As my commentary on John 19:1 mentions, Pilates' name refers to holding a javelin.
This was the second of the 3 times Pilate says he finds no fault (αἰτίαν) in Christ, yet this does not stop the crucifixion. Similar to Peter who denied Christ three times, Pilate three times admits to Christ's lack of fault, rather than do the honest and just thing to do. Eventually, when Christ would be crucified the "fault" or "charge" against Christ would be identified:
And over his head they put the charge (αἰτίαν) against him, which read, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.”--Matthew 27:37
In this passage after tormenting and humiliating Christ, Pilate admits Christ is innocent, implying he knew the punishment was far was unwarranted.
He confesses the wrong he had done, and is not ashamed. For he admitted that he had scourged Him without a cause, and declares that he will show Him unto them, supposing that he would glut their savage passion by so pitiable a spectacle, and well-nigh accuses them henceforth, and that publicly, of putting Him to death unjustly, and of compelling him openly to be a law-breaker, who, if he transgressed his own laws, could not escape scot free. The saying was fulfilled in Christ, and shown to be true, that the prince of this world cometh, and he will find nothing in Me. For observe how Satan, after throwing everything into confusion, finds nothing at all cast out from God, and ranked under the power of sin, which he might, perhaps, if it had been referred to the Saviour Christ, have caused to be rightly condemned and implicated in his accusations. Just as; then, in Adam he subdued the whole human race, showing it to be subject unto sin, so now was he vanquished by Humanity. For He That was truly God, and had no sin in Him, was yet Man; and just as the sentence of condemnation for transgression went forth over all mankind, through one man, the first Adam, so likewise, also, the blessing of justification by Christ is extended to all through One Man, the Second Adam. Paul is our witness, who says: As through one the judgment came unto all men to condemnation; even so through One the free gift came unto all men to justification of life. We therefore are diseased through the disobedience of the first Adam and its curse, but are enriched through the obedience of the Second and its blessing. For He that was Lord of the Law as God came among us, and kept the Law as Man. Yea, we find Him saying unto us: He that loveth Me will keep My commandments; even as I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love. Note how He, as Lawgiver and God, has enjoined upon us the keeping of His commandments; and how, as keeping the Law while a Man among men, He declares that He Himself also kept the commandment of His Father.--St Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Book XII, on John 19:4
The only difference in manuscript traditions is the Alexandrian add "ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτὸν"--"they came to him..." Which is fairly insignificant.
St Cyril of Alexandria follows the Alexandrian reading and comments:
[He] suffers the crowd of soldiers to insult Him, and put a crown of thorns about His Head, and throw a purple robe upon Him, and buffet Him with the palms of their hands, and otherwise dishonour Him. For he thought he could easily put to shame the people of the Jews, if they saw the Man Who was altogether free from guilt suffering this punishment, only without a cause. He was scourged unjustly, that He might deliver us from merited chastisement; He was buffeted and smitten, that we might buffet Satan, who had buffeted us, and that we might escape from the sin that cleaves to us through the original transgression. For if we think aright, we shall believe that all Christ's sufferings were for us and on our behalf, and have power to release and deliver us from all those calamities we have deserved for our revolt from God. For as Christ, Who knew not death, when He gave up His own Body for our salvation, was able to loose the bonds of death for all mankind, for He, being One, died for all; so we must understand that Christ's suffering all these things for us sufficed also to release us all from scourging and dishonour.St Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Book XII, on John 19:3
Χαῖρε--Hail
The word Χαῖρε translated hail in addition to being a greeting means to rejoice/be glad, to add to the mockery. Though John does not record it, Matthew notes when Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss he said, "Χαῖρε"
And forthwith he came to Jesus, and said, Hail (Χαῖρε), master; and kissed him.--Matthew 26:49
This is the same word the Angel Gabriel greeted the Virgin Mary with in Luke 1.
Slap ῥαπίσματα
John here seems to leave it implied or ambiguous about how Jesus was slapped but Matthew gospel adds more detail:
And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.--Matthew 27:30
In the prior verse of Matthew, the reed accompanied the crown of thorns as a faux scepter which they used to slap him with shortly after.
Jesus was slapped earlier (similar to previously being told "hello" at the start of his betrayal) at the beginning of his "trial" because He was perceived as disrespected the High Priest Caiaphas.
And
he having said these things, one of the officers standing by did give
Jesus a slap (ῥάπισμα), saying, 'Thus dost thou answer the chief priest?'--John 18:22 (see also Matthew 26:67)
have given my back to scourges and my cheeks to blows (ῥαπίσματα), but I did not turn away my face from the shame of spittings. --Isaiah 50:6 (translated from LXX)
We saw previously, John 19:1 the scourged was fulfilling Isaiah 50:6 also.
The apostolic fathers and other ante-nicene fathers like the Epistle of Barnabas from the late first/early second century believed this was fulfilled in Christ:
He himself willed thus to suffer, for it was necessary that He should suffer on the tree. For says he who prophesies regarding Him, "Spare my soul from the sword, fasten my flesh with nails; for the assemblies of the wicked have risen up against me." And again he says, "Behold, I have given my back to scourges, and my cheeks to strokes, and I have set my countenance as a firm rock." (Isaiah 50:6)--Epistle of Barnabas, Chapter 5
In fact, reading Barnabas, he says much of Isaiah 50 was fulfilled by Christ.
St Justin Martyr (2nd century) likewise:
And when the Spirit of prophecy speaks from the person of Christ, the utterances are of this sort: "I have spread out My hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people, to those who walk in a way that is not good." (Isaiah 65:2) And again: "I gave My back to the scourges, and My cheeks to the buffetings; I turned not away My face from the shame of spittings; and the Lord was My helper: therefore was I not confounded: but I set My face as a firm rock; and I knew that I should not be ashamed, for He is near that justifies Me." (Isaiah 50:6) --St Justin Martyr, The First Apology, Chapter 38
St Irenaeus (2nd century) also:
Some of them, moreover — [when they predicted that] as a weak and inglorious man, and as one who knew what it was to bear infirmity, (Isaiah 53:3) and sitting upon the foal of an ass, (Zechariah 9:9) He should come to Jerusalem; and that He should give His back to stripes, (Isaiah 50:6) and His cheeks to palms [which struck Him]; and that He should be led as a sheep to the slaughter; (Isaiah 53:7)--St Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 33:12
Also, noteworthy Hosea 11:4 mentions God slapping (ῥαπίζων) "I will be to them as a man smiting [another] on his cheek", Hosea 11:1 is applied to Christ by Matthew.
King of the Jews (Ἰουδαίων)
The title is that of the Messiah, and implicitly of God himself, the original head of the Jews since God did not want them to have a king initially. The Jews preferred Cesar as their king than God. God allowed Israel kings as a concession, similar to allowing divorce. The Jews were only to have a king through David, but here many recognize a pagan as their king per the priest in John 19:15. This was contrary to the Torah:
you may indeed set a king over you whom the LORD your God will choose.
One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not
put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.--Deuteronomy 17:15
Cesar was not their "brother" being a pagan, but a foreigner. This will be dealt with more on John 19:15 comments.
