Examples of clothing and styles in ancient India

Jun 2014
5,204
New Delhi, India
It's just not common in India for some time. Relief images, art work from the period shows as such. It's not like they cant produce it, didn't care for it.
What artwork shows is people indoors, studying/dancing or in temples, where one does not wear shoes. But otherwise, some foot-wear is necessary unless the person is working in a rice field inundated with water.
 
Likes: Ashoka maurya
and where is the toe stirrup shown here?

View attachment 17830

Never said it was a widely distributed it wasnt and even disappeared from imagery till actual stirrups came about. Images point is, being bear foot wasnt just for indoors, dances, etc. but was common in war, horse rider, chariot, hunting, whatever. So much so at one point, some riders developed a rudimentary stirrup through stabilized with their foot toe, instead of the whole foot.
 
Never said it was a widely distributed it wasnt and even disappeared from imagery till actual stirrups came about. Images point is, being bear foot wasnt just for indoors, dances, etc. but was common in war, horse rider, chariot, hunting, whatever.
i think you are reading too much into the religious carvings mate, try to have the context of the carving and the scenes they are depicting before making hasty conclusions.

as the above user stated, its illogical to be barefoot as a soldier, even as a commoner it was illogical to roam barefoot, do you have any other cultural reference, where armies fought barefoot?

regards
 
i think you are reading too much into the religious carvings mate, try to have the context of the carving and the scenes they are depicting before making hasty conclusions.

as the above user stated, its illogical to be barefoot as a soldier, even as a commoner it was illogical to roam barefoot, do you have any other cultural reference, where armies fought barefoot?

regards

No, Im not. You look at one detail, bare footed-ness. You act like they didnt detail, single piece boots, laced boots, sandles, etc. in the same stupas reliefs, etc. as well. They do.
 
No, Im not. You look at one detail, bare footed-ness. You act like they didnt detail, single piece boots, laced boots, sandles, etc. in the same stupas reliefs, etc. as well. They do.
no, i think that you are confusing arts with reality, religious art is abstract and symbolic, it doesnt need to detail many things, indian women are shown completely naked, it doesnt mean that indian women roamed butt naked, this is kind of conclusions many people make when they see indian narrative panels from shunga periods for instance. The boots are shown, hence my question, what evidence do you have that contemporary armies fought barefoot? is there any evidence from lets say greeks, persians, egyptians, mesopotamians etc?

regards
 
no, i think that you are confusing arts with reality, religious art is abstract and symbolic, it doesnt need to detail many things, indian women are shown completely naked, it doesnt mean that indian women roamed butt naked, this is kind of conclusions many people make when they see indian narrative panels from shunga periods for instance. The boots are shown, hence my question, what evidence do you have that contemporary armies fought barefoot? is there any evidence from lets say greeks, persians, egyptians, mesopotamians etc?

regards


Dude, you're nuts. So you might as well ignore everything in those images, just cause you cant stand one fact. Ignore every detail from the broadswords with flared tips, ignore the bell shaped shields, ignore the turban styles, ignore large earing the elongate the users earlobes, ignore the torso wraps, long, short sleeve tunics, ignore the different types of bows designs, axe designs, all because you attribute one thing -- bear footedness to religious narrative, good one, bud, you are the one that needs to get back to reality.

And yes, boots are shown, just not common, bud. This is the skew isnt religious narrative, but what's on the ground then.