The conventional vestments of Christian clergy won't concern us here, because all authorities agree that they were adopted late by the church (fourth century at best) and that they are of pagan origin.
The basic equipment of the early Christian, for example, is a dark brown or purplish-brown cassock. It appears to have been a dark brown dress for the ordinary Roman day worker, the ordinary clothes of a Roman citizen, not the clothes of the nobility. In fact, the early Christians used to be made fun of because their leaders did not wear special clothes in public. The special vestments were inherited at a later time.
The stole goes with the later priestly surplice. It was strictly a gift given by the emperor, first by Constantine to Pope Sylvester as a personal gift, following the old Persian custom. The king gave a congratulatory robe, the stole, and he gave it to other bishops too, who started passing it around after the fourth century. But it is admitted by everyone to be of purely pagan origin. So is the cappachon (cope), the ancient amice or amictus (an archaic pallium), which went with it, as well as the cap (the camelaucum). When Constantine offered Sylvester the imperial crown to wear, Sylvester refused. Constantine did give him a white cap formed like a Phrygian cap, which he put on Sylvester's head with his own hands, and which the bishop and his successors wore in procession as a mark of royal favor. A similar accoutrement is a pileus, which later on became the bishop's mitre. But none of this really applies to our discussion here.1
The liturgical colors are first given significance in the ninth century. The Roman clerics say, the devout Catholics say, and the great authorities on this concede that they have absolutely no antique or sacred Christian background. In themselves, the colors are not ancient, and they are not at all sacred in the church. The first explanation of them was given by William Durandus (following Pope Innocent III), who died in the beginning of the thirteenth century. In attempting to discover a reason for the colors, Jungmann says, in his most recent book on the Roman rite, that "white [is] . . . festive, . . . red [is] for martyrs' days, . . . black for days [of] penance, and . . . green for days without a festal character"2—all of which is logical enough, but the point is that the ignorant must work out the answers for themselves. The key to the practice has been lost.
So the conventional Christian robes needn't concern us. But the Jewish and Christian apocalyptic, which scholars such as Klaus Koch and Pierre Grelot only began to take seriously around 1960, and which was substantially ignored before 1948,3 tells a different story. These writings have a great deal to say about certain holy garments and their nature and significance. What they say is in closest agreement with the oldest writings of the Egyptians and Babylonians, for that matter, taking us into a world which has been completely forgotten until our own day and introducing us to concepts in modern times first made known to the world by Joseph Smith.
In the appendix to my book on the Egyptian endowment, I cite the Pistis Sophia,4 a very early Christian writing, written in the third century but sounding as if it belongs to the forty-day literature.5 When the Lord spoke to the disciples after the resurrection, he formed a prayer circle: his disciples, men and women, stood around behind Jesus, who himself stood at the altar, thus facing, as it were, the four corners of the world, with his disciples who were all clothed in garments of linen (quoting the disciples). Jesus proceeded to give the prayer.6 The Pistis Sophia claims to be derived from 2 Jeu, a book allegedly written by Enoch and then hidden up in the cleft of a rock.7 Second Jeu says: "All the apostles were clothed in linen garments, . . . their feet were placed together and they turned themselves to the four corners of the world."8 And Jesus, taking the place of Adam, proceeded to instruct them in all the necessary ordinances. The point is that when they formed a prayer circle, they always mentioned "clothed in their garments" or "clothed in white linen." Next comes the passage I cited from Cyril of Jerusalem;9 it is the fullest description we have, the only definite mention of particular garments. We see why it was not well known and was not followed through: "Yesterday, . . . immediately upon entering you removed your street clothes. And that was the image of putting off the old man and his works. . . . And may that garment, once put off, never be put on again!"10 "As Christ after his baptism . . . went forth to confront the Adversary, so you after your holy baptism and mystic anointing [the washing and anointing] were clothed in the armor of the Holy Ghost [a protective garment], to stand against the opposing . . . power."11 "Having put off the old man's garment of sorrow, you now celebrate as you put on the garment of the Lord Jesus Christ."12 "Having been baptized in Christ and having put on Christ (cf. Galatians 3:2713) [notice the imagery that follows: you put on Christ, you put on the new man, you put on the new body; this is very closely connected with the putting on of clothes], like a garment, you come to resemble (symmorphoi gegonate) the Son of God."14
The next day Cyril continues, "After you have put off the old garments and put on those of spiritual white, you should keep them always thus spotless white. This is not to say you must always go around in white clothes [these clothes were real; futhermore, we know of the baptismal garments, for we have references to them], but rather that you should always [be] clothed in what is really white and glorious." Then he cites Isaiah 61:10: "Let my soul exult in the Lord, for he hath clothed me in a robe of salvation and clothing of rejoicing."15
This is the fullest of early Christian references to the vestments. But these are not vestments in the modern sense at all. They are worn by all Christians—but not all the time, not as a sign of clerical vocation within the church, and not as a public sign.
The combination of the items that make up the full clothing comes from the description of the high priestly garments at the beginning of Exodus 28. Very recently in Jerusalem, a magnificent book was published based on an attempt to reconstruct the kelîm, the supellectila, the implements and equipment of the temple, and the priestly garments. A section at the end of the book describes them in detail.16 In this particular passage there is general assemblage, a listing, and then a description of what the articles are.
"Thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother," the Lord tells Moses (cf. Exodus 28:2), lekabod ultip'eret, "both for glory and for magnificence"—to give an impression, to fill one with awe. And the Lord instructed Moses to say to all the people of "thoughtful-mindedness" and intelligence "that they shall do so, and make such garments for Aaron, for holiness, and for his priesthood, to represent his priesthood to me" (cf. Exodus 28:3). "And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an 'epod [the much disputed ephod!], and the mecîl," "a "cloak, a covering, a long garment"; "a ketonet," the "shirt"; "a tashbets," a thing elaborately woven in a checkerboard pattern, or something similar; "a mitre" miznepet, "a turban," "a round cap"; "and a girdle" or "sash"; "and these garments they shall make holy for Aaron, thy brother, and for his sons, to serve me in the priesthood" (Exodus 28:4).
