by Krista West
Figure 7. Paenula (Carl Kohler, History of Costume, Dover Publications, 115).
Garments of Late Antiquity
Thus at the beginning of the Christian era we see two distinct, major categories of garments: tunics and cloaks. All too often in the research of liturgical garments a critical error is made in envisioning ecclesiastical garments as far more complicated and convoluted in their evolution than they actually are. For instance it is vitally important to understand pre-Christian dress in order to ascertain the simple fact that tunics were often layered, a necessity in colder climates or for general comfort and modesty. A person wearing a colobium, a specialized type of tunic, must also wear a lighter tunic as an undergarment for modesty or warmth (or to protect the skin from the rough threads of a colobium embellished with metal thread embroidery), but despite the fact that they are two separate garments, in their essence they are the same design: both are tunics. When studying the history of Orthodox Christian liturgical dress, it is helpful to categorize garments according to their basic design and not necessarily by the various names that have been applied to them throughout different ages. In this way, a universality of design can be observed in Orthodox Christian vesture that illuminates its origins in ancient garments.
The Roman dress described thus far remained in use through the third century AD and the subsequent founding of Constantinople as the “New Rome,” with one important exception. By the beginning of the second century AD the toga was confined to purely ceremonial use, having fallen out of favor with the average citizen who preferred the easier-to-wear paenula. During the “Transition Period” (approx. AD 285–324) which served as a bridge between the old Roman dress and the newer styles of Byzantium, the only form of the toga that remained in use was the ceremonial toga picta which was worn by Roman consuls (high-ranking officers of state) and which became lavishly ornamented, with the formerly narrow clavi (decorative bands) evolving into a single, eight-inch wide band of decoration perfectly displayed when the toga picta was folded into its customary eight-inch wide folds, thereby becoming what is known as the toga contabulata.12
The tunica continued in use, but the wider-sleeved version referred to as the colobium began to be more commonly adopted. It is at this point in the development of the tunic that many writers, in their analysis of garment history, begin referring to this wide-sleeved tunic as a “dalmatic,” a term that can be misleading. The word “dalmatic” has been adopted as a description because a particular type of wide-sleeved tunic was the national costume of the inhabitants of Dalmatia (the eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea).13 In the West the wide-sleeved tunic bearing the name dalmatic became, in time, the distinctive vesture of Western Christian deacons, a circumstance which unfortunately complicates a discussion of Eastern Orthodox vestments since in Orthodox nomenclature the term dalmatic is never used. In reference to Orthodox vestments I prefer the more precise term “colobium,” which denotes a wide-sleeved tunic which was always worn over a tunica talaris (the specific term for the narrow-sleeved, undergarment version of the tunica). During the Transition Period we find men wearing the tunica talaris with the colobium over it and then wrapping the paenula over all (see Fig. 8). For more formal occasions, the pallium might be worn over the paenula or in its place (the cloak in Fig. 8 is most likely a pallium as it is more rectangular in shape than a paenula).14 It is important to note that the paenula was used as a common, everyday garment whereas the pallium had an air of formality associated with its use (most likely from its common origins with the toga).
Figure 8. Depiction of an early Christian priest from the catacombs. He is wearing the tunica talaris (of which only the edge of the right-hand cuff is visible), colobium (note the dark bands which are clavi), and pallium. (Mary G. Houston, Ancient Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Costume, Dover Publications, 128).
By the early years of the Christian era men of the lowest classes, slaves, and soldiers would have worn short tunics with various types of cloak-like overgarments, such as the paenula. Men of higher social standing, including teachers and those in positions of authority (such as the Apostles and early Christian clerics), would have worn the longer tunic and pallium. In early Christian iconography, such as the grand mosaic of the Procession of the Martyrs in Sant’Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna, the martyrs are depicted wearing this same combination of dress to identify not only their spiritual rank and the reverence due to them, but to underscore their position as “philosophers,” i.e., “lovers of Wisdom” (“Wisdom” here being Christ himself). Alternately, they might have worn the paenula over the tunic, as we may surmise the Apostle Paul did, for he requests in 2 Timothy 4.13 “Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come. . . .” In Greek, the word used for “cloak” in this passage is φαιλόνην (phailoneen) [accusative case], which nearly all authorities agree is the paenula since the two words are linguistically similar. In early iconography, the Apostles are frequently garbed in this classic tunica, colobium and paenula/pallium combination as a means of visually denoting their respected status within the Church.
