From Temple to Museum: Colonial Collections and Umā Maheśvara Icons in the Middle Ganga Valley [1 ed.] 9781138202498

Table of contents :
Cover
Title
Copyright
Contents
List of figures
List of tables
Preface
Introduction
PART I The making of museum collections
1 Creating identities
2 Making of museums
PART II The icon in context
3 Sacred sites
4 The Uma Mahesvaramurti
5 Shifting centres
Conclusion: from sacred icons to objet d’art
List of Hindi and Sanskrit words
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

From Temple to Museum

Religious icons have been a contested terrain across the world. Their implications and understanding travel further than the artistic or the aesthetic and inform contemporary preoccupations. This book traces the lives of religious sculptures beyond the moment of their creation. It lays bare their purpose and evolution by contextualising them in their original architectural or ritual setting while also following their displacement. The work examines how these images may have moved during different spates of temple renovation and acquired new identities by being relocated either within sacred precincts or in private collections and museums, art markets or even desecrated and lost. The book highlights contentious issues in Indian archaeology such as renegotiating identities of religious images, reuse and sharing of sacred space by adherents of different faiths, rebuilding of temples and consequent reinvention of these sites. The author also engages with postcolonial debates surrounding history writing and knowledge creation in British India and how colonial archaeology, archival practices, official surveys and institutionalisation of museums have influenced the current understanding of religion, sacred space and religious icons. In doing so it bridges the historiographical divide between the ancient and the modern as well as socio-religious practices and their institutional memory and preservation. Drawn from a wide-ranging and interdisciplinary study of religious sculptures, classical texts, colonial archival records, British travelogues, official correspondences and fieldwork, the book will interest scholars and researchers of history, archaeology, religion, art history, museums studies, South Asian studies and Buddhist studies. Salila Kulshreshtha is an independent researcher currently based in Dubai. She has taught Art History, History and Humanities in Mumbai at Rizvi College of Architecture and Indian Education Society’s College of Architecture and in the USA at the Old Dominion University and Virginia Wesleyan College. She secured her PhD in History from the Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. Her doctoral research focuses on how the spatial relocation of sacred sculptures brings about a change in their identity and ritual purpose. She has worked on issues of urban heritage and heritage education with INTACH and with the Dr Bhau Daji Lad Mumbai City Museum. Her forthcoming publications include Removable Heritage: Nalanda Beyond the Mahavihara and Between Shrines and Monuments: Heritage of Sacred Spaces in South Bihar. She has also published with the online journal wire.in. Her research interests include religious iconography, afterlives of shrines, colonial archaeology and the making of museums in South Asia.

Archaeology and Religion in South Asia

Series Editor: Himanshu Prabha Ray, Ludwig Maximillian University Munich, Germany; former Chairperson of the National Monuments Authority, Ministry of Culture, Government of India and former Professor, Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India Editorial Board: Gavin Flood, Academic Director, Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies; Jessica Frazier, Academic Administrator, Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies; Julia Shaw, Institute of Archaeology, University College, London; Shailendra Bhandare, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford; Devangana Desai, Asiatic Society, Mumbai; and Vidula Jaiswal, Jnana Pravaha, Varanasi, former Professor, Banaras Hindu University This Series, in association with the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies, reflects on the complex relationship between religion and society through new perspectives and advances in archaeology. It looks at this critical interface to provide alternative understandings of communities, beliefs, cultural systems, sacred sites, ritual practices, food habits, dietary modifications, power and agents of political legitimisation. The books in the Series underline the importance of archaeological evidence in the production of knowledge of the past. They also emphasise that a systematic study of religion requires engagement with a diverse range of sources such as inscriptions, iconography, numismatics and architectural remains. Books in this series Archaeology and Religion in Early Northwest India History, Theory, Practice Daniel Michon Negotiating Cultural Identity Landscapes in Early Medieval South Asian History Edited by Himanshu Prabha Ray For a full list of titles in this series, please visit www.routledge.com/ Archaeology-and-Religion-in-South-Asia/book-series/AR

From Temple to Museum Colonial Collections and Uma Mahesvara Icons in the Middle Ganga Valley

Salila Kulshreshtha

First published 2018 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2018 Salila Kulshreshtha The right of Salila Kulshreshtha to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-20249-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-12121-5 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Contents

List of figures List of tables Preface Introduction

vi viii ix 1

PART I

The making of museum collections

19

1

Creating identities

21

2

Making of museums

58

PART II

The icon in context

95

3

Sacred sites

97

4

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

146

5

Shifting centres

291

Conclusion: from sacred icons to objet d’art

328

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words Bibliography Index

342 349 361

Figures

2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

4.1 4.2 4.3

4.4

4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8

Uma Mahesvara icons from Bodh Gaya Mahant’s Matha Uma Mahesvara from Broadley Collection; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 7881 Façade of Lomas Rishi Cave, Barabar Hills, Gaya Mundesvari temple, one of the earliest stone temples in the region, as it now survives without its shikhara One of the many Uma Mahesvara icons reused in the walls of the Vishnupad temple complex, Gaya Miniature temples with Uma Mahesvara image in the central niche along with another Uma Mahesvara icon next to it at the Suraj Pokhra, Bargaon Century-wise distribution of images One of the earliest Uma Mahesvara, Mahramau, Gaya; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 11260 Uma Mahesvara, Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger, represents the icon in its ‘classic’ Eastern Indian pose; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 6837 Uma Mahesvara, Nandua, Gaya; the figures of Shiva and Uma are cut away from the back slab to introduce a three-dimensional effect; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 11065 Uma Mahesvara, Bodh Gaya, representing the later mandala style icons; now at Patna Museum Map showing district-wise distribution of Uma Mahesvara images from various sites in South Bihar District-wise delineation of images Bronze Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 9624

63 67 99 108 127

131 155 161

165

167 184 256 256 263

Figures Front view of inscribed Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 966 4.10 Back view of inscribed Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 966; inscribed ‘Kalanda’ 5.1 Modern Mahadev Temple, Akbarpur, Hilsa, Patna 5.2 Reuse of pillars and sculptures at Vishnupad temple, Gaya 5.3 Re-enshrinement of older sculptures and architectural fragments in a new shrine, Vageshwari Temple, Kurkihar 5.4 Colossal Buddha at Rukministhan, Jagdishpur, Nalanda 5.5 Buddha worshipped as Bhairav or Teliya Baba or Black Buddha, outside the monastic complex, Nalanda

vii

4.9

276

277 294 298 303 310 318

Tables

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Early rock-cut shrines in South Bihar: third century bce–first century ce Early shrines in South Bihar: fifth–seventh centuries ce Expansion and re-organisation of shrines: seventh–tenth centuries ce Evolution of multi-religious architectural complexes in South Bihar: tenth century ce Chronological break-down of Uma Mahesvara images District-wise distribution of Uma Mahesvara images Evolution of the Uma Mahesvara icon Bronze Uma Mahesvara images from South Bihar

100 102 112 123 156 168 186 269

Preface

This journey from a research synopsis to a monograph has taken almost ten years with two brief interludes. During this process I have lived in three continents and used several libraries and institutional facilities that I wish to thank. The monograph is an outcome of my doctoral thesis submitted to the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi. I am extremely grateful to the faculty and staff of the Centre for Historical Studies (CHS), JNU for providing me the assistance and support as a doctoral student and teaching me the historians’ craft to think, to research, to argue and to write. The Central Library at JNU and the CHS Library provided me with a constant supply of books and journals and also a conducive atmosphere to work in. I am indebted to Professor Heeraman Tiwari and to my co-supervisor Professor R Mahalakshmi who provided crucial inputs to my thesis. A special note of acknowledgement to Dharmendra Sir who helped me navigate through the many administrative requirements of the university through my years as a MA, MPhil and PhD student. I would also like to thank the libraries and institutions whose facilities I have used including the American Institute of Indian Studies, Gurgaon; the National Museum Library, New Delhi; the Library of the Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi; the Central Secretariat Library and the Indira Gandhi National Centre of Arts, New Delhi. I started working on my project while I was teaching at the Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia in 2006. I spent many winter afternoons in the university library and I am grateful to the staff and inter-library loan facility for helping me work on a topic totally unfamiliar to them. I still remember a book on the composite forms of Shiva which was sourced all the way from the University of Hawaii! My memories of Virginia would not be the same without the Val and Clayton Drees. Clay provided me with my first teaching job at

x

Preface

Virginia Wesleyan College, Virginia Beach, and has been a mentor ever since. During the years I lived and worked in Mumbai, the galleries of the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya and its library became a favourite haunt and provided the necessary backdrop to the section on colonial museums. My experience as the Assistant Keeper for the Dr Bhau Daji Lad Mumbai City Museum gave me first-hand exposure to handling colonial collections, heritage issues and the creation of colonial identities. Dr Devangana Desai with whom I frequently interacted in Mumbai guided me with her insights on sacred icons and their placement on temple walls. In the summer of 2011 I went on my field trip to various sites of Bihar and I would like to thank those who made my study tour a success. Dr Bijoy Chaudhary at the KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, shared his vast knowledge of and years of experience in mapping and documenting the archaeological sites of Bihar; to him I am very grateful. Over my years of association with him I have learned that the realities at site level are much different from the published reports. I am also thankful to the staff of Patna Museum and the then Curator Dr Umesh Chandra Dwivedi for helping me explore the museum and access the original museum registers and the reserve collection. I would also like to thank the staff of Bihar Puravid Parishad and Bihar State Archives for allowing me to use their resources. I express my gratitude to the Archaeological Museum at Nalanda, Naradah Sangrahalaya, Nawadah, Gaya and Bodh Gaya Museums where I visited the galleries and also looked at the museum registers and reserve collections. Having spent a considerable amount of my time in museums in the last decade and the many conversations I have had with the staff has helped me put together a picture of museum practices from the past and in the present, and how these are crucial spaces which shape the heritage of a region. I am deeply indebted to the Mahant at Bodh Gaya Matha who allowed me to view and photograph the collection of sculptures in the Mahant’s Compound which is usually not open to public viewing and adds a totally different facet to the history of the site. While at the Matha I had the opportunity to meet Shri Giri the Sanchalak or the Administrator of the Matha who has resided there for more than seventy years and shared with me an insider’s perspective on the history of the Matha and the changing landscape of Bodh Gaya. While working on my manuscript I spent two years living in Netherlands where I used the library facilities and the photo archives at the University of Leiden and the collection of eastern Indian sculptures at the National Museum of Ethnology, Leiden and I am grateful to these

Preface

xi

institutions for allowing me to use their facilities. The historic city scape of Leiden, the ambiance of the university town and the academic initiatives of the International Institute of Asian Studies, Leiden provided an intellectual community for me to work in. The photographs that I have published in this monograph come from many sources, some of these are my own, clicked during my field trips. The photo of the Mahant’s Collection has been given to me with permission to publish by Mr Vikas Vaibhav and I am thankful to him. Mr Vikas Vaibhav is a bureaucrat by profession but his passion for the history and heritage of Bihar is apparent in the remarkable blog that he writes http://silentpagesindia.blogspot.ae/. I would also like to thank the Centre for Art and Archaeology (CA&A) of the American Institute of Indian Studies, Gurgaon for providing me with digital copies of their photographs. A special note of thanks to Mr Shankar Suman at the Patna Museum for helping me publish photographs of sculptures from the Patna Museum. The image of the Buddha as Teliya Baba from Nalanda was given to me by Sonali Dhingra, PhD Candidate, Harvard University, and I wish to thank her for the same. I am grateful to Aakash Chakrabarty and his team at Routledge for teaching me the logistics of publishing. I am deeply indebted to Professor Himanshu Prabha Ray who has gone beyond being my teacher, supervisor and mentor to look after my personal well-being. I have known Professor Ray for almost twenty years and all through this time she has guided me into the academic world with utmost patience, encouraged me to put in my best effort and has given me the space to work in my individual style. My research and this monograph would not have been the same without her expertise, her critical insights and her approach to religious archaeology. My relationship with her is most cherished! Some close friends who over the years have become my support system and to them I am extremely thankful. Monita, Minaz and Pallavi for being my inspiring girl gang; Shalini, Susanna and Rachel on whom I have relied on many occasions; Utthara for her positivity and eye for detail and Nitin for his encouragement, scholarly advice and for reading various sections of the manuscript. I am blessed with a large and loving family: parents, in-laws, husband, siblings who have encouraged and supported me in my scholarly pursuits Words cannot express my gratitude to them. My grandfather, who is no longer, passed to me his passion for history and love for reading. Vivaan and Vedika have seen their mother juggle parenthood and research. Their arrival into the world during my period of research provided two brief but most beautiful interludes.

xii

Preface

Varun, my best friend and my biggest critic – has always pushed me to pursue my passions and achieve my goals; I thank him for this beautiful life that we have built together. I am most grateful to my parents who worked very hard to provide me with the best education. They have been my pillar of strength and patience and have instilled in me the values of hard work and diligence – to them I dedicate this book.

Introduction

May the throat of Nila-kantha, Its hue like a thundercloud’s – On which shines like a streak of lightning The creeper of Gauri’s arm – protect you.1 The 38-inch-tall sandstone sculpture of Uma-Maheshvara, a pair of Hindu deities, was to go on view Tuesday – with a $350,000 asking price – in “Sacred and Sublime,” an exhibition at Carlton Rochell Asian Art, in the Fuller Building’s elegant gallery enclave on 57th Street. It was not the star attraction among 65 works of Indian and Southeast Asian art, several of which are valued at more than $1 million apiece. But LACMA purchased the Uma-Maheshvara in 1969 as part of a 345-piece collection amassed by dealer Nasli Heeramaneck and his wife, Alice. The acquisition immediately established the museum as a serious collector of Indian art.2

The Uma Mahesvara icon depicts Shiva and Uma seated together on the same pedestal caught in an intimate embrace, their bodies enthralled in passion while their faces reflect sublime tranquillity. The image represents conjugal bliss, cosmic procreation and the synthesis of two powerful and independent deities. It is an embodiment of dichotomies: the male and the female, purusha and prakriti, Shiva and Shakti, rudra and saumya, destruction and regeneration. The two cited extracts discuss the Uma Mahesvara icons in two entirely different contexts. The first describes the intrinsic beauty and grace of the Uma Mahesvara motif in a performing drama The Little Clay Cart, dated to the early centuries of the common era, in which Uma Mahesvara is one of the manifest rupa in which Shiva’s benefaction is evoked. The second extract describes a sculptural representation of the Uma Mahesvara motif ascribed to fifth-century Uttar

2

Introduction

Pradesh. This sculpture was being deaccessioned from the Los Angeles County Museum and offered for sale at an auction to which Pratapaditya Pal strongly objected. The piece was being sold since the museum administrators felt that “similar objects in the collection were superior, had stronger exhibition histories and were more frequently on view at the museum.”3 Pal meanwhile ascribed the sculpture to the “Gupta period” thus pushing back its chronology as well as associating it with a dynasty known for being great patrons of art. My engagement with the Uma Mahesvara icon is neither to describe the scriptural or spiritual meanings that surround it, nor discuss its chronology or evaluate the aesthetics of the sculptures, which has oft been done in the typical art historical fashion. I approach the Uma Mahesvaramurti in its particular Eastern Indian manifestation to trace its original ritual and architectural context. In my perception sacred images are alive and from the moment of fabrication, through their lives, they inhabit different places, interact with a variety of people and travel large distances, sometimes even crossing international borders by air. At each stage of their existence and at each location of their placement, their identity and purpose alters. By tracing the biographies of Uma Mahesvara images, I will enter the shrines where they were originally located. The original architectural placement of the icons vis-à-vis their later relocation will suggest how their identities have changed and their original perspective has been forever lost; the sacred sites where they were located were consequently reconfigured and reinvented. As a methodological approach through the medium of sacred sculptures, I will discuss the politics of heritage making and the creation of a certain religious identity for a defined geographical region. The region discussed is that of the middle Ganga valley; the area south of river Ganga in the present-day state of Bihar.4 The temples and temple sites referred to are those built from eighth to the fourteenth centuries. Current historiographical stance tends to view the region as the original Buddhist homeland, its history framed by the succession of dynasties: the Mauryas, the Sungas, the Guptas, the Pala, the Senas and so on. I use religious sculptures as the main source of historical investigation and study them without comparison to textual prescriptions as is the general norm. By highlighting the architectural context and ritual use of the images I create a historical narrative of sites from South Bihar. A striking aspect of the sites which emerges is their apparent polytheism in motifs, images and cults. It is common to find Buddhist, Jain and Hindu images within the same sacred space and still under worship. At what moment do the sites of South Bihar then begin

Introduction

3

to acquire a monotheistic Buddhist identity? How were the existing sacred sculptures, especially those under worship, misrepresented to fit a particular notion of the past and a convenient configuration of sacred spaces? I will discuss through the course of the book, how colonial interventions in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries reinterpreted the study of this past through the introduction of new disciplines such as archaeology, art history and iconography. The book will highlight significant issues in Indian archaeology such as: the reuse and sharing of sacred space by adherents of different faiths and the rebuilding of temples and consequent reinvention of sites where these images were located and thus situated the icon in a religious edifice.

Understanding sacred sculptures There are three overarching themes which run through the course of the book and tie together the different chapters. These also suggest the wider historiographical discourses to study sacred images from the period; these include situating them within their social and material milieu, the colonial discourse around shrines and religious icons and the question of sacred space and an understanding of the images enshrined within. Historians and anthropologists studying the social dimension of religion and temple architecture from north and east India between the eighth and the thirteenth centuries have largely placed them within the paradigm of ‘feudal economies’ of the ‘early medieval period’. By using dynastic tags such as ‘post-Gupta’ continuing into the ‘Pala dynasty’, this period saw the efflorescence of major temple complexes in north India though religion and religious arts of the period have often been depicted as one of decay when iconography “became obscene.”5 Within this ideological stance, the temples and the Brahman priests were seen as wielding significant economic and political authority on account of the control of large agricultural tracts and other means of production. The temple complexes as such were not merely sacred centres but also spaces of social conglomeration, education, festivals, etcetera. One of the most profound denunciations of this ideological approach has been the application of the European feudal model in the Indian context.6 An alternate model suggests the emergence of temples in early medieval India as a corollary to two simultaneous processes: the formation of a decentralised state structure and the social restructuring creating the need for ideological legitimisation amongst the new ruling families such as the Rajputs.7 These new rulers started to seek legitimisation through economic patronage to Brahmans and investment in

4

Introduction

temples, mathas and viharas by the means of land grants. The shift of power to regional rulers led to assimilation of new religions and cultural motifs such as those which have often been perceived as Tantric and esoteric within Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain rituals. Parallel with the bhakti tradition its emphasis on deity-devotee-preceptor relationship also came to be incorporated within the folds of the Brahmanical religion. While the local cults and deities were incorporated into the Brahmanical pantheon as avataras of Shiva, Vishnu and the Devi, the process found textual legitimisation through the corpus of the Puranas and the Upapuranas. This wave of Brahmanisation has been discussed as a period of Hindu resurgence and a consequent decline of Buddhism.8 The period is marked by social accommodation and religious assimilation, with no linear transition from Buddhism to Hinduism but a shared religious milieu. The key to understanding this assimilation is through two simultaneous processes: First, the elaboration of the Hindu pantheon through redactions of the Epics and the fabrication of new mythologies through the Puranas. A second instrument was the emergence of Tantricism as a powerful religious energy which, through the process of textual reformulations, invented rites for the absorption of folk cults and the modification of Buddhism and Shaivism in the contemporary religious milieu.9 The Tantric and esoteric religious practices which are supposed to have caused the degeneration of Buddhism actually led to a reinvention of Mahayana Buddhism in its Vajrayana form, a phenomenon which I will raise towards the end of the book. On the ground level this process of religious accommodation and social integration had a direct bearing on the religious arts and architecture.10 Not only do we see a proliferation of shrines from about the eighth to ninth centuries, a tabulation of my sculptural data also reveals a substantial increase in the corpus of available religious sculptures. The temple grew to be a pre-eminent institution and liberal donations led to the expansion in its size and ornamentations. The elaborate temple complexes with their accessory buildings and enclosures that developed “were like replicas of palace complexes and contemporary inscriptions proudly mention tall temples rivalling mountain peaks.”11 The bhakti tradition and a need to incorporate the expanded pantheon also came to be accommodated in the architectural scheme of the temples. What is most striking in the shrines of South Bihar from this period is the sharing of sacred space where Buddhist and Hindu deities and rituals came to co-exist within the same sacred enclosure, a development which I will elaborate upon in Chapter 3. At the same time the growth or regional kingdoms led to regional schools of

Introduction

5

art each interpreting the temple according to their social functions, climatic and geographic needs and the availability of building materials in the area. More importantly the icons and temples from the region became increasingly stylised and show adherence to Shilpa Shastras; though systematised and perfected, the art of temple building inhibited the emergence of new forms and reflected the mechanical repetition of motifs. A second major theme running through the course of my book concerns the colonial attitudes towards religion and religious architecture in India and how this religious past was appropriated and presented by the official machinery. The late nineteenth century is the starting point of my investigation when religious sites in India start to be surveyed, explored and documented with the larger purpose of re-discovering the history of Buddhism in its pristine homeland and the sites associated with the life of the historical Buddha. Once the religious sculptures and structures started getting “discovered” and listed, questions emerged: what are the nomenclatures given to these icons? What are the descriptions of their physical attributes, and what are the Western reactions to these? What is the colonial take on icons in relation to the built structures? Do Hindu images such as the Uma Mahesvara interest them or is it just the sites and the surviving monuments which are central to their project? By using the memoirs and records of surveyors and explorers, I map the sacred sites of South Bihar and a documentation of its archaeological remains. There are multiple strands of the colonial discourse through which a particular religious identity for the region was being created, and these will emerge in the different chapters of my book. The first step towards this was the beginning of colonial archaeology in South Bihar in the late nineteenth century, initially through antiquarian explorations and in the second half of the century with the formal establishment of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). The ASI came to play a crucial role in our present understanding of Indian archaeology, archaeological sites and monuments; ASI’s work entailed a shift from a textual depiction of India’s past to an archaeological one, which I will touch upon in the first two chapters. Upinder Singh has discussed the archaeological policies of the colonial government during this period as a direct corollary of their political engagements in India and how these policies reflect the European and more so the British attitudes towards Indian religions and religious architecture.12 Singh has also discussed how the personal motivations of British officers and individual personalities such as Alexander Cunningham shaped the government’s engagement with Indian religions and religious sites.

