Eminent Hysterians aside - who know nothing - why does no one refer to Persia? In Persia, it was the custom among the females of the Zoroastrian royalty and aristocracy (and in general, amongst all brides) to wear the veil. The royal and aristocratic women were to be veiled in front of men who were not their relatives. It was a sign of their rank. From what I have read on Iranian-Zoroastrian pages where they posted quotations from books, the veil was not a religious mandate amongst Zoroastrians. Some of the males and definitely the priests were also veiled at times - for different reasons. Amongst men it was also fashion and a sign of status, amongst priests it's because they weren't/aren't allowed to pollute the Sacred Fire.
The importance of what I just stated above, with respect to the Indian case, is two-fold: Persia was near India and had a veiling custom earlier than our confrontation with the Religion of PEACE; and the fact that significant parts of northern India were under tribute to Persia for at least a while - long enough to take over some of their fashionable customs: everyone loves copying the fashions of the aristocracy of successful nations. (Somewhere on IF I read that Hindus were in the Persian army fighting against Greeks - give me some time, I'll find that again.
<b>ADDED:</b> Found link
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Greek author Diodorus Siculus tells how in <b>316 B.C.</b> the Indian commander of a hired-army in Iran is killed, upon which his two spouses argue about the privilege of becoming the sati.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->)
Anyway, here's some supporting stuff for what I have just said (though what I'd originally read on it came from some Iranian-Zoroastrian site or forum where there were extensive articles on it). Don't know to correct most of the characters that have gone astray below, so am not attempting it:
http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/...6a026.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>ÃAÃDOR</b>, a loose female garment covering the body, sometimes also the face. The etymology of the word is unknown; connection with Indian chattra âparasolâ is uncertain (cf. ùatr).
<i>In Early Literary Sources
Among Zoroastrians
In Islamic Persia </i>
<b>In Early Literary Sources</b>
At least as early as <b>Achaemenid times Persian queens were hidden from the people.</b> Plutarch, discussing the reign of Artaxerxes (r. 404-359), writes that Queen Stateira was beloved by the common folk because the curtains of her carriage were always up, and thus the women of the people were permitted to see and greet her (âArtaxerxes,â 5; cf. Xenophon, Cyropaedia 6.4.11). <b>The fact that women of royalty were carried in curÂtained carriages gave rise to a motif in Persian narrative literature, the most celebrated example of which we find in the epic of V^s o Ra@m^n, with material dating from the Parthian era. There (p. 93), V^s is not only sitting behind curtains (parda) but also wearing a veil (neqa@b) on her face (cf. Bakòt^a@r-na@ma, ed. Sáafa@, pp. 5-6).</b>
In the Pahlavi texts ±a@dor is mentioned in at least two cases: in the Riva@yat ^ He@m^d i AÃawahiÃta@n, a 4th/10th-century Zoroastrian legal text (ed. Safa-Isfehani, p. 33.9), <b>±a@dor is mentioned, together with the sarband and wa@Ãmag, as a female head dress worn by ZoroasÂtrian women;</b> in the Ma@daya@n ^ Yo@iÃt ^ Friya@n, a Pahlavi text (6th century?) based on (lost) Avestan texts (cf. Yt. 5.81-83), we read (3.56) that Hufriya@, the sister of Yo@iÃt, a Turanian Zoroastrian, and the wife of Axt, an opponent of the new, Zoroastrian, faith, put on a veil (±a@dur) when she was requested to answer the question whether the pleasure of women is from dress and housewifery rather than being with their husbands.
<b>Persian classical texts provide us with a wealth of passages in which we find women of different periods and different classes covered with either ±a@dor or other forms of head dresses.</b> For instance, when Ë^r^n's conversation with the new king and her stepson Ë^ru@ya is over, she removes her ±a@dor to show him that it was her beautyâunseen by othersâthat worked like magic upon the dead king, K¨osrow Parve@z, and nothing else (Ëa@h-na@ma, Moscow, IX, pp. 2940 v. 534).
