Weiner Mihályné szerk.: Az Iparművészeti Múzeum Évkönyvei 10. (Budapest, 1967)
HOPP FERENC MÚZEUM - MUSÉE FERENC HOPP - Horváth, Vera: Maurya Mother Goddess Figurines
made certain that the figurines are dated back to the period of the art of Maurya's. The very subject, whom the figurines may embody in still unknown, though many similar pieces were found in North West India ever since. It is most likely that they are of religious destination, representing the "Goddess", the" Livine Woman", as they, usually called, the "Mother Goddess". 13 The framed head-dress reminded Rowland of the fan-like ornament of the Mother Goddess of Indus Culture, and as such, he suggested relations between the two cultures. 14 As it was mentioned before, in Das Gupta's opinion, the figurines are very similar to the "applied style", which is charecteristic to the post-Indus, pre-Maurya era, whereas the modelling of features denies this supposition. By observing our figurines, it is interesting to note that the elaborate finish of the face contradicts the applied, superficial, roughly-made jewels, while, at the same time, the large-bead, single string of necklace of the figurines closely follows the style, found with that of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa. 15 As explanation of the differences in ideas and techniques of presentation and decoration, it may be presumed that the highly developed and refined art of terracottas, while greatly surpassing the idol-like, schematic goddesses, it still applied the traditional decorating elements on both Mother Goddess figurines of the Indus Culture and the female statues of post-Indus, pre-Muarya epoch. As pointed out by Wheeler, the Mother Goddess figurines of the Indus Culture when compared with other ceramic statues ol the same culture, and with the work of art of round sculpture, were showing more ancient, archaic way of representation, even during the era of Indus Culture. 16 Close observations on the applied jewels of Figurines 4 and 5 reveal the way of decoration, which — even by Indus Culture — was considered as ancient. Based on the similarity between the types of jewels, to investigate the possibility of archaizing may be too bold of an attempt. An alternative explanation for its appearence may be found in the supposition that the preparation and finish of the figurines of religious destination were so severly influenced by ancient traditions that this habit prevailed, even, when artistic aspects, or uniformity were at stake. As another possibility, in the presentation of the Mother Goddess, the ancient rules were obeyed again, or, these rules—as an intermediate stage, represented by post-Indus, pre-Maurya statues — might have never been neglected, By discounting the excavations, the fact, whether the identity of the types of jewels meant continuity, or the proto-ind, — or Harappa people, creators of the Indus Culture did reach the upper Indus River was not confirmed yet by archaeologists. Because of the above mentioned, the question, whether the archaization was intentional, — can not be answered, because, by doing so, the makers of the figurines in 315-385 B.C. are presumed of having had known the type 13 V. S. Agrawala, Terracotta Figurines of Ahichchhatra, District Bareeilly U.P.A.I. No. 4. (1947-1948) 109. 14 B. Rowland, op. cit. 15 D. H. Gordon, Mohenjo-daro, Some Observations on Indian Prehistory, loc. cit. R.E.M. Wheeler, op. cit. Pl. III. Fig. 103, 105, 109. 16 R.E.M. Wheeler, The Indus Civilization, 1953 (Cambridge) 83. H. Zimmer, The Art of Indian Asia, I-1I. 1955. I. 21-22.
