Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Position of Women in Hindu Civilisation, from Prehistoric Times to the Present Day c15.s1: Dress

The Position of Women in Hindu Civilisation, from Prehistoric Times to the Present Day c15.s1

Language
English

Dress

c15.s1.1

The Vedic literature supplies us with very little information about the dress of the women of the age. The vocabulary itself of the period has got no separate words to denote women's clothes. The same words are used to denote the different clothes worn both by men and women. An under-garment (*vāsaḥ antaram*) and an upper garment (*paridhānam*) were in general use among the members of both the sexes. A waistband was used round the lower garment (*Ś. Br.*, 1, 3, 3, 6). Probably both the garments were usually coloured in the case of women, for the Vedic literature refers to the dyer (*V. S.*, 30, 12). In addition to the two garments, mentioned above, kings used to wear a gorgeous mantle (*drāpi*) on ceremonious occasions. Queens also probably had the counterpart of this mantle in the form of an embroidered shawl, though there is no definite evidence on the point. In one place goddess Indrāṇī is described as wearing a headdress (*ushṇīsha*, *Ś. Br.*, XIV, 2, 1, 8); it is probable that the well-to-do ladies of the Vedic age were also doing the same.

c15.s1.2

We get no information or clue as to how the lower garment or *sari* was worn in these days. The art of weaving was well developed, and it is fairly certain that the *sari* was a long piece, about five or six yards in length. A portion of it was therefore very probably used to cover the upper part of the body as well, as is done in modern times all over the country. The additional upper garment (*paridhānam*) was probably used only on ceremonious occasions. The same was probably the case with the head-dress.

c15.s1.3

The epics show that the dress of women continued to be more or less of the above type for a long time. Draupadī's remarks, when summoned to the gambling hall, make it clear that to go out without an upper garment properly covering the entire bust was regarded as indecorous¹. At home, however, only one *sari* was worn, but it used to cover the shoulders and bosom as well; Draupadī, when dragged out by her garment by Duśśāsana, is described as having the upper part of her *sari* falling down². The additional upper garment was not absolutely necessary to cover the bust. It only formed part of the ceremonious dress. Sītā therefore could dispense with it when she wanted a piece of cloth to tie her ornaments in order to drop them down to Sugrīva, when she was very anxious to leave behind a clue about her abduction, as she was being carried away in the air by Rāvaṇa.

c15.s1.4

¹ एकं च वासो मम मन्दबुद्धे सभां नेतुं नार्हसि मामनार्य ॥ II, 89,44.

c15.s1.5

² प्रकीर्णकेशी पतिरार्थवस्त्रा दुःशासनेन व्यवधूयमाना ॥ II, 89,47.

c15.s1.6

The fashion in the Vedic age of wearing a head-dress was followed in later times in some provinces but given up in others. To judge from the evidence of sculpture, we find that it continued to be current in Central India, Malava and United Provinces down to the early centuries of the Christian era. In the sculptures of the Śuṅga period at Bharhut, Sanchi and Mathura, ladies invariably appear with a head-dress (See Plate III). To judge from the statue of a Yakshiṇī found at Didarganj near Patna (See Plate IV), it would appear that women in eastern India, however, had developed a dislike for the head-dress more than two thousand years ago. Gradually the head-dress became an antiquated fashion all over the country. It begins to disappear from the sculptures and paintings from about the 4th century A. D. No women in Ajanta frescoes are seen to wear it. The same is generally the case with medieval sculptures all over the country. Classical Sanskrit literature also does not refer to it. The head-dress for women eventually disappeared from the country, probably because it was felt to be superflous. Orthodox women found it more convenient to cover their heads with a portion of their *saris*. Fashionable ladies did not like to conceal from view their elaborate and artistic coiffure (See Plate VIII).

c15.s1.7

The classical Sanskrit literature supplies us with meagre and disappointing data about the dress of women during the first millennium of the Christian era. It no doubt grows very eloquent in several places in describing in detail the beauty of young ladies and their attractive and numerous ornaments, but it rarely describes the constituents of their dress or the precise manner in which it was worn. The scanty evidence available from it shows that normally women required two garments during this period also. The upper garment or shawl was, however, used only on ceremonious occasions. Goddess Lakshmī, who appears seated on numerous Gupta coins, is seen invariably wearing a shawl, which completely covers her bosom, bust and arms down to the wrist (Allan, *Catalogue of Gupta Coins*, Pl. I, Nos., 6, 10, 13). When in the standing posture, ladies used to wear the shawl in different ways. Sometimes it used to cover their entire person down to the ankles (*Ibid.*, Pl. III, No. 6); if they happened to stand with their palms on the waist, they often used to fold the garment and pass it over their shoulders and allow it to hang down to the ankles through the arm cavities (*Ibid.*, No. 5). At home the *sari* alone was sufficient; a portion of it could be passed over the shoulders, so as to completely cover the entire bust, navel and breasts. Their waistband, for instance, could become visible only if the upper part of the *sari* happened to slip down. This could usually occur either when a woman was beside herself, being confounded or overpowered with terror¹, or