<b>Veiling was not limited to women but was practiced also by the Persian kings.</b> Ebn Esháa@q (d. ca. 150/767) relates in his S^ra (I, p. 42) that K¨osrow Ano@Ã^rava@n (r. 531-79) came into the audience hall to receive Zuyazan of Yaman covered, and only when he was seated on the throne under the hanging crown was his veil removed. K¨osrow Parv^z's head was veiled when he was brought to the house where he was to be confined during his last days (D^navar^, ed. Guirgass, p. 112; T®abar^, I, p. 1046).
<b>Bibliography :</b> Bakòt^a@r-na@ma, ed. D¨. Sáafa@, TehÂran, 1347 Ë./1968. Moháammad b. Esháa@q, S^rat Rasu@l Alla@h, ed. F. Wüstenfeld, Das Leben Muhammeds nach Muhammed b. Ishaq bearbeitet von ¿Abd-al-Malik b. Hisham, 2 vols., Göttingen, 1858-60. Fakòr-al-D^n As¿ad Gorga@n^, V^s o Ra@m^n, ed. M. A. Todua et al., Tehran, 1349 Ë./1970. Ma@daya@n ^ Yo@iÃt ^ Friya@n, ed. E. W. West, in M. Haug and E. W. West, The Book of Arda Viraf. Pahlavi Text Prepared by Destur Hoshangii Jamaspji Asa . . ., Bombay and London, 1872 (repr. Amsterdam, 1971), appendix I: The Tale of Gôsht-i Fryânô. N. Safa-Isfehani, ed. and tr., Riva@yat-i He@m^t-i AÃawahista@n [sic]. A Study in Zoroastrian Law, Harvard, 1980.
(Bijan Gheiby)
<b>Among Zoroastrians</b>
There does not seem to be any evidence of veils, either covering the body or just the mouth or head from the Achaemenian period. Instead covering the mouth with the fingers, apparently as a gesture of deference to avoid offending the monarch with the smell of one's breath, is seen for example in a relief from Persepolis where a Median official, separated from Darius by two beehive-Âshaped incense-burners on chest-high stands, holds the tips of the fingers of his right hand over his lips (Hinz, pl. 19 opposite p. 64).
<b>In Iranian painting of the Parthian and Sasanian periods, however, especially from S^sta@n and Sogdia, servants are shown wearing the mouth-veil</b>, Pahlavi pada@n or pada@m (Av. paiti.da@na-, borrowed in Armenian as p¿andam; see Russell, pp. 482, 486), which ZoroasÂtrian priests still employ ritually to prevent the breath from polluting the sacred fire (see Kawami, p. 48).
<b>First-century women wearing veils completely coverÂing their heads and faces are seen in a marble relief from Palmyra (Ghirshman, 1962, pl. 96); in 2nd-century Palmyrene sculpture veils covering the head but leaving the face exposed are common (ibid.; pls. 93-95).</b> Women in Sasanian art, other than royal figures, appear most often in cheerful settings as musicians or dancers. In the latter case they often twirl long scarves or veils of a diaphanous material (see, e.g., Harper, pp. 77-78, and cf. clothing), but their heads are rarely covered. Silk was also sometimes used for the ritual mouth veils (Persian Rivayats, p. 296), but Dhabhar points out that this usage should properly be condemned as the silk worm was traditionally regarded as an Ahrimanic creature (ibid., n. 1).
Parsi women today do not cover their faces, but the sari is traditionally draped over the head, especially on solemn occasions. An imported Persian woolen cloth of the Achaemenian period found at Pazyryk in Siberia depicts women before an incense burner on a stand with veils draped over their crowned heads and unveiled serving-women standing behind them (Rudenko, pp. 296-97 and pl. 139). To this day, Parsi women carry an incense burner about the house at dusk, and this scene may represent an ancient form of the same domestic observance, since women have never taken a formal role in Zoroastrian public rituals.
