AI-assisted research; archaeological and art-historical review pending. This article introduces form and methods of interpretation, not a complete chronological typology. Full comparison of Anuradhapura, Polonnaruwa and later examples, sculptors’ working methods and competing symbolic interpretations remains needed. The 1954 study was consulted through its digitised opening text, not a complete review of its argument. No antiquity authentication or present ownership determination is offered.
A stone at the beginning of a passage
In the opening of his 1954 study, archaeologist Senarath Paranavitana describes semicircular slabs at the foot of stairways leading to ancient buildings at Anuradhapura. These are the architectural moonstones called sandakada pahana, rather than the gemstone sold under the same English name. Their position matters: a carving encountered while approaching a building belongs to an entrance arrangement, not merely to a collection of detached decorative pictures. Begin by looking at the slab in relation to the steps and the building beyond it.
Look from the centre towards the edge
Paranavitana’s opening description identifies a half-lotus surrounded by concentric bands containing birds, foliage and a procession of animals. The arrangement combines repetition with the sculptor’s treatment of living forms. A useful first exercise is to describe what is present: the number and order of bands, the figures within them, and any worn or missing areas. That description can then be compared with another example. It should come before assigning each animal a fixed meaning or assuming every surviving moonstone follows an identical design.
A motif can participate in more than one meaning
E. M. Mahesh Chathuranga Ekanayaka’s 2025 discussion of lion imagery places Sri Lankan carvings within religious and royal visual traditions. It interprets lions on Anuradhapura moonstones through strength and guardianship, while discussing other lion images in settings associated with Buddhist teaching and kingship. This is an art-historical interpretation, not a label left by the original sculptor. The wider lesson is to examine the setting and the author’s evidence instead of treating ‘lion’ as a universal code with only one possible translation. A full assessment of competing moonstone interpretations remains a separate research task.
Resemblance does not establish age or provenance
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa’s February 2013 report examined a moonstone advertised for auction in London at the request of Sri Lanka’s Director General of Archaeology. He compared photographs, measurements, motifs, wear and stone material with Anuradhapura examples. The investigation raised the possibility of a later replica, but explicitly treated its findings as preliminary and called for more research before a final decision. This dated case demonstrates the limits of judging an object by a familiar pattern alone. Neither the report nor this summary should be read as a current determination of that object’s ownership or authenticity; the article has not investigated subsequent developments.
Historical footage preserves a dated view, not a final interpretation
Penn Museum catalogues ‘Ceylon 1955 Reel 9 of 24’, film F16-0089, as an unedited travelogue. Its shotlist includes a moonstone, guardstone and monuments at Anuradhapura and other sites. Such a record offers a route into studying how historic places were filmed and described in the mid-twentieth century. The catalogue’s monument dates and superlatives are not adopted here as verified archaeology. The linked museum record is useful archival context; a comparison of individual frames with present conditions has not been undertaken for this article.
Watch a Sinhala introduction
Nade Gura Travel & Conservation Society’s 2019 Sandakada Pahana documentary provides a topic-specific visual companion. Its title, publisher and thumbnail were confirmed through YouTube metadata. This is an independent travel and conservation channel, not the Department of Archaeology. The narration has not been independently transcribed or checked; use the research references to examine historical or symbolic claims rather than treating the film as editorial approval of them.
Sandakada Pahana (සඳකඩපහණ) Moonstone, The Documentry
Independent 2019 documentary. Narration and interpretations have not been independently fact-checked; not an official archaeological assessment.
Watch on YouTube ↗Follow the evidence
S. Paranavitana · Artibus Asiae 17(3/4), copy hosted on Scribd
E. M. Mahesh Chathuranga Ekanayaka · Sri Lanka Journal of Aesthetic Studies
Wijerathne Bohingamuwa · archaeology.lk
Penn Museum · University of Pennsylvania
Nade Gura Travel & Conservation Society / YouTube
Sources consulted during this AI-assisted update: 8 September 2026. Source labels describe provenance, not independent fact-check approval. This article remains open to correction.