Here is the shesh, "white linen," a necessity to both the ketonet, or "shirt, coat," which is of white linen, and the pants that go along with it (Exodus 39:28). What is the ephod? According to our source, it is worn on the two shoulders and tied around the waist with knots—everything tied, never any buttons. This shows the latest speculative reconstruction of the ephod. The ephod is best rendered "apron," and it wraps around the mecîl, or blue robe. The word sabib (Exodus 28:31-34) suggests it must be somehow embroidered. The high priest is shown in the full outfit; not so full either. And here is a view from the back. And then the breastplate is tied on, and that is different from the ephod. As Rashi describes it, "the fabric [of the ephod] was the same as the fabric of the veil and the screen of the Tabernacle. . . . The ephod . . . was like a sash to the robe; it was girt around the robe as the girdle was girt around the tunic."17
The book gives a description of the cap: "And you shall make a miznepet shesh"—of white linen (Exodus 28:39). Miznepet means a "turban," or something wrapped around with white linen, worn by every priest. "This gold band shall be of pure gold" (Exodus 28:36); this is worn only by the high priest, and he wears it on top of the regular priest's mitre. The book has a note which tells us that there are three levels at which the garment is worn: one, the high priest, one, on the Day of Atonement, and one, the ordinary.18
These are speculative reconstructions, the best scholars can do. We do have fuller descriptions in combinations. The fullest, and one of the most instructive, is from the Testament of Levi from the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. In it, Levi goes to Beit-el (the house of God, the place of the temple),19 after he has received his trials and test; he goes to receive the ordinances. This is the temple, the same place where Joseph Smith saw the ladder representing the three degrees of glory.20 Rendered very literally, the story is as follows: Levi goes to Beit-el, where he says, "And I saw seven men, clothed in white, who said to me, 'arise and put on the garment (endusai),' "21 a holy, protective leather garment. Originally it had to be leather; it is associated with the lion skin Heracles always wore22 and also the leopard skin that an Egyptian priest must wear over one shoulder.23 It protected Heracles when he went through the world on his twelve labors as the benefactor of the human race; there was a lot of risk, and he needed protection, which the stole gave him. This later became the imperial stole which the emperor gave to Pope Sylvester; earlier it was the holy protective leather garment of the priesthood.24
There were additional items. First, there was the stephanos that surrounds or encircles the head—a crown, wreath, or chaplet (following the form used here). The main emphasis of the word implies that it crowned the head and was round, surrounding or encircling it.25 Then there was the logion tes syneseos, that is, the oracle-breastplate—the Urim and Thummim of understanding. There was the poderes, a long, overall robe that hung down to the feet and went over one shoulder. It was the basic robe of truth. There was the petalon, some kind of garment made of wild olive leaves, signifying faithfulness. Next came the zone, or "girdle," also called mitra, as worn by a wrestler—a band of sindon, of echema, "firmness," a symbol of strengthening. Last of all, Levi received the 'epod of prophecy.26
Each of the seven angels, the seven men in white, as he placed an item of clothing upon Levi, said:
From this time, thou art a high priest of the Lord, thou and thy seed after thee, for all eternity. The first anointed me with holy oil and gave me the staff of judgment. The second washed me with pure water and gave me bread and wine in the Holy of Holies, and placed upon me the holy and glorious garment [the leather stole, the protective garment]. The third placed about me a linen robe like an ephod.27
This mention of a linen robe shows that the ephod is not the little, brightly colored, plaid thing beneath the breastplate (though the plaid apron, the first tunica, is universal.)28 The Scotch plaid is the same item as the Arabic qumas (qamis)—a sacred tribal garment, a garment of identification. The tribe of Levi used it, but like the Scottish clans, the traditional plaid is the crest on the arrow, woven two ways. Your plaid identifies you: your tribe, your arrow after you have shot it. Thus, you can get your arrow back again so you can claim that your have shot your victim. Otherwise there would be a lot of arguing.29
This very same archaic plaid was worn by the early Greeks and is found all around the Mediterranean; the plaid and bagpipes go together among the Scots, the Irish, the Minoans, and the Egyptians who all had them. It is a very ancient dress. The kaunakes of the earliest Sumerian priests was first made of the leaves of the ficus religiosus, the fig tree.30
When Levi received the glorious garment,
the third angel put on the linen robe like an ephod, and the fourth put a girdle or sash about me like [resembling] purple [homoian porphura]. And the fifth gave me the olive branch of prosperity, a flourishing state of the body (piotetos), and the sixth placed a stephanos around my head. The seventh tied on the stephanos (the priestly diadem), and he filled my hands with incense material (thumiamatos) to show that I was to serve as a priest of the Lord. And he said to me, Levi, thy seed is chosen to have authority in three things, in similitude of a semeion [sign, miracle] of the glory of the Lord to come: (1) [he who first believeth, Adam, who was the first to hold the priesthood, in degree, love, and ministry,] and there shall be no greater than he, (2) the priesthood of Aaron or Levi, and (3) the priesthood to come, bringing a new name. For a king shall arise out of Judah and establish a new priesthood after the manner of the Gentiles which shall be unto all nations. His parousia, his glorious coming, cannot be told; it is secret, as an exalted prophet of the seed of our Father Abraham.31
When Jacob awoke, he said, "I hid these things in my heart and told them to no man."32 They were very secret, things not communicated to us in the Old Testament. This is a fuller description of the garments than we find in Exodus 28. The significance and the symbolism of some of these things is explained in the Testament of Levi, but it was top secret.
Jerome, who lived fifteen years in Palestine, and who was more acquainted with the early church than any other man of his time, said that the priestly garments are full of cosmic symbolism. But we don't know what they were. They have some celestial and divine meaning.33
The Wisdom of Solomon takes up this same theme: "For upon Aaron's long high-priestly robe was the whole world pictured, and the glories of the Father were engraved upon the four rows of precious stones."34 The Zohar explains that the same marks were on the mantle of the temple. We have a recent discovery regarding these marks: in 1966, in the Bar Kokhba Cave, on the Dead Sea, was found a cave of scrolls, and also many old garments, remarkably well preserved. Some of them bore the gamma patterns. Here is one of them with the gamma pattern.35 This is evidence that these patterns stay around and are interpreted in various ways. These date from the time of the Bar Kokhba, the early part of the second century. The discover of these garments, Professor Yadin, writes about them: "An amusing development in early Christian art can now be better explained: in many of the famous mosaics in Rome, Ravenna, and Naples, especially from the fifth century A.D. and later [but earlier also], one can see that all the mantles of the biblical figures are depicted with a single pattern similar to the Greek letter gamma36—a little more like a right angle—a square. The most famous examples come from the fifth century, from Ravenna. The pattern is on the edges of the robe, but it is quite common. There are many examples of it in the earliest Christian life, but not later, because by then they have been transferred to the altar cloth. Originally they belonged to the veil of the temple.37
Yadin continues, "It is known that Christian artists used earlier Jewish illustrations and particularly illuminated Bibles in order to emulate their motifs. By that time the differences between the two types of mantles had been forgotten, and the gammas appeared in full; . . . they may have assumed that all patterns were gammas."38 But all we find are these marks. An especially holy person will have this mark on him. "The pattern ultimately became the most popular in the altar-cloth of the Christian church, and even the altar-cloth itself came to be known as the gammadia."39 There are two types of early Jewish garments. Yadin finds them amusing because, he explains, the Christians didn't understand them. But what was the original Jewish usage? Do we have earlier examples than those of the first centuries? Yes, the garment was an "amusing" Jewish development from much earlier forms. The Egyptian garments were similar, and we have interesting examples.