6

Introduction

She traces his transformation from an official surveyor and amateur archaeologist to the Director General of the newly constituted ASI and how his “obsession with the Chinese accounts” of Buddhist pilgrimage sites shaped the policies of the ASI. By tracing the process of discovery of religious sites, shrines and religious sculptures from South Bihar, I apply the themes developed by Singh in a specific regional context to test the development of a particular discourse and the creation of permanent identities. A significant issue raised by Singh that I develop in this book is how colonial archaeologists and their policies completely overlooked India’s history of living religions and rituals, removed the sacred icons to museums and transformed shrines into monuments without taking into consideration the viewpoint of the natives whose history was being discovered. The association of religious shrines with one period and one community was a strategy through which sacred spaces came to be defined as monotheistic and hence became sites of contestation. What happened to the sites, monuments and artefacts once they were discovered during surveys and explorations? The focus of my research shifts to the establishment of the earliest museums in South Bihar and how in this process sacred sculptures were relocated from temples to museums and private collections within and outside India to lose their original identity and context. Moving to the twentieth century, I examine the transformation in archaeological policies as re-envisioned by Lord Curzon and John Marshall that ushered in an era of restoration, conservation and the founding of museums. The museum space, systems of display and cataloguing and the narratives created around the collections was yet another strategy which shaped the colonial discourse. Tapati Guha-Thakurta in her comprehensive volume has focussed on the study of archaeology, art history and museums in India by presenting two polar narratives the colonial and the national and how each of these influenced the way in which we now view Indian arts, aesthetics and archaeology.13 She has discussed how the past was redefined by a political rhetoric, intellectual scholarship, historical monuments and objects became sites of controversy. She thus traces the biographies of sites and monuments to explore the trajectories in which their histories have been presented and how monuments and objects came to represent India’s past. Continuing on this theme, in Chapter 2 of this volume, ‘Making of Museum’, I discuss the two earliest museums in South Bihar, the Patna Museum and the Nalanda Museum. I highlight how various interpretative strategies were used in early colonial museums to create a certain history of South Bihar, including, for example, the idea

Introduction

7

of a glorious Buddhist past positioned against decadent Brahmanical practices, the cyclical nature of art with the Mauryas, the Guptas and the Palas being the apogee and how a hype was created around Bodh Gaya and Nalanda along with the so-called other Buddhist sites in India such as Sanchi, Amravati and Bharhut. In this context, I examine the role of early museums as store houses of specimens of art, and how the museums, as custodians of this art, shaped the discourse on art and iconography, thus highlighting how an institutional apparatus was used to create knowledge of Bihar’s past. Another layer of the colonial discourse which I touch upon is the process of knowledge creation. I examine how archaeology and museums along with other scientific disciplines such as cartography, ethnography and surveys were used by the British to gather information on the region. Peter Gottschalk has argued how religion became the underlying factor which the British believed “represented the fundamental quality of every Indian” and on which the native population was categorised during revenue surveys and census and on maps.14 Every survey hence aimed to unravel the religious fabric and gain more information about it. He cites instances of travellers, surveyors, missionaries, military officers and administrators who travelled through Bihar and how each of them viewed the land and its people through the prism of religion and left a record of the same. He demonstrates such social and religious classifications introduced by the British government to stamp Indian life in administrative records and these are used to the present day. The colonial devise of using religion as a system of classification exaggerated differences in India; Hinduism and Islam became segregated categories with no scope of interaction between the two. I trace this process of survey and mapping in Bihar as a means of knowledge production of the land and the application of European and more particularly Christian theologies to characterise Indian realities. For instance, James Rennell’s first map of Bihar on the one hand marked religious sites as Buddhist, Hindu and Islamic thus attaching permanent identities to them; on the other by defining the borders of sacred precincts areas of worship and habitation came to be seen as separate units unlike ground realties. Similarly I argue how Francis Buchanan’s survey of the region compiled a rich corpus of data on the land but reveals British prejudices and unfamiliarity with the Indian landscape. Most importantly an understanding of the colonial discourse on the region in the eighteenth and the nineteenth century under the garb of knowledge production is significant as it constructed certain stereotypes which set the parameters within which successive generations of

8

Introduction

historians and archaeologists have worked. I argue that the “power of knowledge” and how this knowledge was tailored through interpretations created a permanent history and identity for the region. The British historians and archaeologists in India were operating within a colonial parameter where Indian culture was seen as degenerate and inferior and hence a pretext to be colonised. Through the surveys, archaeological explorations, mapping, etcetera, knowledge of this ancient land was being generated which would be used to educate the natives who were supposedly ignorant of their past, their “original” religious practices and the symbols of this past. In this context Janice Leoshko’s work Sacred Traces focuses on the historical archaeology of Bodh Gaya and how colonial interventions at the site distorted its character and religious landscape.15 The British focused on highlighting aspects which were “original” to Indian religions, anything which emerged later was seen as negative, decadent and hence a pretext for foreign rule.16 The biggest flaw with this viewpoint is that the concept of “difference” obliterates the importance of continuity; transformations are ignored and any innovation is seen as moving away from the true religion. The biographies of shrines and religious icons that I will sketch will trace the long-term usage of sites and motifs thus bringing out the incumbent change, and how this change is a part of historical processes. Change does not necessarily mean degeneration as portrayed by colonial archaeologist and historians but also signifies a revival and reinvention. By studying the evolution of the Uma Mahesvara motif over the course of seven centuries or more, and its changing architectural placement I will be able to bring out the accompanying modifications in religious idiom, ritual praxis, configuration of shrines and other sacred landmarks as well as periods of assimilation (or animosity) with other traditions. At the same time by freezing the architectural and ritual purpose of shrines at the moment of creation, as evident in the conservation efforts of the British archaeologist once again the concept of change was being erased to preserve the colonial version of a pristine Buddhist past. The third aspect of my study questions the idea of sacred space: what defines a space as sacred, does the site have some intrinsic powers or geographical features which makes it sacred; how do different groups of people associate themselves with the site, can the same sacred space be reused over time; what are the different man-made structures which demarcate this sacred space; how are sacred icons configured to define this sacred space? One of the earliest definitions of sacred space comes from Mircea Eliade for whom a sacred space is

Introduction

9

a site of individual and collective effort to exercise a ritual sensibility.17 Eliade described sacred space in terms of rituals and traditions and the space which is occupied to perform these becomes sacred. Moreover, for Eliade this sacred space is the axle between the heavens above and the underworlds below such that the same space remains sacred and reused by different groups of people over time. Ever since Eliade, sacred space has come to be variously defined in academic discourse. For instance, Stella Kramrisch defined sacred space in terms of monuments and structures: a selected space becomes sacred by demarcating it architecturally through the means of monuments. The monuments in turn become the concrete manifestation of sacred space which is encapsulated within the garbha griha by the walls and the icons placed within and outside.18 Michael Meister has similarly looked at sacred space in terms of structures: icons, altars and enclosures which make the space sacred and provide the defined and controlled atmosphere for the worshipper to experience the divine.19 R Champakalakshmi in her work on Hindu temples has defined sacred space through the temple and its multiple facets such as architecture, sculpture, iconography, rituals and institutional organisations.20 She further discusses how the temple integrates a sacred landscape through rituals, festivals and pilgrimage that create a network of smaller shrines. There are several drawbacks with the present definition of sacred space and its demarcation based on shrines, altars and icons somewhat endorses the colonial perspective. In the context of Asian religions ritual performance very often extends beyond the built structure of the shrines to include aspects of geographical landscape such as hills, trees and tanks connected to the main shrine and to each other through ritual networks. Hence defining sacred space within the temple walls limits this possibility of examining the complex web of relationships in which the shrine is integrated. Moreover there are several instances from my micro-region which I will discuss subsequently, where the same sacred space came to be reused by several communities of people over time. I will hence be considering spaces as defined by multiple layers of faith and rituals encapsulated within large architectural complexes. These complexes include many sacred sites; the temple, stupa, samadhis, dargahs, idgah, tanks, icons, trees, etcetera and the sites are reinvented through rituals, circumambulation, pilgrimage, fairs and festivals and mostly through cultural memory. Based on the study of pilgrimage networks at Vijayanagara, John M Fritz and George Michell21 constructed sacred space through ritual movement which links the different sacred spots together and form a sacred landscape. Similarly James Preston has taken into consideration

10

Introduction

a range of temples and religious structures to understand sacred space and believes that these shrines are embedded in a series of ritual nexus.22 He believes that an idea of sacred space can emerge by reading the interaction between the different layers of shrines and religious institutions connected by economic and social ties. HP Ray in her study of shrines in Asia has similarly argued that the religious identity of a sacred centre is not restricted to one or another religion but instead have multiple affiliations. The sites also communicate with a host of audiences such as the lay worshipper, the ritual specialist, the royalty and the elite as well as the artisan and the sculptor. Ray suggests viewing shrines as ritual instruments that integrate individuals and communities and are placed within cultures and societies which sustain them.23 My methodological approach is hence based on the premise that the identity and context of sacred spaces and religious icons are made and remade through their encounters with varied audience, who bring with them diverse ways of seeing and acting. There is no fixed or prescribed way of looking, placing or even worshipping since icons enter into a host of complex ritual, personal, material and spiritual relationships with the human devotees who worship them. By tracing a cultural biography of Uma Mahesvara icons from South Bihar and the temples in which they were enshrined I will examine their changing relationship with the audiences and communities that created and used them and periods of assimilation when sacred motifs and symbols of different faiths were integrated in the same sacred space. Sacred space hence comes to be shared by different communities, their rituals and their monuments thus bring in a multiplicity of voices which can be reused to interpret the past. By focusing on a micro region I will moreover try to understand how a series of shrines would have been tied together by ritual networks. A new interpretative framework is required for sites with multiple religious traditions where colonial modes of enquiry of establishing chronologies and aesthetics are no longer valid.24 My perception of religious images as timeless beings is inspired by Richard Davis’ remarkable work Lives of Indian Images where he has constructed the biographies of various Indian images by exhuming and examining their past lives as they have been relocated and re-identified over time by various communities of audience.25 Davis considers the viewing of images as art objects in museums as “problematic,” artificial and as limiting their meaning and identity. He takes the Hindu theological postulate of religious images as animate beings who acquire new identities as per demands of audience and locational setting.26 By looking at these identities as “culturally constructed” and

Introduction

11

“endowed with culturally specific meanings,” Davis also emphasises on “a community of response,” which implies the plurality of ways in which viewers approach and encounter a visual object.27 Monica Juneja in her work has similarly been able to trace the biographies of monuments from medieval India and as sites of prolonged usage she has argued that these appropriated structures acquired new meanings since they participated in the everyday lives of different communities in new ways.28 She understands architectural complexes as harmonising the old and the new religious systems by creatively appropriating older religious spaces, sculptures and architectural fragments to create new edifices which were vested with new meanings. She believes that such an approach would “help in historicising the polarities between iconoclasm and assimilation and so sensitise us to the dangers of burdening pre modern pasts with contemporary concerns and meanings.”29 Taking the cue from Juneja I will hence use a new lens to look at early medieval Indian structures where the iconographic and visual programmes will be understood as “traditions of representation and the evolution, borrowing and reworking of forms, motifs and symbols.”30 Working within this framework my study of religious sculptures will suggest a shift in scholarly attention towards the circumstances – religious, cultural, political and economic – within which the identities of icons are repeatedly constructed and reconstructed. At the core of my study is the physical movement of sculptures to new locations which adds new meanings to its usage and identity: as a museum piece, an object of worship in a sanctum or as wall ornamentation. Each shift also brings with it new modes of interaction with the audience and hence new parameters to viewing it. My study moreover overcomes the chronological divide between the ancient, the medieval and the modern where religious sculptures become timeless, their identities fluid and by tracing their continuous life I am able to trace patterns of change in ideology, co-existence of varied religious traditions and ritual flexibility.

Outline of the book With this premise, the book will provide a new approach towards the study of sacred sculptures by contextualising them in terms of their original architectural placement and ritual purpose to examine how a change in the location of the icon changes its identity. The book is organised into two sections, the first unravels the colonial period overlay and reconfiguration of sacred spaces which underscore the complex relationship between the icon and religious architecture.

12

Introduction

The first chapter begins in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century with colonial survey and documentation of sites of South Bihar and how through colonial modes of enquiry and documentation, religious sites and sacred iconography in the region acquired certain identities, meanings and nomenclatures. The chapter examines the beginnings of archaeological explorations as colonial officials undertook travels, made collections and established personal and private museums. The temple sites were consequently reorganised in the name of conservation and religious sculptures were dislocated. The chapter concludes with the formulation of a colonial discourse on the region: how colonial prejudices, methodologies and interpretations have tainted present understanding of religious sites, images and their histories. In this process of rediscovery while some images continued to be worshipped, a large number of these were moved into museums to lose their sacred identity and be viewed as art objects. The second chapter moves the scene of action to the newly established museums in Bihar in the early twentieth century, a shift in focus of the ASI from excavation to documentation of sites, structures and artefacts and to the official policies towards preservation and conservation of sites. The newly constituted museums, first at Patna and Nalanda through their narratives of display, cataloguing and nomenclature, presented a visual archive which codified the parameters within which religious images were to be viewed thus shaping the study of iconography. In Part II, I travel back in time to study a specific religious icon, the Uma Mahesvara in the regional context of South Bihar. The third chapter is the bridge between the first and the second parts of the book which will take the readers back in time to trace the making of the sacred landscape of South Bihar from the emergence of the earliest rock-cut shrines, to single-celled-built shrines and eventually to large multi-religious architectural complexes. In this process my primary focus is to examine how sculptures were integrated into the core rituals and philosophical structuring of the temples by investigating their original architectural and ritual contexts. By understanding the ritual narratives of sites I show how shrines underwent several spates of rebuilding and reorganisation accompanied by the introduction of specific iconographic programmes thus the purpose behind the making of icons in such large numbers. In this context I discuss the architectural and ritual placement of Uma Mahesvara icons and how they became characteristic of Shaiva temples in the region. A cartographic delineation of shrines and icons reveal a series of sacred landforms

Introduction

13

from Rohtas to Bhagalpur all along the southern bank of the Ganga, thus construing a sacred geography. I compare the temple plans, their expansion and reorganisation from the field to textual prescriptions by bringing in recommendation from the Mayamatam; a Shilpa Shastra dated from the contemporary period from South India, to establish pan-Indian patterns. Rather than studying the shrines as archaeological sites, I suggest ways of relooking by taking into purview the current human settlements around them, patterns of ritual praxis and the shifting iconographic programmes. In the second chapter of this second section I will focus on the Uma Mahesvara form specifically, where I discuss the different perspectives of looking at religious icons and elaborate upon the characteristics of Uma Mahesvara images from South Bihar in particular. The chapter collates primary date on the sculptures which I have collected through field work and from various museum collections. On tabulation, I have been able to draw out patterns of evolution of the motif, highlighting regional and chronological continuity and variation. I attempt to answer questions as to the purpose of making this particular image type in such large numbers, the changing meaning of religious sculptures because of a change in its physical placement, and the historical context of the images. The chapter also examines a handful of metal Uma Mahesvaramurti from the region and contextualise these in their positions as utsavamurti used during temple festivals and processions, issues of patronage and the problem of approaching sculptural hordes. The history of sacred sites of South Bihar is usually seen to have come to an abrupt end around the twelfth and thirteenth centuries with the arrival of the ‘invading’ armies of Bakhtiyar Khilji and other Muslim generals who ‘destroyed’ the monasteries at Nalanda, Oddantpuri and Vikramsila, looted the vaults of many magnificent temples and desecrated the enshrined sculptures. In the last chapter of the book I attempt to recreate an alternate history for this region and argue how the same sacred space came to be shared by different religious groups. I discuss patterns of rebuilding and reconfiguration of the sacred landscape to meet the challenges of the contemporary period and to incorporate the needs of Islam. I also attempt to trace how unlike the picture painted in the contemporary texts, Buddhism was not ‘destroyed’ but adapted itself as per the needs of the time and survived in its newer manifestations such as its close overlap with Shaivism in the region. I present various case studies of how various sacred icons have been appropriated and enshrined with brand new identities by newer communities of people keeping in mind the spiritual crisis of the period. Finally I discuss how this shifting identity of sites, shrines

14

Introduction

and sculptures has tinctured the way we look at the religious identity of Bihar and its cultural heritage.

Sifting the sources To trace the plurality of voices and multiplicity of occupation of religious sites I also relied upon a variety of sources. Religious sculptures form the main source of historical investigation and are studied without being compared to textual prescriptions as is the general norm. My sculptural data comprises nearly 150 Uma Mahesvara icons in stone and ashta dhatu, while some of these are in situ and still in worship, there are others distributed in museums and private collections all over the world. Extensive field work across South Bihar – visiting sites, temples and physically viewing the sculptures – helped me visualise them more holistically. Once again sacred images changed their connotation and became the object of study of a researcher. A large corpus of my sculptural data has been gathered from the various temples and archaeological sites and a second bulk of data has been gathered from museums including reserve collections and original catalogues. These include the National Museum, New Delhi; Patna Museum; Killa House Museum / Jalan Museum Collection, Patna; Nalanda Site Museum; Nav Nalanda Mahavihara; Nardah Collection, Nawadah; Bodh Gaya Site Museum; Mahant’s Collection at Bodh Gaya and the Gaya Museum. For images located in museums outside India I have relied on photo archives and museum catalogues available online. I have also used digital archives of the American Institute of Indian Studies (www. indiastudies.org/art-archeology/photo-archive/) and the Huntington Archive (www.huntingtonarchive.osu.edu/). Photographs of Uma Mahesvara images published in various secondary texts have also been taken into purview. For writings on the colonial period I have made use of the Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India, Site Reports also published by the ASI, Indian Archaeology a Review and various travelogues and archival materials such as the journals of James Rennell, travel diaries of Francis Hamilton Buchanan, Alexander Cunningham’s monographs on Nalanda and Gaya, RL Mitra’s work on Bodh Gaya as also unpublished official papers, reports, notes and correspondences stored in the Bihar State Archives, Patna. For a more panIndian picture on the placement of religious images I have brought in a Shilpa text called Mayamatam dated between the ninth and twelfth centuries and believed to have originated in Tamil Nadu. For my lack

Introduction

15

of knowledge of Tamil, I have used the English translation of the text by Bruno Dagens (2000). For ease of reading I have not used diacritical marks in the text unless I am quoting a person or text. A list of Sanskrit and Hindi words used has been included in the book for reference. I hope that my multi-disciplinary approach, taking into account a variety of textual and archaeological sources as well as ethnographic data will throw a fresh perspective to approaching sacred images and archaeological sites in the region as well as the processes behind the making of a particular heritage for the state of Bihar.

Notes 1 Diwakar Acharya (transl.), The Little Clay Cart, by Sudraka, New York University Press, 2009. 2 ‘LACMA Does an About-face on Art Sale,’ Los Angeles Times, LA California, 17 March 2007, http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/17/ entertainment/et-lacma17 accessed on 28 April, 2017. For more on this case see Stephen Markel, ‘The Disputed Uma Maheshvara in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art: A Case Study in Reattribution and Reinterpretation,’ Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 58, 2008, pp. 87–111. 3 Ibid. 4 I define the area as ‘South Bihar.’ This is not to be confused with the present-day state of Jharkhand. ‘South Bihar’ is the area south of the Ganga covering the current districts of Patna, Jehanabad, Nalanda, Rohtas, Aurangabad, Nawadah, Gaya, Sheikhpura, Munger and Bhagalpur. 5 KM Panikkar in Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya (ed.), Studying Early India: Archaeology, Text and Historical Issues, Permanent Black, New Delhi, Third Impression, 2011, p. 156. 6 Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya, ‘Historical Context of Early Medieval Temple of North India,’ in BD Chattopadhyaya (ed.), Studying Early India: Archaeology, Text and Historical Issues, Permanent Black, New Delhi, Third Impression, 2011, pp. 153–171. 7 Brajadulal Chattopadhyaya, ‘State and Economy in North India: Fourth Century to Twelfth Century,’ in BD Chattopadhyaya (ed.), Studying Early India: Archaeology, Text and Historical Issues, Permanent Black, New Delhi, Third Impression, 2011, pp. 233–262. 8 Ram Sharan Sharma, ‘Material Milieu of Tantricism,’ in Ram Sharan Sharma and Vivekanand Jha (eds.), Indian Society: Historical Probings, In Memory of DD Kosambi, People’s Publishing House, New Delhi, 1974, pp. 175–189 and NN Bhattacharya, History of Tantric Religion, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1982. 9 Vijay Nath, Purāṇas and Acculturation: A Historico Anthropological Perspective, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2001. 10 Devangana Desai, ‘Social Dimensions of Art in Early India,’ Presidential Address for Indian History Congress, 50th Session, Gorakhpur University, 1989. 11 Ibid.

16

Introduction

12 Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India: Early Archaeologists and the Beginnings of Archaeology, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2004. 13 Tapati Guha-Thakurta, Monuments, Objects, Histories: Institutions of Art in Colonial and Post-Colonial India, Columbia University Press, 2004. 14 Peter Gottschalk, Religion, Science and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India, Oxford University Press, New York, 2013. 15 Janice Leoshko, Sacred Traces: The British Explorations of Buddhism in South Asia, Ashgate, UK, 2003. 16 Leoshko picks up the case of the British initiatives into Buddhist archaeology and iconography which ascribed certain notions of what was original, what was important, what was degenerate and most importantly chartered out a sacred Buddhist geography. She brings out the essentials of the British approach that defined the broad outlines of the place of Buddhism in India’s past and how eastern Indian art was made to fit into this perspective. Leoshko is “not concerned with those in the 19th century involved in discovering and defining the Buddhist traditions of South Asia but the results of their actions.” She emphasises upon the effects of past actions and how the concerns of these individuals further shaped perceptions already held about the Indian past. Ibid., p. 8. 17 Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion, Harcourt Brace, New York, 1959. 18 Stella Kramrisch, ‘Space in Indian Cosmogony and Architecture,’ in Kapila Vatsyayana (ed.), Concepts of Space: Ancient and Modern, IGNCA, New Delhi, 1991, pp. 101–104. 19 ‘Hindu temples are built to shelter images that focus worship, they also shelter the worshipper and provide space for a controlled ritual,’ Michael W Meister, ‘The Hindu Temple: Axis of Access,’ in Kapila Vatsyayana (ed.), Concepts of Space: Ancient and Modern, IGNCA, New Delhi, 1991, pp. 269–280. 20 R Champakalakshmi, The Hindu Temple, Roli Books, New Delhi, India, 2001. 21 John M Fritz and George Michell, ‘Space and Meaning at Vijayanagara,’ in Kapila Vatsyayana (ed.), Concepts of Space: Ancient and Modern, IGNCA, New Delhi, 1991, pp. 197–208. 22 James Preston, ‘Sacred Centers and Symbolic Networks in India,’ in S Mahapatra (ed.), The Realm of the Sacred, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1992. 23 HP Ray (ed.), Sacred Landscapes in Asia: Sacred Traditions, Multiple Identities, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2007. 24 Geri H Malandra, ‘The Creation of a Past for Ajanta and Ellora,’ in Catherine B Asher and Thomas R Metcalf (ed.), Perceptions of South Asia’s Visual Past, Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, 1994, p. 67. 25 Richard H Davis, Lives of Indian Images, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. 26 For many centuries, most Hindus have taken for granted that the religious images that they place in temples and home shrines for the purposes of worship are alive. They believe these as visual and symbolic representations of particular deities and come to be infused with the presence or life or power of those deities.

Introduction

17

27 Ibid. 28 Monica Juneja, Architecture in Medieval India: Forms, Contexts, Histories, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2001. 29 Juneja believes that this appropriation and assimilation was happening everywhere that Islam went. But in other regions of the Islamic world, especially those possessing a tradition of community prayer, the destruction of extant buildings in order to construct a mosque was generally avoided, for basilica, churches and synagogues all had large hall-like central spaces designed to accommodate large numbers of believers. With minimal adjustments these buildings could serve the needs of an Islamic mosque. Rows of columns, courtyards, arch and dome from the appropriated buildings could easily be used in mosques. In the Indian context, the antithetical forms of worship in Hinduism and Islam: “the one personal, introspective and anthropomorphic, the other non-figural inspired by the idea of community, brotherhood and surrender to an abstract truth,” accounted for the distinct form of religious structures whose spaces could not be easily harmonised. Hence there was a necessity of dismantling space designed to accommodate a congregation of worshippers. Ibid., p. 76. 30 Ibid., p. 40.

