On the Apparel of Women (Modern, Updated Translation)

On the Apparel of Women Summary

Tertullian’s On the Apparel of Women (De cultu feminarum), written around 202 AD in Carthage, stands as a passionate, two-book exhortation directed primarily at Christian women, though its principles extend to all believers. Influenced by his Montanist rigorism and a deep sense of eschatological urgency, Tertullian frames feminine adornment as a spiritual battleground where vanity, lust, and demonic influence threaten the soul’s salvation. He opens with the Genesis narrative: after the Fall, God clothed Adam and Eve in humble “tunics of skins,” a divinely sanctioned model of necessity and penitence, not ornamentation. Any departure from this—elaborate hairstyles, dyed wool, silks, purple dyes, gold, pearls, or cosmetics—revives a false pre-lapsarian innocence and defies the curse of mortality and toil.

In the first book, Tertullian traces the origin of luxurious apparel to fallen angels who, lusting after human women (a tradition drawn from the Book of Enoch), taught mankind the arts of metallurgy, dyeing, and beautification. These innovations, he argues, were not neutral crafts but instruments of corruption, turning women into “altars of the devil” and ensnaring men through sensual provocation. Makeup masks the face God gave; jewelry burdens the body meant for service; fine garments proclaim pride rather than humility. Such excesses not only dishonor the Creator but endanger both wearer and observer, fostering envy, lust, and idolatry in a fallen world already teetering toward judgment.

The second book shifts to direct scriptural command, citing 1 Timothy 2:9–10 and 1 Peter 3:3–4 to insist that Christian women must adorn themselves “in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety… with good works” rather than “broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array.” Tertullian rejects common excuses—marital duty, social custom, festival license, or the example of wealthy pagan matrons—asserting that faith demands a higher standard. Even virgins and widows, free from spousal obligation, must embrace stricter simplicity as a testimony to their consecration. Men, though less directly addressed, are warned against complicity in vanity, either by demanding finery from wives or indulging in it themselves.

On the Apparel of Women

Want to support our work? Please purchase the book on Amazon and leave a positive review.

Buy on Amazon

Free Book Preview (In Modern English)

If there existed on earth a faith as great as the reward of faith expected in heaven, none of you, dear sisters, from the moment you first came to know the Lord and understood the truth about your own condition as women, would have desired such a joyful (not to mention ostentatious) style of dress.

Instead, you would choose to dress humbly and embrace a modest appearance, walking as Eve did in mourning and repentance, so that through every sign of penitence, you might more fully atone for what you inherited from Eve—the disgrace of the first sin and the blame placed on her as the cause of human downfall. In pain and anxiety, you bear children, woman; and your desire is for your husband, and he rules over you (Gen. 3:16). Do you not realize that each of you is an Eve? God's sentence on your sex continues in this age, and the guilt must necessarily continue too. You are the devil's gateway; you are the one who unlocked the forbidden tree; you are the first to abandon divine law; you are the one who persuaded the man whom the devil was not brave enough to attack. You destroyed God's image, man, so easily.

Because of your actions—death—even the Son of God had to die. And do you think about adorning yourself beyond your garments of skins? Consider this: if from the beginning of the world the Milesians sheared sheep, the Serians spun trees, the Tyrians dyed, the Phrygians embroidered with needles, and the Babylonians with looms, if pearls gleamed and onyx stones shone, if gold had already emerged from the ground with its accompanying greed, and if mirrors had already been allowed to deceive so greatly, Eve, expelled from paradise and already dead, would have coveted these things, I imagine! Therefore, she should not now crave or be familiar with what she neither had nor knew when she was alive, if she desires to live again. These things are all the trappings of a woman in her condemned and dead state, as if to enhance the grandeur of her funeral.

Fallen Angels and Fashion

For those who established these practices are condemned to the penalty of death—specifically, the angels who descended from heaven to be with the daughters of men. This disgrace also reflects on women. In a time much less informed than ours, these angels revealed certain hidden materials and various scientific arts. If it's true that they exposed the processes of metallurgy, disclosed the natural properties of herbs, shared the powers of enchantments, and explored every curious art, even to the interpretation of the stars, they specifically gave women the means for feminine display: the brilliance of jewels that adorn necklaces, the gold bands that encircle arms, the dyes that color wools, and the black powder that highlights eyelids and eyelashes. 

The nature of these things can be understood from the nature and condition of their teachers: sinners could never have shown or provided anything that leads to integrity, unlawful lovers nothing that leads to chastity, and renegade spirits nothing that leads to the fear of God. If these are to be called teachings, bad teachers must have taught poorly; if they are wages of lust, there is nothing base for which the wages are honorable. But why was it so important to show and give these things? 

Was it because women, without material causes of splendor and without clever contrivances of grace, could not please men, who, while still unadorned and plain, had attracted angels? Or was it that the lovers would seem cheap and disrespectful if they gave no compensating gift to the women they enticed into marriage? These questions are beyond calculation. Women who had angels as husbands could desire nothing more; they had, indeed, made a grand match! 

