The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c33.31.2

v1.c33.31.2

and the lotus pond indicated by conventional lotuses out of all proportion to the size of the beasts wading through it. In the latter, the leaves and flowers are of normal size; the water is portrayed by undulating lines; the banyan tree is realistically true to nature; the modelling of the elephants is more forceful and elaborate; and, though the figures are kept religiously to one plane, strong contrasts of light and shade and a suggestion of depth are obtained by cutting deep into the surface of the stone. Both reliefs are admirable in their own way, but there can be no two opinions as to which of the two is the more masterly. The one on the South Gateway is the work of a creative genius, more expert perhaps with the pencil or brush than with the chisel, but possessed of a delicate sense of line and of decorative and rhythmic composition. That on the West, on the other hand, is technically more advanced, and the individual figures, taken by themselves, are undoubtedly more effective and convincing; but it fails to please, because the detail is too crowded and confusing, and the composition too regular and mechanical. The same remark holds good, if we compare the ‘war of the relics’ on the Southern Gateway, with the somewhat similar scene on the Western (Pl. XXIII, 63, 64). In both there is abundance of fancy and expressive movement, but the movement and fancy are of a different order.