In the early Byzantine mosaics of San Vitale and Sant’Apollinare Nuovo, many of the primary figures such as the Old Testament patriarchs, angels, and the martyrs are depicted wearing the tunica decorated with clavi, with the pallium over all, a fact that leads us to consider in greater depth that most common decoration of the tunic, the clavi. Clavi are narrow, embroidered or woven bands of decoration that were applied to the tunica and the toga to enhance their appearance and denote status. While there are multiple variations in the placement of such bands, they are most commonly depicted on the tunicae in early icons as two vertical stripes, one on either side of the center of the tunic, in a darker color that contrasts with the lighter color of the garment. Although they are shown in icons as solid bands of color, such as purple or deep red, they also sometimes incorporated ornate geometric, floral, or meander designs, a fact we may deduce from a few extant late-antique tunics (most notably those in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York). In addition to decorating the garment, the clavi were a means of indicating the rank of the wearer, thereby utilizing decorations as symbols of status and vocation, a necessity when so many members of society dressed in similar garments.15
Garments of the Early Byzantine Age16 and the Emergence of a Standardized Vestment Tradition
With the establishment of Constantinople as the “New Rome” in the early fourth century and the subsequent inauguration of the Byzantine era, the custom of specific garments or garment decorations having a purely ceremonial function, be it civil or religious, reached a pinnacle of standardization greater than any heretofore seen in the ancient world. In a thorough study of Orthodox Christian liturgical dress, it is imperative to reflect upon the Byzantine outlook and its effect upon the standardization of Orthodox Christian vesture in order to understand this usage in its proper historical context. This worldview is evocatively described in Robert Browning’s Justinian and Theodora:
When, in the early fourth century, Constantine was converted to Christianity—which soon became the dominant and then the official religion of the empire—a new dimension was added to the political idea of its citizens. The permanence of the Roman Empire was seen no longer as a mere matter of fact, but as an essential part of the divine plan for the salvation of mankind. The first step had been the unification of the civilized world under Augustus at the time of the birth of Christ. This was now seen to have been the necessary condition for the rapid spread of Christianity. Now the Roman state, from being a passive vehicle for the spread of truth—and sometimes, under bad emperors, actively hindering its spread—had become its active champion, foreshadowing upon earth the Kingdom of God which was to come in the fullness of time. As there was one God, so there could be only one empire and one emperor. These were the ideas which Justinian, like every man of his time, had inherited. It would never have occurred, even to a humble man, to ques
tion them.17
And from the same source, now referencing the many problems Justinian faced at the beginning of his reign:
A modern man, faced with a situation in which things seem to be going seriously wrong, would think in terms of reform, of fashioning something new. For a man of the sixth century, and especially for one as steeped in the traditions of the past as was Justinian, such an approach was impossible. ‘Innovation’ was a word with strongly pejorative overtones; in theological parlance it implied heresy. Neither the refinements of philosophical thought nor the clichés of popular expression had any room for the concept of progress or continuous change. Although Justinian . . . introduced much that was new into the Roman world, he could only do so by convincing himself and others that he was restoring the past. His grand idea was to correct the errors of the past century and to rebuild, in even greater majesty and glory, the empire, the Christian empire of Constantine.18
It was precisely this creativity within the bounds of conformity to established patterns that led to what Byzantine scholar Gervase Mathews refers to as “one of the primary creative periods in human history, in thought and in literature as well as in architecture and art. . . . Fresh literary forms were created in hymns, in chronicles, and in lives of saints. There was nothing sterile in a literature which produced an orator as great as St John Chrysostom. . . .”19 If the traditions of the ancient Roman Empire were a nascent bud, then in Byzantium they found their Christian flowering. For the Byzantine man the duty imposed by his society was not to throw away the grand traditions of old Rome, but rather to redeem and resurrect them in new and salvific forms.
As a point of contrast it is important to note that while Byzantine society was experiencing a renewed commitment to the perpetuation and revitalization of old Rome’s traditions, in the Western Roman Empire such was not the case. With its precipitous decline in the years leading up to the fifth century and its final fall to the Ostrogoths in AD 476, the Western Roman world was effectively cut off from much of the redemptive work of synthesizing venerable cultural traditions that was such a noted feature of Byzantine life in both the civil and spiritual arenas.20 It is only after the Western Roman world began to succumb to the incursions of the northern barbarian invaders that the beginnings of Western vestments (such as those worn in the Roman Catholic and Anglican communions) start to be described by Western Christian writers. This division between Western and Eastern modes of thinking and theology has hampered scholars who approach the study of ecclesiastical garments from a purely Western viewpoint, not taking into consideration the conscious absorption of ancient Roman traditions and garments into the vesture of Byzantium and the Eastern Church. Thus while there are numerous Western authors who argue for the late standardization of church vestments (their dating usually puts such standardization somewhere between the eighth and twelfth centuries), there is a compelling argument to be made from the study of Byzantine society and civil practice for the early standardization of Orthodox Christian vestments, perhaps as early as the third century and certainly no later than the fifth century. Evidence of an early-established vestment tradition may in fact be seen in an address to Paulinus, Bishop of Tyre, related by the historian Eusebius in the early fourth century. The oration begins, “Friends of God and priests clothed with the sacred vestment and the heavenly crown of glory, the divine unction and priestly garments of the Holy Spirit. . . .”21
The Theodosian Code of AD 382 presents the most compelling evidence for early standardization, as it requires all civil servants to wear a badge of office.22 In the sixth century the same approach to standardization of dress is apparent in Justinian’s “hierarchy of clothing” which restricts the use of specific textiles and specific garments to certain social classes.23 In addition to its grounding in ancient Roman practice, such a strict, ceremonial delineation of clothing has its origins as far back as ancient Assyria where scarves of office were awarded to high-ranking officials.24 The ceremonial use of garments was simply an unquestioned fact of life from ancient times through the Byzantine era and constituted a strict regulation of what today we would call “uniforms.”
