UPSC 2017 GS-I · 10 marks · 150 words

How do you justify the view that the level of excellence of the Gupta numismatic art is not at all noticeable in later times?

What “Justify” demands

argue positively for the stated position with evidence, and meet the obvious objection.

The characteristic failure: presenting both sides neutrally when a defence was asked for.

What a top answer must contain

These are the checkable specifics from the marking standard for this question — the actual case, committee, datum or thinker, not an instruction to “give examples”.

Gupta coinage peaks: Samudragupta's Ashvamedha, lyrist and archer types; Chandragupta II's horseman and umbrella types; Kumaragupta's rhinoceros-slayer
Technical excellence: high gold purity in early issues, Sanskrit legends in Brahmi, portraiture with individualised features, reverse Lakshmi and Garuda motifs
Decline evidence: falling gold content in later Gupta dinaras, stereotyped and blundered legends, crude die-cutting
After the Guptas: Huna imitations, and the near-absence of gold coinage until the Delhi Sultanate — Indo-Sasanian 'gadhaiya' coins as degenerate derivatives
The qualifier a top answer adds: silver and copper issues, and later regional gold (Cholas, Kalachuris), mean 'not at all noticeable' overstates it

The band thresholds and the pre-scored sample answers behind this standard stay private — they are the calibration your copy is placed against.

Now write it, and find out what you actually scored

Attempt this question — typed or photographed — and it is marked against the standard above in under a minute: six parameter scores, a blunt verdict, and the points you missed. 50 free credits on signup, no card.

Write this answer See a marked copy first

How do you justify the view that the level of excellence of the Gupta numismatic art is not at all noticeable in later times?

What a top answer must contain

Now write it, and find out what you actually scored

More from UPSC GS-I