There are certain marks on the garment, certain marks of recognition for the initiated, and the marks themselves always have cosmic symbolism. The Pistis Sophia makes a great many references to these. For example: "I found an ordinance inscribed upon my garment (enduma)," says the hero, "written in five words. . . . It is the garment which belonged to you in the pre-existence, from the beginning, and when your time is come on the earth, you will put it on and return home to us." He adds, "In this garment, it has the five marks," which he calls charagme, meaning "cuts" or "marks."40 The second garment has the marks and all the glory of the name; the third garment has all the mysteries of the ordinances. This is the doctrine of the three garments of Jesus, and of the five charagme. In the Manichaean Kephalaia (written in Coptic), there are five mysteries; the strings—which later become the tzitzit—were considered the fifth sign or mark, because they were special. These five mysteries, the five tokens, first originated among the Godhead. The mysteries were brought to this world, being preached by an apostle. Men learned them and established them in their midst. These five tokens are the marks of the church. The first is the greeting of peace, by which one becomes a son of peace. The second is the grasp of the right hand, by which he is brought into the church. The third is the embrace, by which he becomes "a son" (editors assume that means "of the church").
The Odes of Solomon, discovered in 1906, say, "Thy seal is known, and all thy creatures know it, and thy hosts possess it, and the elect angels are clad with it." Being clad with certain signs are the five archons.41 Discovered around 1913, the Coptic Bartholomew says that Adam and Eve had written upon their garments certain characters or marks, as signs of the Holy Ghost, written in seven places.42 The Pastor of Hermas43 mentions it, as does the Pistis Sophia.44
In 1800s in Egypt, Petrie excavated numerous mummies with amulets arranged in the wrappings. Figure 27A shows, as Petrie describes it, the compass-like level and the square on the breast. He was able to generalize that the square probably means "rectitude," uprightness, and that the other tool (which is hung in that position, they assume, because it has a mark on the top of it) means "making equilibrium, . . . evenly balanced mind," or measure in all things.45 Schäfer discovered some among other amulets, and here are pictures of what they were like.46 Thus the Egyptians also used gammadia marks, sometimes located on either breast. Some garments bearing gammadia have been found in graves in Palestine. Are all instances of gammadia of Egyptian origin? Not necessarily. These things do get around. They become lost; they become simply designs; nobody understands what they are; nobody understands any more the meaning of the words. Thus, we speculate as we try to reconstruct them.
Most challenging are the veils from Taoist-Buddhist tombs at Astana, in Central Asia, originally Nestorian (Christian) country, discovered by Sir Aurel Stein in 1925. We see the king and queen embracing at their wedding, the king holding the square on high, the queen a compass. As it is explained, the instruments are taking the measurements of the universe, at the founding of a new world and a new age. Above the couple's head is the sun surrounded by twelve disks, meaning the circle of the year or the navel of the universe. Among the stars depicted, Stein and his assistant identified the Big Dipper alone as clearly discernable.47 As noted above, the garment draped over the coffin and the veil hung on the wall had the same marks; they were placed on the garment as reminders of personal commitment, while on the veil they represent man's place in the cosmos.48
When the temple was destroyed, the priesthood was lost and the robes of the priesthood or their ministrations disappeared. Churches do not bother about these anymore. When the ordinances were lost, the garment became purely allegorical. In the famous literature of Mozarabic Spain, and even earlier, there is the Latin poem called "The Lorica,"49 lorica being the garment described as a protective apron. Its meaning was purely allegorical, its whole function theatrical. It became a showpiece—clumsy, costly, ornate, and impractical. Constantine at Nicea is a good example. His garments were completely encrusted with jewels. Eusebius says when sunlight hit him (it was carefully prearranged that sunlight would hit him when he stepped out before the assembly), one would have thought he was an angel of heaven. He moved like an Egyptian pharaoh.50
At the other extreme, one might say that the garment is unique, the real thing, magical. If you had the garment, it was all you needed. But the magic is not the garment; the garment is not magic. Later, it was said that all you needed in order to have Moses' divine power was the staff of Aaron. Or if you could find the Seal of Solomon, then you would have the power. We know that these things work only according to faith. Israel, like the Nephites and Lamanites, sinned at both extremes, the esoteric and exoteric. The Israelites were either overdressed in fine clothes and all manner of costly apparel or went about as the Nephites and Lamanites did in their times of degeneracy, without anything on at all. Both extremes are equally offensive: in either case, it is a vulgar display of one's person. If you overdress or underdress, you are just showing yourself off, and that distracts from the real purpose of dress.
The putting on of the body is compared not only with the putting on of the garment; it is accompanied by an act. A newborn babe receives his swaddling clothes in a ritual—the baptismal garments of the new Christian, which was regarded as an extension of the body, an aura. It is an expression of personality and a necessary protection. Garments belong to that type of symbols that are more than symbols, like water and food. Just as water cleanses symbolically, it cleanses, revives, and purifies literally; water can also be a death—overwhelming; you must pass through it. It really does those things—it really does refresh, really does revive, really does cleanse, really does soothe, and really can drown. Likewise a garment is a sign of protection, of dignity, of modesty; it is not just a sign of those things—it actually does impart them.
A very early Syrian hymn on baptism, for example, says that though you strip off the garment outside you, you do not put off the garment within you when you have been baptized. For if you continue to be clad in it, the storms and trials of life will not prevail against you. Beware of the enemy, lest he strip you as he did Adam, and make you an alien to the kingdom. Like many similar passages it propounds the idea of a protection necessary in this world. Here is a famous passage from the Odes of Solomon: "I stripped it off and cast it [the earthly garment] from me, and the Lord renewed me in His garment, and he possessed me by His light; and from above, he gave me immortal rest."51 Another from the Odes of Solomon: "I put off darkness and clothed myself in light, and even I myself acquired a body, free from sorrow or pain,"52 for the passing from one state of existence, one body to another, is always compared to and accompanied by the putting on and putting off of garments. In the newly discovered Papyrus Bodmer is an interesting comment: the garment is as necessary and therefore as real a part of the body as food is. Food is a symbol; it is not really a part of the body, yet when you eat it, it does become so. It gives you strength; the garment is like food—it is extraneous; it is out there, you can acquire it and put it away, if you want. But at the same time, it is a real part of you, very intimate. The belief used to be that the contact with it had definite significance. We could have discussed specific aspects of the garments, but it has been safer to generalize.
The Mandaeans had a lot to say about the heavenly garment. When you left the world above, and each time you passed from one state of initiation to another, you changed garments. We likewise make some change or alteration in the garment, at each state of initiation. In a wonderful passage in the Mandaean hymn of The Pearl,53 the hero returns to heaven. In this old doctrine—which you meet quite often—he, like all of us, left his garment—his spotless garment—there. He yearned to return to it, to be able to wear it again. It is now being kept for us in reserve up there, and one of the great tragedies of messing things up in this life is that we will not be able to go back and wear it. Of course it stands for other things, too. In The Pearl, the prince hurries homeward, back to his garment laid up in heaven, the garment and the toga are wrapped and sent down by his parents. He puts them on halfway—he is so eager—and suddenly he says, as if in a mirror, "The garment was my very first. It fitted me; it would fit no one else." All of a sudden it glitters, recalling to his mind all his former glory, because there are signs on it. He returns to his garment.54
The garment motif is almost an obsession in the literature of Christ's forty-day ministry after the resurrection. Christ, sitting with the apostles, says, "Do not touch me. I am not in the right garments yet." He had left his garment in the tomb. The disciples had found an angel sitting at the foot of the couch on which Christ had been lying, on which the garment lay neatly folded. He was gone, and he had put on another garment, the one he was wearing when Mary met him. (According to a very old account, he told her not to touch him: "I'm going to my father and receive the garment that is waiting for me." He talked to the apostles a lot saying, "When I have finished my work here, and had my last meeting with you, then I will put on that other garment. I cannot until I am finished with my earthly mission here." Then he will go back and put on his garment, returning to his robes of glory, as each of us will.)
