Due to the lack of scientific dates for the early sculptural art of the Kashmir Valley, the question of its chronology is debatable. Many theories have been put forward about the time of the appearance of ancient terracotta sculptures, which were found on this territory during excavation work for 100 years. Their critical review has never been conducted. Over the past few decades, it has been possible to gather valuable information about the origin and development of sculptural art in the Kashmir Valley. The study is based on new archaeological materials, which would allow us to get a clear idea of its chronology. Information from written sources was taken into account, as well as the provisions of previously put forward theories were considered. The aim of this work is to recreate the chronology of early sculptural art in the Kashmir Valley through a new understanding of existing knowledge, re-studying and interpreting the collected evidence.

Keywords: sculptures, Kashmir, chronology, Kushan, Ushkur, Harvan, Akhnur.

Introduction

The idea that there are no examples of early sculptural art in the Kashmir Valley, unlike in Gandhara and Mathura, where magnificent examples were created during the Kushan dynasty, is not entirely correct. It should be noted that in the Kashmir valley there were no sources of such materials as the clay shale found in Gandhara, or the red sandstone found in Mathura, which the Kushan masters were so skilled in processing. The raw materials of Kashmir were not suitable for making elegant sculptural images. Therefore, the lack of samples of early sculpture in this region can be explained by the lack of raw materials, and not by a gap in the history of Kushan art. Nevertheless, terracotta sculptures found on several monuments in the Kashmir Valley and in the neighboring state of Jammu (Akhnur) clearly demonstrate the ability of Kushan masters to create outstanding works not only from slate and red sandstone, but also from clay and shtuk. The small number of them is explained by the fact that Kashmir as a whole still remains an unexplored region. The fact that in addition to producing terracotta tiles, Kushan craftsmen were engaged in making sculptures from this material is confirmed by the results of many excavations in the territory of Ushkur and Kanispur in Baramulla district, Harvan in Srinagar, Semthana in Anantnag, Akhnur in Jammu. There is a significant amount of evidence that indicates the prosperity of the art of terracotta and PU sculpture in the Kashmir valley, which occurred during the existence of the Kushan kingdom. However, it is difficult to create a chronology of this art. Many researchers have put forward different points of view, placing it in the chronological framework between 600 and 730 AD, i.e. referring to a later time than the period of the Kushan dynasty in Kashmir. Unfortunately, during the excavations in Ushkur and Akhnur, led by D. R. Sakhni and K. L. Fabry, the stratigraphic context of the finds, in particular terracotta and bamboo sculptures, was not recorded. This was also not done

page 80
during archaeological research in Harvan, where. despite large-scale excavation work, little attention was paid to the study of the cultural layer of the monument. Unplanned, unsystematic excavations almost hopelessly paralyzed the solution of the question of the chronology of the art of terracotta and bamboo sculpture. The lack of information about the archaeological contexts in which all the collected materials were found has led to the emergence of a large number of theories and assumptions that go beyond a reasonable chronological framework or do not find support among scientists. The use of scientific methods during excavations could help to avoid such a situation. Thanks to recent archaeological surveys conducted under the direction of B. R. Mani in Kanispor (1998 - 1999) and Akhnur (1999 - 2000), the situation in Kushan archaeology in the state of Jammu and Kashmir has changed. In this article, to analyze the proposed theories, the most interesting materials available will be considered, as well as arguments why the art of terracotta sculpture should be attributed to the Kushan period, and not to a later one.

