[Illustration: FIG. 14.--Hittite Weather-god.]
Headgear.
The treatment of the hair, moustache and beard is extremely interesting
in the study of oriental archaeology (see Muller, Meyer, opp. citt.). A
special covering for the head was not indispensable. The Semites often
bound their bushy locks with a fillet, which varies from a single band
(so often, e.g. Palestinian captives, 10th century) to a fourfold one,
from a plain band to highly decorated diadems. The Ethiopians of
Tirhakah's army (7th cent.) stuck a single feather in the front of their
fillet, and a feathered ornament recurs from the old Babylonian goddess
with two large feathers on her head to the feathered crown common from
Assur-bani-pal's Arabians to Ararat, and is familiar from the later
distinctive Persian head-dress.[8] But the ordinary Semitic head
covering was a cloth which sometimes appears with two ends tied in
front, the third falling behind. Or it falls over the nape of the neck
and is kept in position with a band; or again as a cloth cap has lappets
to protect the ears. Sometimes it has a more bulky appearance. In
general, the use of a square or rectangular cloth (whether folded
diagonally or not) corresponds to the modern _keffiyeh_ woven with long
fringes which are plaited into cords knitted at the ends or worked into
little balls sewn over with coloured silks and golden threads.[9] The
_keffiyeh_ covering cheek, neck and throat, is worn over a small
skull-cap and will be accompanied with the relatively modern fez
(_tarb[=u]sh_) and a woollen cloth. Probably the oldest head-dress is
the circular close-fitting cap (plain or braided), which, according to
Meyer, is of Sumerian (non-Semitic) origin. But it has a long history.
Palestinian captives in the Assyrian age wear it with a plain
close-fitting tunic, and it appears upon the god Hadad in north Syria
(cf. also the Gezer seal, fig. 13). With some deities (e.g. the moon-god
Sin) it has a kind of straight brim which gives it a certain resemblance
to a low-crowned "bowler." Very characteristic is the conical cap which,
like the Persian hat (Gr. _kurbasia_), resembled a cock's comb. It is
worn by gods and men, and with the latter sometimes has ear-flaps (at
Lachish, with other varieties, Ball, 190) or is surmounted by a feather
or crest. It was probably made of plaited leather or felt. Veritable
helmets of metal, such as Herodotus ascribes to Assyrians and Chalybians
(vii. 63, 76), and metal armour, though known farther west, scarcely
appear in old oriental costume, and the passage which attributes bronze
helmets and coats of mail to the Philistine Goliath and the Israelite
Saul cannot be held (on other grounds) to be necessarily reliable for
the middle or close of the 11th century (1 Sam. xvii). A loftier
head-covering was sometimes spherical at the top and narrowed in the
middle; with a brim or border turned up back and front it is worn by
Hittite warriors of Zenj[=i]rli and by their god of storm and war (fig.
14). Elongated and more pointed it is the archaic crown of the Pharaohs
(symbolical of upper Egypt), is worn by a Hittite god of the 14th
century, and finds parallels upon old cultus images from Asia Minor,
Crete and Cyprus. Later, Herodotus describes it as distinctively
Scythian (vii. 64). Finally the cylindrical hat of Hittite kings and
queens reappears with lappets in Phoenicia (Perrot and Chipiez, _Phoen._
ii. 77); without the brim it resembles the crown ofthe Babylonian
Merodach-nadin-akhi, with a feathered top it distinguishes Adad (god of
storm, &c.) at Babylonia. Narrower at the top and surmounted by a spike
it distinguishes the Assyrian kings.
Costume of the Gods.