The theme is clearly reflected, incidentally, in the book of Moses in the expression "clothed upon with glory" (Moses 7:3). Why the insistence on that particular word? Enoch says, "I was clothed upon with glory. Therefore I could stand in the presence of God" (cf. Moses 1:2, 31).55 Otherwise he could not. It is the garment that gives confidence in the presence of God; one does not feel too exposed (2 Nephi 9:14). That garment is the garment that awaits us above, the official garment of heaven, the garment of divinity. So as Enoch says, "I was clothed upon with glory, and I saw the Lord" (Moses 7:3-4), just as Moses saw Him "face to face, . . . and the glory of God was upon Moses; therefore Moses could endure his presence" (Moses 1:2). In the 2 Enoch, discovered in 1892, we read, "The Lord spoke to me with his own mouth: . . . 'Take Enoch and remove his earthly garments and anoint him with holy oil and clothe him in his garment of glory.' . . . And I looked at myself, and I looked like one of the glorious ones."56 Being no different from him in appearance, he is qualified now, in the manner of initiation. He can go back and join them because he has received a particular garment of glory.
Ins the Apocalypse of Moses, another recent discovery, Adam, after being washed three times in the Acherusian Lake, is conducted back to the third heaven. Then he is clothed in linen garments and anointed with oil, and prepared to go into the presence of the Father.57 In the Apocalypse of Elijah too, we read, "Then will Gabriel and Uriel portray the fiery columns. They will come down as in a column from heaven, and they will lead them into the holy land. And they will settle them there so that they may eat of the tree of life and wear a white garment, . . . and there they will not thirst."58 The motif is common.
The Acts of Thomas, still another recent discovery, contains the famous psalm of Judas Thomas: "They shall be in the glory, and they shall be in the joy into which some enter. And they shall put on shining garments and shall be clothed with the glory of the Lord, and they shall praise in the living Father of whose food they have received which never has any impurity in it, and they will drink of eternal life."59 The food and your garment go together.
A puzzling passage in the Coptic Gospel of Philip, found in the 1950s, says that in this world our garments are inferior—inferior to the person.60 Let us hope they are. That is why we should not try to boost ourselves too much by putting on fine apparel. In the next world, there won't be the distinction of dress and person. The garment will be so much a part of us, we won't think of it. People wonder why, when the Angel Moroni came, Joseph Smith said, "I could see into his bosom"; Joseph saw that Moroni was wearing only a very white cloak over him (JS-H 1:31). That is all that was necessary. First, he was not coming to minister in the ordinances. Second, Joseph Smith had not yet been introduced to the garments; he had not received his endowments. There was no reason why Moroni should not come to Joseph informally, in a very easy and relaxed outfit.
Much is now being written about garments. Hugo Gressmann, who dealt with Hebrew literature, says the garment of linen is the cultic representation of the body of life. The reason why the early Egyptians adopted linen was that linen was derived from plants and did not attract bugs and maggots, whereas wool, being of animal origin, did. Leather and wool decay and smell, they attract bugs. Linen remains relatively white and clean. Although it turns yellow, we have in beautiful condition thousands of pieces of magnificent linen from the first dynasty of Egypt, beautifully made, the equal, as Drioton says, to any linen that could be made in France today.
All the saints looked forward to the time when this garment would be removed and the heavenly garment resumed." Also, no unclean person can be clothed in the garments of glory. The investiture is always preceded by a washing, purification, and anointing—the bestowal of the special status; and the garment should be white linen. Part of the purification is the removal and discarding of all previous garments. The interesting rite of trampling on the old garment has recently been discovered.61 When you renew a covenant or turn aside and leave your old life, you take off your old clothes, trample them, and put on new ones. This may be what the Nephites did around the title of liberty, when "they cast their garments at the feet of Moroni, saying, We covenant with our God, that . . . he may cast us at the feet of our enemies, even as we have cast our garments at thy feet to be trodden under foot, if we shall fall into transgression" (Alma 46:22). Leading the people, Moroni virtually says, "This was the garment of our father Joseph." It was a double garment, part of which had decayed and part not (a story not known in the West until recently, through Thaclabi). The people trample on them, while taking an oath: "May we be trampled on as we trample on these garments, if we break our covenants—if we break our oath."62 This practice is well attested to now. It happened in some other cases too.
In 2 Jeu, a very important Coptic writing (in fact, Carl Schmidt thinks it is one of the most important of all early Christian writings), the Lord, after the resurrection, orders the apostles to clothe themselves in white linen robes, then orders them to be washed again; he seals them, after which they receive fire in the spirit at their spiritual baptism.63 An interesting note also occurs in the Elephantine writings. A Jewish community in Elephantine dates back to the sixth century B.C. These Jews, who perhaps left Jerusalem at the time Lehi did in the sixth century, got permission to build a temple there, far up on the first cataract of the Nile. A priest or an officer of the temple had left his garment in the temple annex. He left a note, asking his friend to please be good enough to pick it up for him and bring it home. Thus, he wore a special garment when he went into the temple.64
An Oxyrhynchus fragment from the third to fifth century has received a good deal of notice. It is a story about Jesus, regarded as authentic. One of the high priests, a Pharisee who meets him in the court of the temple, takes him to task, saying, "What is this talk about being pure? I am pure. I am pure, for I have washed in the Pool of David and I have changed my old clothes and put on the white garments; and being thus purified, I proceeded and participated in the holy ordinances and handled the holy vessels." Jesus replies to him, "The dogs and the pigs have bathed upstream from the pool of David where you bathed. You anointed yourself, but the whore and the tax collectors do that. They bathe and anoint themselves and put on fair garments, but does that cause them to be pure?"65 This is an important point. Jesus in not making fun of the purification and anointing, but is saying that the garment is inadequate without the thing that it signifies. It will not protect you unless you are true and faithful to your covenant, and only to the degree to which you do not dishonor your garment has it any significance at all.
On the other hand, you say, "Well, if you have these virtues, what do you need the garment for anyway?" It has been commanded, and this is an important principle, because it works both ways. The garment will teach you sobriety, and sobriety will sanctify the garment and make it meaningful.
A Coptic missal published in 1915 says in effect: "Let us put on splendid apparel, suitable to the honor that befits this great event this day [that is to say, righteousness and charity and judgment and every good quality, for this is the apparel that pleases God]. Let us never permit ourselves to be stripped bare through carelessness. Woe unto those whom the bridegroom shall see without the wedding garment when he comes."66
In the Acts of Thomas: "To the wedding feast I have been invited, and I have put on white garments. May I be worthy of them. May I remember to keep my light bright that I may keep its oil," etc.67 Another very important writing is the so-called Gospel of Truth, discovered in Egypt, one of the Nag Hammadi papyri: "The word of the Father clothes everyone from top to bottom, purifies, and makes them fit to come back into the presence of their Father and their heavenly mother."68 And there are many other examples.
