The Antiquities of Orissa v1.c9.183.1

v1.c9.183.1

There is one circumstance, however, which melts all these arguments into thin air: both the principal figures have traces on their chins of a curly beard, and no Hindu divinity, nor any Hindu householder or man of pleasure, has ever been represented, either in poetry or in plastic art, with such an appendage to his face. The Hindu Śāstras have invariably and uniformly assigned the beard to houseless hermits and sages who have renounced the pleasures of the world, and there is no reason whatever to suppose that there was any exception, or that the sculpture is intended as a satire on a hermit. It must follow, therefore, that the scenes delineated are foreign, and most probably those of some passages in the life of Silénos. The figures are decidedly Bacchic, and the beard, the *cantharus*, the vine crown, and the *tazza*, are very appropriate emblems and accessories to indicate their characters. To account for the Indian character of some of the details, I believe the sculpture to be the handiwork of an Indian artist working for a Bactrian or Greek employer, just in the same way in which Indian artists, working for General Claude Martin produced the “Constantia” house at Lucknow, bastardising a Muhammadan building with corrupt Renaissance ornaments and decorations. A drawing of the design was given by the employer, and the artist worked it out in the best way he could, with such additions and alterations as his Indian ideas of the requirements of art suggested to him.