The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c33.46

v1.c33.46

With the terracottas of this period we are on firmer ground, for examples of them are numerous, and in many cases their age can be determined not only by the internal evidence of their style, but by the associations in which they have been found. These terracottas consist of figurines of men and animals or toy carts in the round, or of small plaques stamped with figures or miniature scenes. The Indian specimens of the Maurya period were, as we have already seen, very crude and primitive, corresponding in this respect with the indigenous stone sculpture of that age. In the second and first centuries b.c., however, terracotta work steadily improved, and towards the beginning of the Christian era we find it hardly less carefully modelled or less richly decorated than contemporary reliefs in stone. By this time, the use of dies for stamping the clay had come into general vogue, and, as a consequence, even the cheaper toys of children were enriched by pretty floral designs in relief. The same thing happened, also, in the case of metal ornaments, which exhibit precisely the same kind of designs as the terracottas. A good illustration of the minute delicacy with which some of these dies were engraved is afforded by a terracotta medallion from Bhīṭā (Pl. XXIX, 81), which might almost be a copy in miniature of the relief work on the Sāñchī gateways, so exactly does it resemble it in style. One of the sculptures at Sāñchī, it may be remembered, was the work of the ivory carvers of Vidiçā, and it was of ivory probably that the die for this medallion was made. Of about the same age, but of much coarser execution is the copper *loṭā* from Gundlā in Kulū reproduced in Pl. XXIX, 82. Here, again, the scene engraved round the body of the vase is the familiar one of a prince seated in a four-horse chariot with a band of musicians in front, a cortège of horsemen and an elephant rider behind. The figure in the chariot has been identified with Gautama Buddha, as Prince Siddhārtha, but it seems, *prima facie*, unlikely that this should be the one and only exception to the rule which obtained among the early Indian artists, of never representing the figure of Gautama Buddha.