1889.] 



on the Civilization of Ancient India. 



171 



Mian Khan and the best at Jamalgarhi. Some of the Mian Khan 

 specimens maj be as old as A. D. 200, though none, I should think, 

 are older. 



As to Kharkai no detailed information is available. Sir A. Cun- 

 ningham merely notes that he saw a large collection of sculptures from 

 this locality in the possession of Mr. Beckett, and that he obtained a 

 considerable number himself " similar in all respects to the sculptures 

 that have been dug up at other places."* Inasmuch as Sir A. Cunning- 

 ham's criticisms are chiefly concerned with the objects obtained at Jamal- 

 garhi, it may bo assumed that the Kharkai sculptures are not remote 

 in date from those procured at that locality. 



" The remains at Sawaldher, 2\ miles to the east of Jamalgarhi, 

 are mostly covered by the houses of the village, and are, therefore, 

 inaccessible. It is believed, however, that some of the finest specimens 

 in the Lahore Museum were obtained at this place by Dr. Bellew."t 

 If this belief be correct, the Sawaldher ruins must be as old as those at 

 Mian Khan, and it is possible that some of the buildings may have been 

 older, and contained works tracing their parentage directly to Greek 

 art. It is a great pity that the objects in the Lahore Museum wore not 

 properly labelled. 



The excavations at Sahri Bahlol proved that the site had been 

 occupied in very ancient times, perhaps as early as B. C. 2,000,2 and 

 the existence of the stilpas, containing the broken statue imbedded in it, 

 proves that Buddhist votaries occupied the place as late as A. D. 500 

 or 600 (A. D. ante, p. 155). The broken statue was particularly well 

 executed, and presumably may be referred to the third century. 



The information respecting the sculpture at Takht-i-Bahi is very 

 scanty. Mr. Fergusson, from examination of photographs, judged that 

 the remains at this place are of considerably later date than those at 

 Jamalgarhi, and his judgment on a question of relative date is entitled 

 to the greatest respect. 



At Takht-i-Bahi, a court was excavated, surrounded on three sides 

 by lofty chapels, each of which seems to have enshrined a colossal 

 plaster statue of Buddha, some twenty feet, or more, in height. Such 

 colossal plaster images do not appear to belong to a very early stage of 

 Buddhist art, and their presence confirms Mr. Fergusson's suggestion 

 that the remains at Takht-i-Bahi should be placed late in the series. 

 Perhaps A. D. 400 to 450 may be assigned as a tentative date. 



To sum up, I accept the numismatic evidence, agreeing as it 



* Archaol. Rep., Vol. V, p. 54. 

 t Ibid., ibid, 

 t Ibid,, p. 38. 

 X 



