Robes of Academia ​🎓​

[JLHPROF]

...As I sit here at my day job we are preparing for the commencement ceremony happening tomorrow.
The robes of academia are being unpacked and steamed, the bachelor's, the master's, the doctor's.  The loops and ruffles, the sleeves and collars/hoods, sashes etc.
The students are collecting their caps, gowns, and tassels, ready to move from one side to the other.

I am once again struck at the way the robes of the priesthood passed down through the educational institutions that originated with the early Christian centers of learning to become the robes of academia.  It is another example of the temple threaded through all culture.
And I am struck by the darkening of the robes, the items that are not the same that might have once been present.  I see the clear origin of academia with the temple, centers of learning, down through the monastic orders, and then to the first universities and colleges.
I understand why some have called them the robes of the false priesthood.  I wonder how many centuries of adjustments to our current temple clothing it would take to arrive at the current academic robes and how many adjustments have already moved in that direction.

My coworkers, some LDS, some not, may not even recognize the connection.  But I notice it every year.

That is all, you can return to your regularly scheduled programming. 🎓

[Kenngo1969]

As Brother Nibley said once, during a prayer at commencement, "We're gathered here in the black robes of a false priesthood ..."

[katherine the great]

I disagree that academic robes stemmed from temple worship. 

[JLHPROF]

32 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I disagree that academic robes stemmed from temple worship. 

Because?

There are obviously similarities and academia began with religious orders.

[OGHoosier]

2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Because?

There are obviously similarities and academia began with religious orders.

Religious orders in a Europe which had long since foregone the temple ordinances in whatever form they existed in the first-century. The line of descent is so extended that the resemblance is tenuous. 

[rongo]

I find the mortar board hat and the switching of the tassel from one side to the other to be more interesting than the robes. Also, schools used to have women sit on one side, and the men on the other in graduation ceremonies. 

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, OGHoosier said:

Religious orders in a Europe which had long since foregone the temple ordinances in whatever form they existed in the first-century. The line of descent is so extended that the resemblance is tenuous. 

Of course they are far removed.  But I disagree the resemblance is tenuous.

https://www.academicdresshire.co.nz/FAQs/What+to+Wear/History+of+Academic+Dress.html

"Academic dress originates in the 12th century when university institutions were a part of the Roman Catholic Church, the ruling religious order of the day. It was in this period that academic study was only done by church monks and clerics. Their roles required they be educated in religion, writing and statecraft. Study largely occurred in cold, unheated churches where cappa clausa (gowns) and hoods were worn to keep the clerics warm."

"The trencher, also known as a mortarboard, is believed to have developed from the ‘biretta’, a similar cap worn by Roman Catholic clergy. The biretta was worn in the middle ages to identify scholars, artists and learned people."

 

They came from the Church.  The Church had remnants of the temple ordinances, as Nibley showed so well.

 

[mfbukowski]

11 hours ago, katherine the great said:

I disagree that academic robes stemmed from temple worship. 

More like Masonry as the common ancestor.

I have no problem with that 

[mgy401]

13 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Of course they are far removed.  But I disagree the resemblance is tenuous.

https://www.academicdresshire.co.nz/FAQs/What+to+Wear/History+of+Academic+Dress.html

"Academic dress originates in the 12th century when university institutions were a part of the Roman Catholic Church, the ruling religious order of the day. It was in this period that academic study was only done by church monks and clerics. Their roles required they be educated in religion, writing and statecraft. Study largely occurred in cold, unheated churches where cappa clausa (gowns) and hoods were worn to keep the clerics warm."

"The trencher, also known as a mortarboard, is believed to have developed from the ‘biretta’, a similar cap worn by Roman Catholic clergy. The biretta was worn in the middle ages to identify scholars, artists and learned people."

 

They came from the Church.  The Church had remnants of the temple ordinances, as Nibley showed so well.

 

The trouble is, I don’t know that either robes or headwear were exclusive to clergy; and surely 12th century Christian clerics weren’t the first people in the history of ever to wear robes/hats/hoods.  And we seem to be assuming that the things we wear in temple worship are mirror images of what our ancient predecessors wore during whatever version of temple worship existed in their day.

I respect Nibley a lot; but the logic being applied here may as well be used to say “The Salt Lake Temple is built of cut stone.  We may assume that ancient temples of Jehovah were built of cut stone.  The Taj Mahal is built of cut stone.  The Taj Mahal is obviously just a corrupted version of the true temples built anciently.”

