Skip to content
Browse articles

The Problem of Ancient Indian Terracottas

By S. N. Jharkandi

Vol. 12 · No. 1March - 1936pp. 138–144English

Summary withheld

An automated check found that the earlier summary of this article may not match its text, so it is hidden while it is rewritten. Please read the original PDF below.

Key passages

Chosen by AI from the article's text. Each one is checked word for word against the text before it is shown.

  • “‘Certain terracoftas have been singled 0118 and quite arbitrarily classified as ‘Primitive’ and ‘Pre-Mauryan.’”
  • “the terra-cottas called ‘Primitive’ there are many that are definitely comparable with the sculp-ture of Barhut and Sanchi [second-first century B.C.]”
  • “All that can safely be said is that the top stratum belongs unquestionably 10 the third or fourili century B.C.’”

Works cited in this article

  1. Man, 1033, 120
  2. Archeeslagical Swrrey of Indio, Annual 1 102046, 1011-12, pp. 71, 72-78
  3. L. Bachhofer, Early Indian Sculpture, vol. I, p. 10, 11; A K Coomaraswamy, History of Indian and Indonesian Art, pl. 111
  4. Journal of the Rombay Historieal Soriety, 1930, pp. 183-791 with nine plates; JRORR., 1032, March pp. 1-4 with one piates; K. 2. Paflel vommemoration Folume, Toona, 1034, pp. 243-61 with 101 plates
  5. K. B. Paethal Commemoration Valume, Poona, 1934, pp. 240, 250

Discussed in this article

AI guide

Discuss this record

Ask about the article, its topics, issue context, selected passages, or reading strategy.

Start with the record

I can unpack the summary, turn it into study questions, explain a selected passage, or compare it with the other articles in this issue.

Original PDF

Inline viewer

Checking source PDF

The viewer will load here if the archive file is reachable.