Sculpture.—­In style Singhalese sculpture was even more conventional and less imaginative than their painting; since the subjects to which it was confined were almost exclusively statues of Buddha[1], and its efforts were mere repetitions of the three orthodox attitudes of the great archetype—­sitting, as when in deep meditation, under the sacred Bo-tree; standing, as when exhorting his multitudinous disciples; and reclining, in the enjoyment of the everlasting repose of “nirwana.”  In each and all of these the details are identical; the length of the ears, the proportions of the arms, fingers, and toes; the colour of the eyes, and the curls of the hair[2] being repeated with wearisome iteration.  To such an extent were these multiplied, and with an adherence so rigid to the same recognised models, that the Rajavali ventures to ascribe to one king the erection of “seventy-two thousand statues of Buddha,” an obvious error[3], but indicative, nevertheless, that the real amount must have been prodigious, in order to obtain credence for the exaggeration.  Many other sovereigns are extolled in the national annals, who rendered their reigns illustrious by the multiplicity of statues which they placed in the temples.  It was doubtless from this incessant study of one and the same figure, that the artists of Ceylon attained to a facility and superiority in producing statues of Buddha, that rendered them famous throughout the countries of Asia, in which his religion prevailed.  The early historians of China speak in raptures of works of this kind, obtained from Singhalese sculptors in the fourth and fifth centuries; they were eagerly sought after by all the surrounding nations; and one peculiarity in their execution consisted in so treating the features, that “on standing at about ten paces distant they appeared truly brilliant, but the lineaments gradually disappeared on a nearer approach."[4]

[Footnote 1:  Mention is made of a figure of an elephant (Rajavali, p. 242), and of a horse (Mahawanso, ch. xxxix.  TURNOUR’S manuscript translation), and a carved bull as amongst the ruins of Anarajapoora.]

[Footnote 2:  M. ABEL REMUSAT has devoted a section of his Melanges Asiatiques, 1825; vol. i. p. 100, to combating the conjecture of Sir W. JONES in his third Dissertation on the Hindus, drawn from the curled or rather the woolly hair represented in his statues, that Buddha drew his descent from an African origin. (Works, vol. i. p, 12.) Another ground for Sir.  W. JONES’S conjecture was the large ears which are usually characteristic of the statues of Buddha.  But it is curious that one of the peculiar features ascribed to the Singhalese by the early Greek writers was the possession of pendulous ears, possibly occasioned by their heavy ear-rings.]

[Footnote 3:  Rajavali, p. 255.  Most of these were built of terra-cotta and cement covered with chunam, preparatory to being painted.  See p. 478.]