Color me . . . unconvinced.  Cut stone is a common historic building material, robes are a common historic item of clothing, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. 

Edited August 6, 2021 by mgy401

[Tacenda]

13 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Because?

There are obviously similarities and academia began with religious orders.

Could it have stemmed from Masonry? Like many rituals in the temple have. 

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Could it have stemmed from Masonry? Like many rituals in the temple have. 

 

1 hour ago, mgy401 said:

The trouble is, I don’t know that either robes or headwear were exclusive to clergy; and surely 12th century Christian clerics weren’t the first people in the history of ever to wear robes/hats/hoods.  And we seem to be assuming that the things we wear in temple worship are mirror images of what our ancient predecessors wore during whatever version of temple worship existed in their day.

Masonic clothing doesn't feature a flat cap with a tassel that traditionally is moved from one side to the other as academia does. That is one match between academia and the temple that Masonry doesn't include.
It is similar to the biretta and the canterbury cap of the Catholic church around the 10-12 century.
As to where they got it...

 

[Fether]

15 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Because?

There are obviously similarities and academia began with religious orders.

I find it far more likely that, in an attempt to bring respect to the endowment, they pulled the clothing style from other respectable places and put them in the temple.

I don’t think there is any problem with this. Circumcision came from Egypt, yet it was an essential part of Jewish culture in the Old Testament

[smac97]

9 hours ago, mgy401 said:

The trouble is, I don’t know that either robes or headwear were exclusive to clergy; and surely 12th century Christian clerics weren’t the first people in the history of ever to wear robes/hats/hoods.  And we seem to be assuming that the things we wear in temple worship are mirror images of what our ancient predecessors wore during whatever version of temple worship existed in their day.

I respect Nibley a lot; but the logic being applied here may as well be used to say “The Salt Lake Temple is built of cut stone.  We may assume that ancient temples of Jehovah were built of cut stone.  The Taj Mahal is built of cut stone.  The Taj Mahal is obviously just a corrupted version of the true temples built anciently.”

Color me . . . unconvinced.  Cut stone is a common historic building material, robes are a common historic item of clothing, and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. 

Nibley also seems to trace academic robes/headwear to . . . the late Romans, to Asian monarchs befor that:

Quote

Twenty-three years ago on this same occasion, I gave the opening prayer, in which I said: “We have met here today clothed in the black robes of a false priesthood.” Many have asked me since whether I really said such a shocking thing, but nobody has ever asked what I meant by it. Why not? Well, some knew the answer already, and as for the rest, we do not question things at the BYU. But for my own relief, I welcome this opportunity to explain: a “false priesthood?”

Why a priesthood? Because these robes originally denoted those who had taken clerical orders, and a college was a “mystery” with all the rites, secrets, oaths, degrees, tests, feasts, and solemnities that go with initiation into higher knowledge.

But why false? Because it is borrowed finery, coming down to us through a long line of unauthorized imitators. It was not until 1893 that “an intercollegiate commission was formed to draft a uniform code for caps, gowns, and hoods” in the United States. Before that there were no rules—you designed your own; and that liberty goes as far back as these fixings can be traced. The late Roman emperors, as we learn from the infallible Du Cange, marked each step in the decline of their power and glory by the addition of some new ornament to the resplendent vestments that proclaimed their sacred office and dominion. Branching off from them, the kings of the tribes who inherited the lands and the claims of the Empire vied with each other in imitating the Roman masters, determined to surpass even them in the theatrical variety and richness of caps and gowns.

One of the four crowns worn by the emperor was the mortarboard. The French kings got it from Charlemagne, the model and founder of their royal lines. To quote Du Cange:

When the French kings quitted the palace at Paris to erect a Temple of Justice, at the same time they conferred their royal adornments on those who would preside therein, so that the judgments that came from their mouths would have more weight and authority with the people, as if they were coming from the mouth of the prince himself {the idea of the Robe of the Prophet, conferring his glory on his successor}. It is to these concessions that the mortar-boards and the scarlet and ermine robes of the chancellors of France and the presidents of Parlement are to be traced. Their gowns or epitogia {the loose robe thrown over the rest of the clothing, to produce the well-known greenhouse effect}, are still made in the ancient fashion. . . . The name “mortar-board” is given to the diadem because it is shaped like a mortar-board which serves for mixing plaster, and is bigger on top than on the bottom. {Charles Du Fresne, Sieur Du Cange, Glossarium ad Scriptores Mediae et Infimae Graecitatis (Graz, Austria: Akademische Druck u. Verlagsanstalt, 1958; Unveränderter Abdruck der 1688 bei Anisson, Joan. Posuel u. Claud. Rigaud in Lyon erschiehenen Ausgabe)}

