Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Antiquities of Orissa v1.c10: Chapter IV. Sculptural Indications of the Social Condition of the Temple Builders

The Antiquities of Orissa v1.c10

Language
English

Contents

Chapter IV. Sculptural Indications of the Social Condition of the Temple Builders

v1.c10.2

Sculptured materials for a social history of India; Sāñcī gateways; Amarāvatī rails; Bhuvaneśvara temples. Similarity of their historical indications deducible from the nature and character of Indian languages and religious systems. Importance of dress in civilization. Evidence of the *Ṛgveda* as to clothing; material thereof, wool and cotton. Testimony of the Bible. Silk; proofs in the *Rāmāyaṇa*. Manu on woollen and hempen thread. Arrian's muslins. Specimens of ornamented cloth from sculptures. Dyed cloth. Style of dress. Vedic evidence thereof; sculptural ditto. Ordinary everyday Uriyā male dress; full dress. Ancient Hindu male dress. Uriyā female dress. Evidence of sculptured dress insufficient to settle questions of Indian ethnology, Mr. Fergusson's *Dasyus*; their relations to the *Vānaprasthas*. Head dress; coiffure; caps; turbans. Beard. Shoes, boots. Personal ornaments; Vedic evidence; that of Amarāvatī; ditto of Bhuvaneśvara. Indian filigree. Crowns, coronets, and tiaras. Ear ornaments. Nose ornaments. Necklaces. Waist ornaments. Leg ditto. Material of ditto. Precious stones. Furniture; bedsteads, bedding, footstools, chairs, folding stools, teapoys, thrones, tables. Mode of sitting. Umbrella. *Cāmara*. Fans. Domestic utensils. Drinking cups; water carafes; goblets; spittoons; betel boxes; courier bags; leather bottles; dressing cases. Musical Instruments. Boats. Food and drink. Offensive arms,—bows, arrows, swords, lances, discuses, lassos. Defensive arms,—shields, armour. Flags. Trumpets. Horse. Harness. Whips. Chariots. Wagons.

v1.c10.3

Bearing in mind the marked success which has attended the labours of Sir Gardner Wilkinson in developing the history of Egypt from her ancient monuments, it is to be hoped that a time will come when it will be possible to deduce a similar social history of India for, at least, a considerable period of her antiquity. Materials for such a work are not altogether wanting. If, owing to the nature of the climate and other causes, there is now in India nothing like the endless series of old paintings which delineate almost every phase of Egyptian life,¹ or the historical bas-reliefs which record with fastidious exactitude the lives of Assyrian Kings, their wars, and hunting scenes, their state ceremonies and religious festivals, their servants and soldiers, their tributaries and captives, there are nevertheless a vast number of sculptures which serve to a great extent the same purpose. The Sāñcī gateways contain representations of several thousands of human figures engaged in various occupations of life, and they date from an early period, certainly not later than the first century of the Christian era. Three centuries subsequently there is in the topes of Amarāvatī,² in Guntoor, another and a most interesting collection. Adverting to the rail round this monument, Mr. Fergusson observes: "There were apparently twenty-four pillars in each quadrant, and eight at least in each gateway, say one hundred and twelve to one hundred and twenty in all. This involves two hundred and thirty to two hundred and forty central discs, all of which were sculptured; and as each of these contains from twenty to thirty figures at least, there must have been in them alone from six thousand to seven thousand figures. If we add to these the continuous frieze above and the sculptures above and below, and the discs on the pillars, there probably were not less than one hundred and twenty to one hundred and forty figures for each intercolumniation, say twelve thousand to fourteen thousand in all. The inner rail contains probably even a greater number of figures than this; but they are so small as more to resemble ivory carving; but except perhaps, the great frieze at Nakhon vat (in Kambodia), there is not, perhaps, even in India, and certainly not in any other part of the world, a storied page of sculpture equal in extent to what this must have been when complete"³. Most of these pillars and discs have no doubt already disappeared, but still enough remains amply to reward to diligent enquirer. Even a careful study of the valuable plates published in Mr. Fergusson's magnificent work would afford by no means a small amount of information to the student of history.

v1.c10.4

¹ The frescoes of the Ajaṇṭā caves shew that they were at one time plentiful in India.

v1.c10.5

² Mr. Fergusson spells the word "Amrāvatī", lit., having mangoe trees; but, as he admits that it is derived from Amareśvara, the lord, *īśvara*, of the immortals, *amara*, the correct orthography should be as given above. To avoid a discussion for which I have no space here, I have accepted Mr. Fergusson's dates of Sāñcī and Amarāvatī; but there are reasons to believe that the principal topes of those places date from a much earlier period.

v1.c10.6

³ *Tree and Serpent Worship.* p. 166.

v1.c10.7

**Extent of Bhuvanes'vara sculptures :** The total amount of sculptured work on the temples of Bhuvanes'vara, is probably greater than what is to be met with in Sāñcī or Amarāvatī; but it is more ornamental than historical. The bulk is made up of mouldings, scrolls, floral devices, and animals, and the number of human figures to be seen is limited to perhaps two or three thousand. Most of those figures, besides, are placed singly in conventional attitudes; and [78] do not yield the same amount of information which storied groups are calculated to afford. Many of them again are repetitions, and others represent scenes, such as eating and drinking, playing and love-making, which are common to humanity in every part of the world. There are, nevertheless, several groups of great interest and even the single figures are not entirely useless as *indicia* of manners, customs, habits, and ideas of their time. Had these three collections belonged to the same province, and been the handiworks of the same race of men, bearing in mind the strong vitality of custom in this country, one could have taken the Sāñcī gateways of the first century, the Amarāvatī rails of the fourth, and the Bhuvanes'vara sculptures of the seventh century, as three consecutive chapters of a single history. Such is, however, not the case. They are entirely separated from each other by distance, by nationality, and, in one case, by religion, and the picture of domestic and social life they represent, cannot be strictly faithful of the whole of India. Nevertheless, their indications and suggestions must be applicable, of course with some reservations, to most parts of the country. The civilization of the Aryans, there are irrefragable evidences to show, had spread over nearly the whole of India long before the time when the sculptures under notice were designed, and it would be unreasonable to suppose that social life and art had been left in each province to follow their own individual course, utterly unaffected by it. Two states of civilization can no more remain in contact for any length of time without influencing each other, than two opposing forces can meet without a counteraction. The languages and the religious systems of the different races of India, bear the most unmistakable evidence of this law, and it may be fairly assumed that it is to be equally met with in domestic and social life. It has been already shewn that architectural details and ornamentation have been very much alike in all parts of India, and the general style of sculpture, making due allowance for differences of material, age and capacity, is likewise the same. The inference, therefore, that the civilization they delineate as regards dress, ornaments, household furniture and utensils, arms, musical instruments, and social life, was, within certain limits, similar, cannot be open to any serious objection. It would be foreign to the subject of this work to enter at length into a disquisition on the state of civilization in ancient India, but a few remarks bearing upon the evidence of the sculptures that have been met with, will perhaps not be quite out of place.

