Coat

Coat. See Dress.

(כְּתֹנֶת, ketho’neth, or כֻּתֹּנֶת, kutto’neth, probably meaning covering; hence Greek χιτών) is the word employed by our translators for the ancient tunic (q.v.), which was in modern phrase a shirt worn next to the skin (Lev 16:4), by females as well as males (Son 5:3; 2Sa 13:18), and especially by the priests and Levites (Exo 28:4; Exo 29:5; Neh 7:70; Neh 7:72). The same term is used of the “coats of skins” prepared by the Almighty for the first human pair (Gen 3:21), which were probably nothing more than aprons, or a short skirt bound at the waist. The tunic was commonly (at least with males) without sleeves, and usually reached to the knees. It was generally made of linen, but for the winter was frequently made of wool; and the rich no doubt wore tunics of byssus (“fine linen,” i.e. [?] cotton, then very rare). It was sometimes woven entire without a seam, like the modern hose (Joh 19:23). It was also occasionally of a gay pattern; such was “Joseph’s coat of many colors” (Genesis 38), that is, of different colored threads in stripes or plaided. Sometimes two tunics seem to have been worn at once, either for ornament or luxury, for the term is frequently used in the plural of an individual (Mat 10:10; Mar 6:9; Luk 3:11). In that case the outer one probably supplied the place of the “cloak” or pallium. SEE CLOTHING; SEE DRESS, etc. The “fisher’s coat” (ἐπενδύτης) mentioned in Joh 21:7, was evidently an outer garment or cloak, and Peter is said to be “naked” before throwing it about him, as having on only the tunic, or perhaps no more than a strip of cloth about the loins, like the modern Arabs. The little “coat” made by Hannah for the young Samuel (1Sa 2:19) was the מֵעַיל (meil’), or outer dress, elsewhere rendered “robe,” “mantle,” or “cloak” [q.v.]. The “coats” of the three Hebrew children in the furnace (Dan 3:21; Dan 3:27) are called in the original Chaldee סִרבָּלַין(sarbalin’, Sept. σαράβαρα), thought by some to be the Persian name for long and wide trowsers, whence Greek σαράβαλλα, Lat. sarabala, etc., but by others, with greater probability, to be kindred with the Arabic name for a long shirt or cloak, which is corroborated by the Talmudic interpretation of mantles, i.e. the pallium or outer dress. (See Smith’s Dict. of Class. Antiq. s.v. Tunica, etc.) SEE ATTIRE.

See GARMENT.

COAT.—This word in the Gospels usually represents the Gr. χιτών, i.e. the tunic or long close-fitting under garment worn in Palestine, as opposed to the ἱμάτιον or full and flowing outer garment (see Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible , art. ‘Dress’).

Our Lord’s instructions to the Twelve included one which forbade their wearing or having in their possession more than one such garment (Mat 10:10, Mar 6:9, Luk 9:3; cf. Luk 3:11). And in the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5:40; cf. Luk 6:29) we are bidden to cultivate such a spirit of meekness as would be illustrated by a readiness to part even with one’s cloak (ἱμάτιον) to him who took away one’s coat.^{* [Note: In Luke the order is transposed, the cloak coming before the coat, this being the order in which these two garments would be torn off.]}

The soldiers at the Crucifixion (Joh 19:23-24) took possession of the Saviour’s garments, according, we suppose, to the usual practice. The outer robes they divided into four parts, one for each of the quaternion, but for the coat (τὸν χιτῶνα), in close fulfilment of Psa 22:18, they cast lots, not wishing to tear it up, because it was ‘without seam, woven from the top throughout.’ Josephus (Ant. iii. vii. 4), quoted by Bp. Westcott, tells us that the long robe (χιτὼν ποδήρης) of the high priest was of this character: ‘This vesture was not composed of two pieces, nor was it sewed together upon the shoulders and the sides, but it was one long vestment, so woven as to have an aperture for the neck’ (Whiston’s translation ). Bp. Westcott further quotes Chrysostom, who perhaps wrote from personal knowledge, as thinking ‘that the detail is added to show “the poorness of the Lord’s garments, and that in dress as in all other things He followed a simple fashion.” ’ Others incline to the view that there is a parallel suggested between the Eternal High Priest’s garment and that of the Aaronic high priest. In any case the seamless robe of Christ has often been taken as a type of the One (ideally) Undivided Church, e.g. by Cyprian in a famous passage (de Unit. Eccl. § 7), where he contrasts the ‘incorrupta atque individua tunica’ of Christ with the prophet Ahijah’s robe, which he tore in duodecim scissuras in token of the disruption of the kingdom (1Ki 11:30 ff.), and concludes: ‘sacramento vestis et signo declaravit ecclesiae unitatem.’ For the part which the Holy Coat has played in legend at Trèves and elsewhere, those who are curious in such matters may consult Gildenmeister and v. Sybel, Der Heilige Rock zu Trier und die 20 anderen heiligen ungenahten Rocke^{3 [Note: designates the particular edition of the work referred]} , 1845.

