Dr Gift introduced us to iconography and iconometry. He made us read a lot on the subjects. We were made familiar with Indian Taalamaana system by Dr.G.S. It is only after careful analysis of iconometric systems given in various books such as Silparatnam, Kasiyappa Silpa Sastram, Brahmeeya Chitrakarma Sastram, and Saraswathiya Chitra Sastram, we were able to establish the existence of two totally different systems for making sculptures in India. We were puzzled by the way the two systems got intermingled in some canons of iconometry at some point of time. As anticipated, like in any other research, we also got sharp criticisms initially for analysing scientifically the sculptures. But by throwing more and more emphasis on the need for the use of advanced statistical techniques and use of the digital technology, archaeologists, art historians of the country slowly started accepting the findings of the MCC team under the leadership of Dr.G.S. It was a major breakthrough for art historians and archaeologists. Dr.G.S. had visited Mahabalipuram hundreds of times. But he used to say that every time he visited Mahabalipuram, he used to see and learn a new thing from the monuments. He loved the place so much. Indian art form, especially the sculptures, took various forms under different dynasties. To recall a few, the anatomical features of women were depicted very naturally in the sculptures of Pallava period, more ornamentation and exaggeration of features were found in sculptures of Vijayanagar period. The usage of musical rocks and pillars were significant features of Pandya regions. The concept of bronze imaging were popularised during the Chola Period. All these concepts and significance of different periods were systematically taught to us by Prof.G.S..

S. Govindaraju,

Dept. of Statistics,

MCC, Tambaram.

Publications