When the deities were regarded as anthropomorphic they naturally wore
clothing which, on the whole, was less subject to change of fashion and
was apt to be symbolical of their attributes. The old Babylonian hero
Gilgamesh and the Egyptian Bes (perhaps of foreign extraction) are nude,
and so in general are the figurines of the Ishtar-Astarte type. Numerous
bronze images of a kneeling god at Telloh give him only a loin-cloth,
and often the deity, like the monarch, has only a skirt. In course of
time various plaids or mantles are assumed, and in Babylonia the
goddesses were the first to have both shoulders covered. Distinctive
features are found in the head-dress, e.g. crowns (cf. the Ammonite god,
2 Sam. xii. 30) or horns (a single pair or an arrangement of four
pairs), and in Babylonia symbolical emblems are attached to the
shoulders (e.g. the rays of the sun-god, stalks, running water). Long
garments ornamented with symbolical designs (stars, &c.) are worn by
Marduk and Adad. The custom of clothing images is well known in the
ancient world, and at the restoration of an Egyptian temple care was
taken to anoint the divine limbs and to prepare the royal linen for the
god. The ceremonial clothing of the god on the occasion of festal
processions, undertaken in Egypt by the "master of secret things," may
be compared with the well-known Babylonian representations of such
promenades. The Babylonian temples received garments as payment in kind,
and the Egyptian lists in the Papyrus Harris (Rameses III.) enumerate an
enormous number of skirts, tunics and mantles, dyed and undyed, for the
various deities. A priest, "master of the wardrobe," is named as early
as the VIth Dynasty, and later texts refer to the weavers and laundry
servants of the temple. It is probable that 2 Kings xxiii. 7 originally
referred to the women who wove garments for the goddess in the temple at
Jerusalem.
Royal costume.
In Egypt the king was regarded as the incarnation of the deity, his son
and earthly likeness. The underlying conception shows itself under
differing though not unrelated forms over western Asia, and in their
light the question of religious and ceremonial dress is of great
interest. Throughout Egyptian history the official costume was
conventionalized, and the latest kings and even the Roman emperors are
arrayed like their predecessors of the IVth Dynasty. The crook which
figures among royal and divine insignia may go back to the
boomerang-like object which was a prominent weapon in antiquity (Muller,
123 sq.). It appears in old Babylonia as a curved stick, and, like the
club, is a distinctive symbol of god and king. It resembles the sceptre
curved at the end, which was carried by old Hittite gods. The Pharaoh's
characteristic crown (or crowns) symbolized his royal domains, the
sacred uraeus marked his divine ancestry, and he sometimes appeared in
the costume of the gods with their fillets adorned with double feathers
and horns. In Babylonia Naram-Sin in the guise of a god wears the
pointed helmet and two great horns distinctive of the deities.[10] This
relationship between the gods and their human representatives is
variously expressed. Khammurabi and the sun-god Shamash, on the former's
famous code of laws, have the same features and almost the same frizzled
beard, and, according to Meyer, the king in claiming supremacy over
Sumer and Akkad wears the costume of the lands.[11] Ordinary folk could
not claim these honours, and in Egypt, where shaving was practically
universal, artificial beards were worn upon solemn occasions as a
peculiar duty. But the appendage of the official was shorter than that
of the king, and the gods had a distinctive shape for themselves; if it
appears upon the dead it is because they in their death had become
identified with the god Osiris (Erman, 59, 225 sq.). Young Egyptian
princes and youthful kings had a long plaited lock (or later a lappet)
on the side of their head in imitation of the youthful Horus, and the
peculiar tonsure adopted by the later Arabs of Sinai was inspired by the
desire to copy their god Orotal-Dionysus.[12] Thus we perceive that
ancient costume and toilet involves the relations between the gods and
men, and also, what is extremely important, the political conditions
among the latter. When the king symbolizes both the god and the extent
of his kingdom, ceremonies which could appear commonplace often acquire
a new significance, any discussion of which belongs to the intricacies
of the history of religion and pre-monarchical society. It must suffice,
therefore, to record the Pharaoh's simple girdle (with or without a
tunic) from which hangs the lion's tail, or the tail-like band suspended
from the extremity of his head-dress (above), or the panther or leopard
skin worn over the shoulders by the high priest at Memphis, subsequently
a ceremonial dress of men of rank. That the Pharaoh's skirt, sometimes
decorated with a pleated golden material, should become an honorific
garment, the right of wearing which was proudly recorded among the
bearer's titles, is quite intelligible, but many difficulties arise when
one attempts to identify the individuals represented, or to trace the
evolution of ideas.[13]
Ceremonial costume.
