Mumbai, November 6, 2026: Nitesh Tiwari’s mythological film Ramayana: Part One, starring Ranbir Kapoor and Sai Pallavi, has renewed debate over the historical authenticity of its costumes and jewellery. As the film reaches theatres, jewellery designer Tarang Arora, Creative Director and CEO of Jaipur-based Tribe Amrapali, has responded to criticism surrounding Sita’s wedding ornaments.
In an interview with The Indian Express published on November 6, Arora explained that recreating jewellery from the era traditionally associated with the Ramayana involves considerable uncertainty because reliable evidence of the exact ornaments worn during that period is limited.
He maintained that the design team’s objective was to create culturally recognisable jewellery while respecting the characters and visual traditions associated with the epic.
Sita’s Wedding Jewellery Sparks Online Debate
The controversy began following the release of the film’s trailer, when some social media users questioned the jewellery worn by Sai Pallavi as Sita.
Particular attention was directed towards her wedding appearance, with critics suggesting that the ornaments resembled styles associated with later periods of Indian history.
Some questioned whether jewellery resembling jadau, a traditional Indian jewellery-making technique, would have existed during the period in which the Ramayana is traditionally set.
The discussion became part of a wider debate over the film’s visual interpretation of an ancient epic.
Jewellery Designer Responds to Authenticity Questions
Responding to the criticism, Tarang Arora said there was no definitive evidence establishing precisely which jewellery styles existed during the era represented in the film.
He acknowledged that some criticism could be valid but argued that historical uncertainty makes absolute accuracy difficult.
Arora also disputed the suggestion that the production had necessarily used jadau jewellery.
His central argument was that designers must interpret available cultural references rather than claim complete archaeological certainty.
The response highlighted the distinction between historical reconstruction and artistic interpretation.
Raja Ravi Varma’s Paintings Inspired Jewellery Designs
Arora revealed that the team drew inspiration from paintings by celebrated Indian artist Raja Ravi Varma.
The painter’s depictions of Hindu deities and mythological figures have influenced popular visual representations of the Ramayana for generations.
The design team also considered jewellery traditions visible in temples and religious artwork.
These references helped shape the characters’ appearances, although they do not establish what jewellery was worn during the historical period associated with the epic.
Arora described the designs as an attempt to create a visually appropriate interpretation based on the available cultural imagination.
More Than 4,000 Jewellery Pieces Created for Film
One of the most notable aspects of the production was the enormous scale of its jewellery-making process.
According to Arora, the team created more than 4,000 individual jewellery pieces for the film.
The designs were developed over approximately two and a half years.
Around 150 artisans were involved in the project, with gemstones sourced and cut locally in Jaipur.
Many pieces were redesigned multiple times before receiving final approval.
Arora said the process was significantly more demanding than earlier film projects because jewellery had to be created for a large number of important characters.
Jaipur Artisans Handcraft Jewellery for Ramayana
The jewellery was designed, customised and handcrafted by Tribe Amrapali, a brand associated with Jaipur’s traditional jewellery industry.
The company has previously worked on major Indian productions, including Baahubali and Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi.
For Ramayana, the team relied extensively on local craftsmanship and traditional jewellery-making skills.
Arora emphasised that the project involved hundreds of hours of detailed design, gemstone work and manual production.
The involvement of Jaipur artisans also highlighted the contribution of India’s traditional jewellery industry to large-scale cinema.
Ayodhya and Lanka Given Contrasting Visual Styles
The jewellery team developed different visual identities for Ayodhya and Lanka.
Ayodhya, associated with Lord Rama and his family, was presented through comparatively understated and elegant ornaments.
Lanka, ruled by Ravana, was designed to appear significantly more elaborate and luxurious.
The contrast was intended to reflect differences in the characters’ circumstances and the visual identity of their kingdoms.
Arora explained that Ravana’s jewellery required particularly elaborate designs because the character is associated with the legendary golden kingdom of Lanka.
Ravana’s Jewellery Among the Most Challenging Designs
Although Sita’s ornaments attracted considerable public attention, Arora identified Ravana’s jewellery as one of the most difficult aspects of the project.