No one can receive the vestments who has not first been cleansed, washed of all uncleanliness, all impurity, nor had been first ordained and received a priesthood. And except he has been reborn as a new man in Christ [in other words, he received baptism], he may put on the linen vestments, which have nothing of death in them but are entirely the garment of life. As we see when the initiates come out of the baptism: the first thing we do to those that come out of the water, we clothe them round about, we cover them properly with truth, having washed away all their previous sins.
The reason for white is explained (Plato expresses this also)69 in numerous references, among them also Plutarch and Hesiod, who said the Egyptians used this rationale.70 Thomas the Dyer seems to contradict himself: "Are you washed white in the blood of the lamb?" Since when can anyone be washed white in blood? The rationale expressed in these documents is that if you mix all colors together, you have a garment that is perfectly white, meaning that it can take any color. If you combine all colors, all experience, all knowledge, you will get (if there is any light at all) white. Of course if you turn off the light, all will be black. But it is the light, and the garment of white, in which all colors of the spectrum are contained.
As Jerome says, the linen garments of the Egyptian priests were worn both as undergarments (intrinsecus, "inside, inwardly") and as outer garments (extrinsecus, "from without, outside").71 Many examples of that have been found.
Notably, one receives the garment always when passing from one stage of existence to another. It marks the condition one is in. To change the garment is to change one's condition, to perform a passage of initiation. Secrecy is important.
The fate of the garment of the priesthood—the garment of Adam—is quite an epic. Adam, when he came to earth, had a garment. He received a garment of light, when, in the Garden of Eden, he was gloriously clothed in 'ur (he changed it for cor). The fact that cor and 'ur are so similar has led to a great deal of controversy. 'Ur is "light"; cor is "skin." So Adam lost his garment of light at the Fall and had to clothe himself in a garment of skin, a reversal of the process. His new leather garment was nonetheless a glorious one, a sign of authority. Eisler calls it the garment of protection.72 It was necessary to protect Adam in his exposed and fallen state. Because he had gotten himself into a dangerous position in which he needed assurance and protection, he received this kind of garment. He could no longer wear his glorious one; it was up above, waiting for him.
"Any of you who will put me on," says the Odes of Solomon, "shall not be injured. You shall possess a new world that is incorrupt."73 The garment is for special protection when one visits other worlds. Much is recorded about Jesus going from world to world, how he changed for each one—"when in Rome, do as the Romans do" (that's the explanation given). Christ is not to be recognized except by the faithful and the righteous to whom he gives the tokens. Others are not supposed to know them. Thus he puts on the garment of the world he is visiting—an interesting concept.
Philo, a Jewish writer at the time of Christ, tries to explain the leather garment, then gives up. He says, in effect, that the tunic of skin is the natural skin of the body. There are many passages on this particular leather clothing and protection. It becomes the aegis; it becomes the golden fleece (which is a skin garment, which protects you from all ill, if you wear it). The aegis is held on the arm—Pallas Athena holds it there, as the leather garment that will protect. She is overseeing, the protecting one, and she protects Athens with the symbol of the aegis, which she holds up. And it is of leather.
John Chrysostom says that this garment of Adam signifies at the same time both kingship and repentance.74 Many texts about John the Baptist describe him as going around dressed in skins, in camel's hair, in other various things—always in garments of skin, or of light. He preaches repentance because he is the voice in the wilderness, representing Adam in the dark and dreary world. John Chrysostom talks about the tradition, and so does the Slavic Halosis of Josephus,75 as well as others. The Slavic Halosis says, "At the time there was a most wonderful man who wandered around in an uncanny sort of way."76 People did not understand him—he was like a man cast out. He compared himself to Adam in the wilderness, wore a garment of skin, and called upon all people to repent. Furthermore, he lived on a primal diet of locusts and honey. "He lived like a spirit without flesh. His mouth knew no bread, not even at the Passover. Wine and strong drink he would not allow in his presence. He went about exposing every form of iniquity." That was his calling, and it represents here the garment of repentance. As a result, you find it being worn by the earliest monks everywhere. The Syrian monks still wear the leather garment, which they call "the garment of repentance."77
Clement of Rome's First Epistle to the Corinthians, the earliest Christian writing known for a long time after the New Testament, says, "Let us be imitators of those who in goatskins and sheepskins went about proclaiming the coming of Christ. I mean the prophets Elijah, Elisha, and even Ezekiel."78 So John the Baptist was just following type—following the men who went around in goatskins and sheepskins proclaiming the coming of Christ, i.e., in a state of humility and repentance.
Another new discovery, the Armenian Revelation to Peter,79 talks about a community of saints up in the mountains that he visited. A community of them was transfigured, but they all wore sheepskins and coats of skin, which signified that they were already dead to things of this world. Theophylactus says that James the brother of the Lord wore only one garment all his life, and it was a garment of repentance. Also a very strict Nazarite, he never cut his hair, even when he was a very, very old man. He wore no wool, but only linen. "Why did you come to the desert?" (Jesus had said the same thing about John the Baptist). Was it to see a man in soft garments? No. Kings and the great ones wear soft garments, and they will not be able to know the truth (cf. Luke 7:24-25). It is the raiment of repentance.
Noah exhorted the righteous, says the book of Jubilees, to cover their shame.80 According to the Book of Adam, it was commanded that they hide the shame of their flesh, for it had been so commanded in the heavenly tablets.81 In order to do this, Adam had what is called "the garment of mortification," like the ihram, which Muslims use in the same way. Being very valuable, Adam's garment was handed down from father to son.
In an interesting account in a very small but important work called the Combat of Adam, Satan is always trying to get the garment. It starts out with Satan trying to get it from Adam. There are a number of very old versions of the way in which the garment was stolen and faked by kings—this among other vicissitudes of the garment. In this particular one, we are told that Satan sent one of his five friends back to Jared's cave to get the garment of Adam. He did not get it, but he faked it, put on a mask, then returned, wearing the mask of great beauty, which fooled Jared and the people into thinking that he had the real thing. Although he got the people to follow him, it was a fraud. For this reason, as Basil the Great recalls the tradition, the garments of Adam were not immediately forthcoming, because they were prizes reserved only for the man who could escape Satan's fraud, whom Satan was constantly trying to get. Because of that particular danger, Adam did not receive permission to make these public. Furthermore, the Pistis Sophia tells of a fight for possession of the garment in heaven. The rebels sinned against the light, and everything was shifted to another frame of reference. Trying to stay in power as long as they could, they tried to grab the garments, but the new order came suddenly. Unable to use their own contaminated stuff, they tried to get new garments before they were kicked out.82 These are very dramatic stories.
