The Beginnings of Buddhist Art and Other Essays in Indian and Central-Asian Archaeology c10.21

c10.21

only since the Vth century A. D.; but in their view this could only be the translation into Pâli of a prose which was quasi-contemporaneous with the verses (¹). Of the Kalpadrumâvadâna all that we can say without imprudence is that this versified amplification does not bear the marks of high antiquity. As to the dates at which the Chinese translations were made and which, according to the information kindly communicated by M. Chavannes, extend from the end of the IIIrd century to that of the Vth of our era, they naturally can furnish us only with a terminus ad quem. Thus, as far as the texts are concerned, practically every extrinsic element of chronological classification is lacking. Happily we are a little better served, as regards the images. Each of these forms part of a whole to which either votive inscriptions or technical considerations permit us to assign a determinate epoch. It is established that the bas-reliefs of Barhut and of Sânchî go back to the IInd or Ist century B. C. (²). Those of Gandhâra and of Amarâvatî are by common accord attributed to the Ist or IInd of our era (³). It is to the same epoch at the latest that, on the strength of the inscriptions and the style, Messrs. Burgess and Griffiths ascribe the archaic paintings of Cave X at Ajanṭâ : on the other hand, the same authorities bring the decoration of Cave XVII down to the beginning of the VIth century (⁴). Certainly these are only approximate dates : but it is a good thing to have even so much, and we must consider ourselves fortunate, if we succeed, by using