1865.) Ancient Remains at Saidpur and Bhitdri. 87 
lotus blossom, and another is remarkable for being seated on the head 
of a non-descript animal, partly of human form and closely resembling 
the figure carved upon a stone of the Gangi bridge before described. 
The figure is decorated with a double necklace, from the centre of which 
hangs a large pendant, and on its back and beneath its feet runs a 
band of elaborate scroll-work forming the lowermost division of the 
sculpture and springing originally from a cherub who has a wonderful 
head of hair, and whose feet are like the talons of a bird. This 
peculiar ornamentation is perhaps the most singular feature of the 
entire sculpture, inasmuch as it fixes the wxra of the slab, and also the 
religious sect from which it proceeded. On the face of the large 
Buddhist tower at Sarnath is a similar scroll-work connected with a 

; similarly carved cherub. As this tower was most probably erected 
“in the Gupta period, the conjecture of General Cunningham becomes 
almost a demonstrated fact, that the slab must date from the same 
epoch, but it is of Buddhist, and not, as he imagines, of Hindu origin, 
“unless it be that the Hindus and Buddhists of about the same period 
adopted the same style of ornamentation, a supposition which although 
‘possible, it would, in the absence of proof, be very hazardous to follow. 
" It seems evident therefore that the ancient remains at Bhitari are 
* of Buddhist and of Hindu origin, though it is hard to say 
‘precisely which preceded the other. The pillar was erected by Skanda 
“Gupta, of whom, the inscription says, “in the spirit of his own dread- 
ful deeds,” he “‘ danced in the fierce dance,” and was possessed of a 
dear insight into the profound wisdom of the Tantras.”’ He was 
consequently a worshipper of Shiva, and was an enthusiastic admirer 
‘of the Tantric mysteries and abominations. But Kuméra Gupta, 
(whose name General Cunningham found stamped on bricks lying 
‘about at Bhitari,) who preceded him, and was most* probably his 
father, was certainly not a Shaiva, for in the inscription reference is 
maze both to him and to his father, Chandra Gupta, the second, as 
worshippers of the “Supreme Bhagavat.” It is just possible that 
this term may mean Vishnu; if so, they were both Vaishnavas. But 
it is exceedingly probable that the allusion is to Buddha, inasmuch 
as, one of the titles most usually ascribed to him is that of “ Bhaga- 
vat.” Moreover, the inscription of Chundra Gupta on one of the 
railings of the Great Tope at Sanchi, sets forth that a sum of money 