Part I

The making of museum collections

1

Creating identities

Science has had her adventurers, and philanthropy her achievements; the shores of India have been invaded by a race of students with no rapacity but for lettered relics; by naturalists, whose cruelty extends not to one human inhabitant; by philosophers, ambitious only for the extirpation of error, and the diffusion of truth. It remains for the artist to claim his part in these guiltless spoliation, and to transport to Europe the picturesque beauties of these favoured regions.1

Thomas and William Daniell paint a picture of the eighteenth-century India as a land of plenty, inundated with European intellectuals, travellers, artists and adventures each of whom wanted to carry a relic of this exotic land for audiences back home. The English East India Company, by now the masters of North India, undertook a massive intellectual campaign “to transform a land of incomprehensible spectacle into an empire of knowledge.”2 The campaign was dependent on geographers, anthropologists and surveyors who mapped the landscapes, studied the inhabitants, collected geological and botanical specimens and recorded details of economy, society and culture. Like elsewhere in India the British government appointed surveyors and officers to survey, document, identify and list the historical sites of Bihar. These surveys mapped the ancient sites in the region, gave details of archaeological remains and most importantly assigned nomenclatures, thus creating identities. The disciplines of archaeology and art history in India were eventually born out of this tide of survey and documentation.3 The surveys aimed to establish India as divided into numerous petty kingdoms. “It was also meant to show that Brahmanism, instead of being an unchanged and unchangeable religion which had subsisted for ages, was of comparatively modern origin, and had been constantly

22

The making of museum collections

receiving additions and alterations; facts which prove that the establishment of the Christian religion in India must ultimately succeed.”4 Individual initiatives as well as those undertaken by the official departments had, amongst other motives the objective of recovering and interpreting the true, pristine past of the nation. “Shared also was the agenda for historicising the colonised within colonial constructs and arriving at comparative linear histories of Indian architecture through meticulous documentation, classification, description, and analysis of empirical evidence.”5 A look at the eighteenth and nineteenth century European writing on Indian history, art and archaeology often reveals the colonial biases visible beneath the veneer of scholarship. The nineteenth century became an age of unprecedented archaeological discovery and documentation, sponsored by the colonial government. Numerous sites were discovered, explored and some excavated. Countless ancient antiquities and monuments were described, drawn and photographed. The identification of a large number of place names mentioned in Indian, Chinese and Greek texts created the basis of ancient Indian historical geography.6 Simultaneously there was a growing threat to the sites: by road and rail construction, brick robbery, takeover by secular structures, treasure hunters and, more so, amateur archaeologists themselves. Antiquities and architectural elements were dislocated from their original location, to later become items in private collections or objects of display in museums in India and abroad. It is crucial to understand this “creation of a past” to view its interconnectedness and permeation into present-day studies. The various explorations by European travellers, artists and scholars contributed to influence the works of British archaeologists. Much of these travelogues and writings are accepted as major archaeological documents to date. The “interconnectedness” thus highlights how these perceptions have shaped the archaeological reports and in the long run influenced the understanding of Indian art and architecture. The chapter thus engages with the formulation of the colonial discourse and traces the “rediscovery” of the “ancient past.” A picture of a “conveniently ruined” past of India was presented to provide a validation to the colonial government to protect, recover and restore.7 Through this chapter I endeavour to provide the different strands of narratives which together weave a picture of decay and corruption in religion, ritual praxis and philosophy hence legitimising colonial rule. I draw out personalities who contributed to this discourse through a particular branch of academic expertise such as cartography, surveying, archaeology and ethnography. There are two parallel processes

Creating identities

23

which I attempt to chronicle: first, to trace the efforts of the British travellers and surveyors at exploring and identifying the sacred landscape; listing sculptural remains, shrines and other ritual objects. This would indicate the character of the sacred sites and relics at the end of the eighteenth century, before the beginning of any archaeological intervention. The second process I record is as to what happened at the sites, the artefacts and the monuments during these decades of their discovery and exploration. The various surveys were meant to provide the colonial government with a historical, economic and social understanding of India which would ease their administration. At the end, however, the surveys, each with different focus and objective eventually added layers to defining and reshaping the religious identity of South Bihar.

James Rennell: drawing a picture of the land (1742–1830) The earliest physical conception of the territories and sites of Bihar probably emerge from the survey and mapping of the region by James Rennell in the middle of the eighteenth century. James Rennell became a midshipman at the age of 14 and received training in surveying in the Royal Navy. In 1763 he joined the English East India Company. Rennell was later appointed Surveyor General of the East India Company’s Dominions in Bengal, with a commission in the Bengal Engineers, on 9 April 1764. Rennell’s survey of Bengal commenced in the autumn of the same year. He first surveyed the mouth of the Ganga in Bengal, carefully fixing the points along its course and subsequently extended his survey to cover the region up to Bhutan. In this pursuit he found much support from Robert Clive who “communicated to him all the materials that could be found in the public offices, furnished him with a proper establishment and gave him all the assistance in his power.”8 Starting from 1767 for the next one decade he carried out the first comprehensive geographical survey of India. He published a magisterial wall map of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa in 1776. Rennell’s work is the earliest accurate general map of the region and is considered to be one of the finest technical achievements of cartography made during the eighteenth century. He further extended his survey to map the Mogul Empire and traced the course of the Ganga as far as Delhi thus also completing the first comprehensive map of India.9 His Bengal Atlas was published as a one volume folio in November 1779, containing twenty-one maps and plans, and the second edition appeared

24

The making of museum collections

in 1781. It was accompanied by a Memoirs containing a full account of the intellectual framework on which the map was executed.10 In 1782 his large Map of Hindoostan was published which covered most of the Indian peninsula above the Deccan. Rennell returned to England in 1782 where he continued to write and publish works on geography and history and became an expert in the mapping and study of ocean currents. He continually updated his maps for accuracy and added new geographical information, using indigenous maps and drawings as sources. His cartographic methods included gleaning information from earlier maps, measuring distances along roads, establishing the coordinates of control points, and then creating a graticule or grid to create his maps.11 Rennell’s maps were of such accuracy and quality that they were used well into the nineteenth century. In methodology, planning and execution, Rennell somewhat followed the strategy of the French cartographer D’Anville; “to collect all the information that was accessible to him, to discuss all the details with the greatest care, bringing all the acumen of a thoroughly logical mind to bear on the decision of each doubtful point, and to give reasons for his decisions, and a full account of his authorities in the memoir.”12 The basic data was garnered by him and his nine assistants in a course of 500 elaborate surveys for Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. In addition, he used the Persian map of Sir R Baker for names of places, which were translated to him by assistants. He also studied the routes of the several invaders to India and of the Mughal armies. Rennell in his survey followed the division of the region into subahs originally devised by Akbar for revenue purposes. “In the division of Hindoostan into subahs I have followed the mode adopted by Emperor Acbar, as it appears to me to be the most permanent one: for the ideas of the boundaries are not only impressed on the minds of the natives by tradition, but are also ascertained in the AYIN ACBAREE; a register of the highest authority.”13 As per Rennell, Akbar divided his empire into eleven subahs, listed by him as “Lahore, Moultan, Agimere, Delhi, Agra, Oude, Allahabd, Bahar, Bengal, Malwa and Guzerat,”14 some of these “were in extent equal to large European kingdoms.”15 The subhas were further divided into circars and pargannas. Apart from convenience, the decision to divide the map into Akbar’s subhas seems to have had a political logic behind it. Akbar’s reign was exactly contemporaneous with that of our great Queen, overlapping it for a few years at the beginning and at the end. It was highest period of the greatest prosperity and highest civilization for Muhamaddan India; and the divisions for the

Creating identities

25

administrative purposes so well described by Akbar’s famous minister, Abul Fazl, are of the greatest historical interest.”16 Rennell defined the boundaries of Hindoostan, “which the Europeans have traditionally regarded as lying between the rivers Indus and the Ganga with the mountains of Tibet to the north, thereby leaving out the Deccan and South India which were not considered a part of Hindoostan.”17 In Section II of his Memoirs he describes this survey as covering an area about 900 miles long by 360 to 240 wide, from the eastern confines of Bengal to Agra, and from the feet of the Himalayas to Calpee. “The measured distances are said to have accorded minutely with observations for latitude and closely with those for longitude.”18 The region is shown divided into subhas, each distinguished in full original wash colours. The map carries detailed labelling of villages, a vast network of roads running throughout the region, innumerable river systems, swamps and mountain ranges. The top right hand corner of Rennell’s Map of Hindoostan carries a rather interesting cartouche. It shows Britannia receiving in her protection the sacred books of the Hindoos presented to her by the pundits or learned Brahmans.19 The mind-set behind this prejudice is confirmed when one reads the Introduction to his Memoirs: The accounts of 22 centuries ago, represent the Indians as people who stood very high in point of civilization: but to judge from their ancient monuments, they had not carried the imitative arts to anything like the degree of perfection attained by the Greeks and Romans, or even by the Egyptians.20 Bihar emerges in Rennell’s Memoirs while discussing the course of the Ganga. He surveyed the region between the years 1763 and 1777. He records that the East India Company was “in full sovereignty, of the whole soubah of Bengal and the greatest part of Bahar.”21 There were however “several purgunnahs on the south-west of little Nagpour, that were formerly classed as belonging to Bahar, but are now in the possession of the Mahrattas.”22 This is the region towards the Deccan plateau, south of Chota Nagpur in South Bihar which had disintegrated from the Mughal Empire after its downfall. Rennell has nothing much to comment about the religions of North India. He points out that The principal monuments of Hindoo superstition are found in the peninsula. Some have concluded from this, and from other

26

The making of museum collections circumstances, that the original feat of the Hindoo religion, was there. Others, perhaps with more appearance of probability, suppose it to have originated on the banks of the Ganges. Monuments of superstition, apparently anterior to the Hindoo, exist in the caves of Salsette and Elephants, two islands on the western coast of India: these consist of apartments of extensive dimensions, excavated from live rock, and decorated with figures and columns.23

It is apparent that he based his conclusion on the basis of monumental remains such as temples and caves which survived in the South but had probably not yet been “discovered” in the Ganga Valley. He gives a detailed description of the city of Patna: Patna is the chief city of Bahar, and is a very extensive and populous city, built along the southern bank of the Ganges, about 400 miles from Calcutta, and 500 from the mouth of the river. Having been often the seat of war, it is fortified in the Indian manner with a wall and a small citadel. It is a place of very considerable trade. Most of the saltpeter imported by the East India Company is manufactured within the province of Bahar. It is a very ancient city; and probably its modern name may be derived from Pataliputra, or Patelpoot-her; which we have supposed above to be the ancient Palibothra.24 Rennell published his wall “Map of Bengal, Bahar, Oudes and Allahabad with parts of Agra and Delhi exhibiting the course of the Ganges from Hurdwar to the sea,” in 1786. The Memoirs explains that the area under possession of the East India Company is shown on the map in red.25 Territories which were British allies were shown in yellow as the map depicts the kingdom of Oudh under Azuph Dowlah.26 The map gives details of roads, forts and military outposts. It also depicts the details of geographical topography: showing mountain ranges, hilly terrains, river systems, tributaries, delta and doab. Another fine cartouche appears on the top right hand corner of the map, depicting a river god surrounded by rich foliage, a leopard, an alligator and a bison. Four native figures also appear in the map including a pundit and a royal lady. On looking closely, the provinces to the South of the Ganga are Rohtas, Shawabad, Bahar and Monghir; the area of the present study. The map marks important battle sites with dates such as 1764 at Buxar which was a watershed for territorial occupation by the East

Creating identities

27

India Company. The map also indicates the Tropic of Cancer running through South Bihar. Created immediately following the Battle of Plassey, the map filled the need for the survey and delineation of the territory under the East India Company and was of both military and administrative importance. As Clement Markham has pointed out, “Rennell’s survey of Bengal was the first, and it is very creditable to British administration that it should have been commenced within six years of the Battle of Plassey and the acquisition of the country.”27 Rennell records in the Preface of his Memoirs, “As almost every particular relating to Hindoostan is become an object of popular curiosity, it can hardly be deemed superfluous to lay before the public an improved system of its geography.”28 The primary function of Rennell’s efforts at survey and map making was to demarcate the area occupied by the East India Company once it had secured a stronghold in North India. Rennell himself wrote: Now that we are engaged either in wars, alliances, or negotiations, with all the principal powers of India, and have displayed the British standard from one end of it to the other, a map of Hindoostan, such as will explain the circumstances of our political connections and the marches of our armies, cannot but be highly interesting to every person whose imagination has been struck by splendor of our victories, or whose attention is roused by the present critical state of our affairs in the quarter of the globe.29 Largely echoing Rennell, Mathew Edney writes, “Imperialism and mapmaking intersect in the most basic manner. Both are fundamentally concerned with territory and knowledge. To govern territories, one must know them.”30 Rennell’s maps hence quantified and “geographically, socially, administratively, and mathematically” situated the borders of Hindoostan in the imagination of the people.31 Peter Robb agrees that while the British at this point concentrated on defending the frontiers “a thorough survey of roads in the province of Behar . . . with all possible dispatch and accuracy was thought of great importance to our security to obtain a perfect knowledge of the routes.”32 Warren Hastings, the then Governor General had intended for the maps to form the basis of his administrative and revenue reforms. The survey created knowledge of districts, its geographical terrain, accessibility and resources, to facilitate administration. Rennell’s surveys paved the way for the East India Company’s mastery over Bengal; the survey and mapping rationalised land ownership and defined

28

The making of museum collections

boundaries so as to facilitate tax collection.33 Maps were also meant to aid military strategy. Tactical considerations built into the maps are obvious: forts are labelled and important cities, towns, garrisons and battlefields dot the maps. At first glance this appears to be a decorative device but after careful examination it seems clear that the illustrations are strategic for the planning of assaults. The maps were also then sent back to England and formed the basis for Robert Orme’s (1728–1801) study titled ‘History of the Military Transactions of the British Nation in Hindoostan from 1745,’ which highlighted the military achievements of the English in India and was published in 1763 in three volumes.34 Thus one aspect of Rennell’s work was the delineation of the Company’s territories in India in order to publicise, back in England, the gains that were being made in the subcontinent. The selection of elements for mapping and their measurements helped establish a new image of the land.35 Rennell’s maps were the first to collate data from all the earlier European and native survey and documentation carried out in India. With this compendium of knowledge, he was able to provide a comprehensive historical, economic and social understanding of India, rather than highlighting specific features. The cartographic delineation of territories had a larger cultural rhetoric: to add to the knowledge bank of the colonial rulers detailed information of their colony. James Rennell’s mapping of the Empire can be seen as the starting point. The long-term impact of official mapping was that it fixed places and defined borders for perpetuity. Villages, place names, boundaries and characters of communities were registered on scientific and objective principles hence giving them a monochromatic and unchanging character. Mapping moreover placed social units as points on a grid of latitude and longitude hence ‘fixing’ what would have once been abstract. The native rulers had some knowledge of the diversity of geographical location and political spaces, fluidity of sacred geography, myths of origins and attachment to villages. Defining such borders for social units on the basis of administrative convenience brought an end to diversity and uniqueness. The “new” places formed on the map were distinct and limited as political and geographical units defined on the basis of a perceived overarching character. The attempt to map India, motivated by a desire to create a knowledge pool to ease administration, compartmentalised into scientific categories people, places, resources, the physical landscape, religious, caste and other geographical parameters without any scope of interaction between any of these units. Each of these was measured with

Creating identities

29

the same methods and with the same instruments, so that the surveys would be consistent in quality and content. “This would further ensure that all parts of the region were mapped together, without any inefficient duplication or unrealized omissions.”36 Geography and epistemological sciences hence took over culture by creating a uniform archive of knowledge. This had a direct impact on the way religious categories and religious sites were perceived. Each religion was given a unique symbol on the map to represent a temple, a mosque or a dargah. A sacred site could hence be shown on the map as belonging to only one religion. Cultural constituents were “preserved” on the map as static; religious fluidity and the multivocality of sites were submerged. Religion as a category was central to British representations of India and religious establishments were mapped both for administrative convenience and revenue extraction. “This suggests that just as the presumed physical boundaries of the village defined it as an economic and legal entity, so its temples and mosques characterized its social quality.”37 This brought about a clear-cut demarcation between borders of a Buddhist, Hindu or Muslim shrine. Religious sites could not be cohabited in the British mind. Another result of mapping and cartography was to define boundaries around temples and other religious architecture. The sacred and the secular units were contained within imaginary dotted lines. This ended up alienating the communities living around temples whose support was crucial for its maintenance. Living traditions and ritual praxis within the sacred space was limited, leading to abandonment of shrines and their consequent decay. This also brought about the movement of icons. When shrines came to be defined as purely Buddhist or seen as converted into a mosque, any lose architectural fragments or icons were shifted to other locations. The British made themselves the intellectual masters of the Indian landscape and geography took over culture by creating a single archive of knowledge.38 It would be apt to summarise in Edward Said’s words that Europe’s comprehensive observation and codification of the nonEuropean world was done “in so thorough and detailed a manner as to leave no item untouched, no culture unstudied, no people or land unclaimed.”39 The military and economic triumph of the English East India Company also resulted in a cultural conquest. The British knowledge of the Indian landscape found immediate reaction in Europe. Once landmarks were marked, routes were traced and connectivity was established on paper the subcontinent saw a continuous traffic of European travellers and artists.

30

The making of museum collections

Francis Hamilton-Buchanan: travel diaries of Bihar (1762–1829) Detailed textual descriptions of South Bihar first appear in the journals of Francis Buchanan (who later assumed the title of Hamilton). Francis Buchanan was a Scotsman trained as a surgeon and joined the Bengal medical services.40 In 1800, Buchanan was commissioned by Governor General Wellesley to conduct a survey of Mysore. The Court of Directors later appointed Buchanan to also undertake the statistical survey of the Bengal Presidency. The travelogues of Buchanan meticulously record exploration of over 100 sites in the districts of Bhagalpur, Patna, Gaya and Shahabad between 1810 and 1813 and mark the beginning of systematic documentation and listing of historical sites and archaeological remains in Bihar.41 Buchanan was not conversant with Indian history; antiquarian enquiry was just one of the subjects he had to cover during the course of his travelling.42 Yet he appears to have visited almost every site falling on his route, where he would rigorously examine the ruins and enquire with the local people about popular culture. Buchanan did a variety of things in the course of this survey: he compiled details of the occupational background of the inhabitants of various places, measured the temperatures of hot springs, collected botanical and geological specimens, measured distances and made detailed maps of the areas he traversed and described the antiquities he saw and the sites he visited.43 The survey lasted seven years, and Buchanan submitted his report in 1816.44 The statistical reports of Buchanan provide a description of sites as they existed at the time of the surveys, long before they were visited and described by archaeologists. To accompany his report, Buchanan often had drawings made of sacred images which he found unusual, site maps and floor plans of buildings a number of which were included in Montegomery Martin’s publication.45 Buchanan was one of the first to recognise the importance of detailed plans and measurements of monuments and sites. He was also the first to identify the importance of significantly large sites in Bihar such as Gaya, Rajgir and Bargaon (Nalanda). Buchanan’s travelogues are remarkable at a time when he had practically no works of reference to assist him in identifying the antiquities of South Bihar, such as the travels of the Chinese pilgrims which provided an abstract map to later archaeologists.46 Notwithstanding the absence of maps, the distances recorded in his journal are set quite accurate. His usual methodology was to tour extensively in the cold weather during which he and his assistants collected information. He

Creating identities

31

then spent the following hot weather and rainy seasons compiling and completing his reports having established his headquarters in or near a town in the district concerned. Buchanan’s first journal is of the Bhagalpur district, dated from 1810–1811 and emphasises more on the natural habitat, outlining details of flora, soil type, varieties of rock, flow and bends of small and large rivers and descriptions of hot springs even recording the temperature of the water. In these earliest reports Buchanan engages little with the cultural elements and observations on religion and mythology are rare. In contrast it is evident that during his tour of the districts of Patna and Gaya, Buchanan came across antiquities considerably more extensive than those he had seen in Bhagalpur. He recognised the antiquity of the region and his description of the sites may be regarded as the special feature of the Patna-Gaya report. In this later report he gives detailed accounts of myths, legends and religious traditions which he came across during his interaction with the people in the region. In his Bhagalpur journal, Buchanan makes passing reference of the temples in the region, limiting himself to merely listing the main deity enshrined in these. When he visited Kahalgaon in the Bhagalpur district which is a significant site for early shrines, he writes The larger hill of Pathurghat named Kaseli or Modiram, bears north by east. On this is the brick temple of Durga Saha, a Sakti with an image . . . Badeswar bears east by south. On the hill is a Siva Linga and at the bottom is a temple of his sister Rajil Devi.47 A similar trend is seen on his visit to the Mandar Hills, Bhagalpur district. This monolithic hillock is dotted with several early shrines and even finds Puranic references. He mentions the image of a female figure called “Papahurni,” “image of Modasudnath,” Antikanath temple in which “is the image of a quadruped standing, the granite is meant to represent a cow.”48 It is however the geological character of this granite hill and the mineral deposits there which capture Buchanan’s attention. “The rock is granite of moderate sized grains of reddish white feldspar, glassy quartz and a little mica.”49 He merely lists the different temples found on the hill and makes passing reference to the architectural fragments lying around. “The whole way from the Math to the tank I observed stones lying by the road. They are squared, many of them part of mouldings, or coloumns, or of images, all extremely rude.”50 By reading these descriptions one gets a general picture of the sanctity of the two hillocks and the fact they are both cluttered with early

32

The making of museum collections

shrines. Buchanan is also able to reflect upon contemporary religious and cultural practices. From Mandar he writes about the Madhusudan temple (an avatara of Krishna), “Near it are several ruins and ruinous buildings, on which there is an inscription in Devanagri, is still in use, the image of Modasudnath being brought to it on the Jatra, and there is a small Rath for the purpose.”51 His descriptions regarding religious sites and sculptures get far more detailed in the case of Patna-Gaya journal dated to 1811–1812. The journals go into several pages of descriptions of temple plans, the enshrined images, ornamentation, inscriptions, state of preservation and also whether the temple was still in active worship or not. Buchanan in fact appeared quite impressed with Gaya, “I went to visit some of the most remarkable places in Gaya.” In the case of the Vishnupad complex in Gaya, which consists of a series of shrines interlinked through the shraadh rites, Buchanan goes into details of even the smallest shrine present in the complex: its history, mythological significance, enshrined image and dynamics in the shraadh rite.52 At Bodh Gaya he had observed the Bakraur mound and quoted local people to suggest that it was related to the Buddha. Buchanan observed a small hill composed of brick and covered in earth. Local memory remembered a complete temple, to have existed at the site, round and solid and dedicated to the Mahamuni. He also got information of archaeological significance where he was informed by the local people that one Mr Bodem dug the mound looting the bricks and in the process found a stone chest containing bones and images. Boddham also uprooted a stone pillar from the mound and reinstalled it in Sahibgunj.53 Buchanan remarks that around the central temple there must have been other smaller temples since several heaps of brick still survived at the site. He was also informed that an image of Bhairav had been found at the site but he was unable to see this image.54 It is interesting to note that popular memory had an understanding of Buddhism as a religion with the Buddha as being Gautama Muni and a Bhagwan. Legends associated the site as the place where Gautam Muni along with other Munis came to perform austerities and one of the other Munis died and was buried there.55 He also writes about meeting the Mahant and his “chelas”. He comments that in the Mahant’s compound the buildings have all been “erected at very different times, each Mahant having made various additions so that there is no uniformity or symmetry of parts.”56 Buchanan was able to see the collection of images at the Mahant’s compound, “The materials have been taken from the ruins, and the Mahants have been at particular pain to have rescued the image although all Nastik,

