The Position of Women in Hindu Civilisation, from Prehistoric Times to the Present Day c15.s1.39

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*.