The Psalm of Thomas says that "those who were not of my Father's house took up arms against me. They fought me for my holy garment, my light garment, which lightens the darkness. They tried to take it from me."83 The Book of Jasher tells us that "after the death of Adam, the garments were given to Enoch, the son of Jared, and when Enoch was taken up to God, he gave them to Methuselah, his son. And at the death of Methuselah, Noah took them with him in the ark. And as they were leaving [the ark], Ham stole those garments from Noah his father, and he took them and hid them from his brothers." Then Ham secretly gave the garments to his favorite son, Cush, who handed them down in the royal line.84 We meet this idea of the stolen garment often. We are told in one document that the garment of Adam was owned also by Noah and Ram, the brother of the biblical Jared; but the tradition is that Ham, the father of Cainan, saw the skin garment of his father, showed it to his brothers outside, made copies of it, and claimed it for himself.85 According to Rabbi Eliezer, Noah came to himself and saw what had happened—that Ham had stolen his garments. (The world used "nakedness" as the word; "skin garment," the same word, is simply a derived or secondary meaning. The word means "skin covering.") When Noah found out what he had done, he cursed Ham and said, "Because you grabbed it ahead of time, Ham, you cannot have the priesthood until the end of time. Meanwhile, I will give the garment to Shem, and part of it to Japheth, but you cannot have it." Why? Because Noah had anticipated that Ham would get it illegally. To show that he was justified, Ham tried to fake it and caused a great deal of confusion thereby. In the Midrash Genesis Rabba, Rabbi Johanan says, "Shem began the good deed [they returned the garment to their father], and then Japheth came and hearkened to him; therefore, Shem was granted the tallit and Japheth the pallium"—the large cover,86 a cloak with clasps and buttons on the shoulder. Tallit here means a fringed garment; Rabbi Johanan means that the reward of Shem, the ancestor of the Jews, "was the precept of the fringes" in the garment, "while that of Japheth," representing the Greeks, "was the pallium," the "cloak, betokening his dignity."87
The Midrash goes on to tell us that as a reward they received from God prayer cloaks (others say it was robes of state), while Ham was denied the protection of the garment, because he had stolen it. This was the priesthood that he was trying to get illegally. And Rabbi Jehudah says in the Pirkê de Rabbi Eliezer,
The coats which the Holy One . . . made for Adam and his wife were with Noah in the ark. . . . When they went forth from the ark, Ham, the son of Noah, brought them forth with him, and gave them as an inheritance to Nimrod. When he put them on, all the beasts, . . . came and prostrated themselves before him [because this was the garment which Adam wore in the Garden, and the beasts all reverenced him because he had dominion over them as long as he acted as God would act.] Therefore, [the sons of man] made him king over themselves.88
He fooled everybody into thinking he had the priesthood because he had the garments. The Apocalypse of Abraham says, "Cush loved Nimrod, the son of his old age [Cush got them from Ham], and gave him that garment in which God had once clothed Adam as he was forced to leave paradise."89 This garment passed from Adam to Enoch to Methuselah to Noah, who took it into the ark. Here Ham misused it and secretly handed it to his son Cush, whose son Nimrod, while wearing this garment, was invincible and irresistible. The garments enabled him to conquer the world and proclaim himself its ruler, so that mankind offered him worship. (There is a profound mystery concerning these garments, which is one of the secrets the ancients kept to themselves.) Then what happened? According to Jewish lore, Nimrod had it; then Esau was jealous of Nimrod, who was another great hunter. He lay in ambush, slew Nimrod, took the garment from him, and brought it home. This garment was the birthright which Jacob got from Esau, who got it back again. This was the garment of Jacob, the garment of Ham. "Nimrod, Amraphel, king of Babel, went forth with his people on a great hunt. At that time he was jealous of the great hunter Esau. As Nimrod approached with two attendants, Esau hid and cut off Nimrod's head before the other two. Esau then fled with the valuable garment of Nimrod, which had made him victorious over the entire world. Then he ran exhausted to Jacob, after hiding the garment."90 That was the deal: he was willing to sell it in a financial sense. In another account, "Nimrod, the king of Babel went hunting in the field; Esau was observing Nimrod all the day, for jealousy had formed in his heart, Esau against Nimrod. Esau lay in ambush and cut off his head and then he took the valuable garment of Nimrod because Nimrod prevailed over the land, and ran and concealed it in his house."91 This was the birthright which he sold to Jacob, and there are other versions of the same thing.92
The Pirkê de Rabbi Eliezer says,
Esau, the brother of Jacob, saw the coats of Nimrod, and in his heart he coveted them, and he slew him, and took them from him. . . . When he [Esau] put them on he also became, by means of them, a mighty hero. . . . And when Jacob went forth from the presence of Isaac his father [after receiving the blessing from Isaac] he said: Esau, the wicked one, is not worthy to wear these coats. So Jacob stole the garment from [Esau's] tent and he dug in the earth and hid [the garments] there.93
Somebody is always trying to steal the garment; somebody is always trying to fake it. It reminds one of "The King's Ankus," the story by Kipling.94 But always there is the false version of it going around: Then Jacob buried the garment. It was this garment in which the firstborn of Israel performed the priestly functions of Mt. Sinai. It was the priestly garment of Adam."
Another version says the same thing. There is a great deal said about stealing. Ham, Cush, Nimrod, Esau—all are accused of it. Finally, there is the garment that came to Joseph. Thaclabi tells the marvelous story about the two garments.95 When Jacob gets the garment from his sons, who had taken it from Joseph to prove to Jacob that his son Joseph was dead, Jacob delivers a very interesting speech on the garment. He is blind, and he knows there are two garments. He weeps for the part that has rotted away (this is the story that Moroni tells), showing that Israel will fall away, but rejoices because of the part that hasn't, and therefore has joy and weeps at the same time. He recognized it, Thaclabi says (Thaclabi picked up these stories from the Jews living in the Persian villages in the ninth century), by the smell of the garment of paradise, because it was the garment that Adam had worn in paradise. Moreover, Abraham says there was no other garment like it in the whole world, and Jacob knew it was the garment of Abraham. Above all, he recognized it because of certain marks or cuts in it. He felt the marks and knew that it was the garment—there was none other like it in the world. It was the one that Adam had in paradise, and the one that Abraham had, too. The stealing of Joseph's garment by his brethren shows Joseph to be the type of the Savior. This is exactly what Moroni says: we are the outcasts of Joseph—despised, rejected, acquainted with grief. In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, we are told many particulars about the figure of Joseph and his garment; the story is of two garments, of the good one and of the bad one, which we find in Alma 46:24-25. The Testament of Benjamin tells about an Ishmaelite who tried to fake the garment and was smitten for it.96
So these various stories go around; breaking them down is very confusing. I myself always get confused: but some notes are too good to miss.97
1. In general, see Ferdinand Cabrol and Henrico Leclercq, eds., Relliquiae Liturgicae Vestustissimae, Monumenta Ecclesiae Liturgicae I (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1913).
2. Josef A. Jungmann, The Mass of the Roman Rite: Its Origins and Development (Missarum Sollemnia), ed. C. K. Reipe, tr. F. A. Brunner (New York: Benziger Brothers, 1961), 84, 195-97.
