AT

Aditya TalwarAIR 270

GS1GS1

Discuss the significance of tiger and elephant symbols in Indian history and culture.

Open scan (p.7)

Introduction

Tiger and elephant have been a pervasive figure of Indian history as seen in the structures, temples and structures.

19 words

Main Body

Significance of the Symbol:

1Found on Harappan seal and figures of the pictographic script and some found in Mesopotamian grounds
2Ashoka pillars and animals on the abacus – Eg Indian lion symbol
3Found on temple sculptures eg Vishvananda temple
4Sculptures pre-standing → eg Dinah elephant
5Found on murals and painting eg White elephant in buddhism
6Frequently mentioned in mythological scriptures eg Goddess 'Durga Vahan' Tiger, 'elephant' in 'Jatakas'
7Found in various literature forms eg Vishnu Swamis, 'Panchatantra'
8Found on coins of the Gupta period
9Mentioned as prayer worthy figures.
10In the case paintings of Bhitti-Kala
11Lewis of Buddhist ushnaras eg Ajanta murals

— Aditya Talwar · AIR 270

113 words1 paragraphs

Conclusion

Therefore such figures show the deep 'Indic culture of environment and nature worship and veneration pursued.'

16 words

  • Provides archaeological evidence from Harappan period
  • References multiple sources: inscriptions, sculptures, literature, mythological texts
  • Covers both pre-historical and historical periods
  • Examples from different regions and time periods
Steal this copy's techniques PremiumAI pulls out the reusable moves — pick the ones you want as flashcards
Compare my answer PremiumSee where this topper beats you

Topper

Aditya Talwar

AIR 270

Subject & Paper

GS1GS1

Topic

Indian Culture

Sculpture

Animal symbolism in Indian sculpture and mythology

Writing Stats

148

Total words

1

Paragraphs

descriptive and analytical

Tone

Linked PYQ

5. Read the following passage and answer the questions that follow : 10x5=50 The complexity of a culture is to be found not only in its variable processes and their social definitions—traditions, institutions and formations—but also in the dynamic interrelations, at every point in the process, of historically varied and variable elements. In what I have called 'epochal' analysis, a cultural process is seized as a cultural system, with determinate dominant features : feudal culture or bourgeois culture or a transition from one to the other. This emphasis on dominant and definitive lineaments and features is important and often, in practice, effective. But it then often happens that its methodology is preserved for the very different function of historical analysis, in which a sense of movement within what is ordinarily abstracted as a system is crucially necessary, especially if it is to connect with the future as well as with the past. In authentic historical analysis, it is necessary at every point to recognize the complex interrelations between movements and tendencies both within and beyond a specific and effective dominance. It is necessary to examine how these relate to the whole cultural process rather than only to the selected and abstracted dominant system. Thus 'bourgeois culture' is a significant generalizing description and hypothesis, expressed within epochal analysis by fundamental comparisons with 'feudal culture' or 'socialist culture'. However, as a description of cultural process, over four or five centuries and in scores of different societies, it requires immediate historical and internally comparative differentiation. Moreover, even if this is acknowledged or practically carried out, the 'epochal' definition can exert its pressure as a static type against which all real cultural process is measured, either to show 'stages' or 'variations' of the type (which is still historical analysis) or, at its worst, to select supporting and exclude 'marginal' or 'incidental' or 'secondary' evidence. Such errors are avoidable if, while retaining the epochal hypothesis, we can find terms which recognize not only 'stages' and 'Variations' but the internal dynamic relations of any actual process. We have certainly still to speak of the 'dominant' and the 'effective', and in these senses of the hegemonic. But we find that we have also to speak, and indeed with further differentiation of each, of the 'residual' and the 'emergent' which in any real process, and at any moment in the process, are significant both in themselves and in what they reveal of the characteristics of the 'dominant'. (a) What does the epochal analysis usually take into account? (b) What has traditionally been the treatment of cultures in relation to the culture? (c) What should be the ideal way to study the historical processes of cultural formation? (d) Explain the viewpoint of the author towards cultural study at a given point in history. (e) Bring out the relation between dominant, residual and emergent cultures.

50M2014Read the following passage