By Jesus' time them term Israel and Jew/Judea had some overlap, since neither were kingdoms anymore. The beginning of John's gospel Nathaniel calls Jesus the king of Israel/
And the soldiers twisted (πλέξαντες) together a crown (στέφανον) of thorns (ἀκανθῶν) and put it on his head (κεφαλῇ) and arrayed (περιέβαλον) him in a purple (πορφυροῦν) robe (ἱμάτιον).--John 19:2
And they stripped him and put a scarlet (κοκκίνην) robe (χλαμύδα) on him, And they twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on His head. They
put a staff in His right hand and knelt down before Him to mock Him,
saying, "Hail, King of the Jews!"--Matthew 27:28-29
καὶ ἐκδύσαντες αὐτόν, περιέθηκαν αὐτῷ χλαμύδα κοκκίνην. Καὶ πλέξαντες στέφανον ἐξ ἀκανθῶν, ἐπέθηκαν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, καὶ κάλαμον ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν αὐτοῦ· καὶ γονυπετήσαντες ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ ἐνέπαιζον αὐτῷ, λέγοντες, Χαῖρε, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων·--Matthew 27:28-29 Byzantine majority (the Alexandrian has several small variants, v 28 has the same words but order changed)
Mark 15:17 largely is the same as Matthew 27:28 in this case but instead uses John's color of purple:
And they clothed him with purple (πορφύραν), and platted (πλέξαντες) a crown of thorns (ἀκάνθινον), and put it about his [head],--Mark 15:17
In John 18, Pilate mockingly called Christ the king of the Jews. Here his soldiers continue the mockery in physical ways.
Soldiers/Cherubim
The Roman soldiers carrying spears/swords might be an allusion to the cherubim with the flaming sword in Genesis to protect the Garden and the Tree of Life:
So He drove out the man; and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden
the cherubim, and the flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the
way to the tree of life.--Genesis 3:24
Twisted (πλέξαντες)
The root word according to a concordance is found:
πλέκω Gr4120
To fold, plait, entwine.
Ex 28:14, Is 28:5, Mt 27:29, Mk 15:17, Jn 19:2
Exodus 28:14 is one of the many times John 19 seems to allude to Exodus 28 which is about Priestly attire, fitting for Christ.
And you shall make two tassels from pure gold, intermingled with flowers, a work of braiding, and you shall place the braided [πεπλεγμένα, peplegmena] tassels on the small shields on their shoulder-straps on the front sides.--Exodus 28:14 NETS of LXX
and two chains [שַׁרְשְׁרֹת shar'sherot] of pure gold, wreathed work thou dost make them, work of
thick bands, and thou hast put the thick chains on the embroidered [שַׁרְשְׁרֹת shar'sherot] things.--Exodus 28:14
In the above the second שַׁרְשְׁרֹתcorresponds to πεπλεγμένα, while the first one is translated as κροσσωτὰ. Here the braiding is part of the garment of the priest, not worn on the head, the high priest wore a turban.
Sharsherot שַׁרְשְׁרֹת appears only 7 times in the MT, x2 in Exodus 28:14, 1 in Exodus 39:15, 1 Kings 7:17, 1 Chronicles 3:5, x2 in 2 Chronicles 3:16.
Isaiah 28:5 reads:
In that day the Lord Sabaoth will be the garland of hope, which is woven [πλακεὶς plakeis] of glory, to what is left of my people.--Isaiah 28:5 NETS of LXX
In that day the LORD of hosts will be a crown of glory, and a diadem [וְלִצְפִירַת v'litz'firat] of beauty, to the remnant of his people--Isaiah 28:5 ESV of MT
The LXX say the crown is woven. Perhaps, this can suggest Christ represents the faithful remnant of God's people.
Thorns ἀκανθῶν
Adam was punished/cursed with thorns:
We see the mention of thorns first,
And unto Adam He said: 'Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying: Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.'--Genesis 3:17-19
The same Greek word is used in Genesis 3:18 LXX "ἀκανθῶν"--thorn bush.
The crown of thorns as an allusion to Adam when he was banished from the Garden, and Christ took away that curse:
"..Let us thank Him who took away the curse by His thorns"--St Ephrem the Syrian, Nativity Hymn 3:18
Through the crown of thorns, which they put on him, they showed and witnessed that he took away the curse of Adam.23 Through all with which they wanted to falsify his words, his truth was crowned by the false ones.--St Ephraim the Syrian, Hymns on the Crucifixion 4:2
St Cyril of Jerusalem (not to be confused with the same of Alexandria), largely agreeing with St Ephrem on Christ undoing the curse of Adam, its represents the forgiveness of sins, also links it to Christ cursing the fig tree:
for what though it be of thorns? Every king is proclaimed by soldiers; and Jesus also must in a figure be crowned by soldiers; so that for this cause the Scripture says in the Canticles, Go forth, O you daughters of Jerusalem, and look upon King Solomon in the crown wherewith His mother crowned Him. (Song of Songs 3:11) And the crown itself was a mystery; for it was a remission of sins, a release from the curse.
Adam received the sentence, Cursed is the ground in your labours; thorns and thistles shall it bring forth to you. (Genesis 3:17-18) For this cause Jesus assumes the thorns, that He may cancel the sentence; for this cause also was He buried in the earth, that the earth which had been cursed might receive the blessing instead of a curse. At the time of the sin, they clothed themselves with fig-leaves; for this cause Jesus also made the fig-tree the last of His signs. For when about to go to His passion, He curses the fig-tree, not every fig-tree, but that one alone, for the sake of the figure; saying, No more let any man eat fruit of you (Mark 11:1); let the doom be cancelled. And because they aforetime clothed themselves with fig-leaves, He came at a season when food was not wont to be found on the fig-tree. Who knows not that in winter-time the fig-tree bears no fruit, but is clothed with leaves only? Was Jesus ignorant of this, which all knew? No, but though He knew, yet He came as if seeking; not ignorant that He should not find, but showing that the emblematical curse extended to the leaves only.--St Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 13:17-18
Rufinus also notes the connection with Adam:
It is written that there was put on Him a crown of thorns. Of this hear in the Canticles the voice of God the Father marvelling at the iniquity of Jerusalem in the insult done to His Son: "Go forth and see, you daughters of Jerusalem, the crown wherewith His mother has crowned Him." Moreover, of the thorns another Prophet makes mention: "I looked that she should bring forth grapes, and she brought forth thorns, and instead of righteousness a cry." But that you may know the secrets of the mystery, it behooved Him, Who came to take away the sins of the world, to free the earth also from the curse, which it had received through the sin of the first man, when the Lord said "Cursed be the earth in your labours: thorns: and thistles shall it bring forth to you." For this cause, therefore, is Jesus crowned with thorns, that first sentence of condemnation might be remitted.--Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles' Creed
Thorns in Syrian Christian and Jewish tradition
It is noteworthy that Jewish tradition believes the fig tree to be the Tree of knowledge of good and evil, which those in the Syrian tradition generally held to such as the Nestorian bishop of Mosul--Solomon of Akhlat in his Book of the Bee (His hands were nailed upon the wood of the fig-tree of which Adam ate, and behold, we have mentioned its history with that of Moses' rod.--Solomon of Akhlat, Book of the Bee, Chapter 44).
