The Position of Women in Hindu Civilisation, from Prehistoric Times to the Present Day c15.s1.22

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.