<b>Zoroastrian village women of the Yazd area wear a ±a@dor wrapped around their necks and heads (Boyce, Stronghold, p. 12, and pls. VIa-b), but all the face and some hair is allowed to show, a tradition maintained in the face of Muslim opposition.</b>
(Bibliography follows at original link)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The veiling of women in Islam is by diktat of the koran though - as the <b>same article</b> continues to show (though first this is preceeded by some para speculating on something that may or may not be true, don't know myself):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>In Islamic Persia</b>
In the Islamic period ±a@dor, or ±a@dar (lw. in Ar. Ãa@der), designates the loose, enveloping, sleeveless outer garÂment worn by women in Iran in compliance with Islamic regulations on dress (for dialect variations see Doerfer, III, pp. 17-18), called in Arabic melháaf or melháafa. The veiling of women was common in pre-Islamic Iran (see above), and it <b>may be that some of the rigors imposed on them in the early Islamic periodâas in 4th/10th century Daylam, where women were allowed to go out only at night, wearing black clothes (Spuler, p. 382)âÂrepresented a continuation of pre-Islamic custom.</b>
<span style='color:red'><b>Islamic requirements that have led to the wearing of the ±a@dor derive primarily from Koran 24:31 and 33:59.</b></span>
[...]
(The remaining bit goes deeper into these koranic injunctions (as well as the hadiths and the islamic practise of veiling in islam's history). Pretty interesting. Certainly disproves the late and lame islamic apologetics that the "veil was all Persia's fault".)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://jorge.paulodesigns.com/wedding/ceremony.html
<b>The Persian Wedding Ceremonry, Its History and Symbolism</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mirror (of fate) "Aayeneh-ye Bakht" and two Candelabras (representing the bride and groom and brightness in their future) one on either side of the mirror. The mirror and two candelabras are symbols of light and fire, two very important elements in the <b>Zoroastrian culture. When the bride enters the room she has her veil covering her face. Once the bride sits beside the bridegroom she removes her veil</b> and the first thing that the bridegroom sees in the mirror should be the reflection of his wife-to-be.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->A lot like the 'western' custom of the veiled bride, right? Be that as it may, it is certain that 'honeymoon' - even the English word is translated from Persian - came from Zoroastrian tradition.
And on the same page, we see that some vestiges of their influences on clothing, including wedding clothes, still remain in the north of Old India (Pakistan):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Traditionally, both the bride and the bridegroom would dress in white with wreaths of flower on their necks, something similar to the Hawaiian Lei. <b>These wreaths of flower are still worn in modern wedding ceremonies in Pakistan (which used to be part of the great Persian Empire)</b>, but it is eliminated from the Iranian wedding ceremony. The color white is a symbol of purity, innocence and faithfulness. Today most modern Iranian couples follow the western dress code and style.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, even some islamic sites agree that the Zoroastrians had a concept of veils (but then sometimes, ignorant islamis argue that that somehow means there is no concept of the veil in islam - they are wrong of course as seen in the 1st link above which quotes from the Koran, but I will get back to the islamic covering below):
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_101_...from_purdah.htm
<b>Islami article called "VEIL LIFTED FROM PURDAH"</b> tries to blame Zoroastrianism for the islamic veil; whereas it only succeeds in pointing out that the purdah was an invention of Zoroastrian society for a longish period. But this does in no way deny that the <i>islamic</i> veil is islamic (even in such a case where Iranians converted to islam may have chosen to adopt the local cloths and styles instead of the Arabian style).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The practice of covering the face completely except for the eyes originated in <b>Zoroastrian Persia of old where the patrician (aristocratic) women wore the purdah</b> in order to distinguish themselves from the plebeian (of lower social class) women. This Zoroastrian CUSTOM has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the Shari'ah of Islam!<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, the final thing: the <i>biblical</i> veil is very much a part of islam, because it is very much christoislamic. <b>See also next post.</b>
It is prescribed by the koran (see http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/...6a026.html again) because islam stole its idea - plagiarist religion that it is - from christianity which got it from the babble. Islamic veiling is different from the phenomenon amongst Zoroastrian and original Arabian (and Syrian and other ME) cultures. The purposes were different even among Zoroastrian and Arabian cultures themselves: in Arabia it was both for climatic and fashion reasons, for Zoroastrians it was fashion and class distinction as well as at one time to prevent (aristocratic) women from being seen - that is, for social reasons, nothing religious. What I am saying is: the phenomenon occuring in these two major different cultures seems similar on the surface, but occurred for entirely different reasons.