St Aphrahat the Persian sage states:
Because of her the earth was cursed, that it should bring forth thorns and tares. Accordingly, by the coming of the offspring of the Blessed Mary the thorns are uprooted, the sweat wiped away, the fig-tree cursed, (Matthew 21:19) the dust made salt, (Matthew 5:13) the curse nailed to the cross, (Colossians 2:14) the edge of the sword removed from before the tree of life and it given as food to the faithful, and Paradise promised to the blessed and to virgins and to the saints.--St Aphrahat, Demonstrations VI
St Ephraim notes that bread mentioned following the toiling, sweating among thorns for food, and contrasts it with Christ and the Eucharist:
The beautiful staff that grew among the ugly tares gave the bread of life without toil to the hungry. He released the curse that held Him captive in Adam to eat by the sweat the bread of pains and thorns Blessed is he who eats from His blessed bread and makes pass away from him the curse--St Ephraim the Syrian, Hymn on Virginity 31:14
The burning bush Moses encountered God in Exodus 3 is called סנה sneh, which specifically refers to a thorn bush (contrary to most English translations), in fact Jesus and Stephen in Mark 12:26, Luke 20:37, Acts 7:30 uses a Greek word for the bush "batou" that refers to a thorn bush.
Commenting on the Burning Bush, St Ephraim the Syrian notes:
"The bush which was unsuitable even as an image of dead gods was able to depict within itself the mystery of the living God. Moses, this is a sign to you; as you saw God dwelling in the midst of the fire, by fire you must serve the God who dwells in the fire."--St Ephraim the Syrian, Commentary on Exodus, p 232
On this passage, the editor refers to Ginzberg's Legends of the Jews:
There were good reasons for selecting the thorn-bush as the vessel
for a Divine vision. It was "clean," for the heathen could not use it to
make idols. God's choosing to dwell in the stunted thorn-bush conveyed
the knowledge to Moses that He suffers along with Israel. Furthermore,
Moses was taught that there is nothing in nature, not even the
insignificant thorn-bush, that can exist without the presence of the
Shekinah. Besides, the thorn-bush may be taken as the symbol for Israel
in several respects. As the thorn-bush is the lowliest of all species of
trees, so the condition of Israel in the exile is the lowliest as
compared with that of all the other nations, but as the thorn-bush
releases no bird that alights upon it without lacerating its wings, so
the nations that subjugate Israel will be punished. Also, as a garden
hedge is made of the thorn-bush, so Israel forms the hedge for the
world, the garden of God, for without Israel the world could not endure.
Furthermore, as the thorn-bush bears thorns and roses alike, so Israel
has pious and impious members, and as the thorn-bush requires ample
water for its growth, so Israel can prosper only through the Torah, the
celestial water. And the thorn-bush, the leaf of which consists of five
leaflets, was to indicate to Moses that God had resolved to redeem
Israel only for the sake of the merits of five pious men, Abraham,
Isaac, Jacob, Aaron, and Moses. The numbers represented by the letters
composing the Hebrew word for thorn-bush, Seneh, add up to one hundred
and twenty, to convey that Moses would reach the age of one hundred and
twenty years, and that the Shekinah would rest on Mount Horeb for one
hundred and twenty days. Finally, in order to give Moses an illustration
of His modesty, God descended from the exalted heavens and spake to him
from a lowly thorn-bush instead of the summit of a lofty mountain or
the top of a stately cedar tree. --Legends of the Jews, Volume II, Chapter 4: 303 (Moses in Egypt) by Louis Ginzberg
We see much can be applied to Christ, some seemingly cannot eg the 5 leaves representing 5 people that merited Israel's redemption--Christ alone merited the Church's, and also the gematria. The thorns can represent true worship and symbolizes God suffering with His people, just as Christ being God in Flesh suffered for His people. The thorns allude to a protective hedge--the Garden of God, something alluded to by John 19. The hedge protects the world--Christ's death appeased God's wrath, and by the prayers of the Church in the Mass the death of Christ is presented again.
Lastly, as mentioned, the thorns represent God's modesty, a condescension, the kenosis mentioned in Philippians 2, where God leaves an exalted place and comes in a lowly form.
The Ram caught in the Thicket
When God called off the sacrifice of Isaac, a ram caught in a thicket was found by Abraham and sacrifice in place of Isaac. St Augustine, and others note this:
For when Abraham saw him, he was caught by the horns in a thicket. What, then, did he represent but Jesus, who, before He was offered up, was crowned with thorns by the Jews?--St Augustine, The City of God (Book XVI)
This ties in with my short article where I show a Jewish commentary that noted the sacrificing of Isaac was like a crucifixion.
The Nestorian Solomon of Akhlat (absurdly) claims the cross was made of the wood of the tree used to offer the ram caught in the thicket.
St Cyril of Alexandria commenting on the meaning of the thorns states:
And I have heard some say, and to some the conceit is well-pleasing,
that the crown of thorns further signifies the multitude of
idol-worshippers who will be taken up by Christ, as it were, into a
diadem, through faith in Him; and they liken the Gentiles to barren and
useless thorns, through their bearing no fruit of piety, and being
rather fit to feed consuming fire----just like rubbish in the fields,
just as wild thicket, which grows up without any culture--St Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel According to John, Book XII, on John 19:2
Lactantius states more eloquently:
For the placing of a crown of thorns upon His head, declared that it would come to pass that He would gather to Himself a holy people from those who were guilty. For people standing around in a circle are called a corona . But we, who before that we knew God were unjust, were thorns — that is, evil and guilty, not knowing what was good; and estranged from the conception and the works of righteousness, polluted all things with wickedness and lust. Being taken, therefore, from briars and thorns, we surround the sacred head of God; for, being called by Himself, and spread around Him, we stand beside God, who is our Master and Teacher, and crown Him King of the world, and Lord of all the living --Lactantius, Divine Institutes, Book IV (Of True Wisdom and Religion), Chapter 26
Thorns symbolize the Cares of the World that push aside Christ's gospel
St Augustine interprets the thorns in light of Jesus's parable:
“A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell along the path and was trampled underfoot, and the birds of the air devoured it. And some fell on the rock, and as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture. And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up with it and choked it. And some fell into good soil and grew and yielded a hundredfold.” As he said these things, he called out, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” And when his disciples asked him what this parable meant, he said....Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God....And as for what fell among the thorns, they are those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and their fruit does not mature. --Luke 8:4-15
Origen states not to crown Christ with our thorns:
There are those who still have thorns with which they crown and dishonour Jesus, those, namely, who are choked by the cares, and riches, and pleasures of life, and though they have received the word of God, do not bring it to perfection. (Luke 8:14) We must beware, therefore, lest we also, as crowning Jesus with thorns of our own, should be entered in the Gospel and read of in this character by those who learn the Jesus, who is in all and is present in all rational and holy lives, learn how He is anointed with ointment, is entertained, is glorified, or how, on the other side, He is dishonoured, and mocked, and beaten. All this had to be said; it is part of our demonstration that our good actions, and also the sins of those who stumble, are embodied in the Gospel, either to everlasting life or to reproach and everlasting shame.--Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John (Book I), Chapter 12
Thorns are sins
while saving us from the prickings of our sins, He refused not to submit His head to thorns--Pope Gregory the Great, Pastoral Rule (Book III), Chapter 12
St Thomas Aquinas quoting Bede the Venerable's commentary (which I cannot locate) states:
For instead of a diadem, they put upon Him a crown of thorns, and a
purple robe to represent the purple robe which kings wear. Matthew says,
a scarlet robe, but scarlet and purple are different names for the same
color. And though the soldiers did this in mockery, yet to us their
acts have a meaning. For by the crown of thorns is signified the taking
of our sins upon Him, the thorns which the earth of our body brings
forth. And the purple robe signifies the flesh crucified. For our Lord
is robed in purple, wherever He is glorified by the triumphs of holy
martyrs.--Catena Aurea on John 19:1-5
St Bede seems to tie it also with Genesis 3 curse allegorically.