Creating identities

33

and to have placed them where they might be saved from injury.”57 He visited all the shrines of the Mahabodhi complex: “a building called Rajasthan or palace of Dharma Asoka” who resided in this “palace” and built the “Temple of Buddh 5000 years ago.”58 He was told that the Rajputs were the priests of the temple. Of the Mahabodhi temple Buchanan is able to give a fair dimension and reports that “it seems to have been composed of various courts now mostly reduced to irregular heaps of brick and stones, as immense quantities of materials have been taken away.”59 He reports the temple of “Bageswori” and Tara Devi, the images of both having been dug out and in worship. He visited the “Buddh Pada” and “round it are heaped many images and inscriptions.”60 He also commented that “the number of these small temples scattered all over the neighbourhood (of Mahabodhi temple) for miles is exceedingly great.”61 Interestingly when Buchanan visited the site some workmen were “already working and making excavations.”62 Buchanan records that “The Mondir is rapidly hastening to decay” hence a repair was undertaken by a Maratah chief recently.”63 He remarked that “Some of the images are best in style that I have seen in India.”64 When Buchanan first spotted the ruins of Bargaon, Nalanda he immediately drew parallels with Bodh Gaya, which he had visited earlier. He found a number of Buddhist images which reminded him of those at Bodh Gaya. He refers to the conical heaps of brick towards the South of Bargaon, rightly suspecting them to be the remnants of temples. He observed several neighbouring houses constructed from the bricks from the ruins. As in the case of Bodh Gaya, he reported seeing several heaps of images at Bargaon and many of these having been used in modern temples. He reflected upon contemporary religious practices and records the annual fair which took place around the Suraj Pokhra. At Rajgir, he goes into great detail in describing the numerous shrines, their icons and their mythologies. He was told that the remains of the fort there belonged to Sher Shah. He, however, disagreed and through his surveys ascertained that the remains were far older. He interacted with the local people to collect as much information on the history of the site. For instance, he narrates the “story of Senok family from Hustinapuri and says that they know nothing of the Buddh.”65 He continues with detailed descriptions of temple shrines in his Shahabad journal as well. At Deo Barunark (in erstwhile Shahabad district, now Aurangabad), Buchanan describes in detail the location of a temple in the village “Deo Barun Aruk,” a “Sakadwip Brahman who is Pujari,” a curious column which is “quadrangular at the base and

34

The making of museum collections

capital and octagonal in the centre and a good deal ornamented,” the presence of a nat mandir, a series of temples in the complex dedicated to different deities of the Puranic pantheon, an image “which is called the Sun but resembles Vasudeva and has no horse.”66 The same is the case from Deo Markandeya, another significant temple site in Aurangabad district. He described the “ruin which has been a small mandir with a nat mandir, both built of brick and placed on an elevated terrace of no great size, also constructed of brick.”67 He reports an entire complex of temples here with “three or four lingas,” Ganesha and two Gadadhar, and that all the shrines had fallen and the roofs gone missing. The multi-religious character of sites of South Bihar also finds frequent reference in all of Buchanan’s journals. At Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur, he lists engraved images of “Vishnu riding on the bird guror, Rama, Sita, Hanuman and a vast number of attendants and partisans of the sect of Vaishnav.” At the same site he reports an “idgayi built of brick and as usual ruinous.”68 At Sultanganj, Bhagalpur, Buchanan visits the Fakir’s Rock, a small granite island jutting out in the Ganga and agrees that the name of the island suggests its association with a Muslim saint. He, however, reports the inhabitation of the island by a Shaiva Mahant and his chelas who had a matha there. The face of the rock as he describes was carved with figures of all sects. “I observed Porusram, Narayon and Lakshmi, Anonta, Krishna and Rada, Narsinga, Ganes, Hanuman, Siv and many others beside one of Jain.” He also mentions a small building dedicated to the “Jain tirthankara Porusnath” located on this island. On the mainland across this island he saw a similar relief of many lingas carved on the rock face while on top of the hill he reports seeing a mosque and tombs of saints.69 At the same time local legends prevalent at Sultanganj informed Buchanan about the ritual connection of this island with the shrine of Baidyanath (dedicated to Shiva), located in the same district. At Bodh Gaya he observed a similar trend and mentions the Pancha Pandava images, “five sons of Pandu, who are claimed by all sects.”70 Similarly at Rajgir in the area of Surajkund he mentions “located here is Dorga of Surufuddin Behari, built where the great saint passed much time in prayer. Area has a hot spring and ancient monuments. The Hindus are still permitted to bathe in the place and have a small temple of Siva in the side of the pool.”71 At Bargaon, Buchanan mentions seeing a Buddha image being worshipped as “Bathuk Bhairava” a form of Shiva. He also records the existence of several Jain, Hindu and Buddhist images at the same site.

Creating identities

35

He similarly describes in considerable detail the ruins of a temple complex at Dapthu in Gaya district.72 He mentions a series of five temples, dedicated to various deities and sects: temple of Parashwanath, temple of Kanhaiya and temple of Goddess Jagdamba, all coexisting in the same complex. He also mentions a Pir’s Dargah at the site a little north of the temples. As per Buchanan, the site indicated considerable evidence of temple renovation and re-use of images: Both this door and the stonework of the outer temple seem to be of much greater antiquity than the brickwork, which has probably been renewed several times, but there is no appearance of the image or the plan of the building having undergone any alteration.73 Buchanan also found several Buddhist images amongst Hindu ones or within a Hindu temple and he clearly points this out. At a temple of Narasimha, Buchanan mentions a Shiva linga in a small apartment. The door of this shrine was, however, made of fine grained black stone, much ornamented with four Buddhas on the lintel.74 At Ongari in Gaya, Buchanan mentions a Buddha image being worshipped as “Surjo” or Surya.75 Similarly at Pali, Gaya he observed three heaps of bricks all of which were supposed to have been temples of Shiva. On the summit of the mound is a granite temple. On one end of this is carved a Buddh, the top of this is carved into a Linga; but this obscene object of worship is evidently placed upon it after it had become a heap.”76 This intermingling of faiths and re-use of sacred sites is probably best reflected at the Vishnupad complex in Gaya. Buchanan reflects that the Vishnupad represent various deities of the Hindu theogony, but these are common to all the sects of the Hindus and some sects of Buddh admit to their worship although others reject this practice but these images merely seem intended as ornaments and as such would have been admitted even by Gautama. In fact, by far the greater part of these images although evidently representing personages now worshipped by the Orthodox are said by the skilful to be represented with emblems which clearly show them to have been work of heterodox. It is alleged that the Buddhs took these from previous orthodox buildings and placed them in their new temples

36

The making of museum collections associated them with others of their own heterodox invention . . . there are evidently two periods of buildings.77

This assimilation and accommodation of religious images in sacred structures was accompanied by the re-use of architectural fragments. At Bihar Sharif Buchanan visited a mosque where pillars from a Hindu temple and Buddhist sculptures had been re-used in a “Muhammedan place of worship.”78 At Bodh Gaya Buchanan writes that much of the images from the Mahabodhi complex have been taken away. “It is even alleged by the Rajput convert that all the images now worshipped at Gaya were originally in this temple as ornaments, and have had new names given to them by the Brahmans and suited for their present beliefs.”79 The re-consecration of images at new sites and structures was often accompanied by a change in their identity. Buchanan noticed this at the Kund area in Rajgir: “I observed five or six of such as is called Vasudeva, but from the enormous distention of the ears these are admitted to belong to the sect of the Buddhists.” More interesting are his observations from Kesba or modern Kispa in Gaya: A celebrated image of Tara Devi in a small square temple built recently on a heap of bricks and stone, evidently ruins of former buildings. The image is of a full human size and is standing with a small figure on each side, but the body is entirely covered with a piece of cloth so that it entirely resembles a Hindustani waiting maid. Buchanan suggests this to be a Boddhisatva figure.80 Same is the case at Deo Markandeya from where he reports that a Gadadhar image was worshipped as Surya.81 This process of re-use of images and architectural fragments was not always a peaceful one. At Kharagpur in Bhagalpur district Buchanan mentions the conversion of Hindu temples into “Islamic areas.”82 Buchanan at several sites also encounters mutilated images. Buchanan seemed to have had a fair idea of the contemporary religion. At Koch in Gaya, he writes “Among them are many of Surja, Vishnu, Devi, Ganesha, Hurgauri, Krishna and Rada etc. and two remarkable groups one representing the avatars of Vishnu among which Buddh is omitted and Rada put in to supply its place.”83 Yet Buchanan does not seem to have overcome his western biases. He very often mentions the worship of the lingas as rather crude and indecent. For instance, at Vishnupad, Gaya he writes: “At the south side of the temple (VishnuPad) is Sworga Dewari and on it are several Lingas, one of which is exceedingly indecent.”84 At Sultanganj, Bhagalpur he

Creating identities

37

mentions that even though it is a Shiva temple “none of the carvings are indecent.”85 Buchanan during his tours through Bhagalpur, Patna, Gaya and Shahabad frequently comes across Uma Mahesvara images and calls them Hara Gauri or Gauri Sangkor. He comments that the Hara Gauri image is a very common image in the Gaya region86 and gives the following description of the Uma Mahesvara sculpture. “In this temple which is very small and probably not 100 years old are two small images, one of Ganesa the other of a sitting male with a female on his knee, such as is usually called Hargauri.”87 In some instances he mentions the bull and the lion being present, and at times also a human face or a child/devotee. At the South East corner of the terrace is a small chamber the roof of which has fallen but several images have been placed on it. One resembles Gauri Sangkar but a child is seated at the feet of the female while a bull as usual attends the male.88 Buchanan mentions the Uma Mahesvara image mostly in the context of Shaiva temples and in these he mentions the linga as the principle image of worship. He frequently comes across Uma Mahesvara sculptures lined up in the temple precincts along with other Hindu and Buddhist images. For instance, in the Kund area in Rajgir, he writes, “I observed two of the goddess sitting on a lion couchant, which my people had never before seen; also two of Gauri Sankar and three Lingas.”89 Similarly he reports these images from the Shiva temple at Deo Markandya, About 100 yards north from this temple is another small and more entire building of brick which contains an immense liṅga with a large humanlike but ugly face carved on one side. The ears are very large. This is called Gauri Sankar. Another large square building without a roof and said to be modern. It contains an image called Devi but which represents a male with four arms with a two-armed female seated on his knee as usual in Behar.90 There are three instances where he comes across images of Uma Mahesvara enshrined as the principal deity of the shrine. Both these shrines are mentioned from Rajgir. I ascended the hill to see antiquities. Crossing the Panchanan at the upper end of the great heap, I ascended a very steep precipe to

38

The making of museum collections the small temple called Gauri Sankor, which is situated at the bottom of an immense rock, on the bottom of which is the monument called the Baitaki of Jarasandha.91

The third reference comes from Dapthu, Gaya district, where he mentions seeing a Uma Mahesvara enshrined in the main shrine but the shrine itself was ruined. There are several instances where he confuses the Uma Mahesvara as images of Krishna and Radha,92 and also as Rama and Sita.93 At Ongari, Gaya he saw several images lined up, mostly of Vasudeva as also several mutilated images including one Gauri Sankar. He also found, “in an abode of serpent Nāgasthan three pretty entire Gauri Sankar.” He describes these images as of “A man sitting with a female on each knee. A bull, but no lion beneath. It is called Gauri Sankar but in there being two females and in wanting the bull, it is entirely different nor have I seen it elsewhere.”94 Clearly these were not Uma Mahesvara images. One particular Uma Mahesvara image which has been frequently mentioned by almost all travellers is found at Bodh Gaya under a pipal tree, north of the Mahabodhi temple. “On the pedestal of one of the images representing what the orthodox call Hargauri’ the messengers of Ava engraved their names and the date of their arrival.”95 At one instance, at Prit Sila in Gaya, Buchanan mentions seeing a Uma Mahesvara image in a temple dedicated to Brahma, Near the rock and covered with dirt was lying a small image carved on stone, which represented Gauri on the knee of Sankar in the usual manner but was called Preth Bhawani. The other object of worship in the temple is a mark on the rock supposed to have been made by Brahma.96 Another interesting Uma Mahesvara is mentioned from Deo Barunark, “Another similar shrine is placed near the porch of the great Mandir. The image of this seems to be a Gauri Sangkar and is worshipped at marriages but the Pujari gives it no name.”97 The other sites where Buchanan reports seeing Uma Mahesvara images are Deo Barunark where he mentions three Uma Mahesvara images,98 Tilautta,99 Gurwat,100 Nagarjuni,101 Narawat102 and Kispa all in the Gaya district and at Surajkunda Rajgir.103 The material collected by Buchanan in the course of his surveys is full of archaeological and historical possibilities; but this potential has not been utilised. He was in fact one of the few surveyors who

Creating identities

39

was successful in corroborating local narratives against historical chronology and was hence able to give a more comprehensive picture. Unlike his contemporaries he was also less judgmental of Indian ways and customs. Buchanan documents about a hundred sites in the five districts of Bihar, providing significant clues for later explorers like Markham Kittoe and Alexander Cunningham; his rigorous explorations can be matched only by Cunningham’s archaeological tours. In many ways, “Buchanan’s work fed both official and popular appetites for information on the subcontinent at a time when neither had much to rely upon, and did so with the authority of one who had observed all ‘on the spot’.”104

AM Broadley: the making of a collection (1847–1916) AM Broadley was the District Magistrate of Bihar Sharif in the 1860s and is another noteworthy explorer of Bihar during the latter half of the nineteenth century. Broadley has drawn flak from archaeological quarters for his unscientific excavation of the Temple site 3 of Nalanda. From the rich haul of sculptures and other antiquities which he collected during official tours and his explorations he established a museum at Bihar Sharif in 1878 which was later transferred and kept at the Indian Museum under the Broadley Collection. Once the Patna Museum was established in 1913, a large part of this collection was also transferred there. Broadley like his contemporaries was on a mission to explore Buddhist sites and add to the existing knowledge of the life of the historical Buddha. During the course of his explorations he followed the writings of the Chinese travellers and tried to establish a one-to-one relationship between the Chinese travelogues and the archaeological landscape. He also had Buchanan’s memoirs as a reference map. At several sites he was able to examine the change in the historical landscape since the time Buchanan had visited. Broadley extensively quotes Buchanan who visited these sites in 1812 and saw several pieces in situ which Broadley saw dilapidated or ruined. Broadley during his tours covered the present-day districts of Patna, Nawadah, Nalanda, Bihar Sharif and parts of Gaya. The first site he listed was Nalanda as he believed that Nalanda and Rajgir were the two most important Buddhist sites.105 Based on his study of sites and the antiquities he unearthed, Broadley concluded that Rajgir and Dapthu were “most ancient” while Bargaon was relatively new.106 He explored and excavated several significant sites such as Apshad, Parbati Hill and Ongari in the Gaya district, Telhara, Biswak, Mubarakpur, Rajgir,

40

The making of museum collections

Chandimau, Ghosarawan, Soh Serai, Tetrawan, Nalanda and Giryek in the Nalanda district and Bihar Sharif. Broadley reports extensive remains from several sites. He gives detailed description of Bargaon. He probably visited Temple 12 of the Monastic Complex where he describes the ruins in great detail, and the site seems more intact than at the time Cunningham visited it a few decades later. He extensively describes high conical stupas around the several tanks located in Bargaon and identifies them as remains of temples.107 In 1871, Broadley began excavations on the main mound with one thousand labourers, and within ten days he laid bare the eastern, western and southern facades of the great temple and published a short note of the excavation.108 He similarly gives detailed descriptions of the ruins at Rajgir since he believed in the pre-eminence of the site to Buddhist religion based on its antiquity. He even carried out excavations at Rajgir and carried away sculptures to Bihar Sharif.109 Broadley, however, was not impressed by the sculptures found at Rajgir and commented that the carvings at Rajgir were inferior to those found from Bargaon.110 When Broadley visited Telhara in the Nalanda district he was taken in by the extensive remains at the site. He reports that “a large number of idols of brass and basalt (are) constantly found here.”111 He talks of it being a very significant site and suggests further explorations.112 He reflects “few places in India would yield treasures greater than Tillahrah mound and a shaft might be very well cut through it, without interfering with or disturbing the tombs on the surface.”113 Another significant site Broadley visited was Ghosrawan in the vicinity of Rajgir where he found a series of early temples.114 He first visited the temple of Singhabani (Singhvahini) where the main figure was of Durga with two Buddhist figures on each side. He also located a mound with sculptures and an inscription. His second significant find was a vihara located close to the mound where he reports a second temple with a standing Buddha figure. He further reports a temple dedicated to Mahisasuramardini and finally the temple of Asaji. Broadley gives a picture of the historic landscape from several other sites. At Biswak, Nalanda district he comes across a pile of Hindu and Buddhist figures.115 From Chandimau, in the same district he reports seeing many heaps of sculptures but no ruins. The plateau like top of the Parbati Hill in Patna district, he says was covered with temples and viharas. Some of the temple remains were almost 30 to 40 feet high and covered with Buddhist idols. At Tetrawan he reports remains of “a temple which contains 200 Buddhist sculptures” and also the remains of a vihara.116 Broadley’s intent on identifying all sculptures,

Creating identities

41

carvings and monuments as Buddhist seems evident as he writes, “I rarely found a single figure which I can confidently assert to be purely Hindu.”117 He makes significant discoveries at Mubarakpur, Patna district where he came across a collection of at least 40 sculptures both Hindu and Buddhist. What is interesting is that he notes that some sculptures were unfinished and labels it a sculptor’s studio.118 At Bihar Sharif which he calls Behar, Broadley is able to garner the antiquity of the site based on the Gupta pillar found within the Fort complex bearing an inscription. He reflects on the continuity of the site on the basis of a number of inscribed figures found there bearing names of Pala rajas of Bengal. He also reported seeing extensive ruins and heaps of brick and stone. In the midst of this rubbish, Buddhist carvings are daily turned up. I have seen as many as four chaityās dug out in half an hour. The carvings found here are chiefly chaityās, votive tablets and mouldings containing figures of the Buddha in different positions.119 He also found a figure of Padmapani which he claimed was been “calcined by fire.”120 He claimed the site as having Buddhist linkages since he “found very few Hindu figures” here.121 At Soh Serai in Nalanda district Broadley found the remains of a stupa and a monastery, and he mentions huge piles of bricks which give evidence of a flourishing religious centre. He notices a tree shrine under a pipal tree where villagers had collected fragments and mouldings.122 A portion of a Padmapani figure had gotten moulded in the roots of the tree which Broadley had to cut out before carrying the figure away. When Broadley visited Dapthu he reports seeing a series of temples but most were in a much decayed state. Many temples which Buchanan had seen at Dapthu had now disappeared and Broadley blamed it on the vagaries of season and climate.123 He makes a similar remark from Giriyek near Rajgir that the buildings had dilapidated since the time Buchanan had visit.124 Broadley at several instances mentions how religious images at various sites across the region had acquired new identities and were worshipped by villagers across faith. He noted that votive stupas were very often worshipped as lingas.125 At Rajgir he mentions that a Buddha image was worshipped as Beni Mahadev, a rupa of Shiva.126 At Tetrawan under a tree shrine a colossal seated Buddha was worshipped as Shri Bullum or Bhairau.127 Broadley also mentions that this platform

42

The making of museum collections

seemed to have been repaired several times which hinted that the shrine had been in existence for a long time. The simultaneous co-existence of icons and sculptures of different faiths within the same sacred space as a fairly common trend in the region also finds mention in Broadley’s writings. At Rajgir he records the existence of three Muhamaddan tombs at Jarasandh ki baithak which is generally associated with events of the Mahabharata. At Rajgir, he also mentions a Jain temple made of Buddhist remains.128 The Makhdum Kund at Rajgir, Broadley mentions, was held in veneration both by the Hindus and the Muslims.129 Similarly, he notes the reuse of architectural fragments from monuments of one faith by another. At the Behar fort, he reports that three kinds of remains existed: Muhamaddan remains, Hindu temples and remains of a vihara or college of Buddhist learning. He adds that the Muslim dargah was made of Buddhist monumental remains.130 He also noted beautiful carvings in the stone of the masjid and a basalt panel containing Hindu carvings of at least twenty deities. He also saw remains of granite and basalt pillars and carved doorways. “In the rainy season when rivulets run through the hill a mela is organized at the bottom of the hill attended by both Hindus and Muslims.”131 At Telhara too Broadley recorded a masjid made of the remains from a Buddhist temple. Broadley records Uma Mahesvara images from at least two different sites. The first instance is from Telhera where he noticed a black basalt Uma Mahesvara and he gives a detailed description of the image.132 He, however, identifies Uma as Durga seated on Shiva’s left thigh.133 From Tetrawan he reports that “The only Hindu figures I saw there were these of Siva and Durga, commonly called Gauri Shankar.”134 Broadley in his report also records vandalism and destruction of historical sites. At Behar, he records that the wedge-shaped bricks found there, such as those found at Nalanda and Rajgir, were robbed from the monuments and sold. “The larger ones (bricks) sell for as much as 2 pice a piece.”135 At Telhara in Nalanda district he reports that brass sculptures were melted and made into bangles.136 He also mentions how idols were removed because of Muhamaddan invasion and were buried in the open field to be discovered by a zamindar who placed these in his garden. The zamindar later offered the sculptures and carvings to Broadley. Amateur archaeologists and collectors like Broadley hence significantly altered the fate of hundreds of sculptures and antiquities from Bihar. At Behar, “I have removed the pillar from the place in which it lay, half buried in the ground, and set it up on a brick pedestal opposite

Creating identities

43

the Behar court house.”137 The Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India for the years 1930–34 mentions in context of the conservation work done for the Chaitya site number 12 at Nalanda, About 100 yards to the North of the Stupa Site No. 3 was a large mound concealing the remains of a structure which suffered heavily in the late seventies of the last century when a Sub Divisional Officer of Bihar carried out haphazard excavations at Nalanda and left the ruins to the ravages of the neighbouring villages and treasure seekers.138 Cunningham’s assistant, JD Beglar, who subsequently excavated Nalanda, also wrote about Broadley’s excavation, I cannot but feel that the excavation of this temple . . . was not a work which Mr Broadley should have taken without professional assistance. From a perusal of his account it is impossible to make out with any degree of certainty or even lucidity, the details of the temple which he had excavated or destroyed . . . his description is good enough for a popular account, and they are next to worthless for all scientific purposes and in the interest of true archaeology. I venture to enter a strong protest against acts which destroy such interesting ruins without preserving the detailed and minute measurements of what it thus destroyed.139

Alexander Cunningham: the beginning of the Archaeological Survey of India (1814–1893) The next significant stage in the history of archaeology of Bihar is marked by the arrival of Alexander Cunningham, when the religious sites of South Bihar became a focal point of the new studies and the fate of these sites were to a large extent shaped by Cunningham’s personal vision. Cunningham had the intensity of Buchanan in exploring sites and the added advantage of being able to contextualise and interpret the sites owing to his knowledge of Indology. He was a productive writer and his voluminous writings form an invaluable source of information.140 These give us insights into the tensions, debates and conflicts over archaeological goals and policies keeping in mind the larger aims of running a colonial empire. Cunningham’s earliest projects were concentrated on uncovering India’s Buddhist past and following the itineraries of the Chinese pilgrims Fa Xian and Xuan Zang, who visited North India in the fifth and