In our modern age we are accustomed to view uniforms as something purely utilitarian and functional, such as a postal carrier’s or soldier’s uniform. Yet despite our assumption that uniforms must be practical, even our present-day military uniforms have remnants of “scarves of office” in their epaulets, the golden bands worn on the shoulders of officers’ dress uniforms. These ornaments might seem to serve a purely decorative purpose, but in reality constitute an absolutely essential feature of the uniform: at a glance one can see the rank of the person one is facing. Such was the case in ancient times as well as modern.
The fact that a source as early as the Theodosian Code required all civil servants to wear a “badge” or sign of their office is one of the most compelling arguments for the early standardization of Orthodox liturgical vesture, because from the fourth century onward servants of the Church were also servants of the Byzantine state.25 At the Council of Laodicea in Phyrgia, at the end of the fourth century (AD 342-380), minor orders were forbidden to use the orarion, which demonstrates that the garment was already well established as an identifying mark of the clergy by that time.26 In Canon 23, St John Chrysostom provides the first extant mention of the sticharion as a purely liturgical garment (although he refers to it as a “chitoniskos” which is linguistically related to “chiton,” the ancient Greek word for tunic).27 Mosaics in the church of St George in Thessaloniki, dated to the time of Constantine, depict martyr-bishop Philip and a presbyter, Romanos, in phelonia.28 And mosaics at Ravenna in the churches of San Vitale and Sant’Apollinare in Classe, which were installed during the reign of Justinian, show a very structured use of liturgical garments, making it easy to distinguish which figures are bishops and which are presbyters or deacons. From these and other sources, it is clear to see that we can safely date the standardization of Orthodox Christian liturgical vesture to between the fourth to fifth centuries.
In addition to the widespread use of ceremonial dress, another argument for early standardization is found in the abundant evidence of generous Byzantine imperial patronage of the Church. As Gervase Mathews states, “Haghia Sophia was rebuilt by the Emperor not the Patriarch.”29 From AD 408 to 602 Byzantium enjoyed its greatest period of wealth and in this period imperial patronage played an integral part in Church life. Such patronage was motivated by reverence for the priesthood, eloquently stated by Justinian in his sixth novella:
The greatest blessings of mankind are the gifts of God which have been granted to us by the mercy of Providence—the priesthood and the imperial authority. The priesthood ministers to things divine: the imperial authority is set over and shows diligence in things human; but both proceed from one and the same source, and both adorn the life of man. Nothing, therefore, will be a greater matter of concern to the emperor than the dignity and honour of the clergy; the more as without ceasing they offer prayers to God on his behalf. For if the priesthood be in all respects without blame, and full of faith before God, and if the imperial authority rightly and duly adorn the commonwealth committed to its charge, there will ensue a happy concord which will bring forth all good things for mankind.30
It is inconceivable that the same empire that would require all officers of state to wear specific signs of office would not require the same of its state-supported clergy. This understanding also puts to rest the occasionally proposed speculation that Christian clergy conducted their services in the clothing of the poor or lower classes—an emperor such as Justinian would simply not have allowed such a state of affairs, due both to his personally held beliefs regarding the dignity of the clergy as well as the fact that it would almost certainly have been illegal for a priest not to be somehow identified by his dress (as the Theodosian Code required of all persons of official rank). Additionally, the Byzantine civil service lasted until the middle of the fifteenth century, ensuring continuity in Byzantine art an
d culture for over 1000 years, which in turn safeguarded and solidified the early established traditions of Orthodox vesture.31 Additions and ornaments might be added over the centuries, and certainly were, but it would have been profoundly anti-Byzantine to attempt to lessen, simplify or fundamentally alter the ceremonial dress of the clergy.
In very simple terms, the standardization and regulation of Orthodox Christian vestments begins with the tunica (sticharion), which develops in two directions, first the undergarment (sometimes called the “tunica talaris,” which henceforward will be referred to as the “sticharion”) worn by the Orthodox Christian presbyter or bishop under his other vestments; and secondly as the wider-cut, fuller-sleeved colobium, which goes on to become the deacon’s sticharion in the Church, the garb of the emperor in the civil sector, and then in turn develops into the bishop’s sakkos. In its undergarment version the sticharion is often depicted in icons with the vertical clavi on either side of the center front. The earliest mosaic depictions present both deacons and higher clergy vested in sticharia with clavi, but hierarchs wear a paenula over the sticharion, thereby distinguishing the higher ranks from the deacons. The paenula is the garment from which the phelonion originates, both being names for a large, cape-like over-garment (this is the most visible garment when a presbyter is fully vested). In one of the most important early mosaics from a garment history standpoint, we see St Apollinare, in the Classe church bearing his name (Fig. 9), vested as a bishop, wearing first the sticharion with clavi, then the phelonion (which, it should be noted, is adorned with a beautiful and elaborate pattern), and then a curious garment draped around his shoulders with one end hanging down: the omophorion (which will be discussed further below).