v1.c10.8.1

**Importance of dress :** The first step in the march from barbarism to civilization is indicated by the dress of a nation. Climatic and other causes, no doubt, influence the nature of dress; but no race can be said to have emerged from the grossest barbarism, or the most primitive simplicity, which has not risen to something more substantial, ample and artifical than the wardrobe of mother Eve. The skins of animals have supplied the place of cloth to wild races at all times; but it is only after those nations learn to convert them into leather that they can be said to have reached the outskirts of a civilized life. The Hindus seem to have made considerable progress in this respect at a very early period in their history. The *Samhitā* of the *Ṛgveda*, which dates with the Mosaic chronicles, contain many passages which show that even then they were perfectly familiar with the art of weaving not only for the necessaries, but also for the luxuries, of life. The passages, it must be confessed, are brief and casual, occurring mostly by way of similes and comparisons in hymns designed for the glorification of particular divinities; but they are not the less interesting and suggestive on that account. Thus the verse which describes night as "enwrapping the extended world like a woman weaving a garment"⁴, gives only a simile, yet that simile refers to a familiar fact whose existence cannot be questioned.

v1.c10.8.2

In the same way a hymn to the Āpris makes "night and day interweave, in concert, like two famous female weavers, the extended thread to complete the web of the sacrifice".⁵ Elsewhere we read of the fathers, who "wove and placed the warp and the woof". (X.30). "Uṣā (dawn) is a goddess, in person manifest like a maiden, who goes to the resplendent and munificent sun, and, like a youthful bride before her husband, uncovereth, smiling, her bosom in his presence".⁶ Elsewhere she, "like a wife desirous to please her husband, puts on becoming attire, and smiling as it were, displays her charms".⁷ Again, "exhibiting her person like a well-attired female, she stands before our eyes, gracefully inclining like a woman who has been bathing".⁸ "Uṣas the daughter of heaven, tending to the west, puts forth her beauty like a well-dressed woman". In other places she is frequently represented as "clothed with radiance". The idea is repeated in connexion with the altar, which in one place is described as decorated in the same way, “as a wife attached to her husband puts on elegant garments to gratify him”.⁹ In a subsequent hymn, “the vast offspring of the firmament, the seven eternal ever youthful rivers”, of the Vedic age are said to be “not clothed, yet not naked”¹⁰. In the remarkable hymn, in which Trita prays to be released from his confinement in a well, he says, “the ribs (of the well) close round me, like the rival wives (of one husband);

v1.c10.8.3

cares consume me, Śatakratu, although thy worshipper, as a rat (gnaws a weaver’s) threads”,¹¹ and the scholiast finds in this, not altogether [ 79 ] without reason, a reference to the practice well known in the time of Manu (VIII. 397) of sizing threads with rice water, for the purose of weaving, and which made them palatable to rats. The whole passage, however, admits of a different interpretation. In a hymn to Indra, praises and hymns are compared to “elegant wellmade garments” (*vastreva bhadra sukṛta*), as being fit to be received as a respectful present”¹² (*Upasaṁhāravad grāhyāṇi*). Commenting on this passage, Wilson says, “If the rendering be correct this shows the custom of presenting honorary dresses to be of Indian origin, and of considerable antiquity”. Among largesses given to priests by Divodāsa, the idea of a *Khilat* again recurs: thus the priest says, “I have received from Divodāsa ten horses, ten purses, ten clothes (*Khilats* of ten parchas ?), and ample food”. Aśvattha gave to Payu “ten lumps of gold, ten well-appointed chariots, a hundred head of cattle”.¹³ Gifts of “elegantly adorned and well-dressed female slaves” are recited in a subsequent book. The *Yajus* and the *Sāma Vedas*, likewise, contain many references of the same kind to clothing, and in one place in the former “gold cloth”, or brocade, for a counterpane is distinctly mentioned¹⁴;

v1.c10.8.4

but as those works are to a certain extent of comparatively later date, it is not necessary to load these pages with quotations from them.

v1.c10.9

⁴ Wilson's *Ṛgveda* II. p. 307.

v1.c10.10

⁵ *Ibid.* II. p. 218.

v1.c10.11

⁶ *Ibid.* II. p. 9.

v1.c10.12

⁷ *Ibid.* II. p. 12.

v1.c10.13

⁸ *Ibid.* III. p. 369.

v1.c10.14

⁹ *Ibid.* III. 122.

v1.c10.15

¹⁰ *Ibid.* II. 320.

v1.c10.16

¹¹ *Ibid.* I. 271.

v1.c10.17

¹² Wilson’s *Ṛgveda* III. 277.

v1.c10.18

¹³ *Ibid.*, III. 474.

v1.c10.19

¹⁴ *Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa*, III. 675.

