Indian subcontinent, V , 3: Sculpture, early historic period3rd century BC...

http://www.oxfordartonline.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/subscriber/article/grov...

1 of 4

10/1/2011 7:19 PM

Indian subcontinent, V , 3: Sculpture, early historic period3rd century BC...

http://www.oxfordartonline.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/subscriber/article/grov...

Grove Art Online

Previous result

Results list

Next result

article url: http://www.oxfordartonline.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/subscriber/article/grove/art/T040113pg18

Indian subcontinent, V, 3: Sculpture, early historic period3rd century BC 3. Early historic period3rd century bc.
Few sculptures are known from the period between the decline of the Indus civilization (c. 2000 BC) and the establishment of the Maurya empire in the 3rd century BC. The maturity of Indian sculpture of the 3rd century BC in the absence of similar accomplishment in the immediately preceding and succeeding periods has led some scholars to see Maurya sculpture as an isolated phenomenon, executed through intervention of Greek or Persian sculptors. However, perhaps a continuity of decorative motifs and, to some extent, plastic feeling can be traced from the sculpture of the Indus civilization (see 2 above) through the bronze animals and charioteer from Daimabad (c. 15001000 BC), the superb weapons of the so-called copperhoard culture of Uttar Pradesh (c. 1000 BC or later) and the lustrous, volumetrically conceived pottery from the Gangetic plain (c. 500 BC). Characterized by a combination of naturalism and abstraction, of rounded, modelled volumes and of textured surface, such works seem to anticipate the co-existence of diverse styles in the 3rd century BC.

(i) Style and dating.

The absence of firm archaeological or documentary evidence makes it difficult to establish a coherent chronological sequence for 3rd-century BC sculpture. Further, the variety of techniques and motifs seems to represent a diversity of artistic choice and skills rather than a pattern of development. A remarkable unity of plastic conception characterizes all the objects and distinguishes them from the cubical modelling of the 2nd-century BC sculpture of Bharhut. The homogeneity of style, together with the evidence of some Ashokan edicts, suggests that much of this sculpture was created during the reign of Ashoka (reg c. 269c. 232 BC), though some examples are probably pre-Ashokan, as Ashoka apparently directed the engraving of inscriptions on pre-existing pillars. The variety of techniques and styles is demonstrated most effectively by the free-standing pillars found especially at sites sacred to Buddhism. Of the roughly 20 pillars of which remains are known, the shaft, the capital, the abacus and the crowning animals show a variety of treatments. The shaft and capital may be squat or slender, with varying ratios of breadth to height. The abacus may be square and plain or round and carved. Crowning animals are single or addorsed (for illustration see SARNATH), and animal capitals occur on both inscribed and uninscribed pillars. Some pillars employ conventions more appropriate to wood, while others show a mastery of the medium of stone. Some are characterized by an integration of parts, others by a lack of integration. The decorative scheme of the abacus frequently consists of combinations of geese and honeysuckle or the bull, horse, lion and elephant along with the wheel. The animal surmounting the pillars is most frequently the lion, as in examples from Sarnath, Rampurva, Lauriya-Nandangarh, Vaishali and Sanchi, though the bull and elephant are also depicted, as at Rampurva and Sankasya respectively. The lions are characterized by geometric tensions and accentuated planes; the qualities of clear definition and fluid rhythm are best combined in the bull of the Rampurva pillar . The animals and birds in relief on the abacus tend to be softer and fuller in modelling than the heraldic animals in the round at the top. The vegetal motifs on the abacus, though articulated with stylized regularity by

2 of 4

10/1/2011 7:19 PM

Indian subcontinent, V , 3: Sculpture, early historic period3rd century BC...

http://www.oxfordartonline.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/subscriber/article/grov...

faceting, ribbing and scooping, are characterized by a lifelike quality. Also firmly related to the reign of Ashoka by an inscription is the elephant shown as if emerging from the rock at DHAULI. Different in style from the pillar sculptures, it is the most softly rendered of all the works. The elephants and makaras (crocodilian beasts) on the entrance of Lomas Rishi Cave (see BARABAR AND NAGARJUNI; see also above) can be dated to the Maurya period by both their context and style. Though often dated later, a number of sculptures are clearly related in form to the pillar sculptures and can thus be assigned to the Maurya period. This group includes the Didarganj Whisk-bearer , two yakas from Patna and the Lohanipur torso (all Patna Mus.) as well as a variety of lesser-known examples: the pair of griffins from Kumrahar, the head of a lion from Masarh, the seven-hooded nga canopy from Rajgir (all four Calcutta, Ind. Mus.), the bull capitals of Salempur and Lohanipur, the bird fragments from Sarnath and two heads from Kumrahar and Lohanipur (all Patna Mus.). These works are related to the sculpture of the pillars by a combination of naturalism and stylization, monumentality and frontality, fluently merging plans and harsh, precise incisions, as well as by a lustrous polish, which appears to be more usual in this period than later. On the other hand, a nilgi (blue bull) head and seven fragments of human heads recovered from Sarnath (all Sarnath, Archaeol. Mus.) show a combination of physical vehemence, anatomical naturalism and cubical volumes that suggest a transition to the 2nd-century BC sculpture of Bharhut. A similar co-existence of styles and motifs also characterizes sculpted ring stones (possibly designed as jewellery moulds). The ring stones range in diameter from about 50 to 80 mm. Most of them are of soapstone, and many have a hole in the centre, giving rise to their name. One group is distinguished by refined workmanship and a clear rendering of such motifs as mother-goddess figures, honeysuckle, palm trees, pyramids, unicorns and sphinxes, some of which may be of western Asiatic derivation. Examples have been found at Taxila, Rupar, Mathura, Sankasya, Kausambi, Rajghat, Jhusi and Vaishali (e.g. Calcutta, Ind. Mus.; Varanasi, Banaras Hindu U., Bharat Kala Bhavan). A second group of ring stones, mostly found at Murtaziganj in Patna (e.g. Patna Mus.), is of somewhat rougher workmanship. Their decoration includes, along with mother-goddess figures, such Indianizing motifs as naturalistic birds and animals, lotuses, and stellate, taurine and crescent designs. A third group, all of which are from Kausambi (e.g. Allahabad Mus.), combines the exquisite workmanship of the first group with motifs such as the honeysuckle stem and rosettes of the second. It is perhaps transitional between the first and second groups.