St Thomas Aquinas expanding on St Bede's comments states:
They mock him with a crown, because it is customary for kings to wear a crown, a crown of gold: "A crown of gold upon his head" (Sir 45:12). The Psalm (20:4) mentions this: "You set a crown of fine gold upon his head." And the soldiers plaited a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, the head of him who is a crown of glory to those who belong to him: "In that day the Lord of hosts will be a crown of glory, and a diadem of beauty, to the remnants of his people" (Isaiah 28:5). It was appropriately made of thorns, because by them he removes the thorns of sin, which pain us through remorse of conscience: "Break up your fallow ground, and sow not among thorns" (Jer 4:3). These thorns also take away the thorns of punishment which burdens us: "Thorns and thistles it shall bring forth to you" (Gen 3:18) --St Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of John, Chapter 19, Lecture 1
Head
The head suffers with the rest of the body, Christ the head
Robe
And the purple robe signifies the flesh crucified. For our Lord is robed in purple, wherever He is glorified by the triumphs of holy martyrs.--Bede the Venerable quoted in Catena Aurea on John 19:1-5
The Purple Robe symbolizes the Kingdom of God on Earth
John says the robe was "purple" πορφυροῦν while Matthew "scarlet" κοκκίνην.
Most say that think the same garment is being referred whether it is scarlet or purple, the Diatessaron (a harmonization of the 4 gospels written by Tatian who would apostacize) seems to speak of two garments, one scarlet and one purple.
And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet cloak. [John 19:2] And they clothed him in garments of purple--Diatessaron, Section 50
There is a Jewish tradition relating to how the priestly garments symbolize righteous (citing Isaiah 59:17):
R. Joshua of Siknin said in the name of R. Levi: It can be compared to a prince whose tutor wanted to go in before the King to plead on behalf of his son, but was afraid of those who stood by lest one of them should attack him. What did the king do? He clothed him in his royal purple cloak, so that all who saw him might be afraid of him. Similarly, Aaron used to enter the Holy of Holies almost hourly [on that day], and had it not been for the many merits which entered with him and helped him [in his petitions], he would have been unable to go in, on account of the angels that were there. For this reason did God give unto him [garments] after the pattern of the holy garments, as it says. And for Aaron's sons thou shalt make tunic, etc. (Ex. XXVIII, 40); just as it is written, And He put on righteousness as a coat of mail, and a helmet of salvation upon His head, and put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak (Isa LIX, 17)--Midrash Rabbah, Exodus. Chapter XXXVIII, 8-9 p 457
Jewish tradition speaks about a story of a king with a purple garment that changes to red:
"It can be compared to a king whose palace-guard sneered at his purple cloak. The king retorted: 'So. you have nothing to do except look at my purple cloak? Well, as long as you live, I will change it and punish you.' Similarly. the wicked who attacked 'the ancient of days' did not do so because He was old, but because they [they Israelites] had wearied him with their actions, for it says, Ye have wearied the Lord with your words (Mal II, 17). God said to them, 'I will change [my cloak], as it says, Wherefore is Thine apparel red? (Isa LXIII, 2), 'and I will punish you,' as it says, The Lord will go forth as a mighty man, He will stir up jealousy like a man of war (ibid XLII, 13)--Midrash Rabbah, Exodus, p 368
Bede the Venerable claims scarlet and purple in the case of the cloak refer to the same color;
a purple robe to represent the purple robe which kings wear. Matthew says, a scarlet robe, but scarlet and purple are different names for the same color.--Bede the Venerable quoted in Catena Aurea on John 19:1-5
The colors are not exactly the same as St Bede says, there is some overlap (as seen below), since other scripture seems to distinguish the two:
“Alas, alas, for the great city that was clothed in fine linen, in
purple (πορφυροῦν) and scarlet (κόκκινον), adorned with gold, with jewels, and with pearls!"--Revelation 18:16
Also, interesting, scarlet and purple are also the priestly colors in Exodus 28 (a chapter that reoccurs in John 19's allusions), which may be the chapter Revelation 18:16 is alluding to:
And they shall take the gold and the blue and the purple (πορφύραν) and the scarlet (κόκκινον) and the linen.--Exodus 28:5 NETS translation of the LXX
But it could be there is some overlap between these colors, just as the Hebrew word commonly translated as "red" אֲדֻמָּה but can refers to red and brown, or a reddish brown--the color of blood.
The κόκκινον word according to Liddle Scott Jones' lexicon says:
As can be seen, πορφυροῦν has shades of red with in its semantic domain, not just purple. When looking at the overlap in meaning the color of the robe, if only one was used was more reddish/scarlet than violet in our modern English speech. This may be why there is not much said by the Greek fathers on the matter--the colors had overlap and was not perceived as being a contradiction.
Colors are not thought of the same in every language. For instance, in English we think of baby blue, dark blue, navy blue as all types of the same color, however in Russia baby blue is called galu'boy голубо́й, while what we call a darker blue is see-nee си́ній.
Perhaps, St John saw it more purplish, or perhaps he deliberately wanted to use a more ambiguous word to overlap with the color of royalty.
Already, widely know is that Jesus means "salvation." The name Pilate transliterated from the Greek word provided by John as pilatos, comes from Latin pilatus a Roman surname (obviously) which refers to a javelin:
pīlātus , a, um, adj. pilum,
I. armed with javelins: “agmina,” Verg. A. 12, 121: “cohors,” Mart. 10, 48, 2. --Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short,
A Latin Dictionary
Which in turn seems to come from:
pīlo , no
I. [select] perf., ātum, 1, v. a., = πιλέω, qs. to ram down; hence, in gen., to thrust home (ante-class. and rare): hastam pilans prae pondere frangit, Host. ap. Serv. ad Verg. A. 12, 121 (pilans id est figens, Serv.). —Hence, pīlātus , a, um, P. a., closepressed, thick, dense = densus, pressus. --Charlton T. Lewis, Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary
I have not yet found a father drawing any symbolism from Pilate's name. Similar to the lance of the soldier, this may be an allusion to the sword of the angel guarding paradise. Or, perhaps, to Phineas who used a javelin to stay the plague.
Also, noteworthy, if Abel is a type of Christ, an innocent man slain, the name Cain can also mean spear/javelin (in addition to the meaning acquired provided by Genesis 4):
And Ishbibenob, who was of the sons of the giant, the weight of whose
spear[קֵינוֹ keyno] was three hundred shekels of brass in weight, he being girded with
new armour, thought to have slain David.--2 Samuel 21:16
Note that קֵינוֹhas וֹ at the end meaning "his" without the vav the word would be spelled קין just like Cain's name. So, we see Christ and Abel both killed by men named javelin/spear.
St Ephraim the Syrian draws a link between Christ and the javelin of Phinehas and the Cherub wielding a sword (as I call this elsewhere, "sacred sharp and pointy objects":
The lance of Phinehas filled me with fear, that sword , with which he excluded the plague. The lance that guarded the Tree of Life makes me joyful yet sad, for it excluded Adam from Life yet excluded the plague from the people. But the lance which wounded Jesus, I [only] grieve for it; he was wounded, and I weep. From him came forth water and blood; Adam washed, came to life and returned to paradise. --Ephrem, Carmina Nisibena 39:7 CSCO , 240, Syri. 102, 24-25, ET by R. Murray, Symbols of Church and Kingdom: A Study in Early Syriac Tradition, 126.
