tain only the wrapper made without the use of scissors or needle";
and again, "The dress of the Hindu men of rank has become nearly the
same with that of the Muhammadans [512] who did not allow any officer
employed by them to appear at their _levees_ (Durbars) except in proper
dress. At home, however, the Hindu men, and on all occasions their
women, retain almost entirely their native dress, which consists of
various pieces of cloth wrapped round them without having been sewn
together in any form, and only kept in their place by having their
ends thrust under the folds." And elsewhere he states: "The flowering
of cotton cloth with the needle has given a good deal of employment
to the Muhammadan women of Maldeh as the needle has never been used by
the Hindus." [513] Darzi, as has been seen, is a Persian word, and in
northern India many tailors are Muhammadans. And it seems, therefore,
a possible hypothesis that the needle and the art of sewing were
brought into general use by the Moslem invaders. It is true that in
his _Indo-Aryans_ [514] Mr. Rajendra Lal Mitra combats this hypothesis
and demonstrates that made-up clothes were known to the Aryans of
the Rig-Veda and are found in early statuary. But he admits that the
instances are not numerous, and it seems likely that the use of such
clothes may have been confined to royal and aristocratic families. It
is possible also that the Scythian invasions of the fifth century
brought about a partial relapse from civilisation, during which certain
arts and industries, and among them that of cutting and sewing cloth,
were partially or completely lost. The tailor is not the familiar
figure in Hindu social life that he is, for example, in England. Here
he is traditionally an object or butt for ridicule as in the saying,
'Nine tailors make a man,' and so on; and his weakness is no doubt
supposed to be due to the fact that he pursues a sedentary indoor
occupation and one more adapted to women than men, the needle being
essentially a feminine implement. A similar ridicule, based no doubt
on exactly the same grounds, attaches in India to the village weaver,
as is evidenced by the proverbs given in the articles on Bhulia, Kori,
and Jolaha. No reason exists probably for the contempt in which the
weaver class is held other than that their work is considered to be
more fitting for women than men. Thus in India the weaver appears to
take the place of the tailor, and this leads to the conclusio