Anointing

← Encyclopedia

Anointing is the ritual application of oil — usually to the head or body of a person, sometimes to an object — to mark a change in status: to set apart, to heal, to consecrate, or to honor the dead. The practice is ancient and widespread across the Near East and the Mediterranean, and its meanings layer rather than replace one another. The same gesture could install a king, ready a corpse for the grave, refresh a guest, or seal a covenant, and a given culture often held several of these at once.

The oil and its work

The medium itself carried much of the meaning. Oil — most often olive oil in the Mediterranean, sesame oil in Mesopotamia — was expensive, slow to make, and prized: it fed lamps, dressed wounds, softened skin against a dry climate, and, blended with resins and spices, became perfume. To pour it out was to spend something real. The richest preparations folded in costly aromatics: the recipe set down in the Israelite priestly law calls for flowing myrrh, fragrant cinnamon and cane, cassia, and olive oil, compounded by a perfumer’s art — a substance kindred in its ingredients to the incense burned in the same sanctuary, and reserved, under penalty, from ordinary use. Oil was thus already a marked material before any rite touched it. It signified gladness — the festal head was an oiled head, the mourner’s a dry one — and it signified care, the body tended rather than neglected. Anointing built on that grammar. To be anointed was to be made glad, made clean, made conspicuous, lifted out of the common run.

Across the ancient world the gesture spread without a single fixed meaning. In Babylonia and Assyria oil was poured over the heads of brides, of parties to a property transaction, and of freed slaves — a public sign that a status had changed and could not quietly change back. Mesopotamian temples maintained an order of anointed priests, the pašišu, whose very name marked the rite that set them apart. Egyptian and Hittite courts anointed officials and, in some cases, vassal kings installed under a greater crown. Greeks and Romans oiled athletes before the contest and guests at the threshold, and they prepared the dead with fragrant oils against decay and for honor. None of these readings canceled the others. A culture could anoint a guest at noon and a corpse at dusk and feel no contradiction, because the underlying act was the same: a person singled out and handled with the costly stuff, set for a moment outside the ordinary economy of touch.

Israel and the making of the anointed one

The most consequential strand runs through Israelite religion, where anointing became the act that made an office real. The priestly tradition describes the sanctuary, its furniture, and the priests themselves anointed at their consecration — the oil setting apart what it touched, transferring it from common to holy. This is anointing as the engine of a wider logic of setting-apart: the same gesture that could honor a guest, applied with intent and the proper oil, moved a thing across the boundary between profane and sacred and made the crossing visible. An altar so anointed was no longer ordinary stone; a man so anointed was no longer an ordinary man. But it is the anointing of kings that carries the weight of the later history. In the books of Samuel the prophet pours oil over Saul, and afterward over David, and the act is not a coronation in the modern sense but something prior to and deeper than coronation: it institutes the man. The horn of oil emptied over the head is the visible moment at which a shepherd becomes the chosen of the Lord, and the narrative pairs the gesture with a further claim — that the spirit of the Lord came upon the anointed from that day forward. The oil is read as the outward face of an inward seizing; what the prophet does with his hand, God is said to do with his power.

From that act came a word with a long future. The one so marked was mashiach, “the anointed,” from the Hebrew root meaning to smear or rub with oil. It was not, at first, a unique title. A reigning king was the Lord’s anointed; so was the high priest; the term could even reach a prophet, and in one striking case the Israelite scriptures call a foreign emperor, Cyrus the Persian, the Lord’s anointed — a non-Israelite raised up for a purpose he never knew he served. The word named a function and a relation, not yet a single awaited person. When the Hebrew scriptures were rendered into Greek, mashiach became christos, formed from the verb to anoint; from christos, by way of Latin, English takes Christ. The chain is unbroken from a horn of oil over a head to a name now borne by a faith: the title is, at root, a description of a rite.

Over later centuries the title slipped its first moorings. The monarchy that the anointing had instituted fell; kings stopped being anointed because there were no kings. But the vocabulary did not die with the office — it migrated forward. The hope attached to the anointed king detached from any sitting ruler and reattached to a deliverer still to come, a coming anointed one who would do what the failed kings had not. This shift is legible within the sources themselves, in the prophetic and post-exilic texts of the Old Testament, where the expectation of an anointed deliverer grows as the actual line of anointed kings recedes into memory. By the close of the Second Temple period the single word messiah could carry a whole horizon of longing — and the various streams of Jewish thought held that horizon differently, some awaiting a royal anointed of David’s line, some a priestly anointed, some both, some something stranger. The rite had become a hope.

Christianity reapplies the vocabulary

Christianity was born inside that expectation and reapplied its whole vocabulary. To confess Jesus as the Christ was to say, in the plain sense of the word, that he was the anointed one the hope had been waiting for — and the New Testament presses the point that his anointing was not by a prophet’s horn of oil but by the spirit at his baptism, the rite refigured as something poured out invisibly. From there the older gesture returned in a new key. Believers, the early writings hold, are anointed in turn — sealed and consecrated not as kings over a nation but as a people set apart. The word Christ, the anointed, generates Christian, the anointed one’s own; the rite is folded into the name of the whole community.

