In regard to the covering of the head, it was deemed a mark of disrespect to walk abroad, or to pass a person, with bared head. [2953] Slaves covered their heads in presence of their heads in presence of their masters, and the Targum Onkelos indicates Israel's freedom by paraphrasing the expression they went out with a high hand' [2954] by with uncovered head' [2955] The ordinary covering of the head was the so-called Sudar (or Sudarimn), a kerchief twisted into a turban, and which might also be worn round the neck. A kind of hat was also in use, either of light material or of felt (Aphilyon shel rosh or Philyon). [2956] The Sudar was twisted by Rabbis in a peculiar manner to distinguish them from others. [2957] We read besides of a sort of cap or hood attached to garments.
Three, or else four articles commonly constituted the dress of the body. First came the under-grment, commonly the Chaluq of the Kittuna [2958] (The Biblical Kethoneth), from which latter some have derived the word cotton.' The Chaluq might be of linen or of wool. [2959] The sages wore it down to the feet. It was covered by the upper garment or Tallith to within about a handbreadth. [2960] The Chaluq lay close to the body, and had no other opening than that round the neck and for the arms. At the bottom it had a kind of hem. To posses only one such coat' or inner garment was a mark of poverty. [2961] Hence, when the Apostles were sent on their temporary mission, they were directed not to take two coats.' [2962] Closely similar to, if not identical with, the Chaluq, was the ancient garment mentioned in the Old Testament as Kethoneth, to which the Greek Chiton' (chitn) corresponds. As the garment which our Lord wore, [2963] [2964] and those of which He spoke to His Apostles are designated by that name, we conclude that it represents the well-know Kethoneth or Rabbinic Kittuna. This might be of almost any material, even leather, though it was generally of wool or flax. It was sleeved, close-fitting, reached to the ankles, and was fastened round the loins, or just under the breast, [2965] by a girdle. One kind of the latter, the Pundah or Aphundah, [2966] was provided with pockets or other receptacles, [2967] and hence might not be worn outside by those who went into the Temple, [2968] probably to indicate that he who went to worship should not be engaged in, nor bear mark of, any other occupation.
Of the two other garments mentioned as parts of a man's toilette, the Aphqarsin or Aphikarsus seems to have been an article of luxury rather than of necessity. Its precise purpose is difficult to determine. A comparison of the passages in which the term occurs conveys the impression, that it was a large kerchief used partly as a head-gear, and which hung down and was fastened under the right arm. [2969] [2970] Probably it was also used for the upper part of the body. But the circumstance that, unlike the other articles of dress, it need not be rent in mourning, [2971] and that, when worn by females, it was regarded as a mark of wealth, [2972] shows that it was not a necessary article of dress, and hence that, in all likelihood, it was not worn by Christ. It was otherwise with the upper garment. Various shapes and kinds of such were in use, from the coarser Boresin and Bardesin - the modern Burnoose - upwards. The Gelima was a cloak of which the border,' or hem,' is specially mentioned ({hebrew}). [2973] The Gunda was a peculiarly Pharisaic garb. [2974] But the upper garment which Jesus wore would be either the so-called Goltha, or, most likely, the Tallith. Both the Goltha [2975] and the Tallith [2976] were provided, on the four borders, with the so-called Tsitsith, or fringes.' These were attached to the four corners of the outer dress, in supposed fulfilment of the command, Numb. xv. 38-41; Deut. xxii. 12. At first, this observance seems to have been comparatively simple. The question as to the number of filaments on these frings' was settled in accordance with the teaching of the School of Shammai. Four filaments (not three, as the Hillelites proposed), each of four finger-lengths (these, as later tradition put it, doubled), and attached to the four corners of what must be a strictly square garment - such were the earliest rules on the subject. [2977] The Mishnah leaves it still a comparatively open question, whether these filaments were to be blue or white. [2978] But the Targum makes a strong point of it as between Moses and Korah, that there was to be a filament of hyacinth colour among four of white. [2979] It seems even to imply the peculiar symbolical mode of knotting them at present in use. [2980] Further symbolic details were, of course, added in the course of time. [2981] As these fringes were attached to the corners of any square garment, the question, whether the upper garment which Jesus wore was the Goltha or the Tallith, is of secondary importance. But as all that concerns His Sacred Person is of deepest interest, we may be allowed to state our belief in favour of the Tallith. Both are mentioned as distinctive dresses of teachers, but the Goltha (so far as it differed from the Tallith) seems the more peculiarly Rabbinic.