[Image] [Hi-Res Image]
Page 4
Dress and Ornament, Hebrew THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
gular piece of rough, heavy woolen material, crudely sewed together so that holes are left for the arms.
Like the abaye, the simla was not s. The worn at work (Matt. xxiv. 18); but it Coat or was similarly useful. All kinds of ar Cloak. titles could be carried in it, e.g. barley, wood, grass, etc. (Ex. xii. 34; Judges viii. 25; II Kings iv. 39). By day it was a protec tion against rain and cold, by night it served as bed and cover (Ex. xxii. 26; Deut. xxiv. 12 sqq.). No respectable man went without this overdress (Amos ii. 16; Isa. xx. 2-3). From this simple garment was developed the richly ornamented mantle of well-to-do Assyrians and Babylonians, which reached from the neck to the knees and had short sleeves. Canaanites of the better classes wore a strip of heavy fancy-colored cloth wrapped around the body several times. This was em broidered in colors and finished with fringe. The Israelites, who had a taste for gorgeous colors (Josh. vii. 21; Judges v. 30; II Sam. i. 24), probably adopted from the Canaanites certain overgarments called me'il and addereth. The first was a costly wrap (I Sam. ii. 19, xviii 4, xxiv. 5, 11), and, ac cording to the description of the priest's me'il, was similar to the sleeveless abaye (Ex. xxviii. 31 aqq.; Josephus, Ant., III. vii. 4). The addereth was an extra robe worn over the simla (Mic. ii. 8), similar to the gorgeous Babylonian robe for which the same name was employed (Josh. vii. 21; Jonah iii. 6). The leather garment worn by the prophets was called by the same name because of its width.A woman's dress evidently differed from that of a man (Deut. xxii. 5), but consisted likewise of simla and kuttoneth. Presumably these garments had sleeves and were longer than those worn by men, were also of finer material, of brighter colors, and more richly ornamented. The sadin, the finer linen underdress, was also worn by women (Isa. iii. 23: Prov. xxxi. 24). Further, mention is made of
the -mifpalaafh, a kind of veil or shawl 3. Women's (Ruth iii. 15); and the md'atapha, a
Attire. wrap of unknown form (Isa. iii. 22).A very important article of female attire was the veil. The use of the veil by the bride (Gen. xxiv. 65) and in other cases (Gen. xxxviii. 14; Ruth iii. 31 is traceable to the influence of the Ishtar .myth. The veil was the symbol of Ishtar, who, on coming from the underworld, walked out veiled to meet Tammuz, her bridegroom. Otherwise it was not customary for women to go veiled (Gen. xii. 14, xxiv. 15 sqq. ), contrary to present custom in the Orient due to the influence of Islam. The veil of the ordinary woman's wardrobe was a neckcloth. According to ancient statuary, it reached from the forehead, down across the back of the head to the hips or still lower, and was not unlike the neckerchief of the peasant woman in modern Palestine. It is not known how the various kinds of veils mentioned in the Old Testament differed from one another (Gen. xxiv. 65; Cant. iv. 3; Isa. iii. 19 aqq., xlvii. 2). The increasing luxury of women un the matter of dress is shown by the enumeration of the articles of a woman's toilet in Isa. iii. 18-23.
As regards head-dress, some representationsshow Jews and Syrians bareheaded, others show them wearing merely a band to hold the hair together. This last is still occasionally seen in Arabia. The usual head-covering of the Bedouin of to-day is the keffiye, a large square piece of woolen cloth folded diagonally, then thrown over
4. The the head in such a way that the loose Head-dress. corners of the triangle protect the back of the head and neck, while the other two corners are tied under the chin and then thrown across the shoulders. A strong wool cord holds the cloth securely on the head. Hebrew peasants undoubtedly wore a similar head-dress. The better classes, both men and women, wore a kind of turban, i.e., a cloth wound about the head. The shape of this varied greatly, depending upon the way it was adjusted, just as the head-dress of to-day varies in different localities. The turban of the high priest, the miznelrheth, had a special form (Ex. xxviii. 40), as did that of the priest, the mig ba'a or peer (Ex. xxviii. 40, xxxix. 28). The peer was afterward worn by men and women of the better classes (Isa. iii. 20; Ezek. xxiv. 17); for in stance, by the bridegroom on the wedding day (Isa. lxi. 10). The high conical turbans seen in pictures of Assyrian kings and priests may be re garded as good examples of this variety of head covering.The use of sandals among the Egyptians became common in the middle kingdom, universal in the new kingdom. On Babylonian and Assyrian monuments even kings appear barefooted. Other representations show sandals with a strap stretched across the foot from the side, and often with a leather strap between the toes and drawn across the foot longitudinally. Later Assyrian soldiers wore a kind of leather boot, made of pieces of leather tied about the foot and reaching above the
g. Foot- ankle. By soldiers of to-day pointed wear. . shoes are worn over the sandals, affording protection to the toes in mountainous districts. , Among the Israelites the common man usually went barefooted, as does the fellah of to-day, though he sometimes had sandals (Amos ii. 6, viii. 6). These were of leather or wood, with leather straps (Gen. xiv. 23; Isa. v. 27). They were not worn in the house nor in the sanctuary (Ex. iii. 5, xii. 11; Josh. v. 15). The priests performed their duties barefooted. In mourning, also, it was customary to go barefooted (II Sam. xv. 30; Ezek. xxiv. 17, 23). Jewelry was much worn in the ancient Orient, as it is to-day, A cane and a signet-ring belonged to the equipment of a Babylonian, and were aisual articles.of personal adornment (cf. Herodotus, i. 195, and Strabo, xvi. 746). The cane was often a necessity, as in the case of the shepherd; otherwise it was a valuable weapon. In modern times it is not used se a support in walking-it ,being too short for that purpose-but is carried thrown across the shoulder.
The signet-ring (hotham) , is quite ancient and is supposed to have been worn even by the patriarchs. The impression of such a ring serves in place of the written signature, hence its importance and the universality of its use., At first these rings were not worn on the finger, but were carried on a cord