The well-known conservatism of religious practice manifests itself in
ceremonial festivals (where there is a tendency for the original
religious meaning to be obscured) and among the priests, and it is
interesting to observe that despite the great changes in Egyptian
costume in the New Kingdom the priests still kept to the simple linen
skirt of earlier days (Erman, 206). Religious dress (whether of priests
or worshippers) was regulated by certain fundamental ideas concerning
access to the deity and its consequences. That it was proper to wear
special garments (or at least to rearrange one's weekday clothes) on the
Jewish sabbath was recognized in the Talmud, and Mahommedans, after
discussing at length the most suitable raiment for prayer, favoured the
use of a single simple garment (Bukh[=a]ri, viii.). It was a deep-seated
belief that those who took part in religious functions were liable to
communicate this "holiness" to others (compare the complex ideas
associated with the Polynesian taboo). Hence priests would remove their
ceremonial dress before leaving the sanctuary "that they sanctify not
the people with their garments" (Ezek. xliv. 19; cf. xlii. 14), and
every precaution was taken on religious occasions to ensure purity by
special ablutions and by cleansing the clothes.[14] In the old ritual at
Mecca, the man who wore his own garments must leave them in the
sanctuary, as they had become "taboo"; hence the sacred circumambulation
of the Ka'ba was performed naked (prohibited by Mahomet), or in clothes
provided for the occasion. The old archaic waist-cloth was used, and at
the present day both male and female pilgrims enter bare-footed and clad
in the scanty _ihr[=a]m_ (C. M. Doughty, _Arabia Deserta_, ii. 479,
481, 537). In several old Babylonian representations the priests or
worshippers appear before the deity in a state of nature.[15] It is
known that laymen were required to wear special garments, and the
priests (who wore dark-red or purple) were sometimes called upon to
change their garments in the course of a ceremony. Thus the temples
required clothing not merely for the gods but also for the attendants
(so at Samaria, 2 Kings x. 22).
In the late usage at Harran the worshipper, after purifying his
garments and his heart, was advised to put on the clothing of the
particular god he addressed (de Goeje, _Oriental Congress_, Leiden,
1883, pp. 341 sqq.). The reason is obvious, and the principle could
be variously expressed. But we are not told whether the prophetess who
wore bands on her arm and drew a mantle over her head (so read in
Ezek. xiii. 17-23) actually used the clothing peculiar to some deity,
nor is it quite clear what is meant when a Babylonian ritual text
refers to the magical use of the linen garment of Eridu (seat of the
cult of Ea). The Bishop Gregentius denounced as heathenish the rites
in which the Arabs wore masks (W. R. Smith, 438), and one is tempted
to compare the use of masks elsewhere in animal worship. Next, one may
observe upon old Babylonian seals, eagle-headed deities with short
feathered skirts attended by human beings similarly arrayed (Ball,
151) or figures draped in a fish skin (Menant, _Rev. de l'hist. des
relig._ xi. 295-301) or a worshipper arrayed somewhat like a cock
(Meyer, 63; cf. Lucian's _De Dea Syria_, S 48; for "bees," &c., as
titles of sacred attendants, see J. G. Frazer, _Pausanias_, iv. 223,
v. 621). Although there is much that is obscure in this line of
research, it is a natural assumption that, in those ritual functions
where the gods were supposed to participate, the role was taken by
men, and the general idea of assimilating oneself to the god (and the
reverse process) manifests itself in too many ways to be ignored (cf.
W. R. Smith, 293, 437 sq., 474; C. J. Ball, _Ency. Bib._, art.
"Cuttings"). But the deities were not originally anthropomorphic, and
it is with the earlier stages in their development that some of the
more remarkable costumes are apparently concerned.
Of all priestly costumes[16] the most interesting is undoubtedly that of
the Jewish Levitical high-priest. In addition to a tunic (kutt[=o]neth)
and a seamless mantle or robe (_m[)e]'[=i]l_), he wore the breastplate
(_h[=o]shen_), the ephod, and a rich outer girdle. Breeches were
assumed on the Day of Atonement. His head-dress was as distinctive as
that of the high priest at Hierapolis, who wore a golden tiara and a
purple dress, while the ordinary priests had a _pilos_ (conical cap,
also worn in Israel, Ex. xxviii. 40) and white garments. But the various
descriptions cannot be easily reconciled.[17] The robe had pomegranates
and golden bells that the sound might give warning as he went in and out
of the sanctuary, and "that he died not" (Ex. xxviii. 35). According to
Josephus they symbolized the lightning and thunder respectively. The
"ephod of prophecy" (so _Test. of Levi_, viii. 2) was essentially once
an object of divination (see EPHOD). The "breastplate of judgment" was
set with twelve jewels engraved with the names of the tribes; the
foreordained covering of the semi-divine being in the garden of the gods
bore the same number of stones (Ezek. xxviii. 13, Septuagint). This
breast ornament finds analogies in the royal and high priestly dress of
Egypt, and in the six jewels of the Babylonian king.[18] The sacred lots
which gave "judgment" in accordance with the divine oracle (Num. xxvii.