Review of materials

The difficulty of analyzing Kashmiri terracotta sculptures is that no fully preserved specimens have been found anywhere in the region. In Kashmir, several terracotta heads were found only in Ushkur (Baramulla district) and Akhnur (Jammu State). Stylistically, products from Semthan in the Kashmir Valley are comparable only to small terracotta figurines from Ushkur, since no large terracotta heads were found on the first monument. Fragments of sculptures, mainly fragments of limbs (fingers, hands, big toes), as well as life-size and larger jewelry, were found in Harwan. In the Ushkur sculptural images, the eyes are slightly slanted and elongated, the thin eyebrows are arched, the nose is sharp, and the face is oval (Fig. 1)*. The head of a bearded ascetic is shown with a wrinkled forehead, straight nose, prominent cheekbones, compressed full lips, large locks of hair pulled back, carefully curled mustache and elegantly curly beard (Figure 2). Another masterpiece discovered in Ushkur is the head of a Bodhisattva with luxuriant long curls arranged in spiraling curls that fall in rolls on both sides of a serene face, and the remains of a crown decoration (Figure 3). In another sculpture, the Bodhisattva is also shown wearing a beautiful flower crown perched on top of a string of beads. The next item is a monk's head, which has a conical shape and less refined features. The remaining samples from Ushkur, probably depicting the heads of servants, are devoid of any pronounced features. Some of the creations of the Ushkur master have come down to

Figure 1. Image of the Bodhisattva's head. Ushkur, Kashmir.

2. Sculptural head of an old ascetic with a beard. Ushkur, Kashmir.

* The sculptural images shown in Figures 1-5 are published with the permission of the Sri Pratap Singh Museum, Srinagar, Kashmir.

page 81

Figure 3. Image of a Bodhisattva's head with luxuriant curls. Ushkur, Kashmir.

Figure 4. Fragment of a female figure. Ushkur, Kashmir.

Fig. 5. Female waist sculpture without a head. Ushkur, Kashmir.

Fig. 6. Sculpted head of a maidservant. Akhnur, Jammu.

Figure 7. Image of Vajrapani's head. Akhnur, Jammu.

us as fragments. In the shattered male statue, the upper half of the torso is covered up to the waist with an embroidered robe, which seems to have been decorated with beads along the edge, while the lower part is completely naked. Another fragment is a girdle sculpture of a woman with a broken head. The woman is wearing a flower-decorated short-sleeve dress, a heavy necklace and bracelets. The pose suggests that she is holding something out to the viewer (Figure 4). Another headless belt sculpture depicts a woman in a necklace wearing a low-cut blouse that tightly covers her breasts (Figure 5).

The described samples from Kashmir bear a close resemblance to materials from the nearby famous settlement of Akhnur in the state of Jammu. The fragment of a sculpture in the form of a maid's head is a remarkable example of an artistic representation of a headdress (Fig. The woman's forehead is decorated with a headband with sewn jewelry and a large ornament in the form of a rose with ribbons on the sides. Another sculpture is a Vajrapani head (Paul, 1986, p.79) with a distorted face. Sunken cheeks, parted lips, and strongly arched eyebrows are shown. Schematically transmitted hair is pulled back in flat wavy curls.

* The sculptural images shown in Figures 6 and 7 are published with the permission of the Dogra Art Museum, Jammu.

page 82
Above the forehead is a bandage, the knot of which is visible above the right ear (Fig. 7). The other two sculptured heads, probably servants, are not so richly decorated, but in general they look very elegant. One of them has a ribbon on her forehead and her hair is fixed on the left side with a rose, and the other has four roses on her head. When recreating the chronology of terracotta sculpture art on the territory of the Kashmir Valley, we also considered the stylistics of patterns.

Chronology issue

Taranatha (1970, pp. 107-108, 121), who refers to the Buddhist art of Gandhara during the life of Nagarjuna, the founder of the Mahayana school of Buddhism, is undoubtedly referring to the art of the Kushan dynasty in Northern India. In the commentary of K. Khandalavala (1949), according to which "Naga artisans who lived in the times described by Taranatha... It is implied that Taranatha's words also apply to Kashmir, where the naga cult has been known since ancient times. This was later confirmed by Kalhana and A. A. Schifner. The former, mentioning Nagarjuna, says that he lived during the reign of the Kushan dynasty in Kashmir [Stein, 1961, p. 31], and the latter writes that Nagarjuna, who appears in the Buddhist tradition as the thirteenth patriarch, was born during the reign of Kanishka [Ibid., p. 173].

