Weiner Mihályné szerk.: Az Iparművészeti Múzeum Évkönyvei 10. (Budapest, 1967)

HOPP FERENC MÚZEUM - MUSÉE FERENC HOPP - Horváth, Vera: Maurya Mother Goddess Figurines

formation of the eyes, the circular head dress and the bead decoration that the possibility of their origin within the same archaeologic culture can not be thought of, they can not be considered as pieces of art of the Indus Culture. After completing the first large part of excavation of the Indus Culture and when Marshall's study on the obtained results was published,

3 such views were formed that all the material, excavated in the area of the River Indus were the remainders of Indus Culture.

4 As such, in 1937, Corbiau suggested that one group of the terracotta female figurines, excavated at the upper regions of the Indus River had to be the remainders of Indus Culture.

5 These ideas were soon rejected.

6 Later no, terracotta statues of unknown provenance, found in North West India, or along the Indus River, though different from the characteristics of the Indus Culture, -were claimed as of pre-Maurya provenance.

7 In Hungarian literature, the Figurines 4 and 5 are referred to as of pre-Maurya provenance.

8 By performing intensive analysis of ancient Indian terracotta statues of unknown provenance, in British Museum,

9 Das Gupta came to the conclusion that the modelling of faces could serve as means for distinction between the female figurines and the post-Indus, pre-Maurya statues. In spite of the fact that the figurines are very similar to post-Indus, pre-Maurya statues and the decorations follow the style applied by the former period, an analogy for the type was found in the Maurya art. Rowland has stated the same

10 of a Sari Dheri type, statue with a framed head-dress, which is very similar to the Figurines 4 and 5 in Hungary. Not only the rosette, but some other decorating elements appear as well and the rosette is completely overshadowed by the framed hairdress. In his next study on one group of ancient Indian terracotta figurines of the Musée Giumet, Las Gupta was showing their Maurya provenance as well.

11 On this basis, the above mentioned two pieces of our group, Figurines 4 and 5 can also be considered as of Maurya origin, because they are in close relation with the figurine from Sari 1 heri, the statues of the British Museum and the Musée Guimet as indicated Das Gupta. Picture 71. in the brochure of Indian Exhibition, held in 1963—1964, in Japan, also exhibits a similar piece.

12 On Figurine 1, 3, and 6 in the Ferenc Hopp Museum, the rosette is decorating the ornament, or hairband that hangs from the back of the head. It is missing from Figurine 2, on the figurine, however, only the well distinguishable 3 J. Marshall, Mohenjo-daro and the Indus Civilization, 1931. 4 D. H. Gordon, Survivals of the Indus Culture. JRAS of Bengal, Vol. VI. (1940) No. 3. Separatum. 5 S. Corbiau, New Finds in the Indus Valley, Iraq, VI. (1936), Part. 1. Spring. Separatum. 6 D. H. Gordon, The Age of Frontier Terra-cottas, Iraq, V. (1938) Part. 2. Separatum. 7 D. H. Gordon, Survivals of the Indus Culture. JRAS of Bengal, VI. (1940) No. 2. Separatum. 8 T. Horváth, The Art of Asia, Budapest, 1954. 22, Fig. 82, 83. E. Baktay, The Art of India, Budapest, 1968. 28. Fig. 14. 9 C. C. Das Gupta, Some Unpublished Ancient Indian Terracottas Preserved in the British Museum -A.A. XIII. (1950) 254 cff. 10 B. Rowland, The Art of Greater India, Los Angeles County Museum, 1950. 8. PI. X. 11 C. C. Das Gupta, Unpublished Ancient Indian Terracottas Preserved in the Musée Guimet Paris, -A.A. XIV. (1951) 283 cff. 12 Indo. Kodai-Bijutsu Ten, ,,Exhibition of Ancient Art of India", Tokio, 1963-1964.