v1.c10.20

**Wool and cotton :** No information is available in the *Ṛgveda* regarding the material of which the clothing, it so often alludes to, was made. Cotton is nowhere mentioned. Rams and ewes are described among domestic animals,¹⁵ but they are not said to be the sources of cloth. It is nevertheless probable that both cotton and wool were the substances which were used in its manufacture; for the term “weaving”, which is occasionally used, could not have originated and got currency in the Vedic language, without the existence of some material adapted and in common use for weaving. “It is difficult to conceive”, says Dr. Muir, “that cotton (which, as we learn from Professor J. H. Balfour, is supposed to have been indigenous in India), though not mentioned in the hymns, should have been unknown when they were composed, or not employed for weaving the light cloth which is necessary in so warm a climate”.¹⁶ This argument would apply equally to woollen stuffs in many parts of the Punjab, the earliest Aryan seats in India, where the cold for some months in the year must have necessitated a much warmer covering than cotton cloth. In the Old Testament there are references which show that the ancient Indians did produce enough of woven texture to be able to export a portion for the use of foreign nations¹⁷. "That the coloured cloth and rich apparel brought to Tyre and Babylon from distant countries, were partly of Indian manufacture will scarcely be doubted", says Heeren, "after what has been already said of the extent of the Phoenician and Babylonian commerce".¹⁸

v1.c10.21

¹⁵ “Who bestows easily-obtained happiness on our steeds, our rams, our ewes, our men, our women, our cows?” Wilson’s *Ṛgveda*, II. p. 111.

v1.c10.22

¹⁶ *Sanskrit Texts*, V. 462.

v1.c10.23

¹⁷ Ezekiel xxvii. 24.

v1.c10.24

¹⁸ Heeren's *Historical Researches*, III. p. 363.

v1.c10.25

**Silk :** The case is different as regards silk. It is a substance which could have scarcely escaped notice had it been known at the time of the Vedas ; but no mention of it has yet been met with. Pāṇini, however, has not only given words for wool, cotton, weaving, cloth turbans, sewing, &c., all of which were, at his time, perfectly familiar, but also for silk for which he gives a special rule.¹⁹ In the time of the *Rāmāyaṇa*, silken, woollen, and cotton stuffs of various kinds were abundant and in extensive use. According to Vālmīki the splendid trousseau of Sītā consisted of "woollen stuffs, furs, precious stones, fine silk, vestments of divers colours, princely ornaments, and sumptuous carriages of every kind"²⁰. The woollen stuff here adverted to, has been supposed by Heeren to have been shawls, for a time when coarse woollen cloths were used to cover wagons, as was the case in the days of the *Rāmāyaṇa*, nothing short of the productions of the looms of Cashmir, the finest and most precious of woollen fabrics, would have been suitable for presentation to a princess ; but the commentator Rāmānuja believes it to have been a stuff from Nepal. That the "fine silk" was a manufactured article is evident from the frequent allusion in the work to silk vestments of various kinds, worn, not only by queens and princesses, but also by other persons of quality. When Rāma and his brothers arrived at the capital from Mithilā with their new-married brides, Kauśalyā, Sumitrā, the fair Kaikeyī, and the rest of the royal *zenana*, "eager to embrace their beauteous daughters, received the happy Sītā, the far-famed Urmilā, and the two daughters of Kuśadhvaja, all sumptuously dressed in silk, and entertaining each other with agreeable conversation, hastened to the temples of the gods to offer incense".²¹ Elsewhere we read—

v1.c10.26

¹⁹ *Kośāḍ ḍhañ* 4.3.42. *Kāśasambhūtam Kauśeyam vastram.*

v1.c10.27

²⁰ *Rāmāyaṇa*, B. I. Canto 74, verses 3-4.

v1.c10.28

²¹ Gorressio's *Rāmāyaṇa*, I. p. 297, verses 8-11.

v1.c10.29

[ 80 ] "Go quickly hence, and with you bear
Fine silken vestures, rich and rare,
And gems and many a precious thing
As gifts to Bharata and the king".²²

v1.c10.30

²² Griffith's *Rāmāyaṇa*. II, p. 270.

v1.c10.31

At the time the *Laws of Manu* were codified, the profession of dealing in woollen stuffs had so far fallen in repute that it was prohibited to the Brāhmaṇs ( X. 87 ), and the use of such stuffs was assigned to the third class of students in theology ; the first and second wearing antelope skin and woven hemp, ( II. 41 ). The sacrificial strings in the same way were required to be made of cotton, hemp, and wool, for the three classes respectively (II. 44).

v1.c10.32

**Various places where stuffs were manufactured :** The *Rāmāyaṇa* does not give us any clue to the different places which were noted for the manufacture of particular articles of clothing ; but some hints are available on this subject in the *Mahābhārata*. In the *Sabhā Parva* of that work, the poet enumerates the several presents which princes and potentates from various parts of India, brought to the presence of Yudhiṣṭhira, and among them are mentioned clothes and skins, the former made of wool and embroidered with gold, being in fact shawls and brocades ; the latter, “ the skins of animals that live in holes and wild cats, intending probably furs of varieties of the martin and weasel families ”, brought by the Kāmbojas or people of the Hindu Kush ; “ blankets of various manufacture ” by the Ābhīras of Guzerat ; clothes of diverse kinds not made of cotton, but of the wool of sheep and goat, or of thread spun by worms (silk ?) or of *paṭṭa* vegetable fibres or hemp-linen, or made by machinery (woven ?), by the Scythians, Tukharas and Kankas ; housings for elephants, by princes of the Eastern tribes, lower Bengal, Midnapur and Ganjam ; and fine linen (? muslin), by the people of Carnatic and Mysore ”.²³ After a careful study of this passage, Professor Wilson is of opinion that “ silk, both raw and manufactured, was no doubt an article of import from China into India at a very early date ”.²⁴ In the first century before Christ, king Śudraka makes the buffoon of his play, the *Mṛcchakaṭika*, enquire about the brother of a courtezan :

v1.c10.33

²³ *Wilson, in the Journal R. As. Soc.* VII. 140.

v1.c10.34

²⁴ Royle, *On the Productive Resources of India*, p. 117.

