tallith under that name, as being made of fine linen: hence Lightfoot (Exercitations on Mar_14:51) identifies the σινδών worn by the young man as a tallith, which he had put on in his haste without his other garments.
(3.) The meil' (מְעַיל) was an upper or second tunic, the difference being that it was longer than the first. It is hence termed in the Sept. ὑποδύτης ποδήρης, and probably in this sense the term is applied to the kethoneth passim (2Sa_13:18), implying that it reached down to the feet. The sacerdotal meal is elsewhere described. SEE PRIEST.
As an article of ordinary dress it was worn by kings (1Sa_24:4), prophets (1Sa_28:14), nobles (Job_1:20), and youths (1Sa_2:19). It may, however, be doubted whether the termed is used in its specific sense in these passages, and not rather in its broad etymological sense (from מָעִל, to cover), for any robe that chanced to be worn over the kethoneth. In the Sept. the renderings vary between ἐπενδύτης (1Sa_18:4; 2Sa_13:18; 1Sa_2:19, Theodot.), a term properly applied to an upper garment, and specially used in Joh_21:7, for the linen coat worn by the Phoenician and Syrian fishermen (Theophyl. in 1.c.), διπλοϊvς (1Sa_2:19; 1Sa_15:27; 1Sa_24:4; 1Sa_24:11; 1Sa_28:14; Job_29:14), ἱμάτια (Job_1:20), στόλη (1Ch_15:27; Job_2:12), and ὑποδύτης (Exo_39:21; Lev_8:7), showing that, generally speaking, it was regarded as an upper garment. This further appears from the passages in which notice of it occurs: in 1Sa_18:4, it is the "robe" which Jonathan first takes off; in 1Sa_18:14, it is the "mantle" in which Samuel is enveloped; in 1Sa_15:27, it is the "mantle," the skirt of which is rent (comp. 1Ki_11:30, where the שִׂמָלְה, samlah', is similarly treated); in 1Sa_24:4, it is the "robe" under which Saul slept (generally the בֶּגֶד, be'ged, was so used); and in Job_1:20; Job_2:12, it is the "mantle" which he rends (comp. Ezr_9:3; Ezr_9:5): in these passages it evidently describes an outer robe, whether the simlah, or the meil itself used as a simlah. Where two tunics are mentioned (Luk_3:11) as being worn at the same time, the second would be a meil; travelers generally wore two (Joseph. Ant. 17:5, 7), but the practice was forbidden to the disciples (Mat_10:10; Luk_9:3).
The dress of the middle and upper classes in modern Egypt (fig. 3) illustrates the customs of the Hebrews. In addition to the shirt, they wear a long vest of striped silk and cotton, called kaftan, descending to the ankles, and with ample sleeves, so that the hands may be concealed at pleasure. The girdle surrounds this vest. The outer robe consists of a long cloth coat, called gibbeh, with sleeves reaching nearly to the wrist. In cold weather the abba is thrown over the shoulders.