(ii) Symbolism and interpretation.

In translating Vedic, Upanishadic or epic ideas and Greek or Persian or other Western Asiatic motifs into stone, the 3rd-century BC sculptor appears to have reinterpreted them syncretically. The pillar had been conceived in earlier Brahmanical literature primarily as an axis mundi , variously expressed as burial post, sacrificial stake, portable victory standard, Tree of Life or cosmic mountain. It had been represented also in ancient Near Eastern reliefs. In all these various forms, it was seen in ancient India as a symbol of the myth of creation, suggesting the eternal, life-giving, cyclical passage of water between earth and heaven. In Persian palaces or Greek temples, the pillar was used as a load-bearing element, seemingly divested of such explicit symbolic functions. The monumental Maurya pillars, however, appear to have taken over the pre-Buddhist symbolism of the pillar. They seem to identify the law of the Buddha with the law of the state and to represent the Buddha as the universal emperor, turning the Wheel of the Law and re-enacting the primordial drama of creation by separation and reintegration of life-giving elements. The birds, animals and plants of the pillars appeared to harmonize with the theme of the cyclic flow of waters. In keeping with their intended symbolism, Maurya pillars are not load-bearing; they stand free with no bases rising straight from the earth. Rather than the additive jointing and setting procedures used for Greek or Persian pillars, Maurya pillars were created by subtractive cutting into a monolithic block of stone. Their shafts are smooth rather than fluted. The so-called Persian bell capitals resemble the bases rather than the capitals of Persepolitan pillars. The drooping sepals of the

3 of 4

10/1/2011 7:19 PM

Indian subcontinent, V , 3: Sculpture, early historic period3rd century BC...

http://www.oxfordartonline.com.ezp2.lib.umn.edu/subscriber/article/grov...

Persian examples have become the petals of lotus-form Maurya capitals, which have been given a greater bulge at the top. An abacus with reliefs was introduced. Western Asiatic motifs were used in both the pillars and the ring stones but given a greater fullness and smoothness and a more curvilinear rhythm than in Persia or Greece. The harsh expression of Persian animals was softened, and the frenzied disquiet or passivity of Greek animals was replaced by lucid repose or gliding motion in Indian examples. Though 3rd-century BC sculpture still poses unresolved questions, its legacy clearly survived in later art. The pillars were imitated in free-standing and structural forms. The combined use of organic and geometric motifs seen in the ring stones is echoed in the medallions of Bharhut and in Mathura reliefs, as well as in the mystical and cosmic diagrams of the Jaina religionyantras, aygapaas and saptacakras. The yak served as model for the labhajika, and the yaka became the precursor of the Buddha image and images of Jaina t rthakaras (teachers). The tension between plastic and linear styles continued. Indian sculpture of the 3rd century BC was, therefore, not an exotic or ephemeral phenomenon, but a part of continuing development.

Bibliography
L. Waddell: Report on the Excavations at Pataliputra (Calcutta, 1903) V. Smith: The Monolithic Pillars or Columns of Asoka, Z. Dt. Mrglnd. Ges., lxv (1911) R. P. Chanda: The Beginnings of Art in Eastern India (Calcutta, 1927) N. R. Ray: Maurya and Sunga Art (Calcutta, 1945) R. E. M. Wheeler: Iran and India in Pre-Islamic Times, Anc. Ind. (19478), pp. 85103 K. A. N. Sastri, ed.: Age of the Nandas and Mauryas (Varanasi, 1952) R. E. M. Wheeler: Civilizations of the Indus Valley and Beyond (London, 1966) B. P. Sinha and L. A. Narain: Pataliputra Excavation, 195556 (Patna, 1970) S. Paranavitana: The Greeks and the Mauryas (Columbo, 1971) J. Irwin: Asokan Pillars: A Reassessment of the Evidence, Burl. Mag., cxv (1973), pp. 70620; cxvi (1974), pp. 71227; cxvii (1975), pp. 63143; cxviii (1976), pp. 73453 J. C. Huntington: The Lomas Rsi: Another Look, Archvs Asian A., xxviii (19745), pp. 3456 S. P. Gupta: The Roots of Indian Art (Delhi, 1980) J. Irwin: The Prayaga Bull-Pillar: Another Pre-Asokan Monument?, South Asian Archaeology , ed. H. Hartel (Berlin, 1981), pp. 31340 J. Irwin: The Lat Bhairo at Benaras (Varanasi): Another Pre-Asokan Monument?, Z. Dt. Mrglnd. Ges., cxxxiii/2 (1983), pp. 32152

Kalyan Kumar Chakravarty

Copyright Oxford University Press 2007 2011.

4 of 4

10/1/2011 7:19 PM