frog and princess(?)

[Valerie J Roebuck]

The materials sound unconventional for an image intended for worship, but
that doesn't necessarily mean that it's not authentic.  It could be part of
a piece of shrine decoration, for example.

It's not possible to decide on date, authenticity etc without actually
handling the object, so I can only suggest that the owner takes the piece
to the nearest museum with a good Indian collection for an opinion.
(Perhaps list members can advise which this is?)

As the owner says, it is far from crude, and clearly deserves following up.
I am still trying to find out about the iconography.

I rather like Swaminathan Madhuresan's suggestion of a Monsoon rain god.
In any case, there must surely be some sort of water/fertility connection.

Valerie J Roebuck
Manchester, UK


Vidyasankar Sundaresan writes:
>
>The owner of the statue, who is in Florida, says the
>following -
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>I bought it from a young lady at a local flea market.
>
>It is small, perhaps 7" high, made from a white metal
>(slag, pot metal, or lead?) that has been poured into
>a mold. There is great detail of a very toothed frog,
>with a female sitting upon the left knee. It weighs 3+
>lbs. in air, 20% less in water; has much age to it, and
>appears to have been out of doors most of its existence.
>
>It is hollow, in that it is from a pouring; indeed
>upon closer examination it looks like it was made from
>2 pouring. It is far from crude, with much detail,
>especially on the female.
>
>It is possible that it was broken off from its stand.
>I had originally thought of it as some kind of a
>fanciful gargoyle. It is significantly weathered and I
>would guess at 100 years or more.
>
>Her right hand, forearm, elbow and upper arm rests upon
>the right shoulder of the frog.  She sits upon his knee
>with his left hand just behind where she sits.  She seems
>to lean into the crook of his left forearm, elbow, and
>upper arm.