44

The making of museum collections

seventh centuries ce. Cunningham’s explorations were largely “text aided” aiming to establish the identity of sites mentioned by the Chinese pilgrims. “He selected for investigation only those areas or places visited by Fa-Hien and Hiuen-Tsang and described by them as having ancient remains.”141 Cunningham’s approach to the identification of ancient places was not restricted to matching accounts and descriptions. The deductions were to be tested on the field; the relationship between settlements and landscape was an important part of his method of survey and reporting; along with attempts at corroborating historical geography with physical landscape and ancient routes.142 His methodology moreover integrated data from a variety of sources, including literary, anthropological and archaeological. This is somewhat summed up in his statement “the discovery and publication of all existing remains of architecture and sculpture with coins and inscriptions, would throw more light on the ancient history of India, both public and domestic, than the printing of all the rubbish contained in the Puranas.”143 Perhaps he was suggesting a new route to India’s ancient past: an archaeological rather than a literary one. After several visits to Bihar during 1861–1881, he identified and explored about seventy-five sites, presenting the architectural features of the extant structures and describing the ruins accompanied by sketch plans. He evolved a style of careful reporting on sites; describing monuments; and measuring mounds, pillars, temples and sculptures. During the course of his exploration he discovered a number of settlements and sites which were not mentioned in literature; he hurried from one site to the next making his surveys quite haphazard. His search for Buddhist sites nevertheless led him to the recovery of a varied archaeological landscape, including the earliest Hindu temple dated to the “Gupta period”. Cunningham even resorted to frequent excavations in the course of his exploratory tours and indulged in what can be described as shaft archaeology, aimed at exposing stupas and collecting artefacts. His antiquarian interest and familiarity with Indology helped him decipher inscriptions, coins and other antiquities which he found; a large portion of which he pocketed for his personal collection. By the end of the nineteenth century we get a picture of rigorous archaeological activity across several sites of South Bihar involving discovery, identification and documentation. Archaeologists were plagued by two larger issues: First, should the focus of archaeological enterprise be contained to architectural description or should they embrace field archaeology? Second, where should the discovered antiquities be

Creating identities

45

deposited? I explore how the archeologists of the time addressed these questions by tracing the significant archaeological projects undertaken by Cunningham in South Bihar. The scope of Cunningham’s work in South Bihar can be outlined in two stages: (1) his initial focus on survey in the capacity as an official Archaeological Surveyor during 1861–1871; (2) his work carried out as Director General of Archaeological Survey of India in 1871. As Archaeological Surveyor: The history of sites of South Bihar remain at the centre of Cunningham’s reports and give a detailed picture of what important sites in the region were like in the second half of the nineteenth century. His field surveys help in the historical mapping of sites, identify several ancient routes, highlight the importance of topography in shaping history, discover manuscripts, document architectural and antiquarian remains, and record lifestyles and oral histories of people and places he visited.144 What remain conspicuously absent are details of sculptures – their styles, iconography and placement. Cunningham began his explorations in South Bihar with Gaya, where he described the caves at the Barabar and Nagarjuni Hills, citing evidence of their successive Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim occupation. His report for 1861–1862 contains some of the earliest descriptions of Bodh Gaya, and he dated the Mahabodhi Temple to 500 ce, as built by King Amara Simha. Moving east, he identified the Kukkutpada Vihara with Kurkihar, and traced the fortification wall of Rajgir, the ancient capital of ancient Magadha. He identified Bargaon with Nalanda on the basis of two inscriptions he found at the site and also the distance of the site from Giryek and Rajgir as provided by Fa Xian. He supplemented his description of Bargaon with a sketch of its ruins, and from the site of Telhara close by, he reported three mounds. In the course of his 1861–1862 explorations, Cunningham made a number of small excavations at Rajgir where he dug a shaft near the Maniyar Math, which led to the discovery of three small figurines. He mentions a Punjab sepoy with a servant making an excavation here at the same time. Excavating at a second spot at Rajgir, Cunningham unearthed the remains of a room, some steps, and a passage. At Bargaon, excavations made at several places revealed various structural remains such as stupas and walls of buildings. At Tetrawan, in the same district, he explored two stupas, one on each side of a colossal Buddha image. In Ghosrawan, Nalanda, by collecting scattered pillar bases at the site and working out their alignment on the sketch plan, Cunningham projected the floor area and the height of the vihara there.

46

The making of museum collections

At the end of four seasons’ work between 1861 and 1865, Cunningham had made good progress and had located twenty-five sites in the Gaya-Nalanda-Rajgir area alone.145 He had also effectively utilised epigraphic and numismatic evidence towards the reconstruction of a desired political history. By 1848, Alexander Cunningham began petitioning the government to establish an official archaeological survey.146 In 1861 the then Governor-General Lord Canning finally established the Archaeological Survey of India with Cunningham as its first Director General. As Director General, ASI: Cunningham held the post of the Director General of the newly constituted Archaeological Survey of India from 1871 to 1885. During his tenure as the Director General he extended his archaeological explorations over a number of “Buddhist sites”, conducting excavations and publishing papers on his finds, including four books. Once he assumed the post of Director General his survey work in Bihar was carried further by his assistants: JD Beglar, ACL Carlleyle and HBW Garrick. Cunningham issued a Memorandum of Instructions to his assistants in which he gave a detailed and systematic exposition of his understanding of the scope of archaeological inquiry which now serves as an important document reflecting upon the agenda of the first Director General of the ASI. He wrote in the Memorandum that “archaeology is not only concerned with broken sculptures, old buildings and mound of ruin” and elaborated that the study of architecture was an important part of archaeological exercise which extended to all ancient remains that helped illustrate the manners and customs of ancient times.147 A field report should include detailed information on the following things: the various names of the place along with origin; the date of its foundation, either historical or traditional or both; the extent of the settlement; a description of the main buildings, whether standing or in ruins; and the history and plan of principle buildings, with a section of at least one typical of each style. He directed particular attention to inscriptions including mason marks as a guide to the age of structures.148 Cunningham also included various features and details of contemporary village life within the scope of archaeological survey. He recommended noting down the details of caste affiliations of villagers as a way of understanding the larger issue of distribution of races.149 He also emphasised the significance of sculptural fragments collected under trees and worshipped in older villages. He directed his assistants to record even weights and measures prevalent in a particular area.150 Cunningham’s Memorandum, though comprehensive in scope, created certain stereotypes which continue to mar Indian archaeology to

Creating identities

47

present times. Cunningham classified the archaeological remains of India into four main categories: architecture, sculpture, coins and inscriptions, and all antiquities were fitted into these categories. The Memorandum did not include excavation since at this point the main aim of the survey was documentation and not excavation. As Director General of the ASI, Cunningham ventured into the architectural sphere and offered a chronological classification of ancient and medieval Indian styles of architecture. It was based on a classification into two periods – ‘Hindu’ (1000 bce to 1200 ce) and ‘Muhamaddan’ (1200 to 1750 ce) with no overlaps between the two.151 His nomenclature of the phases of the Hindu period displayed considerable emphasis on foreign influence. A direct reflection of the Memorandum can be seen in the scope of the work of the ASI across some of the significant religious sites of South Bihar, radically transforming their character and lay out on the pretext of conservation and restoration; ‘restoration’ itself being a European imposition on Indian archaeology. When Cunningham visited Bodh Gaya he listed the inscriptions found there and gave a detailed discussion of the temple, including a description of excavations carried out at the site by him and by Major Mead. On the age of the temple, he voiced disagreement with Rajendralal Mitra, who had dated the temple to about 200 bce, as well as with James Fergusson, who placed it as late as the fourteenth century. According to Cunningham, the temple that stood at Bodh Gaya was essentially the same that Xuan Zang had seen in the seventh century. He believed it had been subsequently repaired but not rebuilt. While clearing the area around the temple, he discovered a raised promenade outside the northern wall. Other important finds included the Vajrasana, coins and precious stones inside the temple.152 Between 1880 and 1884 Beglar was assigned to supervise restoration work at the Bodh Gaya temple. Apart from conducting survey work, the archaeological surveyors were supposed to play the role of professional advisers to local governments and administrations, offering advice on the preservation and repair of historical monuments. The work of repair was to be carried out by the Public Works Departments. Cunningham’s reports of Bodh Gaya from this period are filled with contempt for the Shaiva Mahant who was in charge of the Mahabodhi Temple at the end of the nineteenth century, by which time both the tree and the temple structure had deteriorated considerably. Cunningham further lamented about how Buddhist art of Bodh Gaya, which could originally be compared to that of Greece, had now degraded to be replaced by the “bestiality” and “obscenity” of Hindu sculptures. He also criticised the ignorance of the locals, who used the site’s stones

48

The making of museum collections

as building materials and in this way reiterated the colonial pretext of native apathy and hence a need for conservation. Once again the recurrent narratives of authenticity, origin, the true identity of a structure before Hindu take-over and the recovery of a primary moment of creation were harped upon. Despite this, few efforts were made to preserve the fabric of Bodh Gaya, for at this time the purview of archaeology was limited to collection of artefacts and “restoring” it to its original “Buddhist” character. The second site where Cunningham intervened was the ancient city of Rajgir. He was determined to settle the question of the identification of the Sattaparni cave, where the First Buddhist Council had been held after the Buddha’s death. He, however, wrongly reiterated his identification of the Son-Bhandar cave with the Sattaparni cave. The site of Sultanganj near Bhagalpur was perhaps one of the few sites which were systematically excavated by Cunningham. Here he identified and excavated a brick stupa, drew attention to a large number of stone seats or stools found at all ancient Buddhist sites and suggested that these may have functioned as primitive chairs for monks.153 He noted that they were currently being worshipped by local inhabitants as ‘Goreyas’ or spirits. Beglar identified ancient remains at Dharawat, north of the Barabar Hills, in Gaya district as Xuan Zang’s Gunamati monastery. Cunningham carried out excavations here to reveal walls and sculptures associated with a monastery. On the hill above the monastery he excavated a stupa which yielded a number of clay seals bearing Gupta characters. The discovery of a single punch-marked coin at the site was proof enough for Cunningham of its great antiquity.154 Cunningham visited several ancient Hindu brick temples in the then Gaya district at Deo Markandeya, Mahadeopur and Deo Barunark. He described Deo Markandeya village as being situated on a mound “which is thickly covered with broken bricks and pottery, the latter being chiefly glazed with a shining black.” This reference suggests it might be a Northern Black Polished Ware site. He described a very curious temple at Mahadeopur which was twelve-sided at the base and square at the top. At Deo Barunark, Cunningham found an inscription on one of the temple pillars and dated it to the latter half of the seventh century, suggesting that the temple itself was two or three centuries older. According to Cunningham, this was very important evidence as it proved the use of the arch in the fourth and fifth centuries prior to the coming in of Muslim builders.155 From Volume 3 of the Archaeological Survey Reports, there is regular material on inscriptions: lists, facsimiles, translations and discussions.

Creating identities

49

The report for 1871–1872 lists inscriptions found at Bodh Gaya, Gaya and other places. On the basis of evidence in inscriptions and medieval literary sources, Cunningham constructed a genealogy of the Pala kings of Bihar and Bengal, and a more ambitious genealogical lists relating to the history of Magadha from the Shishunagas to the Palas.156 Cunningham also recognised the importance of photographic documentation of sites and as the Director General of the Archaeological Survey India he emphasised towards this. The survey reports were accompanied by photographs, many of which were taken by Beglar. Cunningham himself was personally involved in the task of helping the government to acquire photographs and negatives from various individuals. It is easy to depreciate the work done by Cunningham: the over concentration upon Buddhist distributions and the frequent technical incompetence; yet his contributions cannot be negated.157 Under Cunningham, archaeology in India for the first time came to be adopted within the purview of a formal state structure. His research and methodology marked a break from the earlier notion of history writing which focused on tracing the geography of the Puranas and the Epics. In addition to the archaeology of Buddhism, he and his colleagues established other branches of archaeology such as numismatics and epigraphy. Cunningham succeeded in an extensive yet comprehensive cataloguing and documentation of archaeological data since he made personal visits to a large number of sites, which helped in unfolding the geography of ancient India around which a lot of subsequent research was carried. The greatest flaw with Cunningham’s methodology was the lack of conservation for standing monuments within their local surroundings. In a number of cases the structures were dismembered and removed from their location to be displayed in museums, to be permanently displaced from their original context. Trenches were often left open leading to denudation of the ancient remains. Sculptures, coins, artefacts and all that was portable was carried away as a relic for a personal collection or to museums in Calcutta or Britain.

Rewriting the past Through the above survey, I have attempted to highlight the different representative perspectives in the late eighteenth to early nineteenth century towards religious architecture and iconography for sites of South Bihar. Texts remained crucial to the study of religion and text based archaeology came in vogue. The main thrust was to discover the “Buddhist” sites and monuments as mentioned in textual traditions

50

The making of museum collections

and establish a history of Buddhism in India. The finding of monuments and antiquities relating to other faiths remained only incidental to the project. Sites, standing structures and sculptures came to be studied in terms of style, chronology and political patronage. In the pursuit to unravel the ‘original’, ‘pure’ variety of Buddhism the interconnectivity between the different chronological periods was lost and the focus remained on a certain “moment” in history without taking into account its logical connection with the other periods. Text based archaeological interventions altered the understanding of structures and icons as merely being abodes of gods and objects of artistic appreciation. Colonial understanding of religion followed a Christianised model that strongly emphasised theistic beliefs, exclusivity and a fundamental dualism between the human world and the transcendental world of the divine.158 It redefined the nature of Indic religions as devoid of social participation and ritual interaction between the deity and the devotee. The shrine became a monument, static and representative of the religious beliefs of the past; as such their participation in the living faith and traditions were side-lined. The sacred landscape of South Bihar underwent radical transformation altering not just the nature of the site but shifting its location from within religious networks to being fossils from the past and mirrors of an ancient civilization. In the pre-colonial period, religious architecture was an important indicator of the interaction with diverse groups of people: the ritual specialist, devotees, artists and patrons just to name a few. The sacred landscape dotted with a series of shrines formed a part of pilgrimage networks that provided connectivity and mobility both locally and within the region. The crucial element in the Asian landscape was the shrine and it is important to situate it in a social context and to unravel the multiple levels at which sacred sites interacted with a diverse range of communities and negotiated between these.159 In this project, to view history within pre-defined parameters, sacred sculptures were relegated to a position of being merely objects from the past. Sculptures came to be understood as illustrative of texts, viewed for their aesthetics and placed within cycles of artistic developments. Just as was the case with the shrines, there was an interest only in early sculptures for the later developments were seen as degenerate and corrupt. Even though inscriptions were seen as valuable evidence from the past, the sculptures on which inscriptions were sometimes placed remained in oblivion. Such studies projected a rather limited understanding of the past and also defined the trajectories for future scholarly research, much

Creating identities

51

of which persists even today. What happened to the sites, monuments and sculptures once they were ‘discovered’? What are the parameters within which religious sculptures are studied? Is it judicious to continue viewing the structures and sacred sites of Bihar as only belonging to one religion? Can the artistic and cultural feats of Bihar only be viewed through a Buddhist construct of the past? James Fergusson wrote: “from its very nature it is evident that sculpture can hardly be as important as architecture as an illustration of the progress of the arts, or the affinities of nations.”160 This is precisely the way in which sculptures are viewed that I hope to correct in the succeeding chapters and offer alternate ways of looking at religious iconography. The next chapter shifts the focus on looking at sculptures within the precincts of early museums in Bihar and how museums through their displays, labelling and cataloguing defined the colonial narratives on religion and religious sites. Sculptures came to be displayed devoid of any architectural context or communities of worshippers; just as the sites from which they came, sculptures became relics of the past.

Notes 1 Thomas and William Daniell, in Mildred Archer, Early Views of India: The Picturesque Journeys of Thomas and William Daniell 1784–1794, Thames and Hudson, London, 1980, p. 7. 2 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction of British India, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1997, p. 2. 3 The Asiatic Society was established in Calcutta in 1784 to encourage antiquarian enquiries in India. The Journal of the Society provided a forum for discussing the archaeological achievements throughout the subcontinent where both amateurs and professionals would publish their explorations conducted in Bihar throughout the nineteenth century. Bijoy K Choudhary, ‘History of Archaeology in Bihar,’ in Gautam Sengupta and Kaushik Gangopadhyay (ed.), Archaeology in India: Individuals, Ideas and Institutions, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2009, pp. 227–243. 4 Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 39. 5 Parul Pandya Dhar, ‘Historiography of Indian Temple Architecture (PostIndependence Writings): Some Methodological Concerns,’ in Gautam Sengupta and Kaushik Gangopadhyay (ed.), Archaeology in India: Individuals, Ideas and Institutions, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2009, pp. 333–350. 6 Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. xviii. 7 Alan Travithick, ‘British Archaeologists, Hindu Abbots and Burmese Buddhists: The Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya, 1811–1877,’ Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 3, No. 33, 1999, pp. 635–656. 8 Clements R Markham, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, Cassel and Co., London- Paris- Melbourne, 1895, p. 50.

52

The making of museum collections

9 Ibid. 10 James Rennell, Memoirs of a Map of Hindoostan: Or the Mogul Empire: With an Introduction Illustrative of the Geography and Present Division of That Country: And a Map of the Countries Situated between the Head of the Indus and the Caspian Sea, M Brown, London, 1788. 11 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 17. 12 Clements R Markham, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, p. 85. 13 James Rennell, Memoirs of a Map of Hindoostan, Preface. 14 Ibid., p. cxi. 15 Ibid. 16 Clements R Markham, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, p. 89. 17 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 17. 18 Clements R Markham, A Memoir on the Indian Surveys, Allen and Co., London, 1871, p. 38. 19 Himanshu Prabha Ray, Oceanography in Historical Perspective: Mapping the Past in the Present, Maritime History Society, Mumbai, 2015. 20 James Rennell, Memoirs of a Map of Hindoostan, p. xxi. 21 Ibid., p. cxiii. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid., p. xxii. 24 Ibid., p. 68. 25 Ibid., p. xvii. 26 Ibid. 27 Clements R Markham, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, p. 45. 28 James Rennell, Memoirs of a Map of Hindoostan, Preface. 29 Clements R Markham, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, p. 86. 30 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 1. 31 Peter Gottschalk, Religion, Science and Empire, p. 57. 32 Peter Robb, ‘Completing “Our Stock of Geography”, or an Object “Still More Sublime”: Colin Mackenzie’s Survey of Mysore, 1799–1810,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1998, pp. 181–206. 33 Himanshu Prabha Ray, Oceanography in Historical Perspective, p. 10. 34 Ibid. 35 Ibid. 36 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 18. 37 Peter Gottschalk, Religion, Science and Empire, p. 74. 38 Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 18. 39 Ibid., p. 24. 40 Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 4. 41 In the case of some sites there is a discrepancy in ascription of districts since they have been considerably revised post-independence. 42 As per Colin Mackenzie’s instructions, a comprehensive list of Categories of Data to be collected by Francis Buchanan in Bengal is as follows: 1. Topographical account of each district: extent, soil, plains, mountains, rivers, harbors, towns, and subdivisions; air and weather; plus

Creating identities

53

“whatever you may discover worthy of remark concerning the history and antiquities of the country.” 2. The condition of the inhabitants”: population, food, clothing, habitations; common diseases and cures; education; poor relief. 3. Religion and customs of each sect or tribe; the emoluments and power enjoyed by priests and chiefs; potential sources of popular discontent. 4. “Natural productions of the country”: animal, vegetable, and mineral, especially: (a) the fisheries: extent, operation, obstacles to improvement and extension; (b) the forests: extent and situation regarding water conveyance, species, value, improvements; (c) the mines and quarries: produce, manner of working, state of employees; 5. Agriculture, especially: (a) “the vegetables cultivated for food, forage, medicine, or intoxication, or as raw materials for the arts”: modes of cultivation, value, extent, improvements; (b) agricultural implements: defects and advantages, potential for improvement; (c) manures and irrigation; (d) flood control and potential improvements; (e) the domestic animals: food, use in labor, value, possible improvements; (f) use of fences and their utility; (g) “the state of farms”: size, expense, rents, wages, condition of laborers, tenures, possible improvements; (h) “the state of the landed property” and tenures. 6. “The progress made by the natives in the fine arts, in the common arts, and the state of the manufactures”: architecture, sculpture, and painting; different processes and machinery used by workmen; relation of manufactures to locally produced raw materials; possible improvements. 7. Commerce: exports and imports, trade; regulation of money, weights, and measures; transportation of goods by land and water; possible improvements. 8. “In addition to the foregoing objects of inquiry, you will take every opportunity of forwarding to the Company’s Botanical garden . . . whatever useful or rare and curious plant and seeds you may be enabled to acquire in the progress of your researches, with such observations as may be necessary for their culture.” Matthew H Edney, Mapping an Empire, p. 46. 43 Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 5. 44 A heavily edited and abridged version of the report, which left out a good deal of the information, was published in three volumes many years later, in 1838, by Montgomery Martin. The detailed maps that Buchanan had compiled were never published, and the late publication of his report meant that his notices of important sites were left to others to announce. In fact, while Montgomery Martin’s name was prominently displayed on the title page of the published version of the report, Francis Buchanan’s was conspicuous by its absence. Ibid. 45 Janice Leoshko, ‘On the Construction of a Buddhist Pilgrimage Site,’ Art History, Vol. 19, No. 4, 1996, pp. 573–597. 46 He perhaps did have the details of the regions from Rennell’s Bengal Atlas. But at the ground level, when surveying on foot, the map would not have been able to provide as much information on routes and smaller sites; with the maps scaled to about eleven miles to an inch. Peter Gottschalk, Religion, Science and Empire, p. 162. 47 CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur in 1810–11, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1930, p. 3.

54 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87

The making of museum collections Ibid., p. 19. Ibid. Ibid., pp. 18–21. Ibid., p. 19. VH Jackson (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya in 1811–12, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1926, pp. 40–51. Ibid., p. 55. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 52. Ibid. Ibid., p. 58. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 59. Ibid., p. 60. Ibid., p. 131. CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Shahabad in 1812–13, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1926, p. 19. Ibid., p. 23. CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur, p. 115. Ibid. VH Jackson (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya, p. 58. Ibid., p. 150. Ibid., p. 151. Ibid. Ibid., p. 47. Ibid., p. 148. Ibid., p. 36. Ibid., p. 42. Ibid., p. 93. Ibid., p. 60. Ibid., p. 155. Ibid., p. 22. CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur, p. 163. VH Jackson (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya, p. 22. Ibid., p. 46. CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur, p. 151. VH Jackson (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya, p. 111. Ibid., p. 115.