(4.) The ordinary outer garment consisted of a quadrangular piece of woollen cloth, probably resembling in shape a Scotch plaid. The size and texture would vary with the means of the wearer. The Hebrew terms referring to it are simlah' (שַׂמְלָה, occasionally שִׂלְמָה), which appears to have had the broadest sense, and sometimes is put for clothes generally (Gen_35:2; Gen_37:34; Exo_3:22; Exo_22:9; Deu_10:18; Isa_3:7; Isa_4:1), though once used specifically of the warrior's cloak (Isa_9:5); be'ged (בֶּגֶד), which is more usual in speaking of robes of a handsome and substantial character (Gen_27:15; Gen_41:42; Exo_28:2; 1Ki_22:10; 2Ch_18:9; Isa_63:1); kesuth' (כְּסוּת), appropriate to passages where covering or protection is the prominent idea (Exo_22:26; Job_26:6; Job_31:19); and, lastly, lebush' (לְבוּשׁ), usual in poetry, but specially applied to a warrior's cloak (2Sa_20:8), priests' vestments (2Ki_10:22), and royal apparel (Est_6:11; Est_8:15). A cognate term, malbush' (מִלְבַּוּשׁ) describes specifically a state dress, whether as used in a royal household (1Ki_10:5; 2Ch_9:4) or for religious festivals (2Ki_10:22): elsewhere it is used generally for robes of a handsome character (Job_27:16; Isa_63:3; Eze_16:13; Zep_1:8). Another term, mad (מִד, with its derivatives מַדָּה, Psa_133:2, and מֶדֶו, 2Sa_10:4; 1Ch_19:4), is expressive of the length of the Hebrew garments (1Sa_4:12; 1Sa_18:4), and is specifically applied to a long cloak (Jdg_3:16; 2Sa_20:8), and to the priest's coat (Lev_6:10). The Greek terms ἱμἀτιον and στόλη express the corresponding idea, the latter being specially appropriate to robes of more than ordinary grandeur (1Ma_10:21; 1Ma_14:9; Mar_12:38; Mar_16:5; Luk_15:22; Luk_20:46; Rev_6:11; Rev_7:9; Rev_7:13); the χίτων and ἱμάτὶον (A.V. "coat," "cloak," Vulg. tunica, pallium) are brought into juxtaposition in Mat_5:40, and Act_9:39. The beged might be worn in various ways, either wrapped round the body, or worn over the shoulders, like a shawl, with the ends or "skirts" (כְּנָפִיַם; Sept. πτερύγια; Vulg. anguli) hanging down in front; or it might be thrown over the head so as to conceal the face (2Sa_15:30; Est_6:12). The ends were skirted with a fringe, and bound with a dark purple ribbon (Num_15:38): it was confined at the waist by a girdle, and the fold (חֵיק; Sept. κόλπος; Vulg. sinus) formed by the overlapping of the robe served as a pocket in which a considerable quantity of articles might be carried (2Ki_4:39; Psa_79:12; Hag_2:12; Niebuhr, Description, page 56), or as a purse (Pro_17:23; Pro_21:14; Isa_65:6-7; Jer_32:18; Luk_6:38).
The ordinary mode of wearing the outer robe, called abba or abayeh, at the present time, is exhibited in figs. 2 and 5. The arms, when falling down, are completely covered by it, as in fig. 5; but in holding any weapon, or in active work, the lower part of the arm is exposed, as in fig. 2.
b. The dress of the women differed from that of the men in regard to the outer garment, the kethoneth being worn equally by both sexes (Son_5:3). The names of their distinctive robes were as follows:
(1) nitpachtath (מַטְפִּחִת; Sept. περίζωμα; Vulg. pallium, linteamen; A.V. "veil," "wimple"), a kind of shawl (Rth_3:15; Isa_3:22);
(2) maataphah' (מִעֲטָפָה; Vulg. palliolun; A.V. "mantle"), another kind of shawl (Isa_3:22), but how differing from the one just mentioned we know not: the etymological meaning of the first name is expansion, of the second env(loping;
(3) tsa'iph (צָעַי; θέριστρον; "veil"), a robe worn by Rebekah on approaching Isaac (Gen_24:65), and by Tamar when she assumed the guise of a harlot (Gen_38:14; Gen_38:19) it was probably, as the Sept. represents it, a light summer dress of handsome appearance (περιέβαλε τὸ θέριστρον καὶ ἐκαλλωπίσατο, Gen_38:14), and of ample dimensions, so that it might be thrown over the head at pleasure;
(4) radid' (רָדַיד; "veil"), a similar robe (Isa_3:23; Son_5:7), and substituted for the fsaiph in the Chaldee version — we may conceive of these robes or shawls as resembling thepeplum of the Greeks, which might be worn over the head (as represented in Smith's Dict. of Ant. Page 753), or again as resembling the habarah and milayeh of the modern Egyptians (Lane, 1:73, 75);
(5) pethigil' (פְּתַיגַיל; χιτὼν μεσοπόρφυρος; "stomacher"), a term of doubtful origin, but probably significant of a gay holiday dress (Isa_3:24)-to the various explanations enumerated by Gesenius (Thesaur. page 1137), we may add one proposed by Saalchutz (Archeol. 1:31), פְּתַי, wide or foolish, and גַּיל, pleasure, in which case it = unbridled pleasure, and has no reference to dress at all;
(6) gilyonim' (גַּלְיֹנַים, Isa_3:23), also a doubtful word, explained in the Sept. as a transparent dress, i.e., of gauze (διαφανῆ Λακωνικά) — Schroeder (De Vest. mul. Hebrews page 311) supports this view, butpperhaps the word means, as in the A.V., "glasses." The garments of females were terminated by an ample border or fringe (שֹׁבֶל, שֹׁוּל; ὀπίσθια; skirts), which concealed the feet (Isa_47:2; Jer_13:22).