Though it must be said that some think the Persians introduced this concept into Judaism (like Zoroastrians introduced the idea of praying 5 times a day into islam). Don't know how true that is.
The importance of what I just stated above, with respect to the Indian case, is two-fold: Persia was near India and had a veiling custom earlier than our confrontation with the Religion of PEACE; and the fact that significant parts of northern India were under tribute to Persia for at least a while - long enough to take over some of their fashionable customs: everyone loves copying the fashions of the aristocracy of successful nations. (Somewhere on IF I read that Hindus were in the Persian army fighting against Greeks - give me some time, I'll find that again.
<b>ADDED:</b> Found link
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Greek author Diodorus Siculus tells how in <b>316 B.C.</b> the Indian commander of a hired-army in Iran is killed, upon which his two spouses argue about the privilege of becoming the sati.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->)
Anyway, here's some supporting stuff for what I have just said (though what I'd originally read on it came from some Iranian-Zoroastrian site or forum where there were extensive articles on it). Don't know to correct most of the characters that have gone astray below, so am not attempting it:
http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/...6a026.html
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>ÃAÃDOR</b>, a loose female garment covering the body, sometimes also the face. The etymology of the word is unknown; connection with Indian chattra âparasolâ is uncertain (cf. ùatr).
<i>In Early Literary Sources
Among Zoroastrians
In Islamic Persia </i>
<b>In Early Literary Sources</b>
At least as early as <b>Achaemenid times Persian queens were hidden from the people.</b> Plutarch, discussing the reign of Artaxerxes (r. 404-359), writes that Queen Stateira was beloved by the common folk because the curtains of her carriage were always up, and thus the women of the people were permitted to see and greet her (âArtaxerxes,â 5; cf. Xenophon, Cyropaedia 6.4.11). <b>The fact that women of royalty were carried in curÂtained carriages gave rise to a motif in Persian narrative literature, the most celebrated example of which we find in the epic of V^s o Ra@m^n, with material dating from the Parthian era. There (p. 93), V^s is not only sitting behind curtains (parda) but also wearing a veil (neqa@b) on her face (cf. Bakòt^a@r-na@ma, ed. Sáafa@, pp. 5-6).</b>
In the Pahlavi texts ±a@dor is mentioned in at least two cases: in the Riva@yat ^ He@m^d i AÃawahiÃta@n, a 4th/10th-century Zoroastrian legal text (ed. Safa-Isfehani, p. 33.9), <b>±a@dor is mentioned, together with the sarband and wa@Ãmag, as a female head dress worn by ZoroasÂtrian women;</b> in the Ma@daya@n ^ Yo@iÃt ^ Friya@n, a Pahlavi text (6th century?) based on (lost) Avestan texts (cf. Yt. 5.81-83), we read (3.56) that Hufriya@, the sister of Yo@iÃt, a Turanian Zoroastrian, and the wife of Axt, an opponent of the new, Zoroastrian, faith, put on a veil (±a@dur) when she was requested to answer the question whether the pleasure of women is from dress and housewifery rather than being with their husbands.
<b>Persian classical texts provide us with a wealth of passages in which we find women of different periods and different classes covered with either ±a@dor or other forms of head dresses.</b> For instance, when Ë^r^n's conversation with the new king and her stepson Ë^ru@ya is over, she removes her ±a@dor to show him that it was her beautyâunseen by othersâthat worked like magic upon the dead king, K¨osrow Parve@z, and nothing else (Ëa@h-na@ma, Moscow, IX, pp. 2940 v. 534).
<b>Veiling was not limited to women but was practiced also by the Persian kings.</b> Ebn Esháa@q (d. ca. 150/767) relates in his S^ra (I, p. 42) that K¨osrow Ano@Ã^rava@n (r. 531-79) came into the audience hall to receive Zuyazan of Yaman covered, and only when he was seated on the throne under the hanging crown was his veil removed. K¨osrow Parv^z's head was veiled when he was brought to the house where he was to be confined during his last days (D^navar^, ed. Guirgass, p. 112; T®abar^, I, p. 1046).
<b>Bibliography :</b> Bakòt^a@r-na@ma, ed. D¨. Sáafa@, TehÂran, 1347 Ë./1968. Moháammad b. Esháa@q, S^rat Rasu@l Alla@h, ed. F. Wüstenfeld, Das Leben Muhammeds nach Muhammed b. Ishaq bearbeitet von ¿Abd-al-Malik b. Hisham, 2 vols., Göttingen, 1858-60. Fakòr-al-D^n As¿ad Gorga@n^, V^s o Ra@m^n, ed. M. A. Todua et al., Tehran, 1349 Ë./1970. Ma@daya@n ^ Yo@iÃt ^ Friya@n, ed. E. W. West, in M. Haug and E. W. West, The Book of Arda Viraf. Pahlavi Text Prepared by Destur Hoshangii Jamaspji Asa . . ., Bombay and London, 1872 (repr. Amsterdam, 1971), appendix I: The Tale of Gôsht-i Fryânô. N. Safa-Isfehani, ed. and tr., Riva@yat-i He@m^t-i AÃawahista@n [sic]. A Study in Zoroastrian Law, Harvard, 1980.
(Bijan Gheiby)
<b>Among Zoroastrians</b>
There does not seem to be any evidence of veils, either covering the body or just the mouth or head from the Achaemenian period. Instead covering the mouth with the fingers, apparently as a gesture of deference to avoid offending the monarch with the smell of one's breath, is seen for example in a relief from Persepolis where a Median official, separated from Darius by two beehive-Âshaped incense-burners on chest-high stands, holds the tips of the fingers of his right hand over his lips (Hinz, pl. 19 opposite p. 64).
<b>In Iranian painting of the Parthian and Sasanian periods, however, especially from S^sta@n and Sogdia, servants are shown wearing the mouth-veil</b>, Pahlavi pada@n or pada@m (Av. paiti.da@na-, borrowed in Armenian as p¿andam; see Russell, pp. 482, 486), which ZoroasÂtrian priests still employ ritually to prevent the breath from polluting the sacred fire (see Kawami, p. 48).
<b>First-century women wearing veils completely coverÂing their heads and faces are seen in a marble relief from Palmyra (Ghirshman, 1962, pl. 96); in 2nd-century Palmyrene sculpture veils covering the head but leaving the face exposed are common (ibid.; pls. 93-95).</b> Women in Sasanian art, other than royal figures, appear most often in cheerful settings as musicians or dancers. In the latter case they often twirl long scarves or veils of a diaphanous material (see, e.g., Harper, pp. 77-78, and cf. clothing), but their heads are rarely covered. Silk was also sometimes used for the ritual mouth veils (Persian Rivayats, p. 296), but Dhabhar points out that this usage should properly be condemned as the silk worm was traditionally regarded as an Ahrimanic creature (ibid., n. 1).
Parsi women today do not cover their faces, but the sari is traditionally draped over the head, especially on solemn occasions. An imported Persian woolen cloth of the Achaemenian period found at Pazyryk in Siberia depicts women before an incense burner on a stand with veils draped over their crowned heads and unveiled serving-women standing behind them (Rudenko, pp. 296-97 and pl. 139). To this day, Parsi women carry an incense burner about the house at dusk, and this scene may represent an ancient form of the same domestic observance, since women have never taken a formal role in Zoroastrian public rituals.
<b>Zoroastrian village women of the Yazd area wear a ±a@dor wrapped around their necks and heads (Boyce, Stronghold, p. 12, and pls. VIa-b), but all the face and some hair is allowed to show, a tradition maintained in the face of Muslim opposition.</b>
(Bibliography follows at original link)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->The veiling of women in Islam is by diktat of the koran though - as the <b>same article</b> continues to show (though first this is preceeded by some para speculating on something that may or may not be true, don't know myself):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>In Islamic Persia</b>
In the Islamic period ±a@dor, or ±a@dar (lw. in Ar. Ãa@der), designates the loose, enveloping, sleeveless outer garÂment worn by women in Iran in compliance with Islamic regulations on dress (for dialect variations see Doerfer, III, pp. 17-18), called in Arabic melháaf or melháafa. The veiling of women was common in pre-Islamic Iran (see above), and it <b>may be that some of the rigors imposed on them in the early Islamic periodâas in 4th/10th century Daylam, where women were allowed to go out only at night, wearing black clothes (Spuler, p. 382)âÂrepresented a continuation of pre-Islamic custom.</b>
<span style='color:red'><b>Islamic requirements that have led to the wearing of the ±a@dor derive primarily from Koran 24:31 and 33:59.</b></span>
[...]