21) have been plausibly compared with the Babylonian tablets of destiny
worn by the gods and the mystic lots upon the bosom of Noah.[19] The two
jewels also engraved with the names of the tribes in a suitable setting,
worn upon the _shoulder_ (see p. 102, c.), served, like the twelve
mentioned, for a memorial before the Deity, effectively bringing them to
remembrance, without any action on the part of the bearer, and thus
tacitly involving supernatural intervention as amulets are regularly
expected to do. The golden plate inscribed "holy to Yahweh" placed over
the head (the details are discrepant) had a mystic atoning force (Ex.
xxviii. 38), and in general writers recognized the peculiar efficacy of
the costume and its symbolical meaning (Philo, _Vita Mosis_, iii. 14;
Jos. _Ant._ iii. 7. 7; Talm. _Zeb._ 88b). Although Jewish tradition
ascribed this gorgeous and significant array to the Mosaic age (if not
to the pre-Mosaic days of Levi, so the _Test. of Levi_), its very
character, in common with the high priest's status, combines kingly and
priestly powers in a manner which is impossible for the period (about
15th-13th cent.). Where the king is the human representative of the
Deity he is theoretically and officially the priesthood, although the
priests carry on the ordinary subordinate functions. The Hebrew kings,
at all events, undertook priestly duties, and not until after the fall
of Jerusalem does the history allow that usurpation of monarchical
rights upon which the prophet Ezekiel (q.v.) encroaches. The embodiment
of political and religious supremacy displayed in the high priest's
authority, clothing and symbols can only reflect exilic or rather
post-exilic conditions.[20] (See further PRIEST.) In the Maccabaean age
the high priest Jonathan received the purple robe and crown and the
buckle of gold worn on the shoulder as a sign of priestly and secular
rank (1 Macc. x. 20, 38, 89, xi. 58). His brother Simon received similar
honours (xiv. 48 sq.), and Hyrcanus, the "second David," was supposed to
have had two crowns, one royal and the other priestly (Talm. _Kidd._
66a). The later Rabbis wore most sumptuous apparel, and were crowned
until the death of Eliezer ben Azarya.
Thus there was a real significance in ceremonial investiture (cf. Num.
xx. 26, 28) and in the transference of clothes (cf. Elisha and
Elijah's mantle, 2 Kings ii. 13). Further the exchange of garments was
not meaningless, and the prohibition in Deut. xxii. 5 points to
religious or superstitious beliefs, on which see J. G. Frazer,
_Adonis, Attis and Osiris_ (2nd ed.), pp. 428-435. On the claim
involved by the act of throwing a garment over another (Ruth iii. 9;
cf. 1 Kings xix. 19), see W. R. Smith, _Kinship and Marriage_[21], 105
sq.; J. Wellhausen, _Archiv f. Religionswiss_. (1907), pp. 40 sqq.;
and on some interesting ideas associated with sandals, see _Ency.
Bib._, s.v. "Shoes." As a sign of grief, or on any occasion when the
individual felt himself brought into closer contact with his deity,
the garments were rent (subsequently a conventional slit at the breast
sufficed) and he donned the _sak_, a loin-cloth or wrapper which
appears to be a survival of older and more primitive dress.[21] Later
tradition (Mish., Kil. ix. 1) does not endorse Ezekiel's prohibition
of woollen garments among the priests in the sanctuary (xliv. 17 sq.).
Why the layman was forbidden a mixture of wool and linen
(_sha'atn[=e]z_, Deut. xxii. 11) is difficult to explain, though
Maimonides perhaps correctly regarded the law as a protest against
heathenism (on the magical use of representatives of the animal and
vegetable kingdom, in conjunction with a metal ring, see I. Goldziher,
_Zeit. f. alttest. Wissens._ xx. 36 sq.).
Ancient oriental costume then cannot be severed from the history and
development of thought. On the one side we may see the increase of rich
apparel and the profusion of clothes by which people of rank indicated
their position. On the other are such figures as the Hebrew prophets,
distinguished by their hairy garment and by their denunciation of the
luxury of both sexes.[22] Superfluous clothing was both weakening and
deteriorating; this formed the point of the advice of Croesus to Cyrus
(Herod. i. 155). But "foreign apparel" was only too apt to involve ideas
of foreign worship (Zeph. i. 8. sq.), and the recognition that national
costume, custom and morality were inseparable underlay the objection to
the Greek cap (the [Greek: petasos]) introduced among the Jews under
Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Macc. iv. 10-17, with the parallel 1 Macc. i.