Figs. 6 and 7 illustrate some of the peculiarities of female dress: the former is an Egyptian woman (in her walking dress); the latter represents a dress, probably of great antiquity, still worn by the peasants in the south of Europe: the outer robe, or hulaliyeh, is a large piece of woolen stuff wound round the body, the upper parts being attached at the shoulders; another piece of the same stuff is used for the head-veil, or tarhah.
c. Having now completed our description of Hebrew dress, we add a few remarks relative to the selection of equivalent terms in our own language. It must at once strike every Biblical student as a great defect in our Auth. Vers. that the same English word should represent various Hebrew words; e.g. that "veil" should be promiscuously used for radid (Isa_3:23), tsaiph (Gen_24:65), mitpachath (Rth_3:15), masveh (Exo_34:33); "robe" for meil (1Sa_18:4), kethoneth (Isa_22:21), addereth (Jon_3:6), salmah (Mic_2:8); "mantle" for meil (1Sa_15:27), addereth (1Ki_19:13), maataphah (Isa_3:22); and "coat" for meil (1Sa_2:19), kethoneth (Gen_3:21); and conversely that different English words should be promiscuously used for the same Hebrew one, as meil is translated "coat," "robe," "mantle;" addereth "robe," "mantle." Uniformity would be desirable, in as far as it can be attained, so that the English reader might understand that the same Hebrew term occurred in the original text where the same English term was found in the translation. Beyond uniformity, correctness of translation would also be desirable: the difficulty of attaining this in the subject of dress, with regard to which the customs and associations are so widely at variance in our own country and in the East, is very great. Take, for instance, the kethoneth: at once an under garment, and yet not unfrequently worn without anything over it — a shirt, as being worn next the skin, and a coat, as being the upper garment worn in a house: deprive the Hebrew of his kethoneth, and he was positively naked; deprive the Englishman of his coat, and he has under garments still. So again with the beged: in shape probably like a Scotch plaid, but the use of such a term would be unintelligible to most English readers; in use unlike any garment with which we are familiar, for we only wear a great- coat or a cloak in bad weather, whereas the Hebrew and his beged were inseparable. With such difficulties attending the subject, any attempt to render the Hebrew terms must be, more or less, a compromise between correctness and modern usage, and the English terms which we are about to propose must be regarded merely in the light of suggestions. Kethoneth answers in many respects to "'frock;" the sailor's "frock" is constantly worn next the skin, and either with or without a coat over it; the "smockfrock" is familiar to us as an upper garment, and still as a kind of undress. In shape and material these correspond with kethoneth, and, like it, the term "frock" is applied to both sexes. In the sacerdotal dress a more technical term might be used: "vestment," in its specific sense as = the chasible, or casula, would represent it very aptly. Meil may perhaps be best rendered "gown," for this too applies to both sexes; and, when to men, always in an official sense, as the academic gown, the alderman's gown, the barrister's gown; just as meal appears to have represented an official, or, at all events, a special dress. In sacerdotal dress "alb" exactly meets it, and retains still, in the Greek Church, the very name, poderis, by which the meil is