332 



JOURNAL, R.A.S. (CEYLON). [VOL. XXI. 



come to the conclusion that the Indians, like the Burmese, the 

 Japanese, and the Chinese, employed wood and wood only for all 

 architectural purposes. Fergusson and many others have even 

 gone so far as to assert that the Indians began to use stone for 

 building purposes for the first time in the Asoka period, and 

 they must have copied it from the Greeks. 



Griinwedel also seems to support this theory. 



Now, the first Greek invasion, which lasted only about four 

 years, took place in April or May, 327 B.C. The date of Asoka's 

 monuments may be fixed at about 242 B.C. The intervening period 

 was only 85 years, and, if we accept the Greek theory, the change 

 from wood to stone must have taken place in this short time. But 

 is it possible for a conservative nation like the ancient Indians to 

 adopt a new material and to become so efficient in the handling of 

 this material as to produce magnificent monuments all over India 

 and Ceylon within a period of say 100 or 150 years ? I doubt it. 



It is, of course, true that the earliest buildings in India belonged 

 to the Buddhists, and none belonging to other contemporary reli- 

 gious sects have yet come to light. From this we must conclude 

 that either the Buddhists during the Asoka period destroyed all 

 non-Buddhistic buildings then in existence, or such buildings, if 

 any were in existence, were entirely constructed of wood. 



The remains of Buddhist monuments, however, are in them- 

 selves quite sufficient to form an accurate idea of the art and 

 culture of India in the time of Asoka. There were stone-cutters 

 who could quarry gigantic shafts of hard sandstone 30 to 40 feet 

 long, or enormous block of granite, and polish them like jewels. 

 There were master-carvers and engravers who must have had 

 chisels and tools quite equal to carving the hardest stone 

 and producing reliefs representing vivid scenes from life. There 

 were skilful architects and engineers who were capable of 

 erecting spacious and lofty edifices. Such being the case, is it 

 possible to imagine that the Indians could have attained to this 

 degree of perfection in the use of stones for building purposes, 

 without centuries of previous training ? 



There is not the slightest doubt that they built in wood also, 

 and that some of their stone sculptures were copies of wooden 

 originals. But this fact, as well as the absence of pre-As6ka 

 buildings and the invasion of Alexander the Great, do not 

 necessarily lead one to conclude that the Indians used stones for 

 building purposes for the first time in the reign of As6ka, and 

 that they must have got the idea from the Greeks. 



On the contrary, it is more probable that both these styles existed 

 side by side. Wood might have been employed more extensively 

 in secular buildings, for no ruins of secular buildings of any 

 antiquity have yet been discovered. 



In Ceylon the upper structure of many a ruin must have been 

 wood. We see this clearly from the arrangement of monolithic 

 pillars on stone stylobates decorated with highly finished 

 mouldings. 



Slide 41. The remains of "the Brazen Palace," Lohd Malid- 

 prdsddaya, at Anur&dhapura , erected by king Dutthagamani about 