Creating identities 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112

113 114 115 116 117 118

55

Ibid., p. 24. Ibid., p. 119. Ibid., p. 22. Ibid., p. 111. Ibid., p. 115. CEAW Oldham (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur, p. 114. VH Jackson (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya, p. 148. Ibid., p. 59. Ibid., p. 34. Ibid., p. 12. Ibid., p. 10. Ibid., p. 84. Ibid., p. 119. Buchanan mentions “Har with Gauri His Spouse Sitting on His Knee,” Ibid., p. 22. Ibid., p. 123. “. . . amongst other images are Buddha and Gauri Sangkor,” Ibid., p. 115. Peter Gottschalk, Religion, Science and Empire, p. 162. AM Broadley, ‘The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar,’ Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1872, pp. 209–312. Ibid. Broadley published a separate pamphlet on his exploration of Bargaon, Ruins of the Nalanda Monasteries at Bargaon, Sub-Division Bihar, Zillah Patna, Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1872. Dr BP Sinha, Archaeology in Bihar, KP Jayaswal Memorial Lecture Series, Volume 5, KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, 1988, p. 35. AM Broadley, ‘The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar,’ p. 238. Ibid., p. 239. Ibid., p. 251. Recent excavations at Telhara, which started in 2009, have yielded remains of an extensive monastic complex on the scale of the Nalanda and Vikramsila monasteries. The project has yielded over 1,000 artefacts from thirty different trenches including seals and sealings, miniature stupas, bronze figurines of the Buddha and sculptures of Hindu and Buddhist deities in sandstone and basalt, copper bells and terracotta objects. Most artefacts have been dated to the Pala period but some also go back to the Gupta times. The most remarkable find came, however, in 2013–2014: a three storied monastic complex, with prayer halls, bases of temples and platforms for monks to sit on. Reported in the Indian Express, 23 February 2014, http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ india-others/a-university-under-a-mound/99/. AM Broadley, ‘The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar,’ p. 251. Ibid., p. 264. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid., p. 278. Ibid. Ibid., p. 254.

56

The making of museum collections

119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132

Ibid., p. 287. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., p. 296. Ibid., p. 256. Ibid., p. 264. Ibid., p. 228. Ibid., p. 232. Ibid., p. 278. Ibid., p. 241. Ibid., p. 242. Ibid., p. 287. Ibid. “The next figure is purely Hindu (for in Tillarah as in Nalanda ruins Hindu and Buddhist idols are mixed together). Like the one last described it is unbroken. It is an alto-relievo in black basalt two feet four inches high containing figures of Durga and Shiva. Shiva is four handed, and is elaborately dressed and ornamented. He is seated on a bull. The upper hand on the right grasps a lotus, while the other rests playfully on the chin of the goddess. His lower hand on the opposite passes around her body and supports her left breast. The one above it grasps a trident. His right leg is turned outwards to the right, but the left one is twisted above the bull’s head, so that the right leg of the goddess rests upon it. Her right hand passes around his neck, while the left grasps a mirror. She is seated on a lion. In his right ear is a circular ring and in his left an oblong drop. In her case the arrangement is reversed. His hair is rolled up into a ball first while hers is dressed almost precisely after fashion of George II’s time.” Ibid. Ibid., p. 253. Ibid., p. 279. Ibid., p. 288. Ibid., p. 287. Ibid., p. 332. Annual Report of the Archaeological Survey of India for the Years 1930– 34, Part I, Swati Publications, New Delhi, p. 131. JD Beglar quoted by Dr BP Sinha, Archaeology in Bihar, p. 35. Upinder Singh, ‘Alexander Cunningham’s Contribution to Indian Archaeology,’ in Gautam Sengupta and Kaushik Gangopadhyay (ed.), Archaeology in India: Individuals, Ideas and Institutions, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2009, pp. 60–75. Dilip K Chakrabarti, A History of Indian Archaeology: From the Beginning to 1947, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1988, p. 58. Upinder Singh, ‘Alexander Cunningham’s Contribution to Indian Archaeology.’ Purushottam Singh, ‘Sir Alexander Cunningham’ in RK Sharma and Devendra Handa (ed.), Revealing India’s Past: Trends in Art and Architecture, AM Shastri Commemoration Volume, Volume 1, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2005, pp. 88–91. “The documenting of traditional histories remained one of the constant features of Cunningham’s surveys and reports. This seems to have

133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

141 142 143

144

Creating identities

145 146

147 148 149 150

151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160

57

stemmed from a conviction that, whether reliable or not, the traditional histories of a place formed an integral part of its past and therefore must be recorded.” Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 74. Purushottam Singh, ‘Sir Alexander Cunningham.’ “The remains of architecture and sculpture are daily deteriorating, and inscriptions are broken or defaced; the sooner therefore that steps are taken for their preservation, the more numerous and consequently the more valuable these remains will be,” said Cunningham in Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 39. Purushottam Singh, ‘Sir Alexander Cunningham.’ Ibid. Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 88. “In noting these few examples, I desire chiefly to direct attention to the many curious and old-fashioned things which still exist in several parts of India. Some of these may help to throw light on the scenes sculptured on old monuments; others may serve to illustrate passages in ancient authors; whilst all will be valuable for preserving knowledge of things which in many places are now fast passing away, and will soon become obsolete and forgotten.” Ibid. Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 85. He discussed his discoveries rather briefly in the report since he planned to write an exclusive monograph on Bodh Gaya. Upinder Singh, The Discovery of Ancient India, p. 111. Ibid. Ibid., p. 113. Ibid. HP Ray, ‘The History of Archaeology in India: Introduction,’ in HP Ray and Carla Sinopoli (ed.), Archaeology as History in Early South Asia, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2004, pp. 12–33. HP Ray, ‘Archaeology and Empire: Buddhist Monuments in Monsoon Asia,’ IESHR, Vol. 45, No. 3, 2008, pp. 417–449. HP Ray, ‘The History of Archaeology in India.’ Janice Leoshko, ‘On the Construction of a Buddhist Pilgrimage Site.’

2

Making of museums

A potsherd dug up and placed in a museum with a label identifying and dating it, becomes a specimen along with thousands of others, which establishes for the archaeologist a history.1

The intellectual campaign initiated by the British government in India in the nineteenth century, found its logical fulfilment in the establishment of institutions and academic disciplines which systematised this knowledge pool and laid the foundations for the development of new disciplines such as, archaeology and art history. Museums in India emerged as one such type of institution. As I discussed in the previous chapter, the surveys and explorations both individual and those sponsored by the Company led to the detailed identification and listing of religious sites of South Bihar. The sites also yielded a great mass of antiquities such as sculptures, architectural fragments and inscriptions. Archaeology as a discipline in India, which was still in its incipient stage, provided no answers or policy on what was to be done with these relics and artefacts. One route for these, and probably also the more favoured one was that they became a part of the private collections of the Company officials. It was an unwritten but well understood deal that the early archaeologists and explorers appropriated what they “discovered.” A large part of these were shipped to Britain as souvenirs of the Empire which had been established. During this long journey overseas, sculptures were often lost, at other instances sat in the packing boxes and crates in which they had been shipped or found a place in the British Museum.2 A second option which subsequently developed was to keep the sculptures and relics within India to educate the native population about their history and religion through these visual tools. The museums which evolved became store houses but more importantly also served as archives of knowledge.

Making of museums

59

I return here to Bernard Cohn’s instance of the potsherd and trace how religious sculptures get transformed into museum specimens. In the life history of sacred icons, the museum became the first step in its spatial relocation from the sacred to profane; in its temporal relocation as a motif from the past to the present and more so in a shift from being a cult object to an exhibition piece. In the case of colonial museums, the didactics of labelling, classifying and cataloguing objects had still not been codified and in this entire process the original identity, purpose and the ritual context of these sculptures was often lost. In the present chapter I argue that museums and private collections in the early twentieth century emerged as cultural texts which present the point of intersection between the colonial past and the post-colonial present. The museum itself becomes a subject of study since it was subjected to the same historical influences as the historical narrative it was expected to present. The colonial museum was meant to be a channel to educate the Indian visitors about their ancient past; however, as we shall see, it became a showcase of Orientalism and imperialistic ambitions and played a central role in the “project of cultural ‘improvement’ of the colony.”3 The first museum in India, the Indian Museum at Calcutta, was established in 1814 as an imperial archive to provide a visual documentation and dissemination of knowledge about India, its “ancient” culture, history and religion. The Indian Museum emerged essentially out of the collection of specimens at the Asiatic Society of Bengal; a result of centuries of survey, exploration and amateur collections by colonial officers and surveyors. The collection of the Asiatic Society had been haphazard and erratic, hence the main thrust behind the establishment of the Indian Museum was to scientifically classify and systematically present the available material so that it could be “mined for knowledge.”4 Having been established as the central storehouse of antiquities and objects hoarded from sites across the Subcontinent, the Museum’s vast collection later motivated the establishment of other regional and provincial museums in India. The Indian Museum was also prioritised as the most legitimate repository of the country’s antiquities, delegitimising the claims of metropolitan museums in the West; if excavated structures could not be safely retained on-site, the argument was that the antiquities should at least remain within the territorial bounds of India.5 The Indian Museum and later the provincial museums hence formally became custodians for the care and conservation of ancient monuments and antiquities against vagaries of nature, human vandalism, theft and sale. The main issue under discussion here is how the colonial museum interpreted and organised this collection of treasure troves and

60

The making of museum collections

curiosities into a systematic pool of information. There were different approaches through which meanings were framed around exhibits. The first and the most convenient was the use of religious denomination and relics of a particular religion were arranged around myths, personalities and the great moments of the mythological universe. The second visual strategy was that sculptures and artefacts were placed as illustrations to texts and the value of sculptures was measured by how true a representation of the text they were able to present. Religious texts and mythologies were thoroughly read and sculptures were placed as portrayal of the texts thus concretising a visual cannon. A third kind of display arrangement was around the great epochs of history and dynastic achievements where artefacts were grouped under broad chronological and dynastic labels. Royal patronage seemed to provide the only kind of explanation for the production of art with no lay participation. A cyclic progression to Indian art was presented with apogee points of great ages and dark ages and styles of execution and aesthetics became the only criteria of analysis. Most importantly such an interpretation of art attached a primacy to sculptures as representative of each age and of Indian’s art heritage. So much so that ancient sculptures came to dominate over medieval miniature paintings. “The field of early archaeology, however, remained dominated by an antiquarian attitude, which valued the most ancient over the medieval.”6 The museum, thus intended to be a new centre of disciplinary knowledge, actually formalised the disciplines of archaeology and iconographic studies in India and fixed the narratives within which sacred icons came to be comprehended. I endeavour here to trace the history of collecting, institutionalisation of museum practices and the consequent evolution of an art-historical scholarship for Bihar in the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries. I discuss how modes of display and cataloguing in colonial museums of Bihar defined a certain way in which sacred sculptures came to be perceived and the field of iconography developed. Religious sculpture became the yardstick to measure Bihar’s artistic feat while the museum space came to exhibit a unidirectional, chronological, dynastic and geographical evolution of sculptural art prohibiting any interpretation which went beyond the scope of style and aesthetics. I begin the chapter by examining the case studies of two private collections from South Bihar: The Bodh Gaya Mahant collection and the private museum of AM Broadley in Bihar Sharif. I have chosen to discuss these two collections in particular for the large number of religious icons and architectural fragments they contain; and more importantly, because the original provenance for a majority of these

Making of museums

61

relics is not known, it has significantly altered the way in which we now study some of these sites such as Nalanda and Bodh Gaya. I juxtapose these two collections in terms of their spatial location, the sacred versus the profane; how the display, meaning and interpretation of each of the objects in the collections were determined by their location, and the eventual fate of both these collections. While the images in the Mahant’s collection are all enshrined irrespective of their religious affiliation; they remain securely locked away from public viewing. The Broadley Collection however continued to move around and the point of dissolution of this Collection in the early twentieth century is the starting point of the establishment of museums in Bihar. I will discuss the circumstances behind the foundation of two of the earliest museums in Bihar, the Patna Museum and the Nalanda Museum; the history of their acquisitions and how the display and nomenclatures of sacred sculptures within the museums determined studies of iconography. The chapter will conclude by examining the works of HD Sankalia and Stella Kramrisch in the early twentieth century and determine how their writings have shaped the discourse on sacred arts, especially that from Bihar.

Modes of collecting and preserving The official discourse worked on consolidating, documenting and displaying a visual archive through museums; there were several private collections and hoards of images which changed the fate of some significant religious sites of Bihar. I would like to highlight the role of two such collections: the first is an assortment of sculptures and architectural fragments stored in the Bodh Gaya Mahant’s compound and the second is a collection of sculptures which originally formed a part of Broadley’s Museum in Bihar Sharif. Both these collections include Buddhist and Hindu sculptures, sacred motifs and architectural fragments from various sites of South Bihar, with little indication of their original provenance or context. I will determine how these images through the course of their lives moved from sites to museums, from the realm of the sacred to the profane and how their current location and modes of display reflect the study of sculptures and sacred sites where they would have originally been located. The Bodh Gaya Mahant’s Compound is located on the left bank of the Phalgu River, a short walk from the Mahabodhi Temple. Next to the Great Temple, which will be noticed further on, the largest building in the village is a monastery, or matha. It is situated

62

The making of museum collections on the left bank of the Lilajan, in the midst of a garden extending over an area of about 20 acres, and surrounded by a high masonry wall. It is four storeyed in some parts, but three storeyed all round a small quadrangle. The ground floor round the quadrangle is faced by a one storeyed verandah built on sculptured monolithic pillars on three sides, and on wooden pillars on the fourth side. The roofs are low, and the windows very small and few in number; but the building is very substantial, and in excellent repair. To the north of this there are three two storeyed buildings of moderate size, and long ranges of out houses and stables in front on the east. On the South there is a commodious three storeyed building called Baradwari, with a terrace in front of it.7

The matha as it presently stands is a whitewashed structure and gives the appearance of a fort with its high walls and corner turrets. One can approach the Compound through an elaborate gateway with iron gates, on both sides of which early sculptures and inscriptions are seen embedded in the wall. The present structure closely corresponds with Buchanan’s descriptions of the site.8 As recorded by GA Grierson, a magistrate of Gaya in the late nineteenth century, the first Shaiva Mahant, Ghamandi Giri belonging to the sect of Giris came to Bodh Gaya sometime in the sixteenth century.9 The site of the Mahabodhi Temple then was largely deserted and the shrine overrun by bushes and trees. The Giri sanyasis cleared the area and settled down; “The Buddhist temple at the time had no priest, nor any worshipper; and such an appropriation of it by a saintly hermit in a small village during the Muhamaddan rule was an act which none would question.”10 Ghamandi Giri was succeeded by his chela Mahant Chaitanya Giri (1615–1642), under whom the Mahants received the right to collect revenues in the area. When the next Mahant, Mahadeva Giri, came into office, the present structure of the matha was built. Grierson dates the building of the monastery somewhere between 1642 and 1682. RL Mitra in his record of Bodh Gaya reaffirms a similar account of the matha and adds that in 1876 according to a ‘Royal Firman from Shah Alum,’ Mahant Mahadeva Giri received the right to collect revenue in the region and that the monastery was built at about that time. It appears that the Giris received land and the rights to rent from land, from a variety of sources. What is of particular interest to the present discussion is the architectural organisation of the matha. The interiors of the matha are organised around a large courtyard at the centre of which is a pavilion made of white marble where the Mahant sits on a tiger skin and gives

Making of museums

63

audience to the visitors. The pillars of this pavilion are also embedded with sculptural fragments some of which are difficult to date. There is also an old well in the courtyard which has now been blocked because of lack of maintenance and repair. Around the courtyard, the main building is two storied and in some places three storied organised as a series of successive pillared verandah leading to individual rooms suggesting that the building might have been constructed in phases. Some of the stone pillars of the verandah are inscribed or sculpted and are obviously appropriated from elsewhere. RL Mitra in his account records “at least 33 pillars (from the Mahabodhi temple) attached to the residence of the Mahant.”11 Within this courtyard, a part of the ground-floor verandah has been fenced off and a heavily secured gate leads into a long chamber. The door to the chamber is kept locked, and entry and photography is restricted. Inside the chamber is probably the largest collection of images and sculptural fragments that I have come across outside of a museum. This fascinating collection includes Buddhist and Hindu deities, the sculptures are whole or broken along with a large number

Figure 2.1 Uma Mahesvara icons from Bodh Gaya Mahant’s Matha Source: Courtesy of Vikas Vaibhav

64

The making of museum collections

of architectural fragments including lintels, inscriptions and sacred motifs. At the heart of the chamber is a shrine where an akhanda jyoti is maintained. The sculptures are all embedded in the walls while the fragments are scattered about. There has been no thought behind the organisation, display or categorisation of images based on their religious affiliation; Buddhist and Hindu icons are interspersed and no distinction is made between them. Daily worship and offerings are made in the Hindu ritual tradition to all images as evident from offerings of vermillion, flowers and incense. Uma Mahesvara images in various postures abound in this collection and most of these are located in the inner chamber or the sanctum with the akhanda jyoti. The images are mostly in dark granite and a few in sandstone and some of these show evidence of gilding. Scholars contend that all of these images came from the Mahabodhi Temple itself, probably placed in the niches in the wall of the main temple, but to me they appear to have been collected from several shrines. The appropriation of sculptures and architectural fragments from the Mahabodhi Temple complex within the structure and shrine of the matha seemed to be a logical process when seen in contemporary light.12 At a time when the Mahabodhi temple might have been largely abandoned and a Shaiva matha came to be established in the vicinity, it was only natural that the Shaivas appropriated and reused the earlier sacred space and sacred motifs. What is remarkable is that the Shaiva sanyasis did not attempt to wipe out the earlier religious denomination of the site but came to incorporate it within their rituals and modes of worship. Buddhist, Vaishnava and Shaiva deities continued to be deified on the same footing. It has been contended that the image which is now enshrined in the Mahabodhi temple was recovered from the Mahant’s compound.13 At what point this appropriation began is difficult to trace and was probably an on-going process which took place over centuries. The collection of Bodh Gaya icons at the Mahant’s house is only one instance of denuding the Mahabodhi Complex and its environs of its icons. The Mahants of Bodh Gaya unlike other Hindus are buried in cemeteries rather than cremated and close to the Mahant’s living quarter is a cemetery complex for the monks. Samadhis of two early Mahants are also located in front of the Mahabodhi temple itself. The cemeteries are marked by several votive stupas used as lingams to indicate their religious affiliation to Shaivite monks. Votive stupas used as lingams are not unique to Bodh Gaya but can be seen across sites of South Bihar often enshrined in modern temples. This once again reflects upon the smooth transition in the identity of religious icons from Buddhist to

Making of museums

65

Hindu. “Even at a very concrete level, then, important symbols of the two faiths were interchanged with great facility: the genetic relations between the two traditions are here instantiated as iconic and material fact with no text-based exegetical mediation.”14 Owing to the sanctity of the site and the fact that sculptures and architectural fragments would have been littered at the site, these were very often used by the local people as construction material to build their houses, the fragments being used on door steps, lintels and pillars.15 The appropriation of relics and sculptures from Bodh Gaya continued into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries once the site was “discovered” by British surveyors and archaeologists, an issue which I will discuss in a later chapter. A second case which significantly altered the fate of several sites of South Bihar were the expeditions of another amateur archaeologist and explorer, AM Broadley, who surveyed and excavated various sites around Nalanda, Rajgir and Bihar Sharif, discussed in the last chapter.16 Like his contemporaries, Broadley concentrated on Buddhist remains in pursuit of the original religion and believed Buddhist art “to have formed a tout ensemble which Hindu art has never surpassed.”17 In the course of his survey and documentation he provides an idea of the geography of the region and lists in detail the Buddhist remains of the sites but merely skims over the relics of other religions.18 Broadley, as was fashionable during his time, followed the routes taken by Fa Xian and Xuan Zang and sieved a small area of the then Patna District, between the Ganga and the foot of the Rajgir Hills, extending about “thirty five miles north to south, and forty from east to west.”19 During the course of his amateur excavations he collected many sculptures and architectural fragments which he then carried off and established a museum at the Collector’s Bungalow at Bihar Sharif. Broadley being the District Magistrate had the economic means and a large labour force including prisoners at his disposal for the excavation of sites.20 He dug shafts in stupas hoping to unearth relics, dismantled shrines and carried away any slabs, inscriptions, sculptures and doorways which interested him.21 He did not just pick up loose fragments or stray sculptures but actually broke down structures to add to his collection. The large, open air museum which he established was called the Bihar Museum. Though he gives no details of his excavations, there is a considerable tally of images listed at the end of his book. He catalogued some of the artefacts but for a large part of this collection of 686 artefacts the original provenance is unknown. “But amateur he remained, letting his desire for additions to the collections triumph more careful work.”22

66

The making of museum collections

The Broadley collection continued to move around through history where the excavation and collection by Broadley himself was just the first step in their displacement. Frederick Asher has traced the several relocations which these images have undergone over time and how this has altered the history and identity of these images.23 Asher moreover by tracing the style, chronology, material, etcetera, has identified the provenance of 46 of these sculptures now kept in the Indian Museum and in the Patna Museum, though the museums in question have taken no measures to rectify their labelling and proposed provenance. In 1891 the Government of Bengal decided to transfer the contents of the Bihar Museum to the Indian Museum, Calcutta, where some of these sculptures were displayed while others stored in the Museum’s reserve collection. PC Mukherji was appointed as a temporary archaeologist of the Indian Museum and was directed to “(i) remove the Broadley collection of ancient sculptures from Behar to Calcutta and to assist . . . in their arrangement in the Museum, and (ii) to make an investigation into the archaeological remains of Rajgir and Bargaon, removing that which ought to be kept in a place of safety and drawing that which could not be removed . . . 735 sculptures of which 686 formed the Broadly collection the remaining 49 having been collected by himself during his tour.”24 This relocation caused a second phase of displacement of these images; not only from one museum to another but also removing them from their original geographical provenance. During this transfer many images were damaged and broken, so much so that subsequently different fragments of the same sculpture landed up in separate museums.25 The larger impact of this was that in the Indian Museum, on the display labels and even in the museum register, the provenance of these sculptures was listed as “Bihar” indicating the Museum and not the site thus losing the original provenance of the objects for ever. Towards the end of the nineteenth century Theodore Bloch assumed the post of First Assistant to the Superintendent of the Indian Museum but had little information regarding the 686 sculptures which had been brought from Bihar Sharif. Bloch wrote the Museum’s new registers and in an attempt to bring some order to the chaos he noted that the sculptures were from Bihar, meaning Bihar Sharif. This misquotation caused further confusion about the provenance and identity of these sculptures. A large part of the sculptures from the Broadley collection travelled further. Once the Patna Museum was founded a significant portion of this collection was sent there. These sculptures are still listed in the

Making of museums

67

Patna Museum catalogue as from the Broadley Collection and their provenance remains undefined or mentioned as ‘Bihar.’ The Indian Museum registers also show that some pieces were given to other fledging museums in India, while others were traded for works from outside eastern India. Items from the Bihar Museum are now found in museums across the world: at Varendra Research Museum, Cleveland Museum of Art and the Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin.