3. See Klaus Koch, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic, tr. M. Kohl (London: SCM, 1972).
4. Hugh Nibley, Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1975), 273-78.
5. For a full discussion of the literature, see Hugh W. Nibley, "Evangelium Quadraginta Dierum," Vigiliae Christianae 20 (1966): 1-24; reprinted as "Evangelium Quadraginta Dierum: The Forty-Day Mission of Christ—The Forgotten Heritage," in CWHN 4:10-44.
6. Pistis Sophia IV, 136, lines 16-22, in Carl Schmidt, ed., Pistis Sophia, tr. Violet MacDermot (Leiden: Brill, 1978), 353; 2 Jeu 42, in Carl Schmidt, ed., The Books of the Jeu and the Untitled Text in the Bruce Codex, tr. Violet MacDermot (Leiden: Brill, 1978), 99.
7. Pistis Sophia III, 134; II, 99, in Schmidt, Pistis Sophia, 349; 247, lines 4-7.
8. 2 Jeu 47, in Schmidt, Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text, 114. Cited in Hugh W. Nibley, "The Early Christian Prayer Circle," BYUS 19 (1978): 46-47; reprinted in CWHN 4:51.
9. Nibley, Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, 280, referring to the "First Lesson on the Initiatory Ordinances," mystagogike prote katechesis; cf. Hugh W. Nibley, "The Idea of the Temple in History," MS 120 (1958): 228-37, 247-49; reprinted in CWHN 4:364.
10. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catacheses (Instructions) XX [II], 2, in PG 33:1077-79.
11. Ibid., XXI [III], 4, in PG 33:1092.
12. Ibid., XIX [I], 10, in PG 33:1073-76.
13. With regard to Paul's phrase of "putting on Christ," see Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 187, which notes: "This concept, which has a powerful and long tradition in ancient religions, describes the Christian's incorporation into the 'body of Christ' as an act of 'clothing,' whereby Christ is understood as the garment. . . . This phrase presupposes the christological-soteriological concept of Christ as a heavenly garment by which the Christian is enwrapped and transformed into a new being. The language is certainly figurative, but it goes beyond the dimension of merely social and ethical inclusion in a religious community; it suggests an event of divine transformation."
14. Cyril of Jerusalem, Instructions XXI [III], 1, in PG 33:1087-89.
15. Ibid., XXII [IV], 8, in PG 33:1104-5.
16. Moshe Levine, The Tabernacle: Its Structure and Utensils, tr. Esther J. Ehrmann (Tel Aviv: Melekhet ha-Mishkan, 1969), 124-31, from the 1968 Hebrew Mele'khet ha-Mishkan: Tabnit ha-Mishkan ve-Kelav.
17. Ibid., 130.
18. Ibid., 124, 141.
19. Testament of Levi 7:4, in OTP 1:790.
20. TPJS 304-5; 12-13; cf. Evening and Morning Star 1 (August 1832): 3; HC 1:283.
21. Testament of Levi 8:2, in OTP 1:791.
22. Apollodorus, The Library II, 4, 10; cf. James G. Frazier, tr., 2 vols. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1921/1967), 1:179.
23. [Cf. I. E. S. Edwards, Treasures of Tutenkhamun (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1976), 104-5.]
24. See also Hugh W. Nibley, Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1952), 160-64; reprinted in CWHN 5:168-71 and notes.
25. Levine, Tabernacle, 141.
26. Testament of Levi 8:2, in OTP 1:791.
27. Testament of Levi 8:3-6; in ibid.
28. Francis Boucher, 20,000 Year of Fashion (New York: Abrams, 1967), 81.
29. Hugh W. Nibley, "The Arrow, the Hunter, and the State," WPQ 2/3 (1949): 328-29; reprinted in CWHN 10:1-2.
30. Robert Eisler, Iesous Basileus ou Basileusas, 2 vols. (Heidelberg: Winter, 1930), 2:33-38; cf. Hebrews 11:37-38.
31. Testament of Levi 8:6-15, in OTP 1:791.
32. Testament of Levi, 8:18-19, in ibid.
33. Jerome, Epistolae (Epistles) 64, in PL 22:607-22
34. Wisdom of Solomon 18:24.
35. Yigael Yadin, Bar-Kokhba: The Rediscovery of the Legendary Hero of the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome (New York: Random House, 1971), 76-77, 79, and the accompanying plates.
36. Ibid., 76, 79.
37. Ibid.; cf. Untitled Text 12, in Schmidt, Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text, 251, lines 7-16.
38. Yadin, Bar-Kokhba, 79.
40. Pistis Sophia I, 10; in Schmidt, Pistis Sophia, 16-18.
41. Odes of Solomon 4:7-8, in OTP 2:736.
42. E. A. W. Budge, Coptic Apocrypha in the Dialect of Upper Egypt (London: British Museum, 1913), xxiv. Nibley, "Early Christian Prayer Circle," 45-47, 58; in CWHN 4:49-51. Cf. summary and bibliography in ANT, 181-86; on Adam and Eve, see ibid., 184.
43. Pastor of Hermas, Similitudo (Similitudes) III, 9, 8, in PG 2:987.
44. Pistis Sophia I, 10, in Schmidt, Pistis Sophia, 18.
45. W. M. Flinders Petrie, Amulets (Warminster, England: Aris & Phillips, 1972; reprint of 1914 ed.), 16.
46. Heinrich Schäfer, "Die Entstehung einiger Mumienamulette," Zeitschrift für ägyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde 43 (1906): 67. Discussing the level and the square, he says, "Im einzelnen aber kann uns jeder neu auftretende Sarg ein neues Gerät zeigen." Of all workman's tools, only the compass or level and the square are found as amulets.
47. Sir Mark Aurel Stein, Innermost Asia, 3 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1928), 2:707.
48. Ibid., 2:665-67, 707; cf. Nibley, "Early Christian Prayer Circle," 66-67; in CWHN 4:73-74.
49. Leo Wiener, Contributions toward a History of Arabico-Gothic Culture, 4 vols. (New York: Neale, 1917), 1:60-73.
50. Eusebius, De Vita Constantini (Life of Constantine) III, 10, in PG 20:1063-66 (A.D. 325); note the similar appearance of King Agrippa I at Caesarea (A.D. 44), also described by Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica (Ecclesiastical History) II, 10, 1-5, in PG 20:157-60; following Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews XIX, 8, 2, and Herod in Acts 12:19-23.
51. Odes of Solomon 11:10-12, in OTP 2:745.
52. Ibid., 21:3-4; cf. 25:8, "And I was covered with the covering of your spirit, and I removed from me my garments of skin."
53. Nibley, Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, 267-72; cf. "Hymn of the Soul," in ANT, 411-15. Edgar Hennecke and William Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vols. (London: Lutterworth, 1963), 2:498-504. Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon, 1958), 112-29.
54. Acts of Thomas 112  — 113 , in ANT, 414-15.
55. For some comparisons on this theme in the Enoch literature, see Hugh W. Nibley, "A Strange Thing in the Land: The Return of the Book of Enoch," Ensign 7 (April 1977): 82-83; reprinted in CWHN 2:228-32.