Phinehas by killing the Israelite and his pagan wife (a union forbidden in the Torah) with a javelin or lance, God's wrath was placated, and a plague was stopped.
And when Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, saw it, he rose up from the midst of the congregation, and took a spear in his hand. And he went after the man of Israel into the chamber, and thrust both of them through, the man of Israel, and the woman through her belly. So, the plague was stayed from the children of Israel.--Numbers 25:7-8
On the issue of scourging, John uses ἐμαστίγωσεν but Mark and Matthew use φραγελλώσας (a word not used elsewhere in the NT and OT):
Then he released for them Barabbas, and having scourged (φραγελλώσας)Jesus, delivered him to be crucified.--Matthew 27:26
So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released for them Barabbas, and
having scourged (φραγελλώσας) Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.--Mark 15:15
The word ἐμαστίγωσεν is not used in the LXX of Isaiah 53,
But he was wounded because of our acts of lawlessness and has been weakened because of our sins; upon him was the discipline (παιδεία) [or punishment] of our peace; by his bruise we were healed.--Isaiah 53:5 (New English Translation of the Septuagint)
Regardless it is clear that this is a fulfillment of Isaiah 53 (and Isaiah 50:6) as St Cyril points out:
He was scourged unjustly, that He might deliver us from merited chastisement; He was buffeted and smitten, that we might buffet Satan, who had buffeted us, and that we might escape from the sin that cleaves to us through the original transgression. For if we think aright, we shall believe that all Christ's sufferings were for us and on our behalf, and have power to release and deliver us from all those calamities we have deserved for our revolt from God. For as Christ, Who knew not death, when He gave up His own Body for our salvation, was able to loose the bonds of death for all mankind, for He, being One, died for all; so we must understand that Christ's suffering all these things for us sufficed also to release us all from scourging and dishonour. Then in what way by His stripes are we healed, according to the Scripture?Because we have all gone astray, every man after his own way, as says the blessed Prophet Isaiah; and the Lord hath given Himself up for our transgressions, and for us is afflicted. For He was bruised for our iniquities, and has given His own back to the scourge, and His cheeks to the smiters, as he also says. --St Cyril of Alexandria, On the Gospel according to John, Book XII
For more citations of the Father on Isaiah 50:6 see my commentary on John 19:3 on "slapping."
St John Chrysostom says it was done to appease Christ's enemies
Pilate scourged Him perhaps desiring to exhaust and to soothe the fury of the Jews. For when he had not been able to deliver Him by his former measures, being anxious to stay the evil at this point, he scourged Him, and permitted to be done what was done, the robe and crown to be put on Him, so as to relax their anger.--St John Chrysostom, Homilies on John's Gospel, Homily 84
Not long after St John Chrysostom, St Augustine in north Africa said similar:
On the Jews crying out that they did not wish Jesus to be released unto them at the passover, but Barabbas the robber; not the Saviour, but the murderer; not the Giver of life, but the destroyer —"then Pilate took Jesus and scourged Him." We must believe that Pilate acted thus for no other reason than that the Jews, glutted with the injuries done to Him, might consider themselves satisfied, and desist from madly pursuing Him even unto death. With a similar intention was it that, as governor, he also permitted his cohort to do what follows, or even perhaps ordered them, although the evangelist is silent on the subject.--St Augustine, Tract 116
Then the wife of the judge, who had suffered in a dream because of
Him, sends a message to her husband; he was better disposed than the rest, he
even wished not to kill Him, but to release Him, and he commanded Him to be
scourged, in order to allay their fury; thus fulfilling the saying of the
prophet: "With His stripes we are healed." --Eusebius of Emesa, Homily on the sufferings and death of our Lord
Lactantius, a 4th Century, North African Roman convert from paganism, states this verse fulfills even Delphic Sibyls:
But that these things were thus about to happen, was announced both by the utterances of the prophets and by the predictions of the Sibyls. In Isaiah it is found thus written: "I am not rebellious, nor do I oppose: I gave my back to the scourge, and my cheeks to the hand: I turned not away my face from the foulness of spitting." In like manner David, in the thirty-fourth Psalm: "The abjects were gathered together against me, and they knew me not: they were dispersed, nor did they feel remorse; they tempted me, and greatly derided me; and they gnashed upon me with their teeth." The Sibyl also showed that the same things would happen:—
"He shall afterwards come into the hands of the unjust and the faithless; and they shall inflict on God blows with impure hands, and with polluted mouths they shall send forth poisonous spittle; and He shall then absolutely give His holy back to stripes."
...And another Sibyl rebukes the land of Judæa in these verses:—
For
you, entertaining hurtful thoughts, did not recognise your God sporting
with mortal thoughts; but crowned Him with a crown of thorns, and
mingled dreadful gall.
An attempt at an exhaustive commentary of John 19:23
Much can be derived from the event in John 19:23 when Christ was crucified and the solider took his clothes.
When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his garments (ἱμάτια) and
divided them into four parts, one part for each soldier; also his tunic (χιτῶνα).
But the tunic (χιτὼν) was seamless (ἄραφος), woven (ὑφαντὸς) in one piece from top (ἄνωθεν) to bottom,--John 19:23
The tunic (χιτὼν) is an inner garment that people wore, whereas garments (ἱμάτια) refer to the rest of the clothes mostly on top of that.
Before they crucified Him, they covered Him in a purple garment for mockery and Pilate was hoping the crown of thorns and robe mockery were enough that he would let Jesus go.
And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head and arrayed him in a purple robe.--John 19:2
Jesus was not crucified with the purple garment according to Mark and Matthew, they dressed Him back in his own clothes to crucify Him
And when they had mocked him, they stripped him of the purple (πορφύραν) cloak and put his own clothes (ἱμάτια) on him. And they led him out to crucify him.--Mark 15:20
Matthew's account describes a scarlet mantle:
And they stripped him, and put on him a scarlet (κοκκίνην) robe (χλαμύδα).--Matthew 27:27
Purple with scarlet, by the way, are some of the priestly colors:
And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple (πορφύραν), and scarlet (κόκκινον), and fine linen.--Exodus 28:5
The differences in color was discussed in my article on John 19:2.
The NT and OT (LXX) never use the word χλαμύδα (G5511) outside of Matthew 27, according to Liddel Scott, the word generally refers to a short mantle horsemen use, though it notes generals and even kings wear them (in ancient times sometimes kings would join the march in battle).
4. The high priest is indeed adorned with the same garments that we
have described, without abating one; only over these he puts on a vestment (χιτῶνα) of a blue color. This also is a long robe, reaching to his feet (ποδήρης), [in our
language it is called .Meeir,] and is tied round with a girdle,
embroidered with the same colors and flowers as the former, with a mixture
of gold interwoven. To the bottom of which garment are hung fringes, in
color like pomegranates, with golden bells by a curious and beautiful contrivance; so that between two bells hangs
a pomegranate, and between two pomegranates a bell. Now this vesture was
not composed of two pieces, nor was it sewed together upon the shoulders
and the sides, but it was one long vestment so woven as to have an aperture
for the neck; not an oblique one, but parted all along the breast and the
back. A border also was sewed to it, lest the aperture should look too
indecently: it was also parted where the hands were to come out. --Antiquities of the Jews - Book III:7:4, Josephus
Perhaps, the one-piece tunic is Christ's priestly attire (later I show Ephraim takes the garments as representing the clothes of not just king but priest). Evidently, Josephus was not fluent in Hebrew, or there was an error in transmission since the he calls the מְעִיל mi'il a meer, getting the final letter wrong. Perhaps, he heard the word from someone with Rhotacism.