Figure 2.2 Uma Mahesvara from Broadley Collection; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 7881 Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

68

The making of museum collections

The nomenclature of images is often confusing also on account of Broadley’s limited knowledge of the identity, provenance and faith of many sculptures. For instance, Vishnu and Surya have been often mentioned as Buddha and Tara as Mayadevi. This confusion was also because Broadley had set out on the agenda of identifying the Buddhist elements in the topography. Most sculptures of the Broadley collection can be dated between the ninth and the eleventh centuries; in a few sculptures earlier prevalent styles are evident. Clearly Broadley visited some fairly early sites which takes their history further back into antiquity. It is important to determine the provenance of this group of sculptures which could throw significant light on the religious history of the region and the evolution of iconography. Although the word “Bihar” on the Indian Museum labels and registers refer to the place where the pieces were first collected, the sculptures clearly came from many different sites and some fairly early ones. Determining the precise provenance of these sculptures would also bring forward many sites with abundant sculptures in the Patna District and would shift the focus from a Buddhist centric history focusing on Nalanda, Rajgir and Bodh Gaya. Many such sites have not been sufficiently explored, and a large number of sculptures are still lying above ground, usually in worship in several villages. Asher further questions the fate of several sculptures of the Broadley collection which were transferred to the Indian Museum but apparently are no longer there. These sculptures clearly travelled further on with different identities, history and provenance. My purpose behind comparing these two collections is many-fold. First is the thrust behind the making of the two collections. Both the cases show that their acquisition was not logical or sequential but rather haphazard. The relics in both cases have been accumulated from different sites with no record of their original history or context or purpose. Second, in both the cases the identities of sculptures as Buddhist and Brahmanical do not appear segregated. While Broadley clearly was looking for Buddhist remains he also gathered what he felt were good examples of artistic feat. Third, the space of display and modes of display of both are contrasting. Broadley as an archaeologist and collector consciously went about collecting the antiquities as relics of the past. The Mahant’s collection on the contrary would have been more sporadic with a view to collect religious motifs, not initiated by a single individual but by the adherents of the faith. While neither of the collections showed taxonomy of display, Broadley presented his collection as in a museum and the Mahant’s collection is displayed more

Making of museums

69

as in a shrine where the images are subject to daily offerings. The configuration of space defined by both the collections of sacred images is hence different, while the Mahant’s collection makes the space sacred; Broadley’s museum was a site of display. Despite the juxtaposition in their display and collection, both Broadley’s images and those at the Mahant’s residence have changed the way in which the sites from which they would have been appropriated have been studied and added another layer of dust to their histories. The sites devoid of their motifs present only half the picture. The images in the two collections moreover suggest that they have been collected from various sites with little idea of their original geographical, chronological or architectural context. The images have developed a life independent of the structures on which they were originally mounted and have undergone significant spatial and temporal location. The aesthetics and styles of the icons also suggest that they belong to different chronological periods and also different sub-regions. One cannot but agree with Asher’s observation that even within Bihar there would have been different schools of sculptures.26

Museums in Bihar To the organisation and development of museums as centre for research and education the Government attaches much importance . . . The Imperial and the majority of the provincial museums contains other sections besides the archaeological and are designed to be generally representative, in the former case of the Indian empire, in the latter of the province or presidency to which they belong. Others are devoted exclusively to antiquities and have been instituted on important sites for the purpose of safe guarding moveable antiquities and exhibiting them to the best advantage amid their natural surroundings.27

The early decades of the twentieth century saw the establishment of two separate museums in Bihar; the Patna Museum was established in 1917 as the museum of the newly founded Province of Bihar and Orissa and in the same year a site museum came to be established at Nalanda to store the antiquities unearthed during excavations there. I examine the thrust behind the establishment of the two museums, their core collections, and strategies of acquisitions as also the focus on developing their collections. I further scrutinise the narratives of display and labelling which the museums developed and which reinforced the colonial modes of looking at sculptures as foremost indicators of artistic development, yet the images were displayed without any indication of their original context. Finally, I argue how the museums were

70

The making of museum collections

not only store houses of the antiquities but also had a larger political rhetoric behind their founding. The Patna Museum The establishment of the Patna Museum, on the one hand, should be studied in light of the formation of the new Province of Bihar and Orissa, with its capital at Patna, separate from Bengal in 1912 and the concerted drive on part of the ASI towards the establishment of local and provincial museums for the preservation of antiquities in their natural surroundings. Before the formation of the new Province, all the excavated remains from the sites of Bihar and Orissa were “exiled” to the Indian Museum, Calcutta.28 In the Presidential address on the occasion of the inauguration of the new building of the Patna Museum, it was remarked with great relief that “much however remained safely concealed underground” and could still be excavated and displayed in the Patna Museum.29 The political circumstances behind the establishment of the new Province and its partitioning from Bengal incited a great fervour to assert a provincial identity, to create a history for the region and to project its artistic and cultural heritage. There could have been no better way to do it than highlight the significance of Buddhism and that of Bihar as the original birth place of the Buddha. A second mode of publicity was based on the personalities of Asoka projected as the first ‘Monarch of India’ and the great ambassador of Buddhism and his grandfather Chandragupta Maurya, the founder of the Mauryan dynasty which formed the first ‘Indian Empire.’ The goal was to glorify and reconstruct the grandeur of their fabled capital Pataliputra recognised as modern day Patna. It was against this “backdrop of provincial reconfigurations,” “politics of place-making” and “provincial self-fashioning”30 in the early decades of the twentieth century Bihar that in the first meeting of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society held on the 20 January 1915, Dr Sachidanand Sinha moved a resolution that a provincial museum and library should be established in the state. The meeting held under the Presidentship of the then Lieutenant Governor Sir Charles S Bayley, appointed a committee to work out a scheme for the establishment of a provincial museum at Patna. It was in fact Charles Bayley who spearheaded the movement to carve out a distinct historical identity for the newly configured province of Bihar and Orissa and passionately led the Bihar and Orissa Research Society towards this. The Society set out with the task of collecting objects of archaeological interest,

Making of museums

71

ethnological data and specimens.31 The Museum was expected to work in tandem with the Society which would represent the “theoretical work of research and criticism on objects of historic or archaeological interest, the Museum seeks, gathers up whenever possible, and preserves the objects themselves. Functioning thus together, each institution is the definite compliment of the other.”32 The Museum was meant to begin as an archaeological and ethnographical museum with the scope of later adding an economic section.33 The collected antiquities were initially stored in the Commissioner’s Bungalow till they became too large to be kept there. In 1917, the collection was then shifted to a few rooms in the north wing of the Patna High Court building where in 1917, Sir Edward Gait the Lieutenant Governor of Bihar and Orissa formally established the Patna Museum with the distinguished ethnologist and anthropologist Rai Bahadur Sarat Chandra Roy as the first Curator. With the everincreasing number of exhibits, the museum had to be expanded, as the Patna High Court Wing could not accommodate it, and more land was needed to construct a new Museum building. In 1925, the land for the museum was allocated and a two-storeyed building designed by Rai Bahadur Bishnu Swarup was completed in 1928. The collection and offices of the Museum were shifted there. On 6 March 1929, the government formally handed over the building to the managing committee and on the following day, the then Governor of Bihar and Orissa, Sir Hugh Lansdowne Stephenson, inaugurated the Museum. In keeping with the rhetoric behind its establishment, out of the many proposals it was decided to have the building designed on a native style. The Patna Museum building as it now stands is one of the best specimens of Indo-Sarcenic style of architecture: Chattri over the centre, domes in the four corners and jharoka style windows.34 The initial collection began with members of the Museum committee visiting other provincial museums in search of antiquities.35 A Provincial Coin Cabinet was also initiated and the Government of India under the Treasure Trove Act agreed that the Patna Museum would “have precedence over all other institutions in respect of specimens from any part of Bihar and Orissa.”36 The emphasis on the coin collection was to establish ancient trade relations and prove the vibrant economic networks that Bihar would have been engaged in even at the earliest times. CEAW Oldham a British civil servant posted in Bihar presented the Museum Coin Cabinet with 129 coins including five ancient silver punch-marked coins and one punch-marked coin found at Rajgir.37 Other early specimens included two inscribed cannons, musical instruments and other articles of ethnographic interest along with samples of

72

The making of museum collections

minerals found in the region, for the geological section. The committee looked with great remorse that a great bulk of archaeological finds, some of the finest specimens of artistic heritage from Bihar and Orissa was in possession of the Indian Museum and from early on there were appeals to reclaim this lost treasure.38 The beginnings of excavation of the site of Pataliputra in 1913, with funding received from Sir Ratan Tata and the excavation of Nalanda in 1915 funded by the Royal Asiatic Society (of Great Britain and Ireland), was particularly welcomed since it would add to the collection of antiquities from the region. Ratan Tata, however, had funded the excavations at Pataliputra with the sole motive to acquire archaeological objects for his personal collection. Throughout the period of excavation of Pataliputra, the ASI Reports portray this dilemma of the archaeologists to find antiquities for Ratan Tata’s collection. Yet this would go against the spirit of the age of depositing archaeological finds in the local museums. Similar was the case at Nalanda where the excavations had been organised by the Director General of Archaeology. The theoretical implication was that the excavated antiquities would be deposited at the newly founded Site Museum there. At the same time the Patna Museum wanted to acquire some of the antiquities for its collection to bask in the fame of the ‘Buddhist University.’ The lack of display and storage space and the absence of a proper museum building were eventually used to plead that some share of the excavations be moved to the Patna Museum. In 1915 the Museum acquired its most prized possession, the Didarganj Yakshi, a chance find which became not just the symbol of aesthetic proficiency of the region but subsequently also the ambassador of independent India’s arts. In 1919, the Bodh Gaya Mahant presented a collection of antiquities to the Museum. In the same year, the Museum acquired antiquities from Belwa, in North Bihar presented by a local Raja, the Maharaja of Hathwa. The antiquities excavated by DB Spooner at Basarah, Vaishali in 1911–1912 were given to the Museum on approval by the Director of Archaeology in 1919. The Basarah antiquities dated to fifth century ce chronologically took back the history of the collection and were “displayed in a room kept apart for them.”39 In the following year, 1920, the Mauryan antiquities, excavated at Kumrahar in 1912–1913, were acquired by the Museum. Among the early collections of the Museum, the most important was the Persepolitan like capital, which was found at Bulandibagh by LA Waddel.40 This initiated the long association of the Museum with the excavations of Pataliputra and forged a relationship of mutual dependence

Making of museums

73

where the Museum relied upon the site to add to its cherished ‘Pataliputra Collection’ and the archaeologist working on the site could use the Museum space to present their version of Mauryan history. In 1922–1923 the Museum itself undertook an excavation at Bulandibagh, which brought many interesting objects to the Museum. In 1926, chance finds in the Patna University campus during a spate of construction brought to light 201 antiquities which were presented to the Museum by VH Jackson.41 The same year a small excavation was undertaken by A Banerji Shastri at Buxar which unearthed a series of early terracotta and 15 more antiquities were acquired by the Museum.42 During 1928–1929 the Museum purchased bronze images of the Buddha from Negapatnam in Tanjore. In 1929 a number of Buddhist sculptures from Udaygiri and Ratnagiri were brought to the Museum. The discovery of the Kurkihar hoard in 1930 was another high point when the Museum came to acquire 163 bronze images of Buddha, Boddhisatva and other Buddhist and Hindu gods and goddesses. These form the most important bronze collection of the early medieval period in the Museum. In 1932, 393 terracotta figurines from Mathura were purchased. The same year the Museum got quite a few objects from Ghorakatora, Rajgir, which was exposed in a small excavation by PC Chaudhari. Side by side the Museum developed its substantial collection of epigraphs and estampages with the aim that the “public will have an opportunity of examining all the important epigraphs from the province in the Provincial Museum.”43 In 1919–1920 the Museum got plaster of Paris casts of the Bodh Gaya pillars stored in the Indian Museum. In addition, copies of inscriptions were made from the sites of Rajgir, Bargaon, Tetrawan, Bihar Sharif, Telhana, Jagdishpur, Deo Barunark, Gaya and Guneri.44 Parallel to this, the Museum worked on developing its ethnological collection by accumulation of objects of daily use of people from Chota Nagpur, Bhils of Gujarat: samples of minerals from Bihar and Orissa; plaster cast of a meteorite which had fallen in the region but was stored in the Indian Museum; plaster casts of fruit and vegetables of Bihar; tree fossils; samples of craft tradition such as ivory, mirrors, textiles, etcetera. The Coin Cabinet made suitable progress with substantial additions each year through purchase, gifts and excavations. Overall the Museum had a steady growth with a well-represented collection by the time it shifted into its new building. The only weak point, described as the “Cinderella” of the museum was the “Arts Section, the reason being that the prices of art treasures have soared

74

The making of museum collections

so high in the period of our existence that it has been found impossible to compete with more affluent purchasers.”45 The Bihar and Orissa Research Society moreover wanted to exercise extreme caution to take steps “to remove to the Museum some of the ancient carvings which lies scattered throughout the province, but this is a matter in which we must proceed warily, and only in accordance with advise of experts.”46 Referring to the earlier generation of scholar-historians, particularly Broadley, they said “that great harm was done many years ago by an amateur enthusiast who made a large collection of these remains without keeping any record of the places from which they were taken.”47 By the end of 1934, the Museum had collected 7,593 archaeological objects including stone sculptures, architectural pieces, metal images, terracotta, prehistoric objects, inscriptions, seals and sealings, potteries and numerous varieties of minor antiquities.48 KP Jayaswal, the then President of the Managing Committee of the Museum, proposed to publish a Catalogue of the Antiquities of the Museum. In 1935, Stella Kramrisch was commissioned to undertake this work, and she submitted the catalogue of stone sculptures, metal images, terracotta and some minor antiquities in 1939. The catalogue prepared by Kramrisch was however later heavily edited and published by PL Gupta only in 1965. Looking at the progress of the Museum, the emphasis on the collection and display of stone sculptures is obvious. In 1923, the Museum purchased a group of Hindu and Buddhist figures in red sandstone from Mathura. In the same year Buddhist sculptures were acquired on a permanent loan from the Peshawar Museum.49 In the following year the Museum, on loan, acquired objects of daily use and Buddhist stucco from Taxila and purchased bronzes of Hindu deities from Nepal.50 In 1925 the Madras Museum presented a host of Amravati sculptures to the Patna Museum.51 In 1928 there was a significant addition to the collection by purchase of a number of Buddhist sculptures from Mathura52 and Benaras53 and subsequently also some Gandharan sculptures. In 1929, the Negapatnam bronzes were purchased. The progress of the Patna Museum collection is an obvious example of the many tangents that religious sculptures travel losing their meanings and context. What is the need for Gandharan sculptures in the Patna Museum? What is the context of Tanjore bronzes in this Museum? The answers lie in the age old colonial practise of museums being illustrative of textual sources and sculptures being the yardstick for artistic feats of dynasties. Similar is the stance of presenting relics in clearly defined categories juxtaposed against each other: Gandhara versus Mathura; Buddhist against Brahmanical; stone vis-à-vis bronzes.

Making of museums

75

The narratives of display at the Patna Museum precisely engage in this colonial enterprise along with the need to highlight a Buddhist history through sculptural reliefs. In this process the Museum purchased samples of images of the Gandhara school, Mathura school and from Amravati. A variety of Buddhist figurines are available in stone, terracotta, stucco and bronzes from sites as varied as Taxila, Mathura, Basarah, Bodh Gaya and Amravati, and are used to create a Buddhist archaeology and represent events from the life of the historical Buddha. The aesthetic qualities of the images are emphasised in their labels and arrangements where the linear evolution of style as per chronology, dynasty and region has been underlined. The sublimity of indigenous styles vis-à-vis foreign influence was deduced in all the phases.54 The Patna Museum Catalogue outlines, “The strength of the collection of stone sculptures in the Patna Museums lies in the insight it affords into the validity of traditional Indian form by works belonging to the ‘beginning’ and to the ‘end’ of the ‘historical’ phase of Indian art. In both these is the spontaneity of original work.”55 At the same time, keeping in mind the construction of a provincial identity the survey of images was meant to outline a panorama of sculptural styles from Bihar with three distinct periods of artistic proclivity: the Mauryan, the Gupta and the Pala. The Museum Catalogue summarises: “The ‘Gupta phase’ can be studied in the Patna Museum from its inception in the school of Mathura to its fullest responsiveness to stages of spiritual realisation. The copious works of the school that flourished under Pala and Sena rule in Bihar and Bengal are shown in one of the earliest definitely dated works.”56 Similar was the case with terracotta and bronzes. The narratives around geography, stylistic influence and purpose have been highlighted by the accumulation of sculptures from different sites of North India such as Mathura, Sravasti, Kausambi and Taxila apart from those from the sites of Bihar. The terracotta has been presented in comparison with stone sculptures to analyse “stylistic mutation,” “relative chronological connection,” “foreign influence,” and suggest parallels “from several sites of pre-historic date in and outside India.”57 In the early years, the Bihar and Orissa Research Society in their attempt to establish an indigenous history strove to create a sequence from stone age to copper to bronze for Bihar. For the Ethnological section of the Museum, the Society had focussed on collecting stone, copper and bronze implements which abound in the South Bihar and Chota Nagpur region.58 Lack of adequate evidence had, however, prevented the making of a complete sequence; “no bronze weapons or implements have yet been found there are not yet sufficient grounds to predicate the existence of a bronze age following the copper age.”59

76

The making of museum collections

Another attempt to assert the provincial identity was the preparation of an Antiquarian Map of Bihar and Orissa in 1918 under the instructions of the Lieutenant Governor. The map depicted places with monuments and ruins in a variety of colours to distinguish the various classes of remains such as Pre-Historic, Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, etcetera. The map for each division was to be prepared and ruins later than 1700 were not included.60 The establishment of the Patna Museum was almost hand in hand with the exploration and subsequently excavation of Mauryan sites at Kumrahar, Bulandibagh and several others all within the city limits of modern day Patna. The Museum display provided the visual testimony for all of the colonial theories. The Greek and Chinese textual sources which the British archaeologists heavily relied on were given a visual illustration, the grandeur of a vanished civilisation could be displayed within the Museum space, and foreign influence of Greeks, Romans and Achemenidians in Pataliputra could be highlighted and documented. The ancient glories of India, its pristine Buddhist universe and the corrupt practices of medieval Hinduism all came to be organised within this space. Archaeology and iconography as disciplines were shaped through museum practices to recover India’s past. But in this process, archaeological finds, especially sculptures, became relics, devoid of meaning and context, engaged in a project of recovery of the ancient past. The Bihar and Orissa Research Society hence summarised the aims of the Museum as: “With our well- lit and restful galleries, the student and scholar should find ample material for instruction and further investigation. They will find arrayed before them a small but interesting panorama of exhibits ranging from the pre-historic fossil tree through the Pre-Dravidian and Pre-Aryan periods to the relics of the Vaishali Republic and on to the Mauryan Period when Hindustan was virtually ruled from Pataliputra, the site of modern Patna, by Chandragupta and the great Asoka 300 years before Christ. Thence they may proceed to the Sunga period, to the Kushana of the Christian Era and to the medieval period. If copper plates interest them, they will find such objects from 6th to 15th century AD. If it is coins they seek, they will find specimens from the 5th century BC to recent times.”61 Nalanda Museum The Nalanda Museum came to be established in 1917 essentially to house the antiquities excavated from Rajgir, Nalanda and other sites in the vicinity. The focus on preventing the removal of antiquities from

Making of museums

77

the proximity of the site was a priority behind the establishment of this Site Museum.62 The antiquities excavated at Nalanda were first housed in a bungalow meant to serve as a rest house for the Archaeological Department. One of the rooms was fitted with wooden racks and show cases in which the antiquities were deposited.63 In a letter to the Secretary Education Department, Government of Bihar and Orissa dated to 1921, Dr Hirananda Shastri requisitioned for improved facilities to this incipient Museum: “As the number of finds has considerably increased arrangement is being made to utilize another room likewise. The antiquities which are being exhibited or deposited to these rooms are not only valuable from an archaeological point of view but many of them possess considerable intrinsic value as well. At the same time most of them are easily portable. The bungalow lies out of the way at a distance from the adjoining villages and hamlets and its rooms are not at all strong. On this account it seems not only desirable but essential to make early arrangements for the protection of the bungalow or the antiquities it accommodates.” The Museum currently has more than 13,000 antiquities in its possession out of which only 350 are displayed in its four galleries. The antiquities can be dated between the fifth and the twelfth centuries and have been collected from the ruins of the Monastic Complex, from the neighbouring villages, from Rajgir and other sites in the vicinity. Other antiquities from the sites have been stored at the Patna Museum, the National Museum, New Delhi and the Indian Museum including parts of the Broadley collection, much of which came from Nalanda and its vicinity. Some bronzes from Nalanda were transferred to the Patna Museum in 1929 on a permanent loan while the Indian Museum houses antiquities which had been a part of the Broadley collection. The National Museum meanwhile acquired antiquities from Nalanda “after selected works, including several Nalanda bronzes, were sent to London for exhibition in 1947–48 honouring India’s independence.”64 When they were returned to India, they came to form the core collection of the National Museum in New Delhi, established post-independence in 1949 as representative of India’s art and heritage. The images have hence travelled as museum pieces serving as relics of the past and as objets d’ art without any geographical or historical context. The antiquities when housed in the rest house had no scheme of display due to constraints of space. The new Museum building, once it was built, was organised into four galleries. The thrust of the Museum is to highlight the Buddhist antecedents of Nalanda though it has a substantial portion of Hindu and Jain images in its collection. The

78

The making of museum collections

First Gallery houses Hindu, Buddhist and Jain sculptures; of the four show cases, three have Buddhist images and one dedicated to the Hindu deities. The Second Gallery displays miscellaneous objects unearthed during excavations in the Monastic Complex and includes seals and sealings, ornaments, terracotta, stucco figurines, tools and implements and other objects of every-day use. The Third Gallery displays Nalanda bronzes including sacred images. The Fourth Gallery contains inscriptions and sculptures belonging to the ‘Pala Period’ and concentrates on ‘Buddhist’ antiquities.65 The Museum was meant to be a ‘Site Museum’ and is still an Archaeological Museum under the ASI. The current display, labelling and cataloguing of artefacts, still reflects colonial taxonomies. The labels provide basic information giving the name, approximate date, material and location of find. “Even today the Nalanda museum carries much of the original function – that is as a storehouse for the works excavated at the site. There is no sense of Nalanda as a living space in which sculptures performed a function.”66 Despite being a Site Museum the antiquities show no connection with the actual site in terms of architectural location giving details of the find spot. Neither does the signage in the Monastic Complex give examples of antiquities found there, and now present in the Museum. The ASI published a guide in 1933 to provide information to visitors on details of the site but once again failed to establish this crucial connection between the site and its artefacts in the Museum. The original scope of the Museum, when established by the ASI, as it still is, can be gathered from A Ghosh’s A Guide to Nalanda.67 The focus of the Museum is on establishing the Buddhist identity of the site especially through the sacred images and motifs. The Guide makes a survey of the different categories of objects found from Nalanda including stone images, stone inscriptions, copper plates, brick inscriptions, sealings and plaques, coins, bricks and pottery yet the focus of the Museum is on the Buddhist images and a very small fraction of Hindu images have even been listed.68 The images and other antiquities from Nalanda have been organised under dynastic labels with the ‘Gupta Period’ as the beginning and ‘Pala Period’ as a phase of last artistic interlude before the final collapse of the site due to Muslim invasions. The aspect of ‘Tantric’ religion and Nalanda being crucial in its development has been highlighted. Religion and art from Nalanda have been referred to as being the point of contact and export of artistic and religious influences to South East Asia and to Tibet. The colonial categorisation of the Buddhist and Brahmanical faith in conflict with each other are obvious by the use of sculptural example such as

Making of museums

79

the Trilokavijaya.69 At the same time there is no attempt to provide any context for the large number of Hindu images found at the site.