(The remaining bit goes deeper into these koranic injunctions (as well as the hadiths and the islamic practise of veiling in islam's history). Pretty interesting. Certainly disproves the late and lame islamic apologetics that the "veil was all Persia's fault".)<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://jorge.paulodesigns.com/wedding/ceremony.html
<b>The Persian Wedding Ceremonry, Its History and Symbolism</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Mirror (of fate) "Aayeneh-ye Bakht" and two Candelabras (representing the bride and groom and brightness in their future) one on either side of the mirror. The mirror and two candelabras are symbols of light and fire, two very important elements in the <b>Zoroastrian culture. When the bride enters the room she has her veil covering her face. Once the bride sits beside the bridegroom she removes her veil</b> and the first thing that the bridegroom sees in the mirror should be the reflection of his wife-to-be.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->A lot like the 'western' custom of the veiled bride, right? Be that as it may, it is certain that 'honeymoon' - even the English word is translated from Persian - came from Zoroastrian tradition.
And on the same page, we see that some vestiges of their influences on clothing, including wedding clothes, still remain in the north of Old India (Pakistan):
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Traditionally, both the bride and the bridegroom would dress in white with wreaths of flower on their necks, something similar to the Hawaiian Lei. <b>These wreaths of flower are still worn in modern wedding ceremonies in Pakistan (which used to be part of the great Persian Empire)</b>, but it is eliminated from the Iranian wedding ceremony. The color white is a symbol of purity, innocence and faithfulness. Today most modern Iranian couples follow the western dress code and style.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, even some islamic sites agree that the Zoroastrians had a concept of veils (but then sometimes, ignorant islamis argue that that somehow means there is no concept of the veil in islam - they are wrong of course as seen in the 1st link above which quotes from the Koran, but I will get back to the islamic covering below):
http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_101_...from_purdah.htm
<b>Islami article called "VEIL LIFTED FROM PURDAH"</b> tries to blame Zoroastrianism for the islamic veil; whereas it only succeeds in pointing out that the purdah was an invention of Zoroastrian society for a longish period. But this does in no way deny that the <i>islamic</i> veil is islamic (even in such a case where Iranians converted to islam may have chosen to adopt the local cloths and styles instead of the Arabian style).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The practice of covering the face completely except for the eyes originated in <b>Zoroastrian Persia of old where the patrician (aristocratic) women wore the purdah</b> in order to distinguish themselves from the plebeian (of lower social class) women. This Zoroastrian CUSTOM has NOTHING whatsoever to do with the Shari'ah of Islam!<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Now, the final thing: the <i>biblical</i> veil is very much a part of islam, because it is very much christoislamic. <b>See also next post.</b>
It is prescribed by the koran (see http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/...6a026.html again) because islam stole its idea - plagiarist religion that it is - from christianity which got it from the babble. Islamic veiling is different from the phenomenon amongst Zoroastrian and original Arabian (and Syrian and other ME) cultures. The purposes were different even among Zoroastrian and Arabian cultures themselves: in Arabia it was both for climatic and fashion reasons, for Zoroastrians it was fashion and class distinction as well as at one time to prevent (aristocratic) women from being seen - that is, for social reasons, nothing religious. What I am saying is: the phenomenon occuring in these two major different cultures seems similar on the surface, but occurred for entirely different reasons.
Though it must be said that some think the Persians introduced this concept into Judaism (like Zoroastrians introduced the idea of praying 5 times a day into islam). Don't know how true that is.