Surely, those who sometimes thought about where they had fallen from, and after the heated impulses of their lusts, looked up toward heaven, thus repaid that very excellence of women, natural beauty, as a cause of evil, so that their good fortune might benefit them nothing; and being turned from simplicity and sincerity, they, along with the angels, might become offensive to God. They knew that all ostentation, ambition, and love of pleasing through carnal means were displeasing to God. These are the angels we are destined to judge; these are the angels we renounce in baptism. These are the reasons they deserve to be judged by humans. What business do their things have with their judges? What connection do those who are to condemn have with those who are to be condemned? The same, I suppose, as Christ has with Belial (2 Cor. 6:15). How can we consistently sit on that future judgment seat to pronounce sentence against those whose gifts we now seek? For you too, women, have the same angelic nature promised as your reward, the same status as men: the same advancement to the dignity of judging is promised to you by the Lord. Unless we begin even here to pre-judge by pre-condemning their things, which we are to condemn in them later, they will rather judge and condemn us.

Why the Book of Enoch Matters

I am aware that the Book of Enoch, which attributes this order of actions to angels, is not accepted by some because it is not included in the Jewish canon. I assume they thought that since it was published before the flood, it couldn't have survived such a global catastrophe that wiped out everything. If that's their reason for rejecting it, they should remember that Noah, who survived the flood, was Enoch's great-grandson. Naturally, he would have heard and remembered, through family stories and inherited traditions, about his great-grandfather's favor in God's eyes and all his teachings. Enoch had instructed Methuselah to pass on this knowledge to his descendants. Therefore, Noah likely continued this responsibility of preserving these teachings. If it were otherwise, he wouldn't have remained silent about God's arrangements, his protector, and the particular honor of his own family.

If Noah had not possessed this conservative power by such a short route, there would still be reason to support our claim of the genuineness of this scripture: he could have just as easily renewed it under the Spirit's inspiration after it had been destroyed by the violence of the flood. This is similar to how, after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonian invasion, it is generally agreed that every document of Jewish literature was restored through Ezra.

But since Enoch in the same Scripture has also preached about the Lord, we should not reject anything that pertains to us; and we read that every Scripture suitable for teaching is divinely inspired. The Jews may now seem to have rejected it for that very reason, just like nearly all the other portions that speak of Christ. It is not surprising, of course, that they did not accept some Scriptures that spoke of Him, especially since they did not accept Him even when He spoke in their presence. Additionally, Enoch is mentioned in the testimony of the Apostle Jude (Jude 1:14-15).

Judging Adornments on their own Merit

Let's assume for a moment that no sign of prior condemnation has been placed on women's finery due to the fate of its creators. Let's not attribute anything to those angels beyond their rejection of heaven and their earthly marriages. Instead, let's examine the characteristics of these things themselves so that we can understand the reasons they are so eagerly sought after.

Women's attire involves two aspects—clothing and adornment. By clothing, we mean what is considered feminine elegance; by adornment, what should be called feminine disgrace. The former is thought to include gold, silver, gems, and garments; the latter involves care of the hair, skin, and other parts of the body that attract attention. We accuse the first of ambition and the second of immodesty; so even at this early stage of our discussion, you can anticipate and discern what, among all these, is appropriate for you, servant of God, given that you are judged by different standards than other women—those of humility and chastity.

The Real Worth of Gold and Silver

Gold and silver, the main materials of worldly splendor, must naturally be the same as what they come from: earth. The earth itself is clearly more glorious, since it's only after being painfully extracted through hard labor in the deadly depths of cursed mines, and leaving its earthly name behind in the fire, that it escapes from torment to become ornaments, from punishment to embellishments, from disgrace to honor. 

But iron, brass, and other less valuable materials share the same origin and metallurgical process as silver and gold, so that in nature's view, gold and silver are not considered any more noble than these. If gold and silver gain their glory from usefulness, then iron and brass surpass them. Their usefulness is so arranged by the Creator that they not only perform more numerous and necessary functions for human affairs, but also support gold and silver by their own strength in more just causes. Rings are made of iron, and history still remembers certain eating and drinking vessels made from brass. Let the excessive abundance of gold and silver consider if it serves to make utensils even for unclean purposes. 

After all, fields aren't tilled with gold, nor are ships held together by silver. No plow digs into the ground with a golden blade; no nail fastens planks with a silver point. I won't even mention that our entire life's needs depend on iron and brass, while those rich materials, needing to be mined and forged for every use, are useless without the hard work of iron and brass. 

Therefore, we must consider why gold and silver are held in such high esteem when they are surpassed by materials that are not only closely related in origin but also more useful.

Pebbles, Pearls, and Pride

In the next place, how should I interpret those jewels that compete with gold in arrogance, except as mere pebbles and stones and insignificant fragments of the same earth? They are not necessary for laying foundations, building walls, supporting structures, or adding strength to roofs. The only structure they know how to build is this foolish pride of women: because they require slow polishing to shine, skillful setting to look good, and careful piercing to hang; and they provide mutual assistance to gold in seductive allure. 

Whatever ambition dredges up from the British or Indian sea is a type of shellfish not more pleasing in taste than—not to mention the oyster and the sea-snail—but even the giant mussel. Let me add that I know of conchs that are sweet fruits of the sea. But if that foreign conch suffers from some internal blemish, it should be seen as a defect rather than a glory; and even if it is called a pearl, it should be understood as nothing more than a hard, round growth of the fish. Some also claim that gems are taken from the foreheads of dragons, just as there is a certain stony substance in the brains of fish. 

This, too, was missing for the Christian woman, so she could add a grace to herself from the serpent! Is this how she will crush the devil's head, while adorning herself with ornaments taken from his head on her own neck, or even on her own head?