c15.s1.8

¹ Compare, for instance, the description of Gopīs given by Bhāsa, when they were terrified by the dreadful fight of Kṛishṇa with Kāliya serpent:—

c15.s1.9

संभ्रान्ता गलितोत्तरीयवसना त्रस्ताकुलव्याहृताः ।
*Bālacharit*, IV, 1.

c15.s1.10

when she was anxious to disclose the charms of her person when bent upon winning over a haughty sage or an indifferent lover¹. Normally the upper part of the *sari* covered not only the bust, but it also reached down to the knees. Rājaśekhara is explicit on the point. Dharmaśāstra writers also lay it down that women should be so dressed that their navel should never become visible and legs should be covered down to the ankles².

c15.s1.11

¹ Compare, for instance, Aśvaghosha’s description of one of the damsels sent to dissuade prince Siddhārtha from renouncing the world:—

c15.s1.12

² न नाभि दर्शयेदागुल्फाद्वासः परिदध्यात् । न स्तनौ विवृतौ कुर्यात् ।

c15.s1.13

The sculptural evidence, however, seems to be partly in conflict with the above observations, based mainly on the data of literature. In the early sculptures of the Punjab and the North Western Frontier Province (*c.* 100 B. C. to *c.* 300 A. D.), we undoubtedly come across several female statues whose torsos are covered with a portion of their *saris*, as described in the epics and classical Sanskrit literature. Such, for instance, is the case with the numerous statues of Hārīti³. Māyādevī seated by her husband’s side when listening to the prophesy about her new born babe, and a beautiful standing Nāgiṇī in human form (See Pl. IV, A) are both shown covering their shoulders

c15.s1.14

³ Bachhoffer, *Early Indian Sculpture*, Pl. 150 B; Gründwedel, *Buddhist Art in India*, (Eng. Trans.), p. 104, fig. 55.

c15.s1.15

मुहुर्मुहुर्मदव्याजस्रस्तनीलांशुकापरा ।
श्रालक्ष्यवसना रेजे स्फुरद्विद्युदिव क्षपा ॥ *Buddhacharita*, IV, 33.

c15.s1.16

*Śankhasmṛiti*.

c15.s1.17

and breasts with a portion of their *saris*¹. The same is the case with several female statues at Mathura².

c15.s1.18

¹ Hargreave, *The Buddha Story in Stone*, Pl. VIII; Bachhoffer, Pl. 150 A.

c15.s1.19

² Agarwal, *Mathurā kī Buddhakalā*, Pl. XIV.

c15.s1.20

But the sculptures in Central and Southern India and the paintings at Ajanta and Bagh caves have quite a different tale to tell. In the sculptures at Bharhut (*c.* 150 B. C.) the *sari* is generally seen covering the lower person only; no part of it is taken round the bust so as to cover the breasts and shoulders (See Pl. III, B). A separate upper garment is often worn by women, but it does not at all cover their bosom (See Pl. III, A). The same is the case with the sculptures at Sanchi and Amaraoti and the paintings at Ajanta, which cover the first four or five centuries of the Christian era.

c15.s1.21

How are we to explain this phenomenon of women appearing without any clothing over their upper person in the sculptures and paintings of Central and Southern India? Several explanations have been offered in this connection. Cunningham thought that nudity conveyed no sense of indecency in India prior to the advent of the Muslims; so women in sculptures and paintings naturally appear to be very scantily dressed (*Tree and Serpent Worship*, pp. 102-3). This theory, however, ignores the data of the Gandhāra sculptures, where women appear with their busts properly covered, and is in conflict with the evidence of contemporary literature, which makes it quite clear that it was regarded as highly indecorous for a woman to move out without completely covering her upper person. How then are we to explain this apparent conflict between the data of sculptures and the evidence of literature?

