I do not think that I need say one word more on this point; nor can I imagine, under the circumstances, any proof more conclusive that the haïk was the clothing of the people of Judæa. If this be not admitted, it will have to be shown, or supposed—the one as difficult as the other—that the successive emigrants, when they collected here, invented a new costume, and abandoned that which they had previously worn. I have already referred to the metaphorical language of Scripture, applying to loose drapery, and not to fitted clothes; such must have been the dress then worn: there is no Eastern dress of the present day to which it will apply. It is only by forgetting our own costume that any grave thought can be associated with the expression, “baring the arm:” tucking up the sleeves, or appearing in shirt-sleeves, would be a metaphor amongst us suited to a scullery or a slaughter-house. “Girding of the loins” is nonsensical, not only with our costume but with every other: the person is already dressed. If the girdle be part of the dress, it is already on; a supplementary one is not carried about. This absurdity has been felt by the translators; for when they make Christ “gird”[279] himself to wash the feet of the Apostles, they add, “with a towel.” The terms in Greek, περιζώννυμι, ὰναζώννυμι, are appropriate, and describe what a Moor would do, viz., draw the fold of the haïk, which hangs over the left shoulder, and passing it round the waist, bind the whole tight, and leave the arms free. In like manner the expression, “the sin that most easily besetteth us,” implies, “the fold most closely drawn around us.”

On the night of the flight from Egypt, the Jews were ordered (Exodus xii. 34,) to bind up their kneading-troughs in their clothes upon their shoulders. What clothes are requisite for carrying on the shoulders a kneading trough? The haïk.

Why kneading-troughs? The Jews did not carry ovens with them. Cakes are kneaded, one by one, on a board or stone, and then laid upon the hot stones or embers, or griddle.[280] Such is the practice of every nomade tribe: a kneading-trough would be of no use. It must then be something of the same description; of course the kuscoussoo tray. Not a tribe moves here that the women do not carry it “on their shoulders,” “in their clothes.” When that diet is used, that dish is of primary necessity; and on that account, as likewise by its dimensions, is worthy of being mentioned in this manner on the occasion of a sudden flight.

The haïk and the kuscoussoo are here united. If you heard of any other people having the one, you would inquire whether they had not also the other. Here in one sentence is it shown that the Jews, when they entered the Wilderness, had both.

If they wore the haïk in the Wilderness, they had it when they entered the Holy Land; for as they did not want new clothes, so would they not change old habits.[281] The people they drove forth were the Brebers, who wear it to-day. The Jews went to Egypt from the Holy Land; Abraham therefore wore the haïk; and having seen him in that dress, I can imagine him in no other.

It belongs but to a small portion of the human family to have a change of raiment for the night;—a striking peculiarity of this dress is its adaptation to both purposes. It is the costume for people who live in tents, and who cannot carry about with them bed and bedding; who must sleep in their clothes, and who prepare for their night’s repose as we do for a journey. Thus, the Jews were commanded, if any had taken the raiment of another in pledge, to restore it “By that the sun goeth down; for that is his covering only—his raiment for his skin, wherein he shall sleep.” Leaving free circulation of air, and not suffocating the body with its own breath, it is at once subservient to convenience and conducive to health.

The Hebrew terms of the Old Testament, the Greek translation of them, and the Greek terms of the New, are quite in accordance with the inferences I have drawn from the scriptural imagery and incidents. The words, “garment,” “raiment,” “clothes,” “coat,” are used at hap-hazard, and we can attach to the costume of the Bible only the most vague and confused ideas. In the Hebrew, however, there is no such disorder: none of the names now used are indeed to be found there, but those used, perfectly suit the Moorish costume, and by it they can alone be understood.

Morocco presents an infinite variety of pieces of dress. These are at first bewildering,[282] but may be reduced to the three vestures already mentioned—a tunic, a pair of drawers, and a haïk; to which is added as accessory, a girdle, a cap, and a pair of slippers. The drawers, shewal, are put on first. Then the sleeveless tunic, Inshwarwan, reaching over the hips; over this the richly embossed and embroidered belt, Indum,[283] and over all the haïk: the drawers and girdle exactly correspond with those mentioned in the Bible. For all other garments, two words only are employed, תנתכ, kitonet, whence the word “cotton,” and also “coat,” this is the χιτωὺ of the Greeks—the sleeveless tunic of the Moors, and הלמש, shemlah; this is the ἱμάτιον of the Greeks, the toga of the Romans, and the haïk of the Moors. It was woven among the Jews by men and women. It was in this that the Jewish women were to bind their kneading-troughs: it was in this the poor man slept, and therefore it had to be returned when taken in pledge “by that the sun went down.” The kitonet might be retained.[284]

The haïk was the dress, not of the Jews only, but of the Canaanites, including among these the Phœnicians; it was wholly different from the costume of the Egyptians, and—as we have now the opportunity of minutely knowing—from that of the great Assyrian empire, which lay to the east, and had spread over the north and west of Asia. Neither does it appear to belong to the Arabs. They wear it indeed now in Barbary, but not in their own country, and it is not likely that the change was there.[285]

The Greek robe was white.[286] It was put on as a clothing, and was at the same time a covering such as might be used to sleep in at night.[287] It was not put on to fit as a dress.[288] It was ample in its folds, and fell to the feet.[289] It covered them all over. But citation of authorities is superfluous. Look at the statue of Demosthenes.