v1.c10.35

“Who is that gentleman dressed in silken raiment, glittering with rich ornaments, and rolling about as if his limbs were out of joint ” ? (Act IV. Sc. II).

v1.c10.36

The mother of the Aspasia appears arrayed in “ flowered muslin” with her “ well-oiled feet thrust into slippers ”.

v1.c10.37

In the time of Alexander's invasion, the Greeks were particularly struck with the extraordinary whiteness of Indian clothing, and did not fail to notice with great curiosity, as Herodotus and others had done before them in Egypt, that they were manufactured with the “ tree-wool ” or “ wool produced in nuts ”. Shortly after, Arrian, in the *Periplus to the Erythrian Sea*, noticed several kinds of cotton fabrics, both thin and thick. He names three principal sorts :—

v1.c10.38

| 1st.— | *Indikon to platuteron i Legoméni Monakhi* | Wide Indian muslins called Monakhe. |
| 2nd.— | *Sagmatogini* | Muslins in single pieces. |
| 3rd.— | *Khudaion* | Coarse muslins. |

v1.c10.39

He has also a coarse cotton fabric of the colour of the mallow of the name of *Molokhina*, a fine muslin (? linen) of name of *Léntia*, and other muslins of the name of *Karpásos*. His *Sindones ai diaphosotatai Gaggitikhai*, it is evident, was also a variety of the finest Bengal muslin.²⁵

v1.c10.40

²⁵ Vincent's *Periplus*, Appendix, vol. I, pp. 40, 41, vol. II, pp. 18, 39, 58, 66, 76.

v1.c10.41

**Cloth in sculpture :** It is not to be expected that ancient sculpture should afford us any valuable information regarding this branch of our enquiry. The material and quality of woven texture can be but ill-represented in marble, and in such rough stones as the sculptors of India ordinarily had at their disposal, nothing of the kind was practicable. Nevertheless, they are not altogether silent on the subject. In the two principal statues in the great temple of Bhuvaneśvara, which are made of a superior kind of chlorite, and placed in deep recesses, completely protected from the sun and rain, the artist has attempted to produce a vestment of rich brocade, proving that fabrics of that description were then, as they are now, highly prized articles of luxury, familiar with the people. A specimen of this cloth is represented in Illustration No. 66. A glance at it will show that in neatness, elegance, and richness of design and execution, it is in no way inferior to the finest production of the Benares loom of the present day. In the temple of Baital Devi, or "the boat-shaped temple", several figures of dancing girls are dressed in clothes of variegated patterns, and one [81] in a *pāyajāmā* or drawers, of diagonal stripes enclosing designs of spots, and zigzag lines. (Illustration No. 67.) A male figure in the same temple, has a pair of short-drawers of a similar kind of cloth, the stripes being relieved by spots only. (Illustration No. 68) A petticoat of a female figure has triple stripes, but no spots, sprigs, or other design. (Illustration No 69.) On some of the statuettes in Lakṣmī's Temple, there are also clothings of different designs, one of which with single stripes is shewn in Illustration No. 70. On a female figure playing with a child, brought from Bhuvaneśvara, and now in the Museum of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (No. 805), a double-striped pattern with wavy lines is distinctly seen. (Illustration No. 71.) On another figure (No. 808), the ground between the wavy horizontal stripes is relieved with detached flowers of two kinds, and the border is elaborately wrought, (Illustration No. 72), and the attendant of this figure has cloth with stripes, but no flowers. Illustration Nos. 73 and 74 exhibit clothes of the same kind, but the flowers are of different patterns. In the group of Silénos in the Asiatic Society's Museum, which, as already shown, is of Indian origin, and dates, at least, from the beginning of the Christian era, there is a male figure dressed in a *cāpkān*, the cloth of which is a kind of flowered mnslin, having sprigs all over the ground. (Illustration No. 75.) On another piece of sculpture in the same collection brought from Behar, and, from the character of the inscription on it, apparently of the eighth or ninth century, there is a representation of a kind of cloth with diagonal stripes relieved by flowers of two patterns. A Buddhist rail post from Buddha Gayā, also in the same collection, shows cloth of a check pattern. (Illustration No. 88.) The selvage of cloth is represented on many figures, and coloured borders on others. The fineness and transparency of scarfs are sometimes attempted to be shown, but the attempt has not been successful, and what appears now to be the success of art is probably due to inefficiency in representing the folds of the costumes.

v1.c10.42

**Dyeing of cloth :** Early Indian literature is silent with respect to the different colours used in dyeing textile fabrics in ancient times. But the great abundance of vegetable dyes in India could not but have attracted the notice of such an intelligent race as the early Aryan settlers were, and looking to the frequent mention of dye stuffs by Manu and other lawgivers, it is to be presumed that they were extensively used by the people in colouring their clothing. The rude aborigines such as the Bheels and Gonds, likewise availed themselves of the supply, and probably coloured their scant clothing and ornamental feathers and fibres to as large an extent as in the present day. Mention is frequently made of Aryan women staining the soles of their feet, and the palms of their hands, with a bright crimson dye extracted from *sapan* wood, and the practice of using colours for beautifying the face was not uncommon. In astrological works black clothing is said to be appropriate to the planet Saturn, yellow to Venus, and red to Mars, and the sin-steeped awning of Parikṣita is described to have been of a black colour. Kṛṣṇa and other gods had, likewise, particular favorite colours for their dresses, and Indian poetry is eloquent on the charming effect of fair women dressed in blue cloth, which is often compared to a dark cloud relieved by the lightning flashes of beauty. No rules, however, appear to have been laid down for the use of distinctive colours by house-holders; and with the solitary exception of hermits, who were required to wear an ochre-coloured vestment, each individual was left perfectly free in the choice of colours for his dress. Indeed, in this respect the Indian Aryans differed entirely from the Egyptians, and also from the ancient Irish, who had particular colours fixed to distinguish the rank and caste of every order of society. In Ireland King Eochaidh, it is said, first laid down the law, in the year of the world 3664, regarding colours to mark the different ranks of the people, and thence obtained the surname of Eadghadhach. His law required “one colour in the clothes of slaves; two in the clothes of soldiers; three in the clothes of goodly heroes, or young lords of territories; six in the clothes of *ollavs* (professors); seven in the clothes of kings and queens”.²⁶ The Egyptian rule, if not so strict, was still well-defined, and among the Romans, the Tyrian purple, as is well known, was exclusively reserved for emperors. The Chinese are also particular in this respect. But in India no colour, or combination of colours, seems to have been forbidden to any one class or individual from the highest to the lowest. In the total absence of old paintings, it is, however, impossible to obtain any evidence on the subject from ancient remains.