The church gave the metaphor a body. It developed rites using a consecrated oil — chrism, from the same Greek root as christos — administered at the threshold of the Christian life and at its decisive turns: at baptism, in the confirmation or sealing of the baptized, and at the ordination of clergy who in turn would handle the holy things. These belong to the wider field of the church’s sacraments and the sacramental acts that ring them; anointing also persists as a rite for the gravely ill and dying, kept distinct as the anointing of the sick. The traditions that keep these rites do not hold the oil to be a symbol only. The dominant teaching is that the chrism conveys the Holy Spirit — that the anointing does what it signifies, sealing a real gift rather than picturing one. Whether the rite is understood to confer grace as a communion of the Spirit or to seal and signify it has divided theologians, but across the divide the oil is treated as efficacious, an instrument and not an ornament.

East and West preserved the practice with differing emphases and a difference of sequence. The Eastern churches keep baptism, chrismation, and first communion together as a single initiation, conferred at once even on an infant: the priest who baptizes also anoints, marking the brow, the senses, and the limbs and naming each anointing as the seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit. The chrism itself, the myron, is consecrated with great solemnity, and in the Eastern reckoning a trace of older chrism is folded into each new batch, so that the present oil is held to descend in an unbroken material line from the church’s beginning. The West broke the sequence: reserving the completing anointing to the bishop, it let confirmation drift years apart from baptism, and gathered the consecration of the chrism into the bishop’s own rite. The same oil, the same root word, two rhythms of administering it. And the royal sense never wholly disappeared — the anointing of monarchs at their crowning survived in Christian Europe as the sacred core of the ceremony, the moment held to make the king more than a man chosen by men, the last clear descendant of the horn poured over Saul.

Islam and the title without the rite

Islam carries the word but not the royal-messianic rite. There is no anointing of caliphs or kings as the act that institutes them; oil and perfume keep their honored place in hospitality, in care of the body, and in the preparation of the dead, but the office of the anointed king has no Islamic counterpart. The word itself, however, is present at the highest level. Al-Masih, the Arabic form of “the anointed,” is a title of Jesus in the Qur’an, where it appears as a fixed honorific for Isa, son of Mary. In the Qur’anic usage the literal sense of “anointed” recedes almost entirely; the term functions as a name attached to Jesus rather than as a claim about a rite performed on him. Later Muslim exegetes, working from the Arabic root that can mean to wipe, to touch, or to anoint, proposed many readings — that he was touched with blessing, that he wiped and healed the sick by God’s leave, that he was made pure — and the lexicographers gathered these into long lists of possible meanings. The same three consonants that gave Hebrew its mashiach and Greek its christos surface here as a title for the same figure, drained of the coronation oil and refilled with other senses.

What scholarship establishes and what the traditions claim

What scholarship can establish is the spread and the social function: oil was costly, fragrant, and associated with gladness and with the body’s care, which made it a natural medium for marking a person as elevated, dedicated, or mourned. The comparative study of the rite — the strand of inquiry that runs from William Robertson Smith’s late-nineteenth-century lectures on the religion of the Semites, which read the anointing of sacred stones as a primal act standing behind the later anointing of persons, through twentieth-century reconstructions of Israelite kingship and its Near Eastern setting — treats the gesture as a piece of social technology before it is anything else. A king newly anointed could not pretend he had not been; the public oil made the change irreversible, witnessed, and binding. The rite did real work in the world whether or not anything unseen accompanied it.

What the traditions themselves claim goes further — that the gesture does something, transferring a charge that ordinary touch could not. The horn of oil carries the spirit; the chrism carries the seal; the sign is not a label fixed to a status already in place but the means by which the status arrives. The two readings are not finally separable in the ancient sources, where the symbol and the thing symbolized were rarely held apart, and where the costliness of the oil was itself part of how the unseen gift was thought to travel. To pour out something precious over a head was, in the same motion, to honor a man and to hand him a power; the social fact and the metaphysical claim arrived in one act.

The image has also traveled into figurative use, where to be “anointed” means to be singled out for a destiny by a power beyond one’s choosing. That sense, secular now, still carries the older weight: a mark conferred from outside, which the marked one did not earn and cannot easily refuse.

Sources and further reading

The foundational comparative treatment remains William Robertson Smith’s Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (1889; subsequent editions to 1894), which set anointing within a ritual-first account of ancient practice and traced the anointing of persons back to the older anointing of holy stones. For the word-history of the title, the Society for Old Testament Study’s reference article on “Messiah” gathers the biblical range of mashiach — king, priest, prophet, and the foreign Cyrus — and its development toward eschatological expectation. The ancient Near Eastern background, including the Mesopotamian pašišu priests and the anointing of brides, freed slaves, and parties to contracts, is surveyed in the Livius account of the roots of messianism. On the Christian rite, the article on chrism describes the consecrated oil, the Eastern myron, and the contrasting Eastern and Western practices of confirmation and chrismation; and on the Islamic title, the survey of “Masih” as a name of Jesus traces al-Masih from the Semitic root through its Qur’anic use and the long exegetical debate over its meaning.

→ Related: Consecration · Sacramental · Spirit · David · Sacrament · Baptism · Anointing Of The Sick · Old Testament