We may note finally: (1) that the word ‘coat’ (so Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 ; Authorized Version ‘fisher’s coat’) in Joh 21:7 stands for the large loose garment (ἐπενδύτης) which St. Peter threw as a covering over his almost naked body when he left his fishing and came into the Master’s presence; (2) that it was the under-garments (χιτῶνες) that the high priest rent when he ‘heard the blasphemy’ at our Lord’s trial (Mar 14:63; see Swete’s notes, in loc.). See also Cloke, Dress.

C. L. Feltoe.

By: Emil G. Hirsch, Gerson B. Levi

An outer garment with sleeves, for the upper part of the body; in the Bible it is an article of dress for both men and women, worn next to the skin, and is distinct from the "cloak," or outer garment (compare Matt. v. 40); either "shirt" or "tunic" would be a more correct rendering. The Hebrew has "kuttonet," rarely "ketonet," which is sometimes translated "robe" or "garment" (Isa. xxii. 21; Neh. vii. 70, 72; II Sam. xiii. 18, 19; Ezra ii. 69). "Kuttonet" is a word of doubtful etymology (coming, perhaps, from a root meaning "to clothe"), but its cognate forms are found in Arabic ("kattan"), Ethiopic ("ketân"), Assyrian ("kitinnê"), and Greek ("chitôn").

Originally (Gen. iii. 21) the garment worn by the Hebrews was a simple loin-cloth of leaves or skins, like that adopted by Elijah (II Kings i. 8, "girdle of leather"; compare the use of the "puntî" on the border of the Red Sea: Müller, "Asien und Europa," p. 108). In course of time this developed into a short shirt, with an aperture for the head to pass through, and was gradually lengthened to the knees (especially when used by women), and sometimes to the ankles. Even tunics with trains are mentioned (Isa. vi. 1; Jer. xiii. 22; Nahum iii. 5). The shirt was made at first without sleeves, and also failed to cover the left shoulder (see Müller, l.c. pp. 296 et seq.). The working classes continued to wear the "primitive loin-cloth" (Müller, ib. p. 297), or the sleeveless coat, as this allowed full freedom of movement for both arms and legs. When the shirt was long, a belt or girdle was worn over it, partly for the purpose of holding it together, but mainly to enable the wearer to tuck in the laps when running, walking, or working.

The expression "mouth of the coat" can not be understood to mean that the shirt had a collar. It denotes simply the opening at the top, fitting closely round the neck (Job xxx. 18). At night (Cant. v. 3) this undergarment was taken off. Later, as outer garments came into use, one clothed only with the kuttonet was considered to be "naked." As a sign of mourning, originally, every article of dress was removed, and cuts were made in the flesh; but as soon as the wearing of the kuttonet alone came to be regarded as equivalent to "nakedness," that garment was rent to express grief (II Sam. xv. 32; compare Morris Jastrow, in "Journal of the American Oriental Society," xxi. 23, 39; and see Cuttings). That a loin-girdle was regarded as equally inadequate with the kuttonet is shown in Talmudic allusions (Shab. 62b; Soṭah 9a; Esth. R. 104b).