K. L. Fabri dates the Akhnur terracotta heads to 700 AD, while the Ushkur and Kharvan terracotta fragments are dated to 720-730 AD (Fabri, 1955, p. 65). It states: "Apart from the name Kanishka in the name of the neighboring city, there is no reason to assume that the monastery was in any way connected with the Kushan kings who converted to Buddhism" [Ibid., p.56]. At the same time, in the Rajatarangini chronicle, in the place referred to by Kalhana [Stein, 1961, p. 30], it is said that the city of Huvishkapur was built by King Khushka of the Turush (Kushan) dynasty. This information is confirmed by travelers and later authors, such as Xuanzang [Beal, 1973, p. 68], Al-Biruni [Sachau, 1910, p.207], A. Cunningham [Cunningham, 1924, p. 115], and M. A. Stein [Stein, 1961]. Another evidence indicating that even during the reign of Lalitadatya (800 AD), this settlement was associated with the Kushan king Khushka is the short inscription "he-sh-ka-ra", written in sharada script on a huge stone block that was found during the study of the monument [Kak, 1933, p. 154]. The results of excavations have shown that the stupa dating back to the reign of Lalitadatya was built on top of an older structure of almost the same type [Ibid., p. 153]. This fact was confirmed when the silt deposits around the structure were removed and part of the stupa base of an earlier time was exposed [Indian Archaeology, 1980, p. 79]. Meanwhile, Xuanzang mentions visiting many religious buildings in Ushkur and stopping for the night in one of the monasteries (Beal, 1973, p. 68). This confirms that before King Lalitadatya built the monastery in Ushkur, they already existed there. The building on which Lalitadatya built the stupa in the first half of the eighth century must have been a similar structure erected by the Kushan king Khuvishka (Khushka). Based on the above fact, the assumption of CL. Fabry about the absence of materials indicating that Ushkur belongs to the Kushan Kingdom can be rejected. It is most likely that based on this consideration, as well as considering the structure built by Lalitadatya as a visual evidence, the researcher dated the Ushkur and Kharvan terracotta fragments to 720-730 AD.

Further, K. L. Fabry mentions that all the terracotta heads discovered as a result of excavations conducted by D. R. Sahni come from the sector located outside the northern wall of the stupa, which is confirmed by his own materials from the same part of the excavation (fragments of sculptural images of animals, people and deities, in particular, torsos, fingers arms, hands, feet, and thumbs; as well as decorative elements that once adorned crowns, architectural elements such as pilasters and lintels, etc.). Interesting observations were made by P. G. Paul. Analyzing the location of the terracotta heads, he came to the conclusion that it is likely that at least several fragments of sculptures will be found on the territory of the complex itself, if these sculptures are contemporaries of the structure built here [Paul, 1986, p.71]. Further, P. G. Paul writes that if we draw an analogy with the layout of the monasteries of Taxila, then immediately to the north of the ruins of Ushkur there should be a larger number of buildings. His point is confirmed by reports from local residents who still find terracotta tiles and fragments in the vast area around the stupa. It is possible that the north wall facing Baramulla, as shown in C. L. Fabry's plan, was decorated with terracotta and shtuk sculptures in the late Kushan period. However, it would be strange to assume that they are related to a building erected by Lalitadatya, since similar finds have not been reported on monuments of the same period in the Kashmir Valley, such as Parihaspor, where huge structures were erected during the reign of this king. In addition, it is unlikely that the buildings are made of high-quality

page 83
the stones were decorated with sculptures made of terracotta and shtuk, because, as you can see from the example of Parikhaspor and Martand (700), the decor was made on the stone itself. The large number of huge stone sculptures that once served as a decoration of these monuments and are currently stored in the Sri Pratap Singh Museum in Srinagar, once again testifies to this and allows us to reject the assumption of K. L. Fabry, because among them are not only terracotta and bamboo sculptures that can be attributed to the era of the Karkotak dynasty..

