Dr. Paul in his doctorate thesis convincingly argumented that the sculpture under discussion is jina Amoghasiddhi and not Buddhamucalinda as expressed by some other scholars. He based his view on the fact that the figure is showing the abhayamudra and not the dhyanamudra which is common for Buddhamucalinda representations. Another argument is the not well-defined snake-canopy which one should expect with a Buddhamucalinda. Although not common one can find a snake-canopy behind the jina Amoghasiddhi as mentioned in various texts. The last argument of dr. Paul is the atlas supporting the throne of Amoghasiddhi, which looks like a Garuda, the vehicle of Amoghasiddhi.
The bronze under discussion is one of the only five known dated sculptures in the art history of Kashmir. One is carved in stone, the others are made of bronze. The dated bronzes can be found in the Norton Simon Foundation (dated A.D. 694), the former Pan Asian Collection (dated A.D. 714) and the Rockefeller Collection (dated A.D. 734).
The figure to be offered at Christie's is dated to A.D. 696/697 and therefore the second oldest known dated Kashmir bronze. Although the sculpture lacks the fine plasticity of other early Kashmir bronzes, it is of eminent importance to our knowledge of early Kashmir casting.

See colour illustration