The Development of Hindu Iconography c4.3

c4.3

In the first chapter of this book, after giving an idea about the subject itself, I have indicated the lines in which the study of Hindu Iconography should be conducted and the varieties of materials handled in its scientific treatment. The second and third chapters contain elaborate discussions about the antiquity and origin of image-worship in India. In them I have tried to appraise critically the views of previous scholars on the above problems and have given my own based on literary and archaeological data. In the fourth and fifth chapters I have shown how the ancient Indian coins and seal-impressions can materially help us in ascertaining the early iconographic types of a number of Hindu divinities and their emblems, many of which would have otherwise remained unknown to us. In the sixth chapter I have elaborately discussed the technique of the Iconoplastic art in India with the help of a variety of indigenous texts, few of which were critically studied by the previous writers on the subject. I have also discussed there the various factors which contributed to the development of this art in India and the nature and extent of their individual contributions. In the seventh chapter have been explained the various technical terms and terminologies that are frequently to be found in iconographic texts, a correct knowledge of which is essential to every student of Hindu Iconography. In the eighth and last chapter the Indian canons of Iconometry have been discussed, a proper understanding of which is necessary for the study of this subject. In course of this I have instituted a brief comparison of the Indian canons with those followed by the Egyptian and the Hellenistic artists of ancient times. It has been found necessary to add three appendices to my book, in the second one of which I have re-edited the iconometric text entitled *Pratimāmānalakṣaṇam* with translation and notes. In all these tasks I have often referred to the views of various previous writers; reasons have often been adduced by me, whether I accepted or rejected them. I may submit here that my method in the above studies is mainly objective, and I have approached the subject chiefly as a student of history and archaeology. This is the reason why I could not utilise some comparatively recent publications of eminent authors, which, remarkable as they are, treat Iconography from an angle different from that of mine.