Other Kashmiri monuments of the Kushan period (Harvan, Semthan and Kanispur) also have terracotta and shtuk sculptures, although not of the same high quality as in Ushkur and Akhnur. In Khar-van, finds similar to the Ushkur and Akhnur finds reported by K. L. Fabry were excavated by R. K. Rok. If we compare Ushkur and Harvan, it should be said that no buildings of the Karkotak dynasty have ever been found on the territory of the latter, however, fragments of terracotta sculpture are identical to Ushkur, therefore, both monuments belong to the Kushan period, since Harvan is well known in the Kashmir Valley as the Kushan monument. In addition, I doubt that K. L. Fabri (1955, p.61) intended to date Ushkur and Akhnur to the Karkotak period. According to him, the pebble wall in Akhnur is built in the same style as in Ushkur. Based on this report, we can conclude that the researcher excavated a similar wall in Ushkur, or he compares the Akhnur wall with the Ushkur stupa of Lalitadatya. Although no structures left behind by Lalitadatya have been found in Akhnur (Mani, 2001a, b, 2004), there is no doubt that K. L. Fabry dealt with buildings from the Kushan period on both sites. Since the pebble walls in Kashmir were recorded on monuments of this time, as in the case of Harvan and Kanispur, the researcher undoubtedly knew about the existence of the Kushan layer in Ushkur, but for unknown reasons denied this fact.

K. L. Fabry made a rather vague and unsubstantiated assumption about the migration of Buddhist sculptors from Gandhara, where this religion declined, to Kashmir: "When the news came that the king of Kashmir, Lalitadatya Mukhtapida, had made a generous donation for the maintenance of the Khushkapur monastery in or around 720, they tied up their bales, packed their work tools, and set out on the great pilgrim road to Baramulla" (Fabri, 1955, p.59). In this case, after completing the work in Ushkur, the craftsmen were apparently sent back to Gandhara, or they were not allowed to participate in other ambitious projects funded by the same king in Parihaspor, or news of the donation made by Lalitadatya in Parihaspor did not reach the artisans who were in Kashmir at the time, and not in Gandhara, as reported by C. L. Fabry. Evidence in the form of fragments of terracotta and bamboo sculptures from Kanispur [Mani, 2000, pl. 22, 25] and Harvan, where no materials dating back to the Karkotak dynasty were found, point to an earlier appearance of this art in the Kashmir Valley and reject the theory of migration proposed by K. L. Fabri. He goes on to state: "Stone almost completely replaces stone carving by the end of the 6th century, which is the heyday of Baroque art. As for the 7th century, I am not aware of any stone sculptures dating back to this period" (Fabri, 1955, p. 60). However, examples of stone carvings can still be found in Parikhaspor, and many stone sculptures dating back to the seventh century can be found in the Sri Pratap Singh Museum in Srinagar (Siudmak, 1989, pl. 8, 10-15). A new study on Kashmiri sculptures (Malla, 1990) does not publish any terracotta or bamboo heads from Ushkur and Akhnur, since they do not belong to the time considered by the author (600-1200). Although J. L. Bhan (2010) placed Ushkur and Akhnur terracotta in the chronological interval between 500 - 600 and 700 AD, but they do not take into account the context in which these finds were discovered, which dates back to the end of the Kushan period in the Kashmir Valley.

Another theory that establishes a connection between the terracotta sculpture of Akhnur and the Gupta period was proposed by M. Chandra (Chanrda, 1973, figs. 28-36). His assumption that this art came from the Ganges Valley to Akhnur by the end of the fourth or beginning of the fifth century is completely incorrect, since, as was proved above, it already existed in the Kushan period in the territory of the Kashmir Valley. Its influence extended from Kashmir or Taxila as the nearest cultural centers, rather than from the Ganges Valley. After the fall of the Kushan Kingdom, the possessions of the Kushan kings in the Ganga-Jamun plains were apparently limited to the Gandhar, Kabul, and Kashmir regions [Mani, 2000, p. 7].

