The correct option is 2 and 3 only.
Explanation
Mauryan art represents a significant transition from wood to stone in Indian architecture. The stone pillars erected during the reign of Ashoka are the finest examples of Mauryan Court Art, serving both as symbols of imperial authority and as mediums for propagating Dhamma.
Statement-wise Analysis:
- Statement 1 is Incorrect. The tradition of erecting pillars was not entirely indigenous. Historians recognize distinct Achaemenian (Persian) influence on Mauryan pillars. Similarities include the highly polished surface (lustrous finish), the bell-shaped capital (resembling the Persian inverted lotus), and the concept of inscribing royal edicts on stone. While the Mauryans adapted these features to an Indian context, the external inspiration is evident.
- Statement 2 is Correct. A key structural difference exists between the two styles. Mauryan pillars are monolithic, meaning the shaft is carved from a single block of stone (typically Chunar sandstone), demonstrating the carver's skill. In contrast, Achaemenian pillars were constructed in separate segments (pieces) by a mason and joined together. Furthermore, Mauryan pillars are smooth, while Achaemenian pillars are generally fluted.
- Statement 3 is Correct. The distribution of Ashokan stone pillars is concentrated in the northern and central parts of the Mauryan Empire. Major sites include Lauriya-Nandangarh, Rampurva, and Lauriya-Araraj in Bihar; Sarnath, Allahabad, and Meerut in Uttar Pradesh; and Sanchi in Madhya Pradesh.
Key Takeaway:
The most critical distinction between Mauryan and Persian pillars is that Mauryan shafts are monolithic (single stone) and smooth, whereas Persian shafts are segmented (masonry) and fluted.