v1.c10.43

²⁶ *Clanmacnoise Annalists*, O'Donovan's translation, *Apud Catalogue of Antiquities in the Royal Irish Academy* I. 297.

v1.c10.44

**Style of dress:** The Vedas afford no information regarding the form and shape of the Hindu dress. Probably, the majority of the people did then, as they do now, wear scarfs or plaid-like articles (*dhuti*) completed in the loom for immediate use, keeping them in position by twisting and tucking round the waist,—“a form of dress than which”, according to Col. Meadows Taylor, “anything more convenient to walk, to sit, or to lie in, it would be impossible to invent”.²⁷ The companions of Alexander noticed the same style of dressing nearly two and twenty centuries ago, and the costume of the masses at the present time differs in no respect from what the Greek writers indicated in their descriptions. But the question may be fairly asked, were kings, princes, and chieftains, the nobles and men of quality, of [82] former times content with the simple *dhuti*, and did they not differ in any respect from the people at large in their habiliments ? Such a state of uniformity in dress is unknown even among the rudest community, and would be altogether improbable among a race who first established the system of castes. Nor is evidence wanting, circumstantial though it be, to show that a very different state of things existed among the Indian Aryans in early times. The mention of the needle and sewing in the *Saṃhitā* of the *Ṛgveda*,²⁸ cannot but suggest that even at that early period, made dresses, or such as had been prepared with the aid of scissors and needle, were not unknown. The word used is *sūcī*, the same which is used to this day to indicate a needle, and it is not likely therefore, that the word then meant only a thorn or other small pointed object. The existence of such words as needle (*sūcī*) and sewing (*sīvan*) in the Vedic language cannot be accounted for, except on the supposition that the people who used them, knew and had what they meant.²⁹ It may also be argued that it is very unlikely that the heroes of the Vedic times, who were able to forge and were in the habit of using armour and mail coats, never came to the idea of fashioning their clothes into made dresses.

v1.c10.45

²⁷ *Edinburgh Review* for July, 1867.

v1.c10.46

²⁸ Wilson's *Ṛgveda* II, p. 288 ; IV. p. 60.

v1.c10.47

²⁹ “*Sīvyatu apaḥ sūcyā chedyamānayā*”, “may she sew the work with a needle, that is not capable of being cut or broken, with one, of which the stitches will endure, in like manner as clothes and the like wrought with a needle last a long time, according to the commentator”. Wilson's *Ṛgveda* II. 288.

v1.c10.48.1

**Sewed dress in Sculpture :** The sculptures of Sāñcī, Amarāvatī, and Orissa, leave no doubt on the subject. Though, owing to causes to be presently noticed, the bulk of the human figures they represent are nude, or very scantily clothed, still there are some which bear unmistakable evidence of the existence of made dresses. Among the Sāñcī bas-reliefs there are several figures dressed in tunics which could never have been made without the aid of needles. The tunics of the two archers on plate XLIII. Fig. 3, of Mr. Fergusson's work are particularly remarkable, inasmuch as the *cāpkāns* there shown, are unmistakable. (Illustration No. 93). Plates XXVIII. Fig. 1, XXXIV. Fig 2, XXXVI. Fig. 2 and XXXVIII. Fig. 1, are also worthy of notice as affording unquestionable evidences of the use of made dresses. A flag-bearer on an elephant has a dress, the sleeves of which are distinctly shewn. (Plate XL. Fig. 2). On a Buddhist rail-post from Buddha Gayā, which probably dates from a time earlier than the Sāñcī rail, there are two figures fully dressed from the neck to the middle of the leg, in a garment which appears strongly like the *jāmā* of the present day (Illustration No. 88). Turning from them to Amarāvatī, the reader will find, among an endless host of nudes and seminudes, figures, the shape of whose habiliments is unmistakably due to the tailor's art. (Plates LXVI and LXXXIV. Fig. 2).

v1.c10.48.2

The figures of Buddha and of priests are also everywhere clothed in a decent attire from the neck to the feet, though in their case the habit seems to be formed of loose plaids thrown lightly over the person, and not needle-made. The sculptures of Orissa offer even more positive proofs. In the Queen's palace (*Rāṇinaur*) among the rock cut caves of Udayagiri, there is a statue, four feet six inches in height, cut out of the solid rock, which is dressed in a close-fitting tunic or *cāpkān*, with the skirts hanging down four inches below the knee, and having sleeves down to the wrist. According to Rev. T. Acland,³⁰ over the *cāpkān*, there was "a short shirt of scale armour", the sleeves of which reached the elbow. This, however, is not now visible. A light scarf passes round the waist and over the forearms, the ends floating in the air, exactly in the way in which the Hindus throw the scarf on their persons in the present day. A girdle or *komarband* round the waist holds, on the left side, a short sword. The head is partially mutilated, but there are traces on it of a twisted turban. The legs and the feet are enclosed in thick, high boots or buskins. The figure has suffered by long exposure to rain and sun, but enough is preserved in the Illustration No. 94 to show that the coat of the figure is made unmistakably of sewed cloth.