John 19:23's mention of a tunic that is woven maybe an allusion to Exodus 36:35 LXX (v 34 in some)
And they made the tunics (ha-katnot הַכָּתְנֹת ) of fine linen of woven (oreg--אֹרֵג) work for Aaron, and for his sons-- Exodus 39:27
As you see the Greek LXX uses χιτῶνας kitonas, the Hebrew usesכָּתְנֹת kat'not. Many argue the χιτῶνας is a loanword from Semitic languages either Assyrian/Akkadian/Hebrew:
And the Lord God made leather tunics (χιτῶνας) for Adam and for his wife and clothed them.--Genesis 3:21 LXX
It appears again in the story of Joseph, who is a type of Christ (envied, betrayed and left for dead, only to 'rise' again):
Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his children, because he [was] the son of his old age: and he made him a coat of [many] colours.--Genesis 37:3 KJV
This translation is likely wrong about "many colors":
And Israel has loved Joseph more than any of his sons, for he [is] a son of his old age, and has made for him a long coat [כְּתֹנֶת];--Genesis 37:3 Literal Standard Version
Now Iakob loved Ioseph more than all his sons, because he was a son of old age to him, and he made him a variegated tunic [χιτῶνα kitona]. --Genesis 37:3 NETS (translation of LXX)
John 19:24 states the prior verse fulfills the prophecy
so they said to one another, “Let us not tear it, but cast lots for it
to see whose it shall be.” This was to fulfill the Scripture which says,
“They divided my garments (ἱμάτιά) among them, and for my clothing (ἱματισμόν) they cast
lots.”--John 19:24
The word לְבוּשִׁי l'vushi seems to only be used once in the Torah with reference to Judah (possibly royal garments):
Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine;
he washeth his garments (לְבֻשׁוֹ l'vusho) in wine, and his vesture in the blood of
grapes;--Genesis 49:11
If we look a related word lavash לָבַשׁ
And Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting, and shall put off the
linen garments (בִּגְדֵי big'dey), which he put on (lavash לָבַשׁ) when he went into the holy place, and
shall leave them there.--Leviticus 16:23
The word lavash לָבַשׁ is used several times in Psalms poetically eg. "Clothed with glory" "Clothed with shame" "clothed with righteousness" etc
Going back to Psalm 22, the word for vesture בְגָדַי v'gaday is used several times in the Torah, in addition to the above referenced Lev 16:23, even for the priests. Here it is used to describe the clothing overall of the priest. The item Josephus refers to as "meer" is mi'il.
And you shall make holy garments (בִגְדֵי) for Aaron your brother, for glory and for beauty....These are the garments (הַבְּגָדִים ) that they shall make: a breastpiece, an ephod, a
robe (וּמְעִיל), a coat (וּכְתֹנֶת) of checker work, a turban, and a sash. They shall make holy
garments (בִגְדֵי) for Aaron your brother and his sons to serve me as priests--Exodus 28:2,4
The LXX reads:
And thou shalt make holy apparel (στολὴν ) for Aaron thy brother, for honour and glory....And these are the garments (στολαί) which they shall make: the breast-plate, and
the shoulder-piece, and the full-length robe (ποδήρη), and the tunic (χιτῶνα) with a
fringe, and the tire, and the girdle; and they shall make holy garments (στολὰς) for Aaron and his sons to minister to me as priests.--Exodus 28:2, 4 (Brenton's LXX translation)
Back to John 19:23, the high priest tore his tunics presumably top to bottom (otherwise would look silly) in outrage and protestation (compare Acts 14:14 where Paul and Barnabas tear their garments in anger), symbolizing the loss of priesthood. The temple veil was itself torn top to bottom, symbolizing the protest/outrage and mourning (eg Genesis 37:34, modern Judaism is called קריעה keri'ah) of the Holy Spirit and the It's departing the temple as It's house and the impending end of the Temple.
..also his tunic (χιτῶνα). But the tunic (χιτὼν) was seamless, woven in one piece from top (ἄνωθεν) to bottom,--John 19:23
And the high priest tore (διαρήξας) his tunics (χιτῶνας) and said, “What further witnesses do we need?--Mark 14:63
And behold, the curtain (καταπέτασμα) of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom (ἄνωθεν). And the earth shook, and the rocks were split.--Matthew 27:51
Symbolic of the end of the Old Testament Levitical priesthood
St Ephraim the Syrian commenting on the priest tearing his tunics states:
"the high priest rent his garments (lit. sinus) and the priesthood fled from him, and left him naked and was spread over our Saviour."--St Ephraim the Syrian, Hymns on the Resurrection
Tying the priest tearing his tunics/robes and the tear of the veil:
The curtain was torn. [This was] to
show that [the Lord] had taken the kingdom away from them and had given
it to others who would bear fruit. An alternative interpretation is: By
the analogy of the torn curtain, the temple would be destroyed because
his Spirit had gone away from it. Since the high priest had wrongfully
torn his robe, the Spirit tore the curtain to proclaim the audacity of
the pride [of the Jews], by means of an action on the level of created
beings. Because [the high priest] had torn his priesthood and had cast
it from him, [the Spirit] also split the curtain apart. Or
[alternatively], just as the temple in which Judas had thrown down the
gold was dissolved and rejected, so too [the Lord] pulled down and rent
asunder the curtain of the door through which [Judas] had entered. Or,
[it was] because they had stripped him of his garments that he rent the
curtain in two. For the heart of the rock was burst asunder, but their
own hearts did not repent.--St Ephraim the Syrian, Commentary on Tatian’s Diatessaron quoted here
Following in one stream of the Syriac tradition largely dependent on St Ephraim, the Church of the East ("Nestorian") bishop, Ishodad of Merv (in modern day Turkmenistan) writes:
The veil of the temple was rent which was a type that was annulled; first, because it could not bear the suffering of the archetype; second, to shew that the Divine Shekinah had withdrawn from it and the grace of the Holy Spirit--Ishodad of Merv, Commentary on the Diatessaron
St Ephraim says the mockery intended for Christ was reversed and suggests the clothing symbolize that of priests and kings (obviously the soldiers took it as mocking a king):
In the robes of mockery that they gave him, in those He mocked them: for He took the raiment of glory, of priest and kings.--St Ephraim, Nisibene Hymns, Hymn 58
Seamless Weave Top to Bottom
The priest's garment was to be woven in Exodus 36:25 (LXX), as I mentioned elsewhere here. God in the Torah seems to prefer weaving to sowing as in Genesis 3 where man sowed, God weaved a tunic.
St Thomas Aquinas' Golden Chain, derived from several commentators (mostly church fathers) from top to bottom symbolizes the Church:
The garment without seam denotes the body of Christ, which was woven
from above; for the Holy Ghost came upon the Virgin, and the power of
the Highest overshadowed her. This holy body of Christ then is
indivisible: for though it be distributed for every one to partake of,
and to sanctify the soul and body of each one individually, yet it
subsists in all wholly and indivisibly. The world consisting of four
elements, the garments of Christ must be understood to represent the
visible creation, which the devils divide amongst themselves, as often
as they deliver to death the word of God which dwells in us, and by
worldly allurements bring us over to their side.--St Thomas Aquinas. Aurea Catena quoting Theophylact, On John 19:23
Theophylact of Ochrid (11th/12th Century Greek bishop) seems to have derived this interpretation from the church father, St Cyril of Alexandria (perhaps earlier):
And it can do no harm also to add, that if any man choose, by way of
speculation, to look upon the coat that was woven from the top
throughout, and seamless, as an illustration of Christ's
holy Body, because It came into being without any connection or
intercourse of man with woman, but woven into its proper shape by the
effective working of the Spirit from above, this view is worthy our
acceptance. For such speculations as do no damage to the elements of the
faith, but are rather fertile of profit, it would surely be ill-advised
for us to reject; nay, we ought rather to commend them, as the fruit of
an excellent disposition of mind.--St Cyril of Alexandria, On the Gospel according to John, Book XII, on John 19:23b
St Augustine said the being woven through symbolizes the oneness and universality of the Church by appealing to the world olos--which itself is part of the word Catholic.