described in the Sept. The sacerdotal ephod approaches, perhaps, most nearly to the term "pall," the ὠμοφόριον of the Greek Church, which we may compare with the ἐπωμίς of the Sept. Addereth answers in several respects to "pelisse," although this term is now applied almost exclusively to female dress. Sadin = "linen wrapper." Simlah we would render "garment," and in the plural "clothes," as the broadest term of the kind; beged "vestment," as being of superior quality; lebush "robe," as still superior; mad "cloak," as being long; and malbush "dress," in the specific sense in which the term is not unfrequently used as = fine dress. In female costume mitpachath might be rendered "shawl," maatapha "mantle," tsaiph "handsome dress," radid "cloak." d. In addition to these terms, which we have thus far extracted from the Bible, we have in the Talmudical writers an entirely new nomenclatur. The tallith' (טִלַּית) is frequently noticed: it was made of fine linen, and had a fringe attached to it, like the beged; it was of ample dimensions, so that the head might be enveloped in it, as was usual among the Jews in the act of prayer. The kolbin' (קוֹלְבַּין) was probably another name for the tallith, derived from the Greek κολόβιον; Epiphanius (1:15) represents the στολαί of the Pharisees as identical with the Dalmatica or the colobium; the latter, as known to us, was a close tunic without sleeves. The chaluk' (חָלוּק) was a woolen shirt, worn as an under tunic. The macto'ren (מִקְטוֹרֶן) was a mantle or outer garment (comp. Lightfoot, Exercitation on Mat_5:40; Mar_14:51; Luk_9:3, etc.). Gloves ( קִסְיָה or כִּ) are also noticed (Chelim, xvis 6; 24:15; 26:3), not, however, as worn for luxury, but for the protection of the hands in manual labor.
With regard to other articles of dress, SEE GIRDLE; SEE HANDKERCHIEF; SEE HEAD-DRESS; SEE HEM OF GARMENT; SEE SANDALS; SEE SHOES; SEE VEIL; also the several words above used in the A.V.
e. The dresses of foreign nations are occasionally referred to in the Bible; that of the Persians is described; in Dan_3:21 in terms which have been variously understood, but which may be identified with the statements of Hero'dotus (1:195; 7:61) in the following manner:
(1) The sarbaln' (סִרְבָּלַין; A.V. "coats") ἀναξύριδες, or drawers, which were the distinctive feature in the Persian as compared with the Hebrew dress;
(2) thepattish' (פִּטַישׁ; A.V. "hosen") = κιθὼν ποδηνεκὴς λίνεος, or inner tunic;
(3) the karbela' (כִּרְבְּלָא; A.V. "hat") = ἄλλος εἰρίνεος κιθών, or upper tunic, corresponding to the meal of the Hebrews;
(4) the lebush' (לְבוּשׁ; A. V. "garment") = χλανίδιον λευκόν, or cloak, which was worn, like the beged, over all. In addition to these terms, we have notice of a robe of state of fine linen, takrik (תִּכרַיךְ; διάδεμα sericum pallium), so called from its ample dimensions (Est_8:15). The same expression is used in the Chaldee for purple garments in Eze_27:16.
The references to Greek or Roman dress are few; the χλαμύς (2Ma_12:35; Mat_27:28) was either the paludamentum, the military scarf of the Roman soldiery, or the Greek chlamys itself, which was introduced under the emperors (Smith's Dict. of Ant. s.v. Chlamys); it was especially worn by officers. The traveling cloak (φελόνης) referred to by Paul (2Ti_4:13) is generally identified with the Roman paenula, of which it may be a corruption; the Talmudical writers have a similar name ( פלייןor פלניא). It is, however, otherwise explained as a traveling case for carrying clothes or books (Conybeare, St. Paul, 2:499).