v1.c10.48.3

If the arguments regarding the age of the Udayagiri caves, elsewhere adduced, be tenable, the figure is over two and twenty centuries old, and at that period, the Buddhists evidently knew the use of made dresses. The habit is so entirely Indian in its character, that none will venture to spy in it any resemblance to the *chiton*, the *chlamys* or such other vestments as the soldiers of Alexander brought to India,³¹ even if it were possible to suppose that it would be at once imitated in stone many hundreds of miles away from the place where it was first exhibited, and the inveterately conservative Indians could be imagined to have resigned, against the common instinct of civilized man in every part of the world, their national attire at the first sight of a foreign garb. The tunic may be compared to that of the Assyrian foot soldier, but its sleeves are long and come down to the wrist, whereas the Assyrian sleeve, as far as can be made out from Layard's plates, never reached below the elbow, leaving the forearm bare. The boots are particularly worthy of notice, as nothing of the kind has anywhere else been seen in India of so old a date. Three warriors at Amarāvati are habited very nearly in the same way, but without the boots. For ready reference I have copied [ 83 ] as much of two of them as is visible in Mr. Fergusson's plates. (Illustrations Nos. 90 and 91).

v1.c10.48.4

Among the sculptures on the temples of Bhuvanes'vara, there are also several representations of needle-made dresses.

v1.c10.49

³⁰ *A Popular Account of the Manners and Customs of India*, p. 120.

v1.c10.50

³¹ It may be remarked *en passant* that, according to Plutarch, instead of Alexander teaching the Asiatics the use of made dresses, that hero himself adopted an Asiatic dress. He first put on a Parthian mode. He thought however, "the habit made too stiff and exotic an appearance, and therefore took not the breeches, or the sweeping train; but adopting something between the Median and Persian mode, contrived vestments more pompous than the former, and more majestic than the latter. At first he used this dress only before the barbarians, or his particular friends within doors; but in time he came to wear it when he appeared in public, and sat for the despatch of business". Langhorne's *Plutarch*, p. 483. Of course this was most probably done with a view to conciliate the conquered people; but it is not very favourable to the theory of Greek dress having been readily adopted by the latter.

v1.c10.51

A basso-relievo horseman in the dancing hall of the Great Tower, is dressed in a perfect *jāmā* of the pattern to be seen on the Rajput horsemen figured in Col. Tod's *Rajasthān*. Its date, however, is doubtful. Several statuettes on the Mukteśvara temple are dressed in petticoats or kilts, the Indian *ghāgrā*, held round the waist by a jewelled girdle or zone. The outline of this habit is so well-defined that it leaves no doubt in the mind of its shape and form being due to scissors and needles. The statuette represented in Illustration No. 83, offers a remarkable instance of this habit. The bust of the figure is enclosed in a tight bodice such as is now in common use in many parts of India, and a long scarf, the substitute for a Grecian himation and the North Indian *uḍnā* or *cādar*, is thrown over the shoulders, with its two ends floating in the air. As the figure shewn in the plate is that of Annapūrṇā, a form of Durgā, offering a cake in a ladle to her lord, Śiva, it is impossible to suppose that the artist has dressed the goddess in a foreign garb, even if it could be shown that foreign models of the kind were accessible to him. The *pāyajāmā* noticed above (Illustration No. 76), is held round the waist by a string with a chain girdle over it, in the same way as Muhammadan women now wear it, but there is a piece of cloth passed between the thighs and tucked behind, probably also so secured in front, the use of which appears quite inexplicable, unless it be assumed to be an imitation of the cloth which wrestlers use over their short-drawers to tie their body firmly. The short-drawers on the same temple, shewn in Illustration No. 80, though well-defined on the figure, appear to be doubtful, as they have besides the longitudinal piece noticed above, a cross belt tied a little above the hip-joint, very much in the same way as the figures of the shepherd Kṛṣṇa are dressed at Vṛndāvana in the present day, and in their case it is the *dhuti* that is arranged so as to represent short-drawers, and no sewed cloth is used. The drawers shown in Illustration No. 85, though divested of the cross piece, are also doubtful. Among the Ajaṇṭā frescoes, “there is a picture of two holy men, one of them is touching the head of an elephant; he holds a cup in his left hand, and wears a long robe reaching to his feet, with very full loose sleeves; the other, who has a nimbus round his head, has an elaborate drapery in folds like that of a Greek statue”.³² In the earlier Sati memorial stones, and in sculptures on the Hullabeed Temple in Mysore, females appear in bodices tied in front. According to the *Śāradā Tilaka* the women of Guzerat used to button their bodices with gems below the hips. ³³ And in all these occur proofs of the use of the needle in the formation of dresses.

v1.c10.52

³² Col. Meadows Taylor, *Edinburgh Review*, for July, 1867.

v1.c10.53

³³ Wilson's *Hindu Theatre* II. 384.

v1.c10.54

**Opinions of Buchanan Hamilton, &c.:** It is not to be denied that these instances are few, but their evidence as far as it goes, is authentic and unmistakable, and, I venture to think, cannot be gainsaid. The nature of the Indian climate is such that for nine months in the year all dresses are more or less unpleasant, and even the British soldier here feels, in April and May, more comfortable without his shirt than with it, and, if not prevented by military discipline, would gladly throw it aside; it is not remarkable, therefore, that the natives should confine themselves to the smallest amount of clothing that decency and the habits of the country permit. But that does not suffice for a universal conclusion as to the total absence of all made dresses. At any rate the instances quoted are enough to set aside the theory first started by Buchanan Hamilton,³⁴ and since adopted by Drs. Muir³⁵ and Watson,³⁶ regarding the Muhammadan origin of the Indian shaped dress as altogether untenable.

v1.c10.55

³⁴ *Martin's Eastern India* II. 699.

v1.c10.56

³⁵ *Sanskrit Texts*, V. 462.

v1.c10.57

³⁶ *Textile Manufactures of India*, 11.

