The view that the level of excellence of Gupta numismatic art is not noticeable in later times can be justified through several factors:

1. Historical Context: The Gupta Empire (4th to 6th century CE) was a period known for its remarkable achievements in various fields, including art, literature, and science. The era witnessed a flourishing artistic environment that resulted in the creation of majestic coins known for their stunning design and intricate details. However, as time progressed, socio-political changes occurred, leading to the decline of the Gupta Empire and the subsequent dynasties that followed. This shift in power might have impacted the resources, patronage, and overall environment required to sustain the same level of excellence in numismatic art.

2. Artistic Techniques and Innovations: The Gupta period witnessed significant advancements in artistic techniques and intricate designs. These included the use of high-quality metal, fine surface detailing, and the integration of various symbols, inscriptions, and figurative representations. While some of these techniques might have been lost or not sufficiently adopted in later periods, the Gupta style of numismatic art might have served as an inspiration for subsequent generations, resulting in the art form evolving or being reinterpreted in different ways.

3. Cultural Changes and Different Aesthetics: Art is inherently influenced by the cultural milieu in which it is created. The Gupta period was marked by a distinct cultural, social, and religious context, which influenced artistic expressions. Over time, as different dynasties and empires rose to power, they brought their own unique cultural ethos and aesthetic preferences. Consequently, numismatic art produced during these later periods might reflect different artistic sensibilities, deviating from the Guptan standards of excellence.

4. Archaeological Evidence and Comparative Analysis: By examining archaeological evidence, such as the existing coinage from later periods, it's possible to observe the stylistic differences and compare them to the Gupta numismatic art. By doing so, one may find that the level of excellence found in the Gupta period might not be as apparent in later times, whether due to changes in craftsmanship, materials, or overall artistic quality.

It's important to note that this view does not suggest a decline in artistic skill or creativity in later periods. Rather, it highlights the unique and exceptional nature of Gupta numismatic art and its distinct adherence to a particular aesthetic standard that might not have been replicated or sustained in subsequent times.

The statement that the level of excellence in Gupta numismatic art is "not at all noticeable" in later times is an oversimplification and needs to be qualified. While it's true that the Gupta period (c. 320-550 CE) witnessed a peak in numismatic art in India, later dynasties and periods did continue to produce coins with varying levels of artistic merit.

Here's a nuanced perspective:

Arguments supporting the statement:

• Decline in technical skill: After the Gupta period, there was a general decline in the technical proficiency of coin production. This resulted in less detailed and intricate designs, often using simpler iconography and less refined depictions of figures.
• Shift in focus: Later rulers placed a greater emphasis on political and religious symbolism on their coins, rather than aesthetic beauty. This resulted in a more standardized and less creative approach to coin design.
• Influence of foreign styles: The influx of foreign influences, particularly from the Islamic world, led to the adoption of new minting techniques and stylistic elements, which sometimes overshadowed traditional Indian artistic elements.

Arguments against the statement:

• Artistic evolution: While the Gupta period set a high bar, later periods still produced coins with artistic merit. Some examples include the intricately detailed coins of the Chalukya dynasty (6th-12th centuries), the artistic depictions on coins of the Chola dynasty (9th-13th centuries), and the beautifully crafted coins of the Mughal Empire (16th-19th centuries).
• Regional variations: Different regions within India developed their own unique coin designs and styles, showcasing artistic variations that continued beyond the Gupta period.
• Religious and cultural influence: The coins of later periods reflected the changing religious and cultural landscape of India, incorporating new deities, symbols, and artistic motifs.

Conclusion:

It's inaccurate to say that the level of excellence in Gupta numismatic art is "not at all noticeable" in later times. While the Gupta period undoubtedly represents a high point in Indian numismatic art, later periods continued to produce coins with artistic value and significance. The artistic expressions of later dynasties may have differed in style and focus, but they still demonstrate the ongoing evolution of Indian art and craftsmanship.

Instead of comparing later periods to the Gupta period, it's more fruitful to appreciate them for their own unique artistic merits and historical context.

The Gupta period (320-550 CE) is indeed considered the golden age of Indian numismatics, and the level of excellence in their numismatic art is unparalleled in later times. Here are some reasons why:

1. Attention to detail: Gupta coins exhibit an extraordinary attention to detail, with intricate designs, precise engravings, and a high level of craftsmanship. Later coins, while still beautiful, lack the same level of intricacy and precision.
2. Iconographic innovation: Gupta coins introduced new iconographic motifs, such as the goddess Lakshmi, the god Kartikeya, and the Buddha, which were later adopted and adapted by other dynasties. However, these motifs were not developed or refined further in later periods.
3. Artistic proportions: Gupta coins demonstrate a mastery of artistic proportions, with well-balanced designs and harmonious layouts. Later coins often lack this sense of balance and harmony.
4. Metalwork and die-engraving: The Gupta period saw significant advances in metalwork and die-engraving techniques, which allowed for the creation of coins with high-relief designs and intricate details. Later coins, while still made from high-quality metals, lack the same level of craftsmanship.
5. ** Limited influence**: Despite their excellence, Gupta coins did not have a lasting impact on the development of Indian numismatics. Later dynasties, such as the Vakataka, the Pallava, and the Rashtrakuta, introduced their own distinct styles, but these styles were not directly influenced by Gupta numismatic art.
6. Lack of continuity: The Gupta period was followed by a period of decline and instability, which disrupted the continuity of Indian numismatics. As a result, the skills and techniques developed during the Gupta period were not passed down to subsequent generations.
7. Regionalization: Indian numismatics became increasingly regionalized in later periods, with different regions developing their own distinct styles and techniques. This regionalization led to a loss of the centralized, pan-Indian style characteristic of the Gupta period.
8. Influence of foreign styles: Later Indian dynasties were influenced by foreign styles, such as Greek, Roman, and Persian styles, which altered the course of Indian numismatic art.
9. Decline of craftsmanship: Over time, the craftsmanship and attention to detail characteristic of Gupta coins began to decline. Later coins often exhibit a more rudimentary level of craftsmanship, with less attention to detail and precision.
10. Historical context: The Gupta period was a time of relative peace and prosperity, which enabled the development of a sophisticated and refined numismatic art. Later periods, marked by political instability and external invasions, did not provide the same conducive environment for artistic innovation.

In conclusion, the exceptional level of excellence in Gupta numismatic art is not matched in later times due to a combination of factors, including the lack of attention to detail, iconographic innovation, and artistic proportions, as well as the decline of craftsmanship, the influence of foreign styles, and the historical context.