D. Barret (1957, 1961), who shared the view of K. L. Fabry, attributed the sculptural art of Kashmir to the period of the rule of Lalitadatya. He suggested comparing the samples of this art with the materials obtained as a result of excavations of monuments in Central Asia, in particular in Mukistan. According to the theory of P. G. Paul, the art of terracotta sculpture dates back to the VI century (Paul, 1986). His comprehensive study of stylistic forms and variants that were widespread in the territory of Gandhara and Central Asia gave rise to some worthy research projects.-

page 84
P. G. Pol [Ibid., pp. 76-78] points out the influence that spread from two different regions, Mukistan and Taxila, but at the same time draws attention to the Gupta mannerism in Ushkur terracotta products, as well as to the characteristic features of Ushkur. In this case, this influence arose for certain reasons and indicates that the art of terracotta sculpture in Kashmir existed for a long period between the second and fifth centuries. Such a chronological framework is quite appropriate for the rough samples found in Kanispur [Mani, 2000, pl. 25]. In addition, they lack many of the features observed in the terracotta sculptures of later times in Ushkur, Harvan and Akhnur. Based on the similarity between the Harvan and Ushkur terracotta samples, P. G. Pol dated them to 600 AD. Of course, it may confuse the continuity of Ushkur's settlement up to the period of Lalitadatya rule, however, as mentioned above, no such evidence was found in Harvan, this settlement apparently was abandoned immediately after the invasion of the Huns.

Many researchers draw an analogy between Gandhara and Mathura sculptures of the late Kushan period. R. Kak [Kak, 1985, p.11; 1933, p. 153] found a striking similarity between the Ushkur sculptural heads and the shtuk statues found in Yuliana (Taxila) and the sculptures of the Mathura school. A large amount of similar material comes from Taxila monasteries such as Dharmarajika, Kalavan, Mohara Moradu, Bhamala and Julian. J. H. Marshall [Marshall, 1951, vol. II, p. 468-472; vol. III, pl. 137, 138, 148, 149, 153, 158 - 161] He dated the terracotta and bamboo art of these areas to the IV-V centuries. An analogy can be drawn between the Akhnur sculptural head of the Buddha (Fabri, 1955, fig. 1] and his sculptures made in Julian [Ibid., vol. III, pl. 105b, 149m, n, 153a] and Dharmarajika [Ibid., pl.159f]. The striking similarity between the terracotta heads from Kashmir and Taxila indicates that the former belong to the same period (400 - 500 AD). Although there are regional variations that indicate that the Kashmiri center of sculptural art was more developed than others of the same time. The production of terracotta tiles in Kashmir originated much earlier and may have served as a platform for the flourishing and spread of this art. In addition, K. D. Gupta [Gupta, 1961, figs. 115-119] published Kushan sculptures comparable to those of Kashmir. A cursory examination of the museum collections in Lucknow revealed somewhat similar piece heads (of unknown origin) dating back to the fourth century [Joshi and Sharma, 1969, fig. 46-49, 51]. J. S. Czuma [Czuma, 1985, fig. 124-127] and A. G. Poster [Poster, 1986, fig. 66-68] also published almost similar sculptures from shtuk, belonging to the late Kushan period, discovered in Gandhara and dating from the beginning of the IV-V century. All these samples indicate an earlier date of Kashmiri sculptural art, i.e. IV-V, and not VI-VIII centuries.