v1.c10.58

**Sanskrit names for tailors :** It has been somewhere said that had the ancient Hindu had needle-made garments, they would have had in their language names for them as well as for tailors; but that they had none such in Sanskrit. This is, however, not the case. In the *Vocabulary* of Amara Siṃha, there are two words for workers with needle, one applying exclusively to those who confined their profession to darning, and the other to general tailoring.³⁷ The first is *tunnavāya*, a word very similar to *tantuvāya* "a weaver", and the other, *saucika* or *sūcika*, general worker with the needle. The profession of the latter was of sufficient importance to necessitate the establishment of a separate tribe, and a mixed class, the lawful issue of Vaiśyas by Śūdra women, was, according to the ancient law-book of Uśanas, destined to live by it, and other manual arts.³⁸ These bore the distinctive tribal name of *Sauci* or needlemen.

v1.c10.59

³⁷ *tantuvāyaḥ kuvindaḥ syāttunnavāyastu saucikaḥ* | *tunnaṃ chinnaṃ vayati* || *Amarakośa.*

v1.c10.60

³⁸ *śūdrāyāṃ vaiśyasaṃsargāt vidhinā sūcakaḥ smṛtaḥ* | *sūcakādviprakanyāyām jātastakṣaka ucyate* // *śilpakarmāṇi cānyāni prāsādalakṣaṇaṃ tathā* // *ityauśanasaṃ dharmaśāstram* //

v1.c10.61

It is not to be denied that in Bengal, with the exception of the *Ācāryas* who are employed in making dresses for idols, and noted for their expertness in darning, tailoring is now the special profession of Musalmans; but elsewhere the case is not so. Mr. Sherring observes: "In addition to the Mahommedans engaged in this calling, there is a considerable number of Hindus of **[ 84 ]** an inferior caste, who pursue it likewise. They are a separate tribe, and are divided into seven sub-castes or clans, as follows:—1. Śrī Bāstab; 2. Nām Deo; 3. Tāñcāra; 4. Dhaneś; 5. Panjābī; 6. Gour; 7. Kantak". An eighth is also found in Benares named Tākseri.³⁹

v1.c10.62

³⁹ *Hindu Castes and Tribes of Benares*, p. 341.

v1.c10.63

**Sanskrit names of made dresses :** As regards the names of made dresses, it is to be observed that the forms of the ancient garments having become obsolete for centuries, their names have likewise fallen into disuse, and what formerly indicated particular forms are now accepted as common terms for dress. There are, nevertheless, some words, the import of which cannot be mistaken, such as *kañcuka*, *kañcolika*, *aṅgika*, *colaka*, *cola*, *kurpāsaka*, *adhikāṅga*, *nīvi*, &c. The most important of these is the first. It is defined as a soldier's dress, shaped like a bodice, a made garment for the body, hanging either as low as the hip or lower down to the legs, i. e., a jacket or a coat. The word *sannāha* used in its definition, ⁴⁰ and which is used for a mail coat, as well as a coat of quilted cotton, has led to its being occasionally confounded with the *varma* or chain-mail, and in some modern dictionaries, it is described as “an iron garment for the protection of the body from arrows”; but that it was formerly made of cloth is evident from its having been used by other than warriors. The sages and hermits, who came to the great coronation feast of Yudhiṣṭhira, are described in the *Mahābhārata* as being dressed in turbans and *kañcukas*,⁴¹ and in their case it would be inconsistent to accept the coat as a hauberk or a cuirass. The immediate, ordinary, everyday attendants on kings, who should always be old, are also said to be so altered, and from various descriptions it would seem that the garment was made of cloth in shape of the well-known Indian *jāmā*. The ordinary term for the eunuchs, who guard the *zanana* of a king, is *kañcukins* or “persons clothed with the *kañcuka*”, and it is not to be believed that they generally moved about in chain-mail, or solid breast-plates. In the *Ratnāvali* of Srīharṣa, a warder of this class offers protection under the folds of its *kañcuka* to a dwarf, who had been frightened out of his wits by a little monkey getting loose from its chains and gambolling about,⁴² and this could not have been possible unless the coat had been of cloth with skirts hanging down close to the ankles. In the present day the flowing forepart of the *dhuti*, which looks very like the folds of the skirt of the *jāmā*, is called *koñcā*. Fair maidens in noble families are said to have, likewise, draped themselves in this garment to heighten their beauty, and it would be absurd to suppose that they used metallic jackets for such a purpose.

v1.c10.64

⁴⁰ bhaṭādeścolākṛtiḥ sannāhaḥ.

v1.c10.65

⁴¹ viviśuste sabhāṃ divyām soṣṇīṣā dhṛtakañcukāḥ /—*Mahābhārata*.

v1.c10.66

⁴² antaḥ kañcukikañcukasya viśati trāsādayaṃ vāmanaḥ /

v1.c10.67

The diminutive of the *kañcuka* is *kañculikā*, and it is universally known to be a cloth bodice, and all respectable women and even goddesses are said to have worn it. Its modern name is *kāñculī*, and it is in common use all over India except among family women in Bengal. Over it is worn a thin, light jacket reaching to the waist, with sleeves to the elbows. This is called an *āngiā*, Hindi *kurtā*. To those who know the Prakrit language, this will at once appear to be a corruption of the Sanskrit *aṅgika*, the K being, by a well-known rule, changed into A. It is probable that the male jacket *aṅgarkhā* of the present day is a modification of the same word, unless it be a corruption of *aṅga*, body and *rakṣā*, protection. In Wilson’s *Dictionary* the word *cola* is explained as “a short jacket or bodice”; but it was more like a waistcoat, something closely resembling a *fatui*, or *sadri* of the Mahommedans, for Indian tailors still call the *torso* or the body part of a coat *colā*, and its appendages *āstin*, sleeve, and *dāman*, skirts, and the Sanskrit *colaka* is explained to be a breast-plate.

v1.c10.68

The word *nīvi* is also remarkable. It is the name of the tape with which drawers (*pāyajāmā*) or the petticoat (*ghāgrā*) is tied round the waist. It could not have had an existence in the language if there had been no *pāyajāmā* or *ghāgrā* to tie.