4. The customs and associations connected with dress are numerous and important, mostly arising from the peculiar form and mode of wearing the outer garments. The beged, for instance, could be applied to many purposes besides its proper use as a vestment; it was sometimes used to carry a burden (Exo_12:34; Jdg_8:25; Pro_30:4), as Ruth used her shawl (Rth_3:15); or to wrap up an article (1Sa_21:9); or again as an impromptu saddle (Mat_21:7). Its most important use, however, was a coverlet at night (Exo_22:27; Rth_3:9; Eze_16:8), whence the word is sometimes taken for bed-clothes (1Sa_19:13; 1Ki_1:1); the Bedouin applies his abba to a similar purpose (Niebuhr, Description, page 56). On this account a creditor could not retain it after sunset (Eze_22:26; Deu_24:12-13; compare Job_22:6; Job_24:7; Amo_2:8). The custom of placing garments in pawn appears to have been very common, so much so that עֲבוֹט, pledge = a garment (Deu_24:12-13); the accumulation of such pledges is referred to in Hab_2:6 (that loadeth himself with עִבְטַיט. i.e., pledges; where the A.V. following the Sept, and Vulg. reads עִב טַיט, "thick clay"); this custom prevailed in the time of our Lord, who bids his disciples give up the ἱμάτιον = beged, in which they slept, as well as the χιτών (Mat_5:40). At the present day it is not unusual to seize the abba as compensation for an injury: an instance is given in Wortabet's Syria, 1:293.
The loose, flowing character of the Hebrew robes admitted of a variety of symbolical actions: rending them was expressive of various emotions, as grief (Gen_37:29; Gen_37:34; Job_1:20; 2Sa_1:2), SEE MOURNING, fear (1Ki_21:27; 2Ki_22:11; 2Ki_22:19), indignation (2Ki_5:7; 2Ki_11:14; Mat_26:65), or despair (Jdg_11:35; Est_4:1): generally the outer garment alone was thus rent (Gen_37:34; Job_1:20; Job_2:12); occasionally the inner (2Sa_15:32), and occasionally both (Ezr_9:3; Mat_26:65, compared with Mar_14:63). Shaking the garments, or shaking the dust off them, was a sign ,of renunciation (Act_18:6); spreading them before a person, of loyalty and joyous reception (2Ki_9:13; Mat_21:8); wrapping them round the head, of awe (1Ki_19:13) or of grief (2Sa_15:30; Est_6:12; Jer_14:3-4); casting them off, of excitement (Act_22:23); laying hold of them, of supplication (1Sa_15:27; Isa_3:6; Isa_4:1; Zec_8:23).
The length of the dress rendered it inconvenient for active exercise; hence the outer garments were either left in the house by a person working close by (Mat_24:18), or were thrown off when the occasion arose (Mar_10:50; Joh_13:4; Act_7:58), or, if this was not possible, as in the case of a person traveling, they were girded up (1Ki_18:46; 2Ki_4:29; 2Ki_9:1; 1Pe_1:13); on entering a house the upper garment was probably laid aside, and resumed on going out (Act_12:8). In a sitting posture, the garments concealed the feet; this was held to be an act of reverence (Isa_6:2; see Lowth's note). The proverbial expression in 1Sa_25:22; 1Ki_14:10; 1Ki_21:21; 2Ki_9:8, probably owes its origin to the length of the garments, which made another habit more natural (comp. Herod. 2:35; Xenoph. Cyrop. 12:16; Ammian. Marcell. 23:6); the expression is variously understood to mean the lowest or the youngest of the people (Gesen. Thesaur. page 1397; Jahn, Archaol. 1:8, § 120). To cut the garments short was the grossest insult that a Jew could receive (2Sa_10:4; the word there used מֶדֶו is peculiarly expressive of the length of the garments). To raise the border or skirt of a woman's dress was a similar insult, implying her unchastity (Isa_47:2; Jer_13:22; Jer_13:26; Nah_3:5).
The putting on and off of garments, and the ease with which it was accomplished, are frequently referred to; the Hebrew expressions for the first of these operations, as regards the outer robe, are לָבִשׁ, labash', to put on, עָטָה, atah', כָּסָה, kasah', and עָטִ, ataph', lit. to cover, the latter three having special reference to the amplitude of the robes; and for the second פָּשִׁט pashat', lit. to expand, which was the natural result of taking off a wide, loose garment. The ease of these operations forms the point of comparison in Psa_102:26; Jer_43:12. In the case of closely- fitting robes the expression is חָגִר, chagar', lit. to gird, which is applied to the ephod (1Sa_2:18; 2Sa_6:14), to sackcloth (2Sa_3:31; Isa_32:11; Jer_4:8); the use of the term may illustrate Gen_3:7, where the garments used by our first parents are called חֲגֹרֹת, chagoroth' (A.V. "aprons"), probably meaning such as could be wound round the body. The converse term is פָּתִח, pathach', to loosen or unbind (Psa_30:11; Isa_20:2).
The number of suits possessed by the Hebrews was considerable; a single suit consisted of an under and upper garment, and was termed עֵרֶךְ בָּגָדַים (Sept. στολὴ ἱματίων, i.e., apparatus vestium; Jdg_17:10). Where more than one is spoken of, the suits are termed חֲלַיפוֹת(ἀλλασσόμεναι στολαί; A.V. "changes of raiment;" compare Homer, Od. 8:249, εἵματα ἐξημοιβά). These formed in ancient times one of the most usual presents among Orientals (Harmer, Observations, 2:379 sq.); five (Gen_45:22) and even ten changes (2Ki_5:5) were thus presented, while as many as thirty were proposed as a wager (Jdg_14:12; Jdg_14:19). The highest token of affection was to present the robe actually worn by the giver (1Sa_18:4; comp. Homer, II. 6:230; Harmer, 2:388). The presentation of a robe in many instances amounted to installation or investiture (Gen_41:42; Est_8:15; Isa_22:21; comp. Morier, Second Journey, page 93); on the other hand, taking it away amounted to dismissal from office (2Ma_4:38). The production of the best robe was a mark of special honor in a household (Luk_15:22). The number of robes thus received or kept in store for presents was very large, and formed one of the main elements of wealth in the East (Job_27:16; Mat_6:19; Jam_5:2), so that to have clothing to be wealthy and powerful (Isa_3:6-7). On grand occasions the entertainer offered becoming robes to his guests (Trench on Parables, page 231). Hence in large households a wardrobe (מְלְתָּחָה) was required for their preservation (2Ki_10:22; compare Harmer, 2:382), superintended by a special officer, named שֹׁמֶר הִבְּגָדַים, keeper of the wardrobe (2Ch_34:22). Robes reserved for special occasions are termed מִחֲלָצוֹת(A.V. "changeable suits;" Isa_3:22; Zec_3:4), because laid aside when the occasion was past.
The color of the garment was, as we have already observed, generally white, hence a spot or stain readily showed itself (Isa_63:3; Jud_1:23; Rev_3:4); reference is made in Lev_13:47 sq. to a greenish or reddish spot of a leprous character. Jahn (Archeol. 1:8, § 135) conceives this to be not the result of leprosy, but the depredations of a small insect; but Schiling De Lepra, page 192) states that leprosy taints clothes, and adds m" the spots are altogether indelible, and seem rather to spread than lessen by washing" (Knobel, Comm. in 1.c.). Frequent washings and the application of the fuller's art were necessary to preserve the purity of the Hebrew dress. SEE SOAP; SEE FULLER.
The business of making clothes devolved upon women in a family (Pro_21:22; Act_9:39); little art was required in what we may term the tailoring department; the garments came forth for the most part ready made from the loom, so that the weaver supplanted the tailor. The references to sewing are therefore few: the term תָּפִרtaphar' (Gen_3:7; Job_16:15; Ecc_3:7; Eze_13:18) was applied by the later Jews to mending rather than making clothes.
The Hebrews were liable to the charge of extravagance in dress; Isaiah in particular (Isa_3:16 sq.) dilates on the numerous robes and ornaments worn by the women of his day. The same subject is referred to in Jer_4:30; Eze_16:10; Zep_1:8, and Sir_11:4, and in a later age 1Ti_2:9; 1Pe_3:3. SEE APPAREL; SEE ATTIRE; SEE CLOTHING; SEE GARMENT SEE RAIMENT, etc.

CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores