Historical Perspectives on Women's Head Coverings: From Ancient Tradit
If we consider the answer through the prism of various social, legal, and cultural practices established in ancient societies and developed over the centuries, a particular perspective emerges. For instance, in the culture of the Near East during the time of the apostles, there was a tradition in which the sign of a woman's married status was expressed through wearing a scarf: a woman adorned with a head covering was already married, whereas an uncovered head was associated with maidenhood. This phenomenon was not confined to Christian circles, as similar views were held by the Jews, for whom an uncovered head was also regarded as a sign of maidenhood. As noted in one of the sources:"Thus, in the culture of the Near East during the time of the apostles, the scarf on a woman's head was a sign of her married status: a maiden did not wear a scarf, but a married woman did (and, by the way, it is incorrect to require girls to wear a scarf)..." (source: link txt, page: 101).In turn, in pagan Rome, strict social and even legal norms regarding female modesty were enforced. If a matrona—that is, a married woman—exposed her head in public, it was considered grounds for divorce. A similar attitude was shared by Jewish traditions, in which an uncovered head indicated maidenhood, as reflected in the following excerpt:"In pagan Rome, if a matrona (a married woman) exposed her head in public, it was considered legal grounds for divorce... The Jews held a similar view. For them, an uncovered head was also seen as a sign of maidenhood—and that is why the Carthaginian church’s virgins of the third century deemed it necessary to walk without a scarf..." (source: link txt, pages: 102-103).These cultural and historical settings created a divergence in the understanding of female modesty and the corresponding norms for wearing head coverings. On one hand, in ancient Jewish culture, the emphasis was on maintaining a symbolic distinction between married and unmarried women, while in medieval and modern Muslim traditions, alternative interpretations of modesty—often associated with comprehensive body covering (a concept that in the apostolic texts frequently implies the "chador")—developed. This indicates that the social norms and behavioral regulations governing female uncovered appearance have deep historical roots, reflecting the peculiarities of the legal and social organization of the societies in which they originated.In summary, the differences in the standards regarding the wearing of the paranja among modern Muslim women and ancient Jewish women are conditioned by the specific cultural and legal settings characteristic of their historical contexts: in ancient societies, the symbolic distinction of a woman's status through her external appearance was of great importance, whereas modern norms are evolving under the influence of alternative interpretations of modesty and religious prescriptions.Supporting citation(s):"Thus, in the culture of the Near East during the time of the apostles, the scarf on a woman's head was a sign of her married status: a maiden did not wear a scarf, but a married woman did (and, by the way, it is incorrect to require girls to wear a scarf)..." (source: link txt, page: 101)."In pagan Rome, if a matrona (a married woman) exposed her head in public, it was considered legal grounds for divorce... The Jews held a similar view. For them, an uncovered head was also seen as a sign of maidenhood—and that is why the Carthaginian church’s virgins of the third century deemed it necessary to walk without a scarf..." (source: link txt, pages: 102-103)."In the third century, Clement of Alexandria, and later Blessed Theophylact of Bulgaria, understood the 'angels' as the 'righteous of the Church'—so that those who witnessed female uncoveredness would not fall into lascivious thoughts… But whether we are referring to angels or to people, I still find it difficult to understand why the saints might be tempted by the sight of a woman’s crown.
Yet, is it truly the view of a woman's hair that provokes such a reaction?Therefore, I believe that the apostolic council is referring to a covering that conceals not only the hair on the head but the entire body. Yes, the apostolic text does not refer merely to a small scarf or hat. It refers to the chador. The term used throughout is 'pokryvaetsya' – katakaliptete – which carries the nuance of being wrapped up. 'It is not simply said: let it be covered, but that it must be covered up. That is, it should be carefully enclosed from all sides'." (source: link txt, pages: 107-108).