Played by Yash, Ravana required a distinctive visual identity reflecting power, grandeur and the character’s complex personality.
The designers incorporated motifs involving serpents, animals, demonic faces and tridents.
The trident references Ravana’s association with Lord Shiva.
Different ornaments were created to represent varying aspects of the character, making his appearance more elaborate than that of several other principal characters.
Sita’s Jewellery Changes Throughout the Story
The design team also used ornaments to reflect changes in Sita’s life.
Her jewellery evolves as she moves from her life in Mithila, where she is the daughter of King Janaka, to her marriage and life in Ayodhya.
The designers incorporated different floral motifs and decorative elements to reflect these changing settings.
As Rama, Sita and Lakshman enter their period of exile, their jewellery becomes significantly simpler.
The reduction in ornaments helps communicate the transition from royal life to living in the forest.
Jewellery Plays Important Role in Ramayana Narrative
Jewellery serves a narrative purpose in the film rather than functioning solely as decoration.
In the Ramayana, Sita drops ornaments while being taken away in Ravana’s Pushpak Vimana.
The ornaments become an important clue in Rama’s search for her.
This aspect of the story required the production team to consider how jewellery would appear in significant dramatic sequences.
The designs therefore needed to support both the characters’ visual identities and the storytelling.
Costume Designers Also Faced Criticism
The jewellery debate follows earlier criticism of the film’s costumes.
Designers Rimple and Harpreet Narula, responsible for the film’s wardrobe, previously addressed questions about Sai Pallavi’s appearance as Sita and Lara Dutta’s portrayal of Kaikeyi.
Some viewers had questioned the use of stitched blouses, draping styles and elaborate clothing.
The costume designers explained that their choices were influenced by religious imagery, regional artistic traditions and the need to create a recognisable cinematic interpretation.
They maintained that the production was not intended to function as a strictly archaeological reconstruction.
Designers Refer to Earlier Television Adaptations
Arora also acknowledged the influence of earlier Indian mythological television productions.
He identified Ramanand Sagar’s Ramayan and B. R. Chopra’s Mahabharat as influential visual references.
These productions helped shape how generations of Indian audiences imagine mythological characters.
Arora explained that modern filmmakers inevitably work within an existing tradition of visual interpretations.
The new adaptation aims to build upon that tradition while introducing a different cinematic scale and aesthetic.
Designer Emphasises Importance of Human Craftsmanship
Despite the increasing use of artificial intelligence in creative industries, Arora stressed the importance of traditional jewellery-making.
He acknowledged that technology can assist designers with research and efficiency.
However, he maintained that human creativity, craftsmanship and artistic judgement remain essential.
The jewellery team’s extensive manual work reflects the production’s emphasis on traditional skills alongside modern filmmaking technology.
Arora also expressed appreciation for director Nitesh Tiwari and producer Namit Malhotra for supporting Indian artisans through the project.
Ramayana Debate Highlights Challenge of Adapting Ancient Epics
The discussion surrounding Sita’s jewellery illustrates the difficulty of adapting culturally significant stories for modern audiences.
Different generations and regions may have distinct expectations about how characters such as Rama, Sita and Ravana should appear.
Some viewers favour interpretations closely aligned with familiar religious artwork, while others seek stronger historical or archaeological grounding.
Because the Ramayana has been represented through literature, sculpture, painting, theatre and television over many centuries, there is no single visual tradition universally accepted by all audiences.
Ramayana: Part One Continues to Generate Discussion
The renewed discussion over jewellery comes as Ramayana: Part One attracts attention for its performances, visual effects, production design and interpretation of the epic.
Arora’s comments provide additional insight into the research and craftsmanship behind the film’s elaborate appearance.
While questions about historical authenticity continue, the designers maintain that their work represents a creative interpretation informed by Indian artistic and religious traditions.
The debate also draws attention to the contributions of the approximately 150 Jaipur artisans who helped create thousands of handcrafted jewellery pieces for the production.
Source: The Indian Express, November 6, 2026; The Hollywood Reporter India, November 3, 2026
Supreme News Network