Whence, also, after here saying, "woven from the top," he added, "throughout." And this also, if referred to its meaning, implies that no one is excluded from a share thereof, who is discovered to belong to the whole: from which whole, as the Greek language indicates, the Church derives her name of Catholic.--St Augustine, Tractate 118
St Jerome when addressing the pope, uses the seamless garment to refer to Church unity:
Since the East, shattered as it is by the long-standing feuds, subsisting between its peoples, is bit by bit tearing into shreds the seamless vest of the Lord, "woven from the top throughout," (John 19:23) since the foxes are destroying the vineyard of Christ, (Song of Songs 2:15) and since among the broken cisterns that hold no water it is hard to discover "the sealed fountain" and "the garden inclosed," (Song of Songs 4:12) I think it my duty to consult the chair of Peter, and to turn to a church whose faith has been praised by Paul. I appeal for spiritual food to the church whence I have received the garb of Christ.--St Jerome, Letter 15 (to Pope Damasus)
However, Jesus' top-down woven tunic remained untorn, the lack of tearing perhaps symbolic of Jesus' acceptance of His execution in the same sense as a lamb led to slaughter.
Sheep before the Shearers
St Ephraim the Syrian, in fact, interprets the passage as fulfilling the prophecy of "a sheep before the shearers":
The sheep in its shame strips off its garment and cloak and gives all of it to its shearers, like the lamb who divided His garments for his crucifiers. --St Ephraim the Syrian, Hymn 11
Interestingly, John does not provide the other tearings, perhaps evidence his intent was to fill in the gap of the other Gospel narratives. In addition, Hebrews speaks of Christ's flesh as being a "veil" (Hebrews 10:20).
Represent the Deity of Christ, the human body and the gospel going out
St Ephraim had more to say on the topic of the tunic and garments:
"The tunic which was not rent signifies his divinity, which is neither rent nor divided: and the robe that is divided into four parts signifies the division of his body and is a type of his gospel which [goes] to the four quarters"--St Ephraim's Commentary on Tatian's Diatessaron
St John Chrysostom says the clothes can represent Christ's simplicity and poverty and his tunic, as St Ephraim said, his Divinity:
The soldiers parted the garments, but not the coat. See the prophecies in every instance fulfilled by their wickednesses; for this also had been predicted of old; yet there were three crucified, but the matters of the prophecies were fulfilled in Him. For why did they not this in the case of the others, but in His case only? Consider too, I pray you, the exactness of the prophecy. For the Prophet says not only, that they "parted," but that they "did not part." The rest therefore they divided, the coat they divided not, but committed the matter to a decision by lot. And the, "Woven from the top" (John 19:23) is not put without a purpose; but some say that a figurative assertion is declared by it, that the Crucified was not simply man, but had also the Divinity from above. Others say that the Evangelist describes the very form of the coat. For since in Palestine they put together two strips of cloth and so weave their garments, John, to show that the coat was of this kind, says, "Woven from the top"; and to me he seems to say this, alluding to the poorness of the garments, and that as in all other things, so in dress also, He followed a simple fashion.--St John Chrysostom, Homilies on the Gospel of St John, Homily 85
St Thomas Aquinas quoting St John Chrysostom adds:
To this it might be asked, why, if Jesus' clothes were so plain and humble did the soldiers cast lots for them? Were they really of little value? Might it symbolize the that the gentiles seek the simplicity of Christ? Or was this an extended part of their mockery? Pretending His cheap clothes were valuable?
St Cyril of Alexandria, in addition, compares the division yet unity to the gospel throughout the world, and the passover lamb,
And if it behoves us also to declare another thought which strikes us with regard to the partition of the garments----a thought which can do no harm, and may possibly do good to those who hear it----I will speak as follows: Their division of the Saviour's garments into four parts, and retention of the coat in its undivided state, is perhaps symbolical of the mysterious providence whereby the four quarters of the world were destined to be saved. For the four quarters of the world divided, as it were, among themselves the garment of the Word, that is, His Body which yet remained indivisible. For though the Only-begotten be cut into small pieces, so far as individual needs are concerned, and sanctify the soul of every man, together with his body, by His Flesh; yet is He, being One, altogether subsistent in the whole Church in indivisible entirety; for, as Saint Paul says, Christ cannot be divided. That such is the meaning of the mystery concerning Him, the Law dimly shadows forth. For the Law represented the taking of a lamb at the fitting time, and the taking, not of one lamb for every man, but of one for every house, according to the number of the household; for every man (if his household were too small) was to join with his neighbour that was next unto his house. And so the command was, that many should have a part in one lamb; but, in order that it might not appear, therefore, to be physically divided, by the flesh being dissevered from the bones, and taken from house to house, the Law laid down the further injunction: In one house shall it be eaten: ye shall not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house. For observe how, as I said just now, the Law took care that many who might be in one household should have a part in one lamb, but most carefully also took great precautions that it should not appear physically divided, but should be found in its completeness and entirety as one in all who partook of it, being, at the same time, divisible and indivisible. We must entertain some such view with regard to Christ's garments, for they were divided into four portions, but the coat remained undivided.--St Cyril of Alexandria, On the Gospel according to John, Book XII, on John 19:23
Putting on Christ
St Cyprian of Carthage in the 3rd century contrasted with dividing garments after Solomon died, Christ's tunic represents unity and "putting of Christ":
This sacrament of unity, this bond of a concord inseparably cohering, is set forth where in the Gospel the coat of the Lord Jesus Christ is not at all divided nor cut, but is received as an entire garment, and is possessed as an uninjured and undivided robe by those who cast lots concerning Christ's garment, who should rather put on Christ. Holy Scripture speaks, saying, "But of the coat, because it was not sewed, but woven from the top throughout, they said one to another, Let us not rend it, but cast lots whose it shall be."(John 19:23-24) That coat bore with it an unity that came down from the top, that is, that came from heaven and the Father, which was not to be at all rent by the receiver and the possessor, but without separation we obtain a whole and substantial entireness. He cannot possess the garment of Christ who parts and divides the Church of Christ. On the other hand, again, when at Solomon's death his kingdom and people were divided, Abijah the prophet, meeting Jeroboam the king in the field, divided his garment into twelve sections, saying, "Take you ten pieces; for thus says the Lord, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and I will give ten sceptres unto you; and two sceptres shall be unto him for my servant David's sake, and for Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen to place my name there." (1 Kings 11:31) As the twelve tribes of Israel were divided, the prophet Abijah rent his garment. But because Christ's people cannot be rent, His robe, woven and united throughout, is not divided by those who possess it; undivided, united, connected, it shows the coherent concord of our people who put on Christ. By the sacrament and sign of His garment, He has declared the unity of the Church. --St Cyprian of Carthage, Treatise 1
Fulfilling the Sermon on the Plain
It is noteworthy, that in the Sermon on the Plain Christ said:
To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one
who takes away your cloak (ἱμάτιον) do not withhold your tunic (χιτῶνα) either.--Luke 6:29
Clearly, Christ fulfilled His own instructions giving away both garment/cloak and tunic.
