Reviews
By U. N. Ghoshal, Indubhusan Banerjee, A. C. Banerjee, Amareswar Thakur, Kasim Ali Sajan Lal, A. S. Gadre
Summary
The review section assesses recent publications. Two Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of Mysore (1938 and 1939) edited by Dr. M. N. Krishna are praised for maintaining a high scholarly standard. The reports provide detailed descriptions of monuments, accompanied by plates, plans, notes on coins, analyses of manuscripts and comprehensive indexes. The 1938 report discusses hill‑forts, Hoysala and Travancore‑style temples, sculptures of Ganga and Yamuna on their mounts, wall paintings at the Jaganmohan Palace in Mysore, and numismatic sections describing punch‑marked coins and gold Varaha types. The inscriptions section publishes 120 records dating from the sixth to the nineteenth centuries, including a copper‑plate of the Ganga king Avinita. The 1939 report continues conservation notes and describes monuments from Ganga through Vijayanagara periods, including unusual Hoysala‑Dravidian temples and Jain bastis; its numismatics section analyses five types of Western Ganga coins and the use of elephants on obverses. The reviewer commends the quality of printing and illustrations but notes minor shortcomings, such as the lack of classification of punch‑marked coins and insufficient consultation of existing coin catalogues. Another review critiques a book on Gujarat history and coins for inaccuracies, including miscounting Valabhi copper‑plate grants, misstatements about punch‑marked coins in Gujarat and misunderstandings of Hindu rites. The reviewer highlights that more than a hundred Valabhi grants are known and that punch‑marked coins from Gujarat have been published previously. Overall, the review section combines appreciative comment on meticulous scholarship with constructive criticism intended to improve historical and numismatic studies.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
The review section acknowledges the exemplary scholarship of the Mysore Archaeological Survey reports while pointing out minor lapses in numismatic classification. It also calls attention to inaccuracies in a recent book on Gujarat, stressing the need for authors to consult existing research. These assessments illustrate the high standards expected in historical and archaeological publications and encourage rigorous documentation and analysis.