v1.c10.69

**Style of dressing:** The ordinary style in which Uriyās of quality used to put on the *dhuti* twelve hundred years ago, is shewn in Illustrations Nos. 81 and 58. It does not differ from the mode of the present time except in the jewelled girdle with a pendant in front. This appendage, however, was probably introduced to heighten the artistic effect of the figures, and was not in common use. The statue of Kārtikeya in the great Tower of Bhuvaneśvara has the *dhuti* tied firmly round the waist, in keeping with the martial character of that divinity. Illustrations Nos 82, 86 and 87, represent the *dhuti* as worn by common people and labourers. In Sāñcī and Amarāvatī, the same style is delineated with but slight differences. The *cādar* or scarf occurs plentifully in all the three places, and the mode of wearing it was the same as at the present day. For full dress the *cāpkān*-like tunic shown on the archers at Sāñcī was probably the prevailing garb for kings, princes, and men of quality; while the long-flowing *jāmā* was kept for lower officers of state, warders, and attendants on kings. The scarf was invariably used, either thrown over the shoulders, or tied round the waist as a *komarband*. The body-cloth under the outer coat was probably the *dhuti* in the generality of cases, military officers of high standing occasionally replacing it by drawers of some kind or other. The *jāmā* was probably [ 85 ] brought by the Aryans from Central Asia, as it is still preserved with a few modifications and mutilations by the Pārsis as their national dress; the modifications in their hands, however, have not been so extensive, as in that of the Moslims in India, who in Akbar's time adopted it as a court dress. The pattern preserved in Rājput sculptures figured by Tod, and on the horseman in the Bhuvaneśvara temple, is perhaps the nearest approach to the ancient habit; it differs from the modern style principally in having short skirts.

v1.c10.70.1

The prevailing character of the ordinary female dress is very much like in the three places, and Mr. Fergusson's description of Sāñcī and Amarāvatī, apply eqally to Orissa. "The costume of the women", he says, "is difficult to describe, though this is principally in consequence of its scantiness. Both at Sāñcī and Amarāvatī, the women always wear enormous bangles about the ankles and wrists,⁴³ and generally strings of beads round the neck, but their body clothing is generally limited to a bead belt round the body below the waist. From this belt slips of cloth are sometimes suspended, more generally at the sides or behind than in front, and sometimes also a cloth worn something like the *dhuti* of the male sex is also added, but when that is the case, it is represented in the sculptures generally as absolutely transparent".⁴⁴ It may be questioned, however, as to whether these habits were really the prevailing costumes of the country at the time, or only the conventional modes of representing the female form. Mr. Fergusson, who has devoted his attention for some time to Indian antiquity, is disposed to accept the first branch of the alternative, and it is certainly not easy to question the testimony of authentic graven stones. That testimony, however, is in direct conflict with the evidence of equally authentic written records. The passage from the *Rigveda* quoted above (p.

v1.c10.70.2

[78] ) in which Uṣā is compared to "a youthful bride before her husband, uncovering, smiling, her bosom in his presence", depicts a peculiarity of Indian female dress, which it would be difficult to conceive, had altogether disappeared from the land when the sculptures were incised, and that a bead girdle was the only attire for the body left even to queens and princesses; when improvements in other respects of social life were marked and progressing; when people lived in two and three-storied houses of brick and stone, such as the Sāñcī bas-reliefs represent; when they drove about in carriages and wagons; freely wrought in gold, silver, copper and iron; and manufactured enough of woven fabrics of a superior quality, such as were exported to and greatly prized in the, for the time, highly civilized countries of the West. The veil, the bodice, and body-clothes, are repeatedly mentioned in the *Rāmāyaṇa* and the *Mahābhārata*; and both in the Hindu and the Buddhist codes of law and morality, modesty of dress in women is everywhere insisted upon as a matter of paramount importance. In the ancient code of laws by Śaṅkha, there is an ordinance which says, "Let no woman go out of the house without permission; nor without a sheet over her dress; nor should she be allowed to run or walk very fast; nor speak with male strangers, unless they be tradesmen, hermits, old people, or medical practitioners;

v1.c10.70.3

nor allow her navel to be seen: she should be so dressed that her clothing should hang down to the ankles; and the breasts should never be exposed".⁴⁵ Gobhila enjoins that "women should always wear a sheet, the Grecian *peplos*, or the Roman *palla* over their body-clothes".⁴⁶ Hārīta says, "the first duty of woman (in the morning) is to bathe and put on (clean) clothes"⁴⁷; and among the most important daily duties of woman, Ṛṣyaśṛṅga enumerates, "cleanliness, attention to the duties of the house, the polish of the household utensils, bathing, dressing, plaiting the hair in braids, and putting flowers thereon".⁴⁸ Other authorities are equally particular in this respect, and everywhere the most important duty enjoined on husbands and relatives is to supply good clothing to the ladies of one's house.

v1.c10.70.4

Manu even goes the length of prohibiting husbands from looking at their wives when engaged in the mysteries of their toilette, and of denouncing the sight of nude females as sinful.⁴⁹ The veil, as a mark of propriety and modesty before seniors and strangers, is everywhere insisted upon, and this idea is carried to the ridiculous extent of prohibiting the offering of the funeral cake to a grandfather without first covering the cake to the mother with *kuśa* grass, as emblematic of her veil, for even in spirit she should not appear before her father-in-law with her face uncovered.⁵⁰ In the case of men not only is nudity prohibited, but even a single garment is held [ 86 ] insufficient for propriety. Manu forbids a single garment when at meals,⁵¹ and the *Viṣṇu Purāṇa* ordains that "a man must neither bathe, nor sleep, nor rinse his mouth, whilst naked; he must not wash his mouth, nor perform any sacred rite, with his waistband unfastened; and he must not offer oblations to fire, nor sacrifice to the gods, nor wash his mouth, nor salute a Brāhmaṇa, nor utter a prayer with only one garment on".⁵² In the *Sāmayācārika-dharma-sūtra* of Āpastamba, even a Brahmacāri, just returned from his noviciate, is required to dress himself with a *jāmā* (*kañcuka*) over his body-clothes, and to move about with either shoes or pattens on.⁵³

First 78 of 558 passages. Read on

Linked texts (35)