P. G. Pol draws attention to the terracotta plates discovered in Harvan with miniature stupas imprinted on them, which had a two-sided image. In his opinion, the forms used for making images from the front and back sides belong to different eras. Round and rectangular plates with a two-sided image are found everywhere in the Ganges Valley since the time of the Shunga and Satavahana dynasties (Dhavalikar, 1977, pl. 55). Similar items dating back to the early Kushan period (1st century) were found in Kousambi (Poster, 1986, p. 119, pl. 52, 53). Analyzing the plates with a one-sided image, we can come to the conclusion that it hardly made sense to decorate the other side 200 - 300 years after their manufacture. In fact, the solidified form cannot be subjected to repeated changes without damage. However, the Kousambi plates were double-molded with decoration on the front and simple decorations, such as imitation rings of coiled cord or repeated chevron ornaments, on the reverse. Thus, the plate can be molded on both sides, but still not after centuries. Pressed from terracotta, the plate could be used as a wall tile or serve as a floor decoration. In both cases, only one side remains in view, so it makes sense to carefully decorate only that side. When determining the date of terracotta sculptures from the Kashmir Valley, P. G. Paul proceeded from this assumption. He believed that the reverse side of the plate, formed at a later time, indicates that Kharvan was inhabited at least until the end of the second half of the VI century, and since the plates and fragments of terracotta were found in the same region, they can be dated to the end of the VI century.

P. G. Paul mentions a religious text written in the Brahmi script on the reverse side of the plates in question, which he believes is similar in style to the Mahanamana text from Bodh Gaya on plates dating from 588-589 (Paul, 1986, p. 74). Therefore, he attributes these items from Kharvan to the end of the VI century or the last period of activity of the Kharvan monastery, when terracotta sculpture of the Ushkur type came into fashion there. P. G. Pol does not give an exhaustive description of the inscriptions. It compares only a few characters used in texts, which is probably not enough.-

page 85
P. G. Pol suggests that the transformation of letters into signs of more acute-angled outlines that took place in the seventh century actually began in the fourth century, when the characters were changed to oblique characters (Vasishtha, 2001, p.22). In the northern region, the font bore a close resemblance to those used in the Kushan period. In addition, many texts were attributed to the beginning of this period, even in cases where Gupta letters were used in their writing (Verma, 1971, p. 114-115). It can be assumed that the development of Brahmi writing signs began in the Kushan period. Therefore, dating the terracotta art of Kashmir by the shape of several letters does not seem reasonable.

Conclusion

A critical analysis of the above hypotheses concerning the chronology of Kashmiri sculptural art has shown that the theory based on archaeological data and written sources, according to which it belongs to the era of the Kushan dynasty, is the most reliable and reliable. The stages of its development were not related to the Gupta, post-Gupta and Karkotak periods. There is no doubt that this art originated in the Kushan era, and in Kashmir and other regions it developed in the late Kushan period. In Kashmir and Gandhar, the Kushan strata can be traced back to the fourth century, while in other areas of Northern India they are limited to the third century (Mani, 2000, p. 6). Thus, the most convincing conclusion from this discussion is that the sculptural art of Kashmir belongs to the late Kushan period.

List of literature

Barret D. Sculptures of the Shahi Period // Oriental Art - 1957. - Vol. III (2). - P. 54 - 59.

Barret D. Sculptures from Kashmir // The British Museum Quarterly. - 1961. -Vol. XXIII (2). -P. 49 - 52.

Beal S. The Life of Hiuen Tsiang (by Shaman Hwui Li). - Delhi: Academica Asiatica, 1973. - 218 p.

Bhan J.L. Kashmir Sculptures. - New Delhi: Readworthy Publications (P) LTD, 2010. - Vol.1. - 600 p.

Chandra M Terracotta Heads from Akhnur // Bull. of the Prince of Wales Museum of Western India. - 1973. - N 12. - P. 54 - 57.

Cunnigham A. Ancient Geography of India / ed. by Surendranath Majumdar Sastri. - Calcutta: Chuckervertty Chatterjee & Co. LTD, 1924. - 481 p.