c15.s1.22

Cunningham did not make proper allowance for the circumstance that some of the carvings are not left at present in the same condition in which they were, when they were finished by the artists hundreds of years before. Havell has pointed out that the exaggerated thinness of the legs of the human figures at Amaraoti makes it clear that the sculptures had their finishing coat of plaster¹. Shrimant Balasaheb Pantapratinidhi, Rajasaheb of Aundh, who is a distinguished artist and art critic, has adduced further evidence in support of the above theory. He has pointed out that in some basreliefs at Amaraoti ladies are to be seen having the *sari* at the waist and also at the feet rolling in folds. At their back also we see some folds hanging down. But the thighs and legs are bare (See Pl. VI). Now it is clearly impossible to so wear a *sari* that it should cover the waist and feet, but leave the legs and thighs bare in front. The only possible explanation is the one offered by the Rajasaheb, *viz.*, in order to produce an effect of transparent garment the limbs of the body such as the thighs, etc., were first carved nude and then given the finishing touch of coating and colouring². It is therefore clear that in Amaraoti sculptures at any rate nudity was not the order of the day; the *saris* were shown partly in carving and partly in plastering and colouring. The upper body therefore may have been covered by that portion of the *sari* which was to be shown in plastering and colouring. In one case we do actually get the example of a lady taking a portion of her *sari* across her bust and over her shoulders, so as to completely cover her bosom¹. This was the normal dress of the women of the age and province.

c15.s1.23

¹ Havell, *Indian Sculpture and Painting*, p. 104.

c15.s1.24

² *A. B. O. R. I.*, Vol. III, p. 19.

c15.s1.25

¹ Cunningham, *Tree and Serpent Worship*, Pl. LIX.

c15.s1.26

It must be, however, admitted that this explanation of the dress being shown partly in carving and partly in colouring does not hold good of many schools of sculptures in ancient India. Such is particularly the case with the sculptures at Bharhut and Sanchi in Central India. Here, unlike at Amraoti, the whole of the *sari* covering the waist, the thighs and the legs is shown in carving; the method of its wearing also shows that no part of it was intended to be taken over the shoulders so as to cover the bust (See Pls. III, A and B). It is therefore not possible to argue that the breasts of women in the sculptures at these places were intended to be subsequently covered by a garment that was to be shown partly in plastering and partly in colouring. This process would have been also a costly one, for the sculptures at these places were intended to be exposed to rain and sunshine throughout the year. Replastering and recolouring would have become frequently necessary and the monks at these monasteries would not have found it always easy to get generous donors to defray the recurring expenditure. Are we then to conclude from the evidence of the plastic art that the women in Central India used to move about with their breasts uncovered in the early centuries of the Christian era ?

c15.s1.27

Nor can it be argued that the upper person of the women in these sculptures is bare, because the sculptors were not skilful enough to show the same *sari* as covering both the lower and the upper parts of the body. They could have avoided this difficulty by using a separate upper garment to cover the bust. As a matter of fact, both at Sanchi and Bharhut ladies of position are often seen wearing an upper garment, but it does not cover the breasts¹ (See Pl. III, A). In the case of the Ajanta paintings the excuse of inefficiency cannot be advanced. The artists were experts and they could easily have shown their women wearing the *sari* in such a way as to cover both the upper and the lower parts of the body. But they have not done so. It is true that most of the ladies at Ajanta, whose breasts appear uncovered, are in the privacy of their inner apartments, where they may not perhaps be expected to wear their full dress. But in some Ajanta frescoes we find women moving about even in public streets with the same insufficient dress. In one scene, for instance, we see a queen figuring in a street procession in the state carriage along with her husband ; she is, however, shown as wearing neither a jacket nor a bodice; nor is her *sari* shown covering her breasts (Heringham, *Ajanta*, Pl. XXIV).

c15.s1.28

¹ See also, Cunnigham, *The Stupa of Bharhut*, Pls. XIII, XVIII.

c15.s1.29

Shrimant Balasaheb Pantapratinidhi, the Rajasaheb of Aundh, has suggested that we can account for this insufficient dress of women at Elora and Ajanta on the assumption that the artists were Dravidians in culture¹. He points out that even today very few in Kochin and Malbar wear any upper garment. So the Dravidian artists have shown their women folk as wearing just the dress that was current in the Dravidian society. The Rajasaheb holds that the artists at Bharhut and Sanchi, on the other hand, were following the Aryan tradition, and so have shown their women as wearing an upper garment which covers the breasts and falls over the left shoulder².

c15.s1.30

¹ B. S. Pantpratinidhi, *Elora*, p. 100.

c15.s1.31

² *Ibid*, p. 97.

c15.s1.32

This theory also is not free from difficulties. It may be at the outset pointed out that the distinction sought to be drawn between the so-called Dravidian artists at Ajanta and Elora and the so-called Aryan artists and Bharhut and Sanchi is not supported by actual data; for the artists at the latter places are as indifferent in covering the breasts of their women as those at the former³ (See Pl. III, B). Sometimes they show their ladies wearing an upper garment, but it is so worn as not to cover the breasts at all⁴ (See Pl. III, A).

c15.s1.33

³ See also *Stupa of Bharhut*, Pl. XXII. 3, XXIII. 3.

c15.s1.34

⁴ *Ibid*, Pls. XIII. and XVIII.

c15.s1.35

It is further very doubtful whether all Dravidian women were really accustomed to move about without covering their breasts. It is true that till quite recently women in Malbar used to regard a bodice or an upper garment as not very necessary. But the Malbar practice was probably a primitive one and cannot be regarded as typically Dravidian. At any rate the women in Tamil and Telugu provinces were not accustomed to move about without properly covering their upper person. In this connection the *Saptaśatī* of Hāla, which undoubtedly reflects the Dravidian life during the early centuries of Christian era, supplies conclusive evidence. Three verses in this anthology make it quite clear that Dravidian ladies used to cover their breasts with adequate clothing in the days when the Ajanta frescoes were being painted. The first of these clearly refers to the breasts being covered by an upper garment¹. The anthology further shows that Dravidian women not only used to cover their upper person with a portion of their *sari* or a separate shawl, but also used to wear a bodice or *kañchukī* underneath. Its ends were tied together between the breasts², and it was not entirely removed even in the privacy of the bed-room³. It is not therefore possible to argue that the women at Elora and Ajanta do not cover their breasts because they are the representatives of Dravidian culture. The *Saptaśatī* shows clearly that the Dravidian ladies in contemporary times used to cover their upper person both with a bodice and an upper garment; the so-called Aryan artists at Sanchi and Bharhut are as careless about covering the breasts of their women as their so-called Dravidian fellow workers at Elora and Ajanta.

c15.s1.36

¹ रक्तदुकूलान्तरितो स्तननखलेख इव नववध्वाः । VI, 69. बलादाकृष्टवस्त्रार्धान्तप्रस्थिते मंथंरं त्वं व्रज । II, 60. नीलपटप्रावृतांगीति मा खल्वेनां परिहर । VI, 20. Sanskrit rendering of the stanzas is given here.

c15.s1.37

² द्वंयंगुलककपाटपिनद्धसविशेषनीलकञ्चुलिका । दर्शयति स्तनस्थलवर्णिकामिव तरुणी युवजनेभ्यः ॥ VII, 20.

c15.s1.38

³ ग्रामतरुण्यो हृदयं हरन्ति विदग्धानां स्तनभारखत्यः । मदने कुसुम्भरागयुक्तकञ्चुकाभरणमात्राः ॥ VI, 45.

c15.s1.39

The real explanation of women appearing without their busts being properly covered in the sculptures and paintings of Southern and Central India seems to be the artistic convention of the age. Breasts are the most significant symbol of motherhood, and the artists of these provinces probably felt that they may be shown uncovered in works of art, though they may be normally concealed in actual life under a bodice or a portion of the *sari*. This convention facilitated the task of fully exhibiting the beauty of the female form without suggesting any indecency. It also gave the artists an opportunity to show the different beautiful ornaments worn on the chest and the shoulders (See Pls. III and IV). This would become quite clear from statues like those of Indrāṇī and Nārasiṁhī discovered at the Sutna Residency in Central India, and now exhibited in the Indian Museum, Calcutta. In the case of these images, the lower and the upper rims of the shawls can be clearly seen at the elbows and shoulders. But the intervening space, as well as the entire bust, are deliberately shown altogether uncovered by the shawl, obviously with a view to display the numerous ornaments worn at the neck, the chest and the shoulder. There was nothing unusual in this procedure, for the art convention everywhere prescribes a much scantier dress for women than is actually worn by them in daily life. This will be quite evident to all the students of ancient and modern sculptures and paintings of European countries. Just as we cannot conclude that women in modern Europe move about in a nude condition in society, because they appear entirely uncovered in works of art, so also we cannot maintain that women in ancient India moved about in public without covering their upper person, because their busts are shown uncovered in the sculptures and paintings of Central and Southern India. The fact is that the dress in sculptures and paintings in not always a faithful copy of the dress actually in vogue in everyday life. The non-recognition of this truth will lead to strange deductions. We shall have to conclude that the Buddha allowed a much ampler dress to the nuns of his Order than was ever worn by ladies of fashion. The former were allowed to have three pieces of cloth, while the latter in sculptures are seen to be wearing only one or two. We shall have to admit that maid-servants used to wear richer dresses than the princesses they served ; for at Ajanta the former are seen wearing gaudy striped bodices, which are never seen used by the latter. We cannot therefore ignore the conclusive evidence supplied by contemporary literature and conclude that women were not properly covering their breasts and busts in ancient India either by a bodice or by a portion of their *sari*.

c15.s1.40

To conclude, the artists of Central and Southern India held that the unfolding of the beauty of the female form by showing the bust uncovered in a work of art need not and should not give rise to any indecent thoughts, if the woman concerned were a lady of virtuous character. To the spectator she would be like a mother. If, however, she was a dancing or a singing girl, there would not be this sacred atmosphere about her. The artist therefore felt that she should not be shown displaying the charms of her uncovered bust. As a consequence we usually find dancing girls appearing with a full dress covering their entire person right up to their necks and ankles. They are seen covering their breasts with bodices, jackets or blouses. This would become quite clear from the dancing scenes at Bharhut, Bagh caves and Sarnath¹.

c15.s1.41

¹ Cunningham, *Bharhut*, Pl. XV; Marshall, *Bagh Caves*, Pl. E; Sahani, *Catalogue of the Museum of Archaeology at Sarnath*, Pl. XXIII, a.

c15.s1.42

There are different fashions of wearing the *sari* current at present in different parts of India. The same was the case in the past. At present the ladies of the higher classes of the Deccan wear the *sari* in the *sakachchha* fashion, *i.e.*, by passing a portion of it in between their legs and tucking it up behind at the waist. In Gujarat, Bengal and United Provinces, on the other hand, the *sari* is worn in the *vikachchha* fashion, *i.e.*, it is simply worn round the legs without any portion of it being tucked up behind.

c15.s1.43

The women of the Gangetic plain were generally speaking following the *vikachchha* method, which is still current there. This is made quite clear from the Didarganj statue of the *charui* bearer from Bihar (See Pl. IV, B) and the Mathura statue of Hārīti from U. P.², as the backs of both these can be clearly seen. That the same fashion continued to be in vogue in the U. P., Bihar, Bengal and Orissa throughout the ancient and medieval periods is made quite clear by numerous statues of Tārā, Māyā, Mahishāsuramardinī, female attendants on Vishṇu images, etc., that were discovered in these provinces and are now exhibited in the Indian Museum, Calcutta.

c15.s1.44

² Vogel, *La Sculpture*, Pl. XI and XII.

c15.s1.45

The present Maharashtrian fashion of wearing the *sari* is seen to be obtaining in the Punjab and North Western Frontier Province during the early centuries of the Christian era. A statute of goddess Hārīti in the Peshawer museum, executed by a Gandhāra artist, shows the *sari* worn in the *sakachchha* fashion ; its upper end is passed over the left shoulder and let hanging down from the right one as is done at present by the Maharashtrian ladies¹. The same is the case with the goddess appearing on a coin of king Azilises ruling over the Punjab in the 1st century B. C.,² and with numerous female statuettes from the same province, now exhibited in the Indian Museum, Calcutta³. Among these the sculpture of a Nāgiṇī represented in the human form is very remarkable in this respect (See Pl. V, A)..

c15.s1.46

¹ *Handbook to the Sculptures in the Peshawer Museum*, Pl. VII.

c15.s1.47

² *Catalogue of the Coins in the Punjab Museum*, Vol. I, Pl. XIII, no. 334.

c15.s1.48

³ Gandhāra gallery exhibits Nos. 12, 17, 31.

c15.s1.49

In Maharashtra itself we find quite unexpectedly the *vikachchha* fashion of the Gangetic plain prevailing down to the 7th or the 8th century A. D. This is rather strange, but the evidence of sculptures is quite convincing on the point. In most of the Ajanta frescoes, we find both ladies and maid-servants usually wearing their *saris* without a *kachchha*⁴. The same is the case with women sculptured at Nagarjunikonda in Telugu country ; it is only maidservants who occasionally appear there with a *sakachchha sari*¹. It is after about 900 A. D., that we begin to get images of goddesses in the Deccan wearing the *sari* in the *sakachchha fasion*. We may therefore presume that this fashion became popular in the Deccan at about the end of the first millennium of the Christian era. Later images and statues from south India, whether in stone or copper, generally attest to the prevalence of the *sakachchha* fashion. This becomes quite clear from the bronze statues from Tanjore exhibited in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, whose backs also can be clearly examined.

c15.s1.50

⁴ Heringham, *Ajanta*, Pls. IIa, X, XI, XIV, XXVIII.

c15.s1.51

¹ *A.S.R.*, 1930-34, Pls. 39 and 40.

c15.s1.52

The Deccan ladies seem to have borrowed this fashion from their sisters in Malava and Central India. The sculptures at Sanchi and Bharhut show that the *sakachchha* fashion was the order of the day in this part of India since early times. This becomes clear beyond all doubt from some of the bas-reliefs, where the back of women is visible, showing clearly the *kachchha* tucked up behind at the waist² (See Pl. VII). This central Indian fashion eventually spread to the Deccan. It had penetrated to South Behar also in the 2nd century B. C., as would appear from several sculptures found at Bodhagaya (*Ars Asiatica*, Vol. XVI, Pls. VI, XI, XIV, etc.). It did not, however, appeal to the women in Gujarat and Bihar, who continue to wear their *saris* in the old *vikachchha* fashion. In Maharashtra too, the *sakachchha* fashion was adopted only by the upper classes; women of the lower classes still continue to adhere to the old *vikachchha* fashion.

c15.s1.53

² Cunningham, *Bharhut*, Pls. VIII, and XLV, 3; *Tree and Serpent Worship*, Pl. XXXVII, 2.

c15.s1.54

The poet Rājaśekhara supplies some further details about the way in which the women of different provinces used to dress themselves in the 10th century A. D. In Bengal the upper part of the *sari* was taken over the head, so as to cover the coiffure. In the United Provinces the upper garment or the upper part of the *sari* was wound round the person and used to reach down to the knees. In Malbar the *sari* hung down from high above the navel, its knot being tied under the armpit. It is not very clear how exactly this was done¹. In ancient times, as in modern days, the fashions of the provincial capitals had a great influence in determining the toilet, the coiffure and the the fashion of the dress of the women in the interior².

c15.s1.55

¹ See *Kāvyamīmānsā*, pp, 8 and 9. Cf. **सीमन्तचुम्बिसिच्यः स्फुटबा मूूलः । (वेषः)** for Bengal; **आश्रोणिगुल्फपरिमण्डलितोत्तरीयं वेषं नमस्यत महावधूम्वरीणाम् ।** for U. P.; **कक्षानिवेशिनिबिडीकृतनीविरेष वेषश्चिरं जयति केरलकामिनीनाम् ।** for Malbar.

c15.s1.56

² > **यो मार्गः परिधानकर्मणि गिरां या सूक्तिमुद्राक्रमे ।** **भंगिर्या कबरीचयेषु रचनं यद्भूषणलीषु च ।** **दृष्टं सुन्दरि कान्य..अल्ललनालाकेरिहान्यच्च यत्- ।** **शिक्षन्ते सकलासु दिक्षु तरसा तत्कौतुकित्यः स्त्रियः ॥** *Bālarāmāyaṇa*, X, 90.

c15.s1.57

Let us now ascertain the role which stitched clothes played in the dress of women. There is one view which holds that the art of sewing was unknown to the Hindus before the advent of the Muslims. It is, however, altogether untenable. The needle and the process of sewing are both referred to as early as in the Ṛigveda³; there is a passage in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* which clearly refers to two pieces of cloths being joined together by the needle¹. The Buddha had forbidden monks to do sewing work for nuns². The *Amarakosha* expressly mentions the tailor³, and the Chinese pilgrim I-tsing informs us that shirts and trousers were quite common in Kashmir and the Punjab during the 7th century A. D.,' though they were not in vogue in the plains⁴. The fact is that in the hot plains of Northern India stitched clothes are very inconvenient, except in the winter, and so for the greater part of the year both men and women can do without them. That seems to be the reason why they are so rarely referred to in literature.

c15.s1.58

³ **सीव्यत्वपः सूच्याऽच्छिद्यमानया ।** II, 32, 4.

c15.s1.59

¹ यथा सूच्या वासः संदधीयान् । एवमेव एताभिर्यज्ञस्य च्छिद्रं संदधेत् । III, 18.

c15.s1.60

² यो पन भिक्खू अञ्ञातिकाय भिक्खूनिय चीवरं सिब्बेय सिब्बापेय्य वा पाचित्तियंति । Vinayapitaka, Pachittiya, 25.

c15.s1.61

³ तुन्नावायः सौचिकः । II, 10, 6.

c15.s1.62

⁴ I-tsing, p. 68.

