The foot pattern allows to illustrate almost all the difficulties encountered by medieval religious iconography. It brings along two perfect classical hierarchies, one relating to the upper and lower part of the body while the other its interior and exterior, both articulating on those of the spirit and the flesh, of the cleanness and the dirt, of the honourable and the humble. Nevertheless, while commentators have troubles explaining why the Christ of the Gospels recommends to go sometimes barefoot, sometimes wearing shoes, iconography gives to feet the most diverse values, at times even conflicting. This witnesses some widespread contradictions within the system, mainly three, which are connected one another. First, nudity, beginning with that of the feet, is sometimes emphasized, sometimes devalued. Second, and this is certainly the cause of it, there is a contradiction between the notions of poverty and decency: poverty involves despoilment, whereas decency requires to be properly, or better richly dressed.Third, the sexual connotations of the foot can refer both to the sin of flesh and to spiritual marriage, so that the sacred often borders on the obscene.