118 



V. A. Smith — Grtxco-Iiom an Influence 



[No. 3, 



Sir A. Cunningham, who was unwilling to recognize Roman in- 

 fluence on the art of Gaudhara, compares the Indo-Corinthiau capitals 

 with those of " the pure Corinthian order of Greece " as follows : — 



" The chief points of similarity are : — 



1st. The three rows of acanthus leaves, eight in each row, which 

 are arranged round the drum or bell of the capital. 



2nd. The broad, but not deep, volutes at the four corners. 



3rd. The four pointed abacus with a curved recess in the middle 

 of each side. 



The most marked points of difference are the following :— 



1st. The wide spread of the abacus, which is equal to 2\ heights 



of the whole capital, that of the Greek examples being little moie than 



1| height. 



2nd. The retention of the points at the four corners of the abacus, 

 ■which in all the Greek examples have been cut off. 



3rd. The insertion of a fourth row of acanthus leaves which is 

 projected forward to the line joining the horns of the abacus. The 

 abacus is thus formed from a square having a curved recess on each side 

 of the central projection. 



4th. The placing of flowers on the abacus which are supported on 

 twisted stems springing from "the roots of the volutes. In a single 

 instance fabulous animals are added to the flowers on the horns of the 

 abacus. 



5th. The insertion of human figures amongst the acanthus leaves, 

 whose overhanging tufts form canopies for the figures." 



I have quoted this passage in full, not because I attach much value 

 to the comparison made in it, but because it gives an authoritative 

 description of the characteristic features of the Indo- Corinthian capitals. 

 Sir A. Cunningham cannot help admitting the resemblance between 

 those specimens which exhibit human figures among the foliage and 

 Roman capitals found in the ruins of the baths of Caracalla, but avoids 

 the natural conclusion, and boldly declai'es that, if the design for these 

 capitals with human figures was suggested by any earlier works, " the 

 suggestion must have come from the creative Greeks of Ariana, and not 

 from the imitative Romans."* On the other hand, I am fully convinced, 

 as I shall try presently to prove, that the design in question did come 

 " from the imitative Romans," and that the art of Gaudhara is essen- 



oapital shown in PI. XLVI1I is conjectural, and not supported by adequate evidence. 

 Two of tlie Jamalgarhi capitals are figured in Pergusson's History of Indian and 

 Eastern Architecture, and a rough sketch of one specimen from the same place is 

 given in Indian Antiquary, Vol. Ill, p. 142. 



* Cunningham, Archaol. Rep., Vol. V, pp. 192—19*1. 