The more luxurious classes of society—e.g., women of royal blood (II Sam. xiii. 18, 19) and men of leisure—wore tunics with sleeves. This is the meaning of the Hebrew "passim" occurring in the description of the garment presented to Joseph by his father (Gen. xxxvii. 3). It was not "of many colors" (see Septuagint); the color of the shirt worn even by those of high rank was yellow, or red, or black (Müller, l.c. pp. 297-299); the upper garment, wound spirally round the body, was of blue and red, and showed various patterns, like those worked into rugs; but its significance lay in the fact that the sleeves (Targ. and Bereshit R. parashah 84) marked the favorite son, who was absolved from work. These sleeves sometimes extended only to the elbow-joint; when they covered the whole length of the arm, the lower part was, as a rule, richly ornamented with fringe. Whether or not the common shirt had seams is not clear. The more costly shirts appear to have been sewed together, the seams, especially those round the neck, being heavily covered with embroidered strips (Müller, l.c. pp. 298, 299). The materials from which these tunics were made were wool—woven by the women—flax, and, for the more costly ones, worn by officials, both secular and sacerdotal (Ezek. xxvii. 16; Isa. xxii. 21), imported Egyptian byssus ("shesh," Gen. xli. 42; Ex. xxviii. 39; and "buẓ," Ezek. xxvii. 16).

In Mishnaic times this coat, or shirt, was still worn. It is found under the name "onḳali" ("nokli," Yer. Shab. 15d), which sometimes seems to denote a garment worn by women, and is correctly explained in the "'Aruk" as "a thin article of apparel worn next to the skin" (compare also Meg. 24b; Sanh. 82b; M. Ḳ. 24a). It was, however, provided with sleeves (Brüll, "Trachten der Juden"; Krauss, "Lehnwörter," s.v.). "Sarbalin" in Dan. iii. 21 is not "coat," but "trousers." (See Costumes in Biblical Times).

COAT.—See Dress, §§ 2 (d), 4.

kōt. See CLOAK; DRESS, etc.

(÷éôþí, Lat. tunica, both words probably related to the Eastern ëֻּúֹּðָä; Assyrian Kitinnê, ‘linen’), or ‘tunic’ (Joh_19:23 Revised Version margin).-The word was used to designate the under-garment of all classes and both sexes, over which the cloak (ùׂîְìָä, ἱìÜôéïí, pallium) was worn. On entering the upper-room in Joppa where the body of Dorcas lay, Peter was surrounded by widows showing the ÷éôῶíáò êáὶ ἱìÜôéò which her hands had made (Act_9:39), Tunics naturally varied in material and shape according to the position, means, and taste of the wearer. Wool and flax were the native products of Syria; line linen (byssus) was largely imported from Egypt; the silk of the East was unknown till the beginning of our era, and its use was deemed an evidence of extreme luxury (Rev_18:12; ‘silk’ in Eze_16:10 is probably a mistake). The Jewish prisoners in Sennacherib’s marble reliefs, who are evidently carved from life, have tunics fitting fairly close to the body and reaching nearly to the ankles. This was the garment worn by free townsmen; that of peasants and slaves was no doubt shorter and looser. The coat of white linen with long skirts and sleeves (Gen_37:3) was a mark of honour, wealth, and leisure. In later times even the poorer classes adopted a somewhat more elaborate toilet. Josephus mentions a slave in the time of Herod the Great who was found to have an incriminating letter of his master’s concealed in his inner tunic, or true shirt (Ant. XVII. v. 7). The ÷éôþí was made of two pieces of cloth sewn together at the sides, or of one piece which required a single seam; or it was entirely seamless (ἄῤῥáöïò, unsewed), being ‘woven from the top throughout’ (Joh_19:23), a process for which a special loom was needed.

The ÷éôþí of the Greeks was of two sorts. The Ionian was a linen tunic with sleeves, reaching to the feet (ôåñìéüåéò [Od. xix. 242]); the Dorian was a square woollen tunic with short sleeves or mere arm holes. Among the Romans a tunic with long sleeves was thought very effeminate; ‘et tunicae manicas habent’ are words uttered in scorn (Virg. aen. ix. 616). The proverb ‘Tunica proprior pallio est’ was like the English ‘Near is my shirt, but nearer is my skin.’ Cf. also article Clothes.

James Strahan.

Gen 3:21 (c) We usually use these coats of skins to represent the imputed righteousness of GOD which is given to us through the death of the Lord JESUS CHRIST. The animal died so that the skins could be used for clothing. Just as human babies are born with no clothes and must obtain clothing from an outside source so new babes in CHRIST have no garment of their own, but must receive the garment of salvation, the robe of righteousness from GOD through faith in JESUS CHRIST. This truth is illustrated in Mat 22:11-12.

Job 30:18 (c) The disease which Job had, which was probably elephantiasis, fastened itself upon his body tenaciously and clung to him as a garment.