c15.s1.63

We may discuss here the controversial question as to whether stitched clothes were in vogue in the Vedic age. In the Indo-Iranian times the Aryans were undoubtedly living in a cold climate, where stitched clothes would have been welcome; but they had not at that time probably sufficiently advanced in civilisation to begin their use. The Ṛigveda refers to Varuṇa as wearing a *drāpi*, while sitting in his heavenly court (1, 25, 13). But whether it was a mantle or an overcoat we do not know. In the marriage hymn the bride is described as wearing a *śāmulyam* on her wedding night, which was discarded the next morning. But this was probably a *sari* rather than a short. According to the *Kātyāyana Śrauta Sūtra* (p. 686), the wife of the sacrificer was given a *chaṇḍātaka* or *dahara* to wear, when she had to ascend by a very high step to the top of the sacrificial pillar. While doing so, the thighs were likely to be exposed to view if there was no under-wear, as the *sari* was very probably worn in the *vikachchha* fashion. So a *chaṇḍātaka*, which has been expressly described as a short by the commentator of the Śrauta Sūtra¹, would have been very desirable. The original Vedic passages, where this ceremony is described, do not however refer to any *chaṇḍātaka* being worn by the wife on the occasion; the word is also not known to Pāṇini, Patañjali and Amara. Kātyāyana is therefore probably referring to an innovation of his age, when he refers to a short or *chaṇḍātaka* being worn by the wife on the occasion. In the Vedic age very probably only a *dahara* or *kaupīna* i.e., a strip of cloth worn on a girdle in between the legs, was used on the occasion. Though therefore sewing was known in the Vedic age, there is no evidence of stitched clothes having come into general vogue at that time.

c15.s1.64

¹ अर्धोरुकं विलासिन्या वासश्चण्डात्तकं विदुः । p. 866.

c15.s1.65

The help of the art of sewing seems to have been first taken for preparing the bodice. This took place even before 600 B.C.; for Buddhist and Jain nuns were enjoined to use it. Its traces can be seen below the breast in the of statue Chaṇḍā Yakshiṇī at Bharhut (Cunningham, Pl. XXII, fig. 3); if the garment is not shown on other female statues at the place, the desire to show off the ornaments at the neck and the chest must have been the obvious reason. The bodice did not require much tailoring like the modern blouse. It had short sleeves but no buttons, and it was secured in its proper place by its ends being tied together in between the two breasts¹. On one of the coins of Samudragupta, Lakshmī can be seen wearing the bodice precisely in this way. We can see both the knot and the two ends hanging down in its continuation. (See Pl. V, B). From Kālidāsa, however, we learn that sometimes the ends of the bodice were tied in a knot on the shoulder²; what was the make up of this type of bodice and how it was tied on the shoulder is rather difficult to understand. The bodice required very little tailoring and women used to stitch it at home. It could be easily taken out, if necessary, to protect oneself against the lunar or solar rays (*Śṛiṅgāraśataka*, 17).

c15.s1.66

¹ Cf. Mahāśvetā's description :— **स्तनयुगुलनिबद्धग्रंथिना कल्पतरुलतावल्कलेन कृतोत्तरीयाम् ।** *Kādambarī*, p. 248.

c15.s1.67

² **इदमपहितसूक्ष्मग्रंथिना स्कन्धदेशे स्तनयुगपरिणाहाच्छादिना वल्कलेन।** *Śākuntala* I, 19.

c15.s1.68

Jackets, blouses and frocks seem to have come into vogue in the plains of northern India, when they were included in the dominions of the Scythians, the Kushāṇas and other Central Asiatic invaders. As these conquerors hailed from a very cold region, they were accustomed to wear shirts, trousers and overcoats. This is quite clear from the evidence of their coinage. Kushāṇa kings like Kanishka and Huvishka are invariably seen wearing a trouser and an overcoat on their coins³. In the Mathura and Gandhāra sculptures, which belong to the period of Kushāṇa supremacy (c. 50 A. D. to c. 300 A. D.), women begin to appear in blouses and frocks. In one basrelief at Mathura even *Sapta Mātṛikās* are seen wearing frocks¹. In Gandhāra sculptures, which mostly hail from the N. W. F. Province, blouses and jackets are fairly common. In one place we find Hāriti wearing a blouse of long sleeves². A Nāgiṇī in human form is also seen doing the same (See Pl. V, A). In another sculpture, Māyādevī is shown wearing a frock over her *sari*³. On one of the coins of the Scythian ruler Azilises even goddes Lakshmī standing on a lotus is represented as wearing a blouse and a trouser⁴ !

c15.s1.69

³ In the early period of their coinage Gupta kings also are seen wearing this foreign dress; it took a few decades for them to discard it in favour of the national Hindu dress.

c15.s1.70

¹ Agarwal, *Mathurā kī Buddhakalā*, Pl. 21.

c15.s1.71

² Bachhoffer, Pl. 150 B.

c15.s1.72

³ Indian Museum, Calcutta ; Gandhār gallery exhibit No. 13.

c15.s1.73

⁴ *Punjab Museum Coin Catalogue*, Vol. I, Pl. XIII, No. 332.

c15.s1.74

The United Provinces, Central India, Gujarat and Maharashtra were under Scythian rule for different periods during the first four centuries of the Christian era. This circumstance very probably facilitated the spread of the fashion of stitched clothes in Hindu society. The tendency to imitate the dress of the rulers is not peculiar to the modern times. It existed in the past as well.