56. 2 Enoch 22:5, 8-10, in OTP 1:137-38.
57. Moses Gaster, The Asatir: The Samaritan Book of the "Secrets of Moses" (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1927). Compare the Coptic Bartholomew in ANT, 185, and the ending of the Apocalypse of Paul, summarized in ibid., 554 (excerpting the Apocalypse of Elijah). Life of Adam and Eve 37:3-5, 40:1-2, in OTP 2:289-91.
58. Apocalypse of Elijah 5:5-6, in OTP 1:750.
59. Cf. William Wright, Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, 2 vols. (London: n.p., 1871; reprinted in 1 volume, Amsterdam: Philo, 1968), 2:246-47.
60. Gospel of Philip 57:19-22, in NHLE, 135.
61. Jonathan Z. Smith, "The Garments of Shame," History of Religions 5 (1965): 217-38; cf. Hugh W. Nibley, "Since Cumorah," IE 69 (August 1966): 711-12; reprinted in CWHN 7:243.
62. Thaclabi, Qisas al-Anbiya, cited in Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 178-89; reprinted in CWHN 6:209-21. Cf. Hugh W. Nibley, Since Cumorah (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1970), 227, 274; reprinted in CWHN 7:199, 243; Hugh W. Nibley, "New Approaches to Book of Mormon Study," IE (November 1953-July 1954): 56-57; reprinted in CWHN 8:94-95; Hugh W. Nibley, "Howlers in the Book of Mormon," MS 125 (February 1963): 28-34; reprinted in CWHN 8:249-50; Hugh W. Nibley, "Bar Kochba and Book of Mormon Backgrounds," BYUS 14 (Autumn 1973): 115-26; reprinted in CWHN 8:280-81; Hugh W. Nibley, "Freemen and Kingmen in the Book of Mormon," in CWHN 8:335-36.
63. 2 Jeu 46-47, in Schmidt, Books of Jeu and the Untitled Text, 109-12; cf. Nibley, "Early Christian Prayer Circle," 46-47, in CWHN 4:51.
64. Ostracon, Cairo 48, 624, in N. Aimé-Giron, "Trois ostraca araméens d'Éléphantine," Annales du Service des Antiquités de l'Égypte 26 (1926): 27. Cf. Bezalel Porten, Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), 277.
65. For a fuller account, see ANT, 29-30.
66. Cf. Encomium of Theodosius, Archbishop of Alexandria, Egypt (British Museum Oriental Manuscript 7021), in E. A. Wallis Budge, Miscellaneous Coptic Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1915/1977), 914-17.
67. Cf. Acts of Thomas 5-6 and 26, in ANT, 366-67, 375; W. Wright, Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, 2:245-51.
68. Gospel of Truth 23:33, 24:7, in NHLE, 41.
69. Plato, Republic IV, 429D-430C.
70. Plutarch, Isis and Osiris 61, 382B-C; Plutarch, Oracles at Delphi 393C-D.
71. Jerome, Commentarium in Ezechielem (Commentary on Ezekiel) XIII, 44, in PL 25:437, and in Theodor Hopfner, Fontes Historiae Religionis Aegyptiacae, 5 vols. in 1 (Bonn: Marx and Weber, 1922-25), 642.
72. Eisler, Iesous Basileus ou Basileusas, 2:33-38.
73. Odes of Solomon 33:12, in OTP 2:764.
74. John Chrysostom says that this garment of Adam signifies at the same time both kingship and repentance, because he is in a fallen state. John Chrysostom, Commentarius in Sanctum Matthaeum Evangelistam (Commentary on Matthew) X, 4, in PG 57:188-89. Cf. Nibley, Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites, 161; in CWHN 5:169, 266, n. 39; Nibley, "Evangelium Quadraginta Dierum," 1-24; in CWHN 4:38, n. 78.
75. Eisler, Iesous Basileus ou Basileusas, 2:6-8, 16.
76. Ibid., 2:6.
77. Ibid., 2:30-38. Cf. Hebrews 1137-38.
78. Clement, Epistola I ad Corinthios (First Epistle to the Corinthians) 17, in PG 1:241-44.
79. Revelation to Peter 238, in E. Verdapet, "The Revelation of the Lord to Peter," tr. F. C. Conybeare, Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 23 (1924): 17.
80. Jubilees 7:20, in OTP 2:70.
81. In J.-P. Migne, Dictionnaire des apocryphes, 2 vols. (Paris: Migne, 1856), 1:87-88 (volumes 23-24 of Troisième et dernière cncyclopédie théologique).
82. Pistis Sophia I, 55; II, 71, in Schmidt, Pistis Sophia, 104; 160.
83. Psalms of Thomas 2; cf. C. R. C. Allberry, A Manichaean Psalm Book, 2 vols. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1938), 2:205.
84. Book of Jasher 7:25-29.
85. See Thaclabi, Qisas al-Anbiya, 96.
86. Jacob Neusner, Genesis Rabbah, 3 vols. (Atlanta: Scholars, 1985), 2:31.
88. Gerald Friedlander, Pirkê de Rabbi Eliezer (New York: Hermon, 1965), 175; cf. 144, 178.
89. Angelo S. Rappoport, Myth and Legend of Ancient Israel, 3 vols. (London: Gresham, 1928), 1:234-35.
90. Book of Jasher 27:2-12.
91. Louis Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews, 7 vols. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1937), 1:318-19.
92. Neusner, Genesis Rabbah, 3:364.
93. Friedlander, Pirkê de Rabbi Eliezer, 178.
94. Kipling, "The King's Ankus," The Jungle Book (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1945), 125-48.
95. Thaclabi, Qisas al-Anbiya, cited in Nibley, Approach to the Book of Mormon, 209-21; in CWHN 6:218-21; cf. Alma 46:24-25.
96. Testament of Benjamin 2-3, in OTP 1:825-26.
97. For additional information, see Percy Dearmer, "Church Vestments," Essays on Ceremonial, ed. Vernon Stanley (London: De la More, 1904), 177-92; D. Duret, Mobilier: Vases, objets et vêtements liturgiques (Paris: Letouzey and Ane, 1932); Ludwig Eisenhofer and Joseph Lechner, The Liturgy of the Roman Rite, tr. A. J. and E. R. Peeler (Freiburg: Herder, 1961), from the 1953 Liturgik des römischen Ritus; Josef A. Jungmann, The Early Liturgy, to the Time of Gregory the Great, tr. F. A. Brunner, Notre Dame University Liturgical Studies 6 (South Bend: Notre Dame, 1959); Robert Lesage, ed., The Twentieth Century Encyclopedia of Catholicism, Vestments and Church Furniture (New York: Hawthorn, 1960); Herbert Norris, Church Vestments: Their Origin and Development (London: Dent, 1949); Marcus von Wellnitz, "The Catholic Liturgy and the Mormon Temple," BYUS 21 (1981): 3-35; John E. W. Wallis, The Church Vestments (London: SPCK, 1924).