Symbolic of Kenosis and Theosis
On another level, the stripping of Christ may symbolize the incarnation itself, the kenosis, where taking form of a slave/servant he humbles Himself to death rather than demanding the treatment deserving of the Son of God. The Fathers sometimes spoke of the incarnation as Christ's putting on garments/robes. St Ephraim on the nativity said:
39.The two things You sought, in Your Birth have been done for us.—
Our visible body You have put on; Your invisible might we have put on:—
our body has become Your clothing; Your Spirit has become our robe. / R., Blessed be He Who has been adorned and has adorned us!--St Ephraim the Syrian, Hymns on the Nativity, Hymn 15
If this is applicable, then garments would seem to refer to humanity especially human nature with the body, and the robe is the Spirit, which would be fairly close to the Greek emphasis on theosis, partaking of the divine nature.
Jesus' Garments Heal:
a woman who had suffered from bleeding for twelve years. She had spent all her money on physicians, but no one was able to heal her. She came up behind Jesus and touched the fringe of His cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped.--Luke 8:43-44
And whithersoever he entered, into villages, or cities, or country, they
laid the sick in the streets, and besought him that they might touch if
it were but the border of his garment: and as many as touched him were
made whole.--Mark 6:56
And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind [him], and touched the hem of his garment:--Matthew 9:20
The very garments that the soldiers divided among themselves healed people, and per Jewish law, the garments fringes are symbolic of God's laws (Numbers 15:38) which Jesus's fulfilled and observed. Later, in Acts the Apostles' (Acts 19:12) garments were sought for healing, too.
Ezekiel 44: Garments transmit Holiness
They are to wear...linen undergarments around their waists. .... When
they go out into the outer court where the people are, they are to take
off the clothes (בִּגְדֵיהֶם ) they have been ministering in and are to leave them in
the sacred rooms, and put on other clothes (בְּגָדִים), so that the people are not
consecrated through contact with their garments (בְּבִגְדֵיהֶם).--Ezekiel 44:19-20
Note Ezekiel 44 was understood as messianic by some Church Fathers. Ezekiel 44:2 for instance is taken to be about the incarnation and the virgin birth.
The priest's clothes themselves are sacred and are not to be for the common people according to this verse since it will cause the laity to become consecrated. Perhaps, the soldiers taking the garments of Christ symbolize Christ dedicating to God even the gentiles. Perhaps, Christ wearing the military cloak symbolizes the future conquest of Christ over the Roman Empire with the conversion of Emperor Constantine the Great.
Jesus' Coat and Joseph's Coat
Others have pointed out the similarities between Joseph being betrayed and almost killed by his brothers only to later save them and the whole "world" from famine, and Christ saving man by His suffering.
John 19:23 describes Christ as wearing garments (ἱμάτια) and a tunic (χιτὼν). The Septuagint of Genesis 37:23 describes Joseph's coat as χιτῶνα (though the Masoretic uses כתנתו )
And it came to pass, when Joseph came to his brethren, that they stripped Joseph of his many-coloured coat (χιτῶνα) that was upon him.--Genesis 37:23 Brenton Translation of LXX
Like Jesus, Joseph was betrayed by his own people, had his persecutors strip him and take his χιτὼν (coat/tunic), brother Joseph and Jesus were betrayed for money, later to be revealed as saviors. Joseph's coat was dipped in blood of a goat, while Christ's was covered in his own blood. Both instances are examples of God using for good what men intended for evil.
Also, interesting is the fact that Psalm 22 uses the metaphor of being attacked by animals to describe Christ's passion, Genesis 37:33 the father assume Joseph was killed by wild animals.
Seamless Garment and the sown garments of Adam and Eve in Eden
The garment is described in John 19 as
.....But the tunic was seamless (ἄραφος), woven in one piece from top to bottom,--John 19:23
The word ἄραφος arafos is only used once in the NT and LXX, however, literally it means non-sown, the word sow ῥάπτω (G4476) is used 3 times in the NT all referring to the "eye of the needle." The LXX the word sow in various forms several times, most notably by Genesis 3:7
And the eyes of both were opened, and they perceived that they were
naked, and they sewed (ἔρραψαν) fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons to
go round them.--Genesis 3:7 Brenton translation of LXX
And the Lord God made leather tunics (χιτῶνας) for Adam and for his wife and clothed them.--Genesis 3:21 LXX
This is contrasted with Christ with an unsown tunic (underwear) that he was stripped of and made naked.
John's emphasis on "seamless" might be another one of the many oblique references to Eden by John and other gospel writers.
Other allusions in John might include: The swords of the cherub and the solider, the trees in the garden and the trees on Golgotha (crosses) that caused both death and eternal life, Adam is cursed to work among thorns, Christ wear a crown of thorns. The bride of Adam comes from his side, just as the Christ came forth from the side of Christ on the Cross. Both address a mother as "woman" the first being Eve the second Mary. Both Adam and Christ "sleep." The gospels at the mention of Christ's death mention the torn temple veil and the priests torn garment, the Temple itself like the Garden was the meeting place of heaven and earth, even more so Christ's body (Christ Himself calls His body the temple in John 2), Adam functioned as a gardener and priest before being banished from His temple, the gospels even have Jesus visiting a garden the eve of His death and speaking of the "fruit of the vine." Then again when he is buried it's in a nearby garden tomb. St Ephraim says the temple was enraged at the actions done to its archetype. The new Adam was crucified on the 6th day, the first Adam was created on the 6th day. Adam was cursed to make bread, Christ in a blessing made Himself bread.
The minor detail to show prophecy fulfilled, and this written to show ruthlessness of execution
The soldiers, then, divided our Saviour's garments among themselves, and this is indicative of their brutal ferocity and inhuman disposition. For it is the custom of executioners to be unmoved by the misery of condemned criminals, and to obey orders sometimes with unnecessary harshness, and to show a masculine indifference to the fate of the sufferers, and to divide their garments among themselves, as though the lot fell upon them by some sufficient and lawful reason. They divided, then, the dissevered garments into four portions, but kept the one coat whole and uncut. For they did not choose to tear it in pieces, and make it altogether useless, and so they decided it by casting lots. For Christ could not lie, Who thus spake by the voice of the Psalmist: They divided My raiment among them, and upon My vesture did they cast lots. All these things were foretold for our profit, that we might know, by comparing the prophecies with the events, what He is of Whom it was foretold that He should come for our sake in our likeness, and of Whom it was expected that He should die for the salvation of all men. For no man of sense can suppose that the Saviour Himself, like the foolish Jews, would strain out the gnat, that is, foretell a trifling detail concerning His sufferings, as in this mention of the partition of His raiment, and, as it were, swallow the camel, that is, think of no account the great lengths to which the impious presumption of the Jews carried them. Rather, when He foretold these details, He foretold also the great event itself; firstly, in order that we might know that, as He was by Nature God, He had perfect knowledge of the future; secondly, also, that we might believe that He was in fact the Messiah of prophecy, being led to the knowledge of the truth by the many and great things fulfilled in Him.--St Cyril of Alexandria, On the Gospel according to John, Book XII, on John 19:23