c15.s1.75

Society, however, had a general prejudice against stitched clothes, and women were for a long time reluctant to take to jackets, blouses and frocks. We find only dancing girls adopting the new fashion in dress in the beginning. This would become quite clear from the fact that it is only women of this class, and not ladies of rank, who are seen wearing jackets and blouses at Bharhut, Bagh and Sarnath. At Ajanta we sometimes find maid-servants wearing shorts and jackets; ladies of position, however, are still seen avoiding their use. It is quite possible that greater stitching was introduced in the bodice (*kañchukī*) at this time, but the prejudice against full fledged jackets, blouses and frocks remained unabated. These became common among a section of ladies only in the Muslim period. They continued to be regarded as a foreign innovation, and women in orthodox families engaged in religious duties used to remove them for the time being.

c15.s1.76

The kind of cloth used by women for their dress differed with their status. Maidens and women in coverture used to wear gay and embroidered cloth. The ladies of the 4th and 5th centuries A. D. used to prefer dotted, striped, gauzy and embroidered muslins for their bodices. This is quite clear from several paintings at Ajanta¹. Some women, especially in Ceylone and south India, used to wear also a narrow breast band across their breasts over their bodices². This fashion did not become common in northern India.

c15.s1.77

¹ Smith, *A History of Fine Arts*, p. 288, fig. 207.

c15.s1.78

² Smith, *Ibid*, Pl. LVIII; T. Gopinath Rao, *Hindu Iconography*, I, ii, Pl. 99; *I.A.*, 1933, p. 160 and Plate.

c15.s1.79

Widows do not appear to have used any bodices. The colour of their *saris* was plain white in the early period. The widowed daughters-in-law of Dhṛitarāshṭra are described as wearing white garments, when they went to see their old father-in-law in the forest³.

c15.s1.80

³ शुक्लोत्तरीया नरराजपत्न्यः । *Mbh.* Chap. XV, 27, 16.

c15.s1.81

This would show that women used to wear gaily coloured *saris* only during their maidenhood and coverture. The orthodox practice of Deccan widows to wear reddish *saris* seems to be due to the influence of the colour of the garments of Buddhist nuns. The Gujarat practice of giving black garments to the widow seems also to be a post-epic development. Like the people in the west Gujaratis held that black was the proper colour for a person in mourning and therefore for the dress of the widow, who was to be in a perpetual mourning. In Bengal and northern India, however, the old custom continues and widows still wear white plain *saris* without any borders.

c15.s1.82

The *lahaṅgā*, which is so common in Rajputana and northern India at present, was altogether unknown in the Hindu period. It is not referred to in literature, nor seen in paintings and sculptures of the Hindu period. It however became quite common after a few centuries of Muslim rule. In northern India it even became an indispensable constituent of the traditional bridal dress. In south India the Muslim influence was less felt and so the *lahaṅgā* or *parakara* became common only among small girls. Grown up women did not take to it.

c15.s1.83

The paintings of the Mogul period give a fairly accurate idea of the dress of Hindu women, who had come under the influence of the new fashions come into vogue with the advent of the Muslim rule. These ladies used to wear a *lahaṅgā* or *pyjamā* down from their waist. The former was sewn in different artistic designs, and nothing was usually worn over it. The *pyjamā*, however, was a simple one, and usually a short *sari* was worn over it. The bust was covered by a bodice or a jacket. An upper garment or *oḍhṇī* was also in vogue ; it hung down from the head covering a portion of the back. In rural areas and orthodox circles the old dress continued to be current.

c15.s1.84

Women are naturally more conservative then men, and so the establishment of British rule during the last 150 years has not yet effected any revolution in their dress. They continue to use their old dress consisting of a *sari*, a bodice and a shawl, even when their husbands have begun to don suits, neckties and collars. The bodice, however, is becoming more and more artistic and fashionable. Shorts and frocks have become common among girls in urban areas, but there are yet no indications that grown up ladies would take to them in the near furture. With increasing facilities in communications women are in a better position to observe the dress prevailing in neighbouring provinces, and there is a tendency among educated and fashionable ladies to borrow some fashions current in other parts of the country. Thus the *vikachchha* mode of wearing *sari* is now becoming common among the fashionable ladies in the urban areas of the Deccan. The dress of the average Hindu women, however, still continues to be the old traditional one of her province. The *lahaṅgā* is the only exception. The main reason for this conservatism is the fact that the traditional dress is on the whole well suited for the climate of the country. Women have also not to mix much among the members of the European community like men, either for official or for social purposes ; so they do not feel the same urge as men for adopting a European or a semi-European dress.

Linked texts (15)