11-15). The Israelite distinctive costume and toilet as part of a
distinctive national religion was in harmony with oriental thought, and,
as a people chosen and possessed by Yahweh, "a kingdom of priests and an
holy nation" (Ex. xix. 5 sq.; cf. Is. lxi. 6), certain outward signs
assumed a new significance and continued to be cherished by orthodox
Jews as tokens of their faith. The tassels attached by blue threads to
the four corners of the outer garment were unique only as regards the
special meaning attached to them (Num. xv. 37-41; Deut. xxii. 12), and
when in the middle ages they marked out the Jew for persecution they
were transferred to a small under-garment (the little _t[=a]l[=i]th_),
the proper _t[=a]l[=i]th_ being worn over the head in the synagogue.
Similarly, sentences bound on the left arm or placed upon the forehead
(Deut. xi. 18, cf. the high priest's plate) find analogies in the means
taken elsewhere to ensure the protection of or to manifest one's
adherence to a deity; the novelty lies in the part these sentences took
in the religion (see PHYLACTERY). While the particular prohibition
regarding the beard and hair in Lev. xix. 27 (cf. Ezek. xliv. 20) was
for the avoidance of heathen customs, the _p[=e]y[=o]th_ or long curls
which became typical in the middle ages are reminiscent of the
Horns-curl of Egypt and the Mahommedan "heaven lock" and evidently
served as positive distinctive marks. Apart from these details later
Jewish dress does not belong to this section. In the Greek and Roman
period foreign influence shows itself very strongly in the introduction
of novelties of costume and of classical terms, and the subject belongs
rather to the Greek and Roman dress of the age.[23] Two conflicting
tendencies were constantly at work, and reached their climax in the
middle ages. There was an anxiety to avoid articles of dress peculiar to
other religions, especially when these were associated with religious
practices; and there was a willingness to refrain from costume contrary
to the customs of an unsympathetic land. On the one hand, there was a
conservatism which is exemplified when the Jews in course of immigration
took with them the characteristic dress of their former adopted home, or
when they remained unmoved by the changes of the Renaissance. On the
other hand, the prominent badge enforced by Pope Innocent III. in 1215
was intended to prevent Jews from being mistaken for Christians, and
similarly in Mahommedan lands they were compelled to wear some
distinctive indication of their sect. Thus the many quaint and
interesting features of later Jewish costume have arisen from certain
specific causes, any consideration of which concerns later and medieval
costume generally. See I. Abrahams, _Jewish Life in the Middle Ages_
(1896), chap. xv. sq.; and especially the _Jew. Encyc._, s.v. "Dress"
(with numerous illustrations).
AUTHORITIES.--Much useful material will be found in popular
illustrated books (especially C. J. Ball, _Light from the East_,
London, 1899) and in the magnificent volumes on the history of ancient
art by G. Perrot and C. Chipiez. On Egyptian costume see especially J.
G. Wilkinson, _Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians_ (ed. by
S. Birch, 1878), and A. Erman _Life in Ancient Egypt_ (1894,
especially pp. 200-233); for Egyptian evidence, see W. M. Muller,
_Asien und Europa nach altagypt. Denkmaler_ (Leipzig, 1893), _Mitteil.
d. vorderasiat. Gesellschaft_ (1904), ii. (and elsewhere). The most
important study on old Babylonian dress is that of E. Meyer, "Sumerier
und Semiten in Babylonien," in the _Abhandlungen_ of the Berlin
University (1906). For Hittite material, see the collection by L.
Messerschmidt, _Mitteil. d. vorderas. Ges._ (1900 and 1902). For
special discussions, see H. Weiss, _Kostumkunde_, i. (Stuttgart,
1881), articles in _Dict. Bible_ (Hastings), _Ency. Biblica_, and
_Jewish Encyc._, and I. Benzinger, Hebr. _Archaologie_ (Tubingen,
1907), pp. 73 sqq. See also the general bibliography at the end.
(S. A. C.)
[Illustration: From Petsofa (Annual of the Brit. School at Athens).