Czuma J.S. Kushan Sculpture: Images from Early India. - Cleveland (Ohio): The Cleveland Museum of Art, 1985. - 242 p.

Dhavalikar M.K. Masterpieces of Indian Terracottas. -Bombay: Taraporevala, 1977. - 68 p.

Fabri C.L. Akhnur Terracottas // Marg. - 1955. -Vol. VIII, N 2. - P. 53 - 64.

Gupta C.D. Origin and Evolution of Indian Clay Sculpture. - Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1961. - 373 p.

Indian Archaeology 1977 - 78-A Review / ed. by B.K. Thapar. - New Delhi: Archaeological Survey of India, 1980. -158p., LXXX pl.

Joshi N.P., Sharma R.C. Catalogue of Gandhara Sculptures in the State Museum Lucknow - Lucknow: The State Museum, 1969. - 104 p.

Kak R. C. Ancient Monuments of Kashmir. - L.: The Indian Society, 1933. - 172 p.

Kak R.C. Handbook of the Archaeological and Numismatic Sections of the Shri Pratap Singh Museum Srinagar. - Patna: Eastern Book House, 1985. - 165 p.

Khandalavala K. Commentary on Taranath's Chapter on Buddhist art // Marg. - 1949. - Vol. 4, N 1. - P. 61 - 63.

Malla Bansilal. Sculptures of Kashmir. - Delhi: Agam Kala Prakashan, 1990. - 126 p.

Mani B.R. Excavations at Kanispur: 1998 - 1999 (District Baramulla, Kashmir) // Pragdhara - 2000. - N 10. - P. 1 - 21.

Mani B.R. Excavations at Ambaran 1999 - 2000 and Dating of Akhnur Buddhist Terracotta Heads // Pragdhara. -2001a. - N 11. - P. 47 - 57.

Mani B.R. Date of the Akhnur Buddhist Terracotta in the Light of Recent Excavations at Ambaran (Akhnur) // South Asian Archaeology: proceeding of the 6th Jnt. Conf. of the Europ. Association of South Asian Archaeologists, Paris, 2 - 6 July 2001 / eds. С. Jarrige, V. Lefevre. - P., 2001b. - Vol. II. - P. 567 - 570.

Mani B.R. Excavation at Ambaran and Akhnur Terracottas // Buddhism and Gandhara Art / eds. R.C. Sharma, Pranati Ghosal. - Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, 2004. -P. 83 - 102.

Marshall J.H. Taxila: 3 vols. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951. - 895 p.

Paul P.G. Early Sculpture of Kashmir. - Leiden: Sneldruk Enschede, 1986. -353 p.

Poster A.G. From Indian Earth: 4000 Years of Terracotta Art. -NY: The Brooklyn Museum, 1986. - 208 p.

Sachau E.C. Alberuni's India (Translation). - L.: Kegan Paul, Trench Trubner & CO. LTD, 1910. - Vol. I. - 408 p.

Siudmak J. Early Stone and Terracotta Sculpture // Art and Architecture of Ancient Kashmir / ed. Pratapaditya Pal. -Bombay: Marg Publications, 1989. - P. 41 - 56.

Stein M.A. Kalhana's Rajatarangini: A Chronicle of the Kings of Kashmir. - Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1961. -Vol. I. - 402 p.

Taranatha. Taranatha's History of Buddhism in Indian / ed. Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya. - Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970. - 493 p.

Vasishtha R.K. Brahmi Script, its Palaeography (from 3rd century to 6th century AD). - Delhi: NAG Publishers, 2001. - 265 p.

Verma T.P. The Palaeography of Brahmi script in North India (from с 236 ВС, to с. 200 AD). - Varanasi: Siddharth Prakashan, 1971. - 137 p.

The article was submitted to the editorial Board on 20.01.14, in the final version-on 27.02.14.

page 86

Permanent link to this publication: