The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c33.44.5

v1.c33.44.5

The pity is that the example of these outside schools made only a superficial and impermanent impression in Orissa—a fact which becomes clear if we consider some of the other caves on this site. In the Gaṇeśh Gumphā, for example, which is a small excavation containing only two cells, the reliefs of the frieze are closely analogous in style and subject, but, at the same time, slightly inferior to those in the upper verandah of the Rānī Gumphā. Then, in the Jayavijaya, we see the style rapidly losing its animation, and in the Alakāpurī cave, which is still later, the execution has become still more coarse and the figures as devoid of expression as anything which has survived from the Early School (Pl. XXVIII, 80). The truth appears to be that the art of Orissa, unlike the art of Central or Western India possessed little independent vitality, and flourished only so long as it was stimulated by other schools, but became retrograde the moment that that inspiration was withdrawn.