Shabbat 59 - Horseshoes and Brooches

One way of deciding what is unfit to be worn as an separate item in pubiic on Shabbat (as opposed to something woven in or sown on to clothing) is determining if the object is succeptable to defilement should it comes in contact with someone ritually unclean. Which brings us to an interesting historical factoid: what horseshoes used to look like.

           "For we learnt: an animal's shoe, [if] of metal, is (subject to be) unclean. For what is it fit? — Rab said: It is fit for drinking water from in battle."

Now that's interesting! These battle horseshoes were not the open hoops we know. They had volume - fitting around and enclosing the horse's hooves, even serving as improvised drinking cups. And they might have had another dual use:

       "R. Johanan said: When one is fleeing from the field of battle, he places this [shoe] on his [own] feet and runs over briars and thorns."

The other basic principle of deciding what it forbidden to wear is value and removability. This is shown in the case of a "Golden City" presumably a brooch with an engraved image of Jerusalem:

         "R. Eliezer ruled: A woman may go out with a golden city at the very outset. . .the Rabbis hold that it is an ornament, [and it is forbidden only] lest she remove it to show [to a friend], and thus come to carry it [in the street]."

Interesting that this was apparently common enough that it needed its own ruling. Also interesting that it does not seem to violate the (historically flexible) rule against graven images. A city is not an animal or human which could be confused with a deity!

And you can't play horseshoes with a drinking cup!