But where did the Roman emperors get it? For one thing, the mortarboard was called a Justinianeion, because of its use by the Emperor Justinian, who introduced it from the East. He got his court trappings and protocol from the monarchs of Asia, in particular the Grand Shah, from whom it can be traced to the khans of the steppes and the Mongol emperors, who wore the golden button of all wisdom on the top of the cap even as I do now; the shamans of the north also had it, and among the Laplanders it is still called “the Cap of the Four Winds.” The four-square headpiece topped by the golden tassel—“the emergent flame of Full Enlightenment”—also figures in some Buddhist and Lamaist representations. But you get the idea—this Prospero suit is pretty strong medicine—“rough magic” indeed! (See Shakespeare, The Tempest, act 5, scene 1, line 51.)

There is another type of robe and headdress described in Exodus and Leviticus and the third book of Josephus’ Antiquities, i.e., the white robe and linen cap of the Hebrew priesthood, which have close resemblance to some Egyptian vestments. They were given up entirely, however, with the passing of the temple, and were never even imitated again by the Jews. Both their basic white and their peculiar design, especially as shown in the latest studies from Israel, are much like our own temple garments. This is not the time or the place to pursue a subject in which Brother Packer wisely recommends a judicious restraint...

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited August 6, 2021 by smac97

[poptart]

8 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

 

Masonic clothing doesn't feature a flat cap with a tassel that traditionally is moved from one side to the other as academia does. That is one match between academia and the temple that Masonry doesn't include.
It is similar to the biretta and the canterbury cap of the Catholic church around the 10-12 century.
As to where they got it...

 

Masons have hats, just not flat caps.  Seems like the higher up the food chain you are the neater your hat is.  

[Fether]

On 8/6/2021 at 5:34 PM, poptart said:

Masons have hats, just not flat caps.  Seems like the higher up the food chain you are the neater your hat is.  

 

[poptart]

13 hours ago, Fether said:

 

[latterdaytemplar]

On 8/6/2021 at 4:57 AM, mfbukowski said:

More like Masonry as the common ancestor.

I have no problem with that 

Robes aren't found in Freemasonry either; we typically wear suits or tuxes with our Masonic aprons.

I have seen robes worn during allegorical plays in Royal Arch Masonry, but I'm not aware of any record of any of the Church's presidents ever having joined the Royal Arch.

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, latterdaytemplar said:

Robes aren't found in Freemasonry either; we typically wear suits or tuxes with our Masonic aprons.

I have seen robes worn during allegorical plays in Royal Arch Masonry, but I'm not aware of any record of any of the Church's presidents ever having joined the Royal Arch.

Thanks!

We churchmembers often get upset when someone says "OH- Joseph stole the endowment from the Masons!"

What they do not understand is that virtually all the leaders of the Restoration were already Masons before Joseph came along, and none of them objected to Joseph's work by using this argument.

If there was any group that would see any similarities as proving the endowment "phony" it would be these devout men!

[mfbukowski]

[mfbukowski]

On 8/6/2021 at 8:25 AM, JLHPROF said:

Masonic clothing doesn't feature a flat cap with a tassel that traditionally is moved from one side to the other as academia does. That is one match between academia and the temple that Masonry doesn't include.

Uh, not any more!

And I understand that the robes are now also changing

Edited September 17, 2021 by mfbukowski

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Uh, not any more!

And I understand that the robes are now also changing

Yes, well you can guess my feelings on that too.

[OGHoosier]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Fashion icons for thousands of years and counting. 

[latterdaytemplar]

On 9/17/2021 at 2:26 PM, mfbukowski said:

Thanks!

We churchmembers often get upset when someone says "OH- Joseph stole the endowment from the Masons!"

What they do not understand is that virtually all the leaders of the Restoration were already Masons before Joseph came along, and none of them objected to Joseph's work by using this argument.

If there was any group that would see any similarities as proving the endowment "phony" it would be these devout men!

Exactly. Even John C. Bennett, who was a Mason and who was excommunicated from the Church, never published anything to do with stealing from Freemasonry in any of his inflammatory writings against Joseph or the Church.

[2BizE]

On 8/5/2021 at 5:35 PM, katherine the great said:

I disagree that academic robes stemmed from temple worship. 

Katherine, you are great. I concur with you. This has nothing to do with the temple.