From temple to shed Through my discussion of early collections and museums of Bihar in the previous sections, I have endeavoured to highlight how archaeological practices which aimed at conservation and preservation of archaeological sites and relics, by the very nature of their practice, proved detrimental in the presentation of a complete picture of the site. Despite the emphasis on in site preservation of artefacts and overall maintenance of sites, sacred images, motifs and architectural fragments continued to be removed and relocated. The institution of the museum itself played havoc with the original context of images. By building up certain narratives of display, labelling and cataloguing religious images lost their sacred powers to become heritage objects ready to receive visitors in the sterile condition of the museums. During this journey from sites to museums was also a stage of sculptures being heaped together in sculptural sheds very often mentioned in reports of the ASI, susceptible to theft, breakage and environmental degradation. Spooner writes in the ASI Annual Report for the Eastern Circle 1912–1913, “My object of visiting this (Deo Barunark) place was to inspect the site of the proposed shed for containing sculptures. The shed since my visit has been constructed. . . . Quite a number of well sculpted idols are lying about, and a few stone mandapa columns, two of which are inscribed, are in front of one of the temples. Everything of value will now be placed in the shed and will be taken care of.” He further added that since the older shed was small, it did not provide enough space for the great quantities of sculptures from the site to be displayed and “hundreds of others are stacked in heaps in the shed.” More importantly “anyone can remove at pleasure,” in addition to the fact that the “present one is not ever burglar proof: anyone can easily climb in over the railings, which are set in the openings, and take whatever he likes.” One of the most significant examples is the complete destruction of the series of stucco recovered from Maniyar Math in Rajgir, one of the earliest in South Bihar. The excavated reliefs were stored in an open air shed, exposed to harsh climatic condition resulting in the disappearance of significant archaeological evidence. The Annual Report of the ASI Bengal Circle of 1903 reports how Buddhist and Hindu images from Patharghata Hills had similarly been removed to Kahalgaon and

80

The making of museum collections

preserved at a large house of a European zamindar, one Mr Barnes.70 There was also a small cannon with a short inscription in the collection. The Report of 1914–1915 added that the cannon was presented to the collection of the Bihar and Orissa Museum, what happened to the images is not known.71 Equally appalling was the situation at Bodh Gaya, despite considerable British interest at the site. The ASI Report states “Bodh Gaya is a place of surpassing interest to the student of Buddhism as well as of Indian archaeology. The monuments at this place range in date from the earliest times of which any remains are extant in the country; and although the most important of these have been described elaborately by many writers the locality always still awaits systematic exploration to yield its buried treasures. Reports of sculptures and antiquities from the locality being sold to pilgrims and visitors by various people are not infrequent. Steps have been taken in the past to prevent such traffic and an overseer with a staff of a few chaukidars is stationed there for the purpose. But it appears that more vigilance is needed on the part of these people to ensure complete safety to the monuments and antiquities in their charge.”72 It was the British who, in the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries, defined how the value and the meanings of the objects produced or found in India were determined. They created a system of classification which determined what was valuable, that which would be preserved as monuments of the past, that which was collected and placed in museums, that which could be bought and sold, that which would be taken from India as mementoes and souvenirs.73 The display and nomenclature used in museums were also reflected in the disciplines of archaeology, art history and iconography and established the scholarship around how religious sculptures were to be studied. “Each phase of the European effort to unlock the secret of the Indian past called for more and more collecting, more and more systems of classification, more and more building of repositories for the study of the past and the representation of the European history of India.”74 l have emphasised how “colonialism, its ideologies and power relations”75 came to influence the ways in which objects are understood, how when sacred icons became idols, “removed from their contexts, and subjected to appropriation and exhibition,”76 their meanings underwent radical changes. “Wrested from popular devotion and disinvested of all sacred connotations” religious sculptures as static and isolated museum objects became a statement of art and of iconographic tradition.77 Sacred and profane came to be looked upon by British archaeologists and historians as two diametrically opposite and

Making of museums

81

fixed categories with no interaction between the two. Once sculptures were recovered from archaeological sites and placed in museums, there was little thought given to the issues of purpose of sacred sculptures or patronage or devotion. At this point I would also like to add a small note on various collections which have moved outside of India. Claudine Bautze-Picron has written extensively on one such collection at the Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin.78 The Museum has a substantial repository of sculptures, architectural fragments and glazed tiles from various sites from Bihar and Bengal that entered the collection between 1876 and 1879. By looking at the original catalogues of the Museum she has traced the various acquisitions and the agents behind these acquisitions. Amongst the many names, RL Mitra played a significant role in sending these objects from the original sites to the Museum in Berlin. Mitra travelled extensively in the region and amongst his many writings is a seminal monograph on Bodh Gaya. The collection includes sculptures from various sites: Bodh Gaya, Munger, Lakhi Serai, Gaya, and even some pieces from Broadley’s Museum. There are at least two Uma Mahesvara images from Munger in this collection.79 Claudine Bautze-Picron mentions names of several individuals who were private collectors, doctors or even travellers who visited the region in the late nineteenth century and either carried back specimens of sculptures or acted as brokers in the transfer of sculptures from temples to museums outside of the country. The collection at the Museum for Indische Kunst, Berlin, is just one example of this process of relocation and de-contextualisation of relics and artefacts. There are several other Museums and private collections which acquired sculptures from the temple sites and what is significant here is that colonial officers, surveyors and archaeologists were not the only people acting as brokers in this process. Nor can we estimate the quantity of sacred icons of sacred icons which left the sites to have lost their geographical and ritual identity.

Preserving colonialism By tracing the many trajectories sacred images travelled and the many identities they adorned I have outlined the role of museums, private collections and modes of exhibitions developed to promote the colonial project to present a “certain history” of their Indian Empire. The visual documentation of the religious history of India created through the interpretation of sites and objects during colonial times also have their reverberation in current studies and displays. I illustrate this process in the next section, in which I discuss the writings of archaeologist

82

The making of museum collections

HD Sankalia and art historian Stella Kramrisch to discuss how museum collections and sites from which they were recovered, have been projected in archaeological discourse, art historical writings and studies in iconography even in the twentieth century. Hasmukh D Sankalia wrote his Masters’ Thesis on the ancient Buddhist University of Nalanda which he submitted to the Bombay University in 1932. It was later published in 1934. Sankalia’s methodology is primarily textual but the significance of his work lies in his ability to corroborate texts with architectural lay-out, ground plans and material evidence gathered from the site. His work not only popularised Nalanda in the early years of its formal excavation by the ASI but he also used iconography as a field of knowledge and as a source to understand the site. Sankalia identifies the archaeological site of Nalanda as that of a Buddhist University and elaborates upon “the meaning of the word university to its Latin original, which roughly meant a community of teachers and scholars.”80 He thus compares this European connotation of a University with traditional modes of learning in India and derives “Nalanda University” as a “Buddhist University” that thrived under royal patronage. Sticking to this dynastic appellation he traces the evolution of the University complex under each dynasty and ruler and then supports this theory with epigraphic evidence. “From the account of Hieun Tsang it appears that there were at least six colleges at Nalanda. For each king, beginning from Kumaragupta I down to Harsa, built a vihara or sangrahama at Nalanda. And if we include a vihara built by Balaputradeva, King of Suvarnadvipa, there would be seven.”81 There are two sets of writings that Sankalia uses for his study of Nalanda, the first being the records of the two Chinese pilgrims Fa Xian and I Tsing and second being the accounts of Taranath, a Tibetan monk who visited Nalanda around the thirteenth century. Based on the memoirs of the Chinese travellers, Sankalia explores the physical lay-out of the “University complex,” as the “greatest centre of Buddhist learning,” dotted with monasteries, temples, kitchen, dining halls and so on. He also emphasises upon the sacredness of the site itself; “Nalanda before it became an educational institution was imbued with the holy memories of the Buddha. Even before the Buddha, it was the place where Mahavira had met Gosala. Among the many places that the Buddha carried his Holy propaganda, Nalanda remained a unique place. Buddha had visited the place with his favourite disciple Ananda.”82 On a critical note, Sankalia, however, concedes that like most other sites in India the antiquity, glamour and sacredness of

Making of museums

83

Nalanda is often reasserted by the popular belief that the “University” was founded by Asoka.83 For information on Nalanda in the medieval period, Sankalia refers to the accounts of Taranath on the basis of which he concludes its pre-eminence as a Tantric centre, “From references in Tibetan sources to Nalanda as a great centre of Tantric learning, or to a person as a professor of Tantra at Nalanda, and also from a number of books, evidently Tantric, ascribed to the Pandits of Nalanda in Chinese, it would appear that Tantra was, perhaps a very popular subject with students and professors at Nalanda.”84 He argues that the form of Tantricism which he associates with “Sakti worship” which was prevalent at Nalanda had its origins amongst the various religions and even philosophical practices that were followed by the Hindus as well as Buddhists. One can thus imagine a religious milieu with considerable fluidity between Buddhism and Hinduism. He describes the Tantricism practiced at Nalanda as a form of Buddhism distinct from “primitive Buddhism” but based on the “recital of mantras and dharanis, practise of yoga, and Samadhi and lastly, worship of not only Buddha in different mudras but even worship of gods and goddess.”85 He believes that this change in doctrine came with social compulsions where the laity could follow the faith yet was allowed liberty of action which was forbidden in the original Buddhist doctrine. It is here that Sankalia uses religious icons found from Nalanda to reinforce his theories on the antiquity and pre-eminence of the site as that of a Buddhist University and its eventual transformation into a Tantric centre. He pre-supposes that the very large number of images in bronze and stone, in a variety of forms and cultic traditions found from Nalanda, suggest that the images in some way might have been integrated into the “University curriculum.” Theology being one of the subjects taught at Nalanda, in keeping with the prevalent Mahayana traditions, the focus might not just have been philosophy but also on image worship. Sankalia sees images as part of a ritual circuit of shrines, defined by strict adherence to scriptural traditions popular within the “University” complex. He discusses that a number of “public rites” were performed by the resident members and priest which revolved around very large images such as those found at Nalanda. He elaborates upon the rites around daily worship of images in shrines which also would have involved the chanting of strotas and mantras.86 In addition, the monks and students also performed “personal worship” in the individual apartments of the monastery every day, which accounts for the large numbers of bronze icons found from the various monasteries. He

84

The making of museum collections

categorises the icons based on their religious affiliation into three categories: as Early Mahayana, Tantric Mahayana and Hindu pantheon87 in contrast to the earlier classification given by AK Coomaraswamy as Early Mahayana, Tantrayana images and finally the Kalachakra images.88 In this aspect, Sankalia’s study significantly differs from Coomaraswamy’s: he does not just focus on the aesthetics but also highlights the placement and purpose of religious images.89 He studies the images in a chronological order, though he remarks that the style of execution of the images has no bearing on its date or textual reference. In this process, he tries to correspond the physical attributes, mudras, garments of the images with textual traditions. Taking note of some very unusual images unique to both Buddhist and Hindu pantheon which have been found from Nalanda, Sankalia attributes these to the strong Tantrayana philosophy popular there. On the basis of the large number of Tara images found at the site, he concludes that “it is quite certain that Tara was also worshipped at Nalanda,” in her various forms as Prajnaparamita, Maha Sri Tara, Shyama Tara, Bhrukuti Tara or Gauri.90 He lists the other figures of the Tantrayana pantheon found at Nalanda, such as Vasundhara, Trilokavijaya, Heruka, Marici, Jambhala and Aparajita and one “most unique” Kalachakrayana image of Yamantaka.91 On the lack of reference to the practise of Tantrayana in the Chinese sources Sankalia concluded that Tantrayana was probably introduced in Buddhism at a much later date, only around the fifth century and in its explicit forms as Vajrayana and Kalachakrayana appeared only in the tenth century when a host of gods and goddesses made their appearance. He also deduced that the Chinese travellers may have chosen to record only the earlier, purer forms of Buddhism. Explaining the variety of Hindu images found at Nalanda such as Vishnu, Surya, Saraswati and Ganga, Balarama, Ananta Vasudeva, Shiva, Parvati and Ganesha, he suggests that on the one hand Buddhism probably underwent some kind of transformation to suit the popular appeal and at the same time was gradually replaced by Hinduism. “The ritualism of Nalanda Buddhism varies from time to time, as modifications took place in the faith itself” when chaityavandana, abulation of the holy image, chanting of gathas, etcetera, were replaced by the individual worship of these Tantric images. Consequently, there was an attempt made to display the superiority of the Buddhist theistic faith over others, as is evident from the figures of Heruka, Trilokavijaya and Aparajita.92 Through his influential work Sankalia recognises the multiplicity of faiths and practices at Nalanda though he emphasises a linear

Making of museums

85

transition of religion from Buddhist to Tantric to Hindu where there was a take-over of sacred space. He also records some popular ritual practices, some of which continued into contemporary times such as the mention of a “particular stupa which contains the Buddha’s hair and nails and people afflicted with children’s complaints coming here and turning around religiously are mostly healed.”93 A second significant issue which Sankalia suggests even in this early study is that the Nalanda of medieval times would have extended far beyond the limits of the present excavated boundaries, an issue which I will come back to in a later chapter. On the basis of iconography and sculptures scattered about on mounds and “in fields, under trees and on roadsides of the village,” he concludes that the site would have extended over villages such as those of Bargaon and Jagdishpur.94 Suggestions such as these made almost eight decades ago have, however, gone unnoticed and Nalanda and other sites in this sub-region continue to be viewed and popularised as Buddhist. A second set of writings on Indian art which are extremely relevant in the context of the early decades of the twentieth century are the works of Stella Kramrisch. Kramrisch was able to elaborate upon the deeper meanings of Indian art, emphasising upon the regional and sociological context without applying the western concepts of aestheticism. She wrote at a time when the museum movement was gaining momentum in India, and her writings are a cross-over between art history and iconographic studies. “She devoted her energy and scholarly skills to building Indian art history as an intellectual discipline in which formal history, archaeology, iconography and religion had their roles to play.”95 While she compared the visual symbols of sacred art with textual prescriptions, she was also able to elaborate upon the spiritual experiences behind the religious arts. She spoke of a symbolism in art and how it becomes a visual expression of the imagination of the patrons and craftsmen and a physical manifestation of centuries old techniques. The nature of her methodological approach and the vast scope of her writings can be understood in light of what Ratan Parimoo describes as the “cultural psychological method.” Having been trained under the Vienna school of art historians, Kramrisch’s approach to art has been inter-disciplinary and concerned with the origin, purpose and agency behind the making of art. At the same time, she attempted to view religious arts as more than just an archaeological object and as providing a more holistic view of the past. Her methodological approach emphasises upon comprehending the nature of art which entailed a critical discussion of chronology, region and physical appearance which she

86

The making of museum collections

felt formed the preface to her study. This has been described by the use of the German word Kunde, meaning “information.”96 The second part of her study is called Wesen – explained as nature or the character, substance or essence of an art object, referring to and describing material, composition, shape and content. Kapila Vatsyayana summarises the vast scope of Kramrisch’s writing under five broad themes: the patron and practise (craftsmen); unknown India comprising of tribal and folk art; the subtle body; the (sacred) image and temple architecture; and lastly the theory and practise of art.97 Kramrisch, in keeping with the nationalist spirit prevalent at the time, talked about the Indianness of art; yet unlike other contemporary nationalist scholars she emphasised on the centrality of history to the study of stylistic changes. Kramrisch accepted ‘naturalism’ as an intrinsic quality of Indian culture, and this she felt reflected on the modelling of human figures, use of certain decorative motifs, costumes, jewellery, animal symbols, etcetera. She detached Hindu art from its Christian counterparts and introduced the spiritual aspects behind sacred arts, something which none of her other contemporaries were able to do. This comes as evident in her pre-occupation with the Puranas, narration of myths and episodes, and the idea of manifest and unmanifest forms of the divinity. She was able to compare the theories of transubstantiation with the Indian idea of pancha koshas from the Upanishads, and the importance of rituals such as breathing life into images. Through the use of such philosophical notion, Kramrisch with her unique approach was able to link Indian art, its origins and evolution with the soils of the Subcontinent with the “post- Gupta period” as the starting point. Kramrisch perceived Indian art as being linear hence attached importance to chronology and periodisation. She divided art into ancient, medieval and modern and into timeless art and time bound. According to her, there were several high peaks in the development of Indian sculpture such as Mathura, yakshis, Shiva Mahadeva, Ellora, Brahmanical rock-cut sculpture, etcetera. Ratan Parimoo writes that Kramrisch saw a “continuous transformation in art where individual works or groups of work are part of this transformation.”98 This approach, however, had a deep drawback where the different periods were broken down and there was no merger of traditions or evolution of styles. Apart from the philosophical and spiritual concepts behind art, Kramrisch was able to emphasise upon the Indianness of art in two ways: first through the agency of the artist and second by integrating sculptures with temple architecture. For Kramrisch, the artist is an important component of art since he is able to assert his individual

Making of museums

87

style and combine textual prescription with local traditions to provide a unique flavour to each piece of art. “Some of the ideas in her book Indian Sculpture: How Indian artists see nature and life, human and animal forms and how in turn do these relate to vegetative forms; how Indian sculptors compose and integrate man, animal and nature and how these within themselves establish the space in which their very forms exist; and how is enfolded the narration of the episodes in the Buddhist reliefs, how there is accentless composition and modelling and how the human body is transubstantiated.”99 The artists and craftsmen with their understanding of texts, individual techniques, choice of stone and other materials gave a visual shape to the religious ideas of the people. Kramrisch’s second approach to emphasise upon the Indianness was to study art by comparing it to textual prescriptions such as the Vastu Shastras and by understanding sculptures as part of temple architecture. She wrote that temples were built as per prescriptions and that “The verbal image is the precursor of the architectural symbol.”100 Kramrisch refused to study art within the confines of the museum or illustrations as she believed that when placed in a museum, sculptures are devoid of their original context.101 She tried to understand the meaning behind the Hindu temples; the sacred site, geography, rituals, pilgrimage networks, mythology and so on and then perceived and understood the sacred images as part of this larger complex. She believed in the vastu purusa mandala and the sacred square as the foundation of a temple complex which differentiated the sacred from the profane. Kramrisch made a significant departure from earlier studies where she stressed upon the architectural and ritual context to sacred sculptures and the metaphysical experience behind them. She was able to ignite a new line of thought on Hindu temple architecture which was followed by others in the 1960s. In this sense my methodology and approach to understand sacred iconography is very close to Kramrisch where I evoke the architectural placement and ritual context of icons as well as understand the stylistic evolution of the Uma Mahesvara icon. A second reason Kramrisch’s approach and understanding of sacred sculptures are important is because she was the first to prepare a catalogue of sculptures of the Patna Museum soon after it was established in the 1930s.102 This catalogue for the Patna Museum was later published with minor modifications by PL Gupta the then curator of the Museum.103 Even the present published catalogue of the Museum has emerged out of Kramrisch’s seminal work.104 Kramrisch’s comprehensive study of the Pala and Sena Sculptures also makes her writings relevant to the geographical context of the

88

The making of museum collections

present study. For Kramrisch “art is situated in political developments,”105 and she classifies Pala and Sena art as the Eastern School hence codifying a specific style, a dynastic tag and a fixed chronology. A similar taxonomy of classification is very much visible in the narratives of the museums which crystallised during the period. Though Kramrisch conceded that no direct patronage to art came from the rulers themselves who were more interested in the act of donation which was why sacred arts was popular during the period. By doing so she introduced the second aspect of viewing art with a clear separation between the sacred and the profane space, where the divine and the deity live in separate zones with no point of merger and is another tendency seen in museum displays from the contemporary period. Kramrisch also made distinct division between Buddhist, Hindu and Tantric art. She spoke of Eastern India as the starting ground for Tantricism as a consequence of the decline of Buddhism and the advent of Islam. This entailed the predominance of an overarching female principle and the evolution of composite icons such as the Uma Mahesvara. Kramrisch developed a vocabulary for art criticism where the surface beauty was “connected with the depth,”106 where as in a museum each piece of art can be looked at individually yet is the part of a sequence belonging to a particular period, region and dynastic style. Her emphasis on aesthetic qualities analysed the position of limbs, facial expression, drapery and jewellery, and the hidden meanings behind each decoration such as the lotus, the kinnaras and the seat. The museums from the period, the Patna Museum being an ideal example, were able to adopt Kramrisch’s style of classification but failed to understand her holistic approach. As a result, the importance of sculptures is still gauged by their association with the Mauryas, the Guptas, the Palas or the Senas and where deities still stand in museums as fossilised pieces classified as Hindu or Buddhist.

Notes 1 Bernard S Cohn, ‘The Transformation of Objects into Artifacts, Antiquities and Art in Nineteenth Century India,’ in Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Powers of Art: Patronage in Indian Culture, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1992. 2 Colin Mackenzie ‘saved’ as much of the sculptures at Amaravati as he could and since there was no museum in India in which they could be deposited, he shipped the first batch to London in 1821, hoping that they would be accepted for the ‘Oriental Repository’ but the offer was coldly received. At that time there was little interest in paintings and sculptures to justify the large amount of space they would have needed to be on

Making of museums

3 4 5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12

13

14 15

89

permanent display. They were therefore relegated to the stables of East India House where they remained forgotten for the next half a century; HP Ray, Colonial Archaeology in South Asia: The Legacy of Sir Mortimer Wheeler, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, India, 2008. Saloni Mathur, India by Design: Colonial History and Cultural Display, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 2007, p. 16. Tapati Guha Thakurta, ‘The Museumised Relic: Archaeology and the First Museum of Colonial India,’ IESHR, Vol. 34, No. 1, 1997, Sage Publications, New Delhi, pp. 21–51. Tapati Guha Thakurta, Monuments, Objects, Histories, p. 58. Kavita Singh, ‘The Museum Is National,’ India International Centre Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 3/4, Winter 2002–Spring 2003, pp. 176–196. RL Mitra, Buddha Gaya: The Hermitage of Sakya Muni, Printed at the Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1878, p. 3. “The convent is surrounded by a high brick wall containing a very considerable space on the banks of the west branch of the Fulgo, between it and the great temple of Buddh Gaya. The wall has turrets at the corners and some at the sides and has two great gates the handsomest part of the building.” Ibid. GA Grierson and Rai Ram Anugrah Narayan-Singh Bahadur, Bodh Gaya Math: District Gaya, Printed at the Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1893. RL Mitra, Buddha Gaya, p. 4. Ibid., p. 70. Alan Trevithick draws out from Mackenzie’s Report, “At least one of the Buddha figures from the shrine had been ‘carried away by the Bairagis [Saivites] of this place, who keep it in their convent.’ The Pandit was told that, in the upper stories of the temple there had been perhaps ‘a lakh of small, elegant images and vases,’ but that they had either been ‘destroyed by time’, or ‘removed by the Bairagis, and some carried off by English gentle-men.’ Bits and pieces of the temple had been carried off, no doubt, by a variety of persons for a very long time, but it was not until 1847 that ‘English gentlemen’ began to consider organizing the removal of antiquities in the manner we think of as early archaeology.” Alan Trevithick, ‘British Archaeologists, Hindu Abbots, Burmese Buddhists: The Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya, 1811–1877,’ Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 33, No. 3, July 1999, pp. 635–666. “In the 18th or 19th century the last image (of Buddha) was evidently lost, and in its place was set up a black stone image, which I believe was removed by one of the Mahants of the math when he again consecrated a lingam in the middle of the sanctuary. The image was not destroyed but removed to a small temple within the enclosure of the math where it still exists. There is an inscription on its base which records the name of the person who dedicated it. The lingam established in the centre of the square area in front of the throne is not an ordinary figure of the kind, but a big votive stupa, which has been made to do duty for it. It is still worshipped by the Mahant of the math,” RL Mitra, Buddha Gaya, p. 84. Alan Trevithick, ‘British Archaeologists, Hindu Abbots, Burmese Buddhists.’ “Fragments of mouldings, friezes, architraves and other architectural stones, are to be met with in almost every part, stuck in the mud walls of

90

16

17 18 19 20

21

22 23 24 25

26 27

The making of museum collections huts over an area of five miles to the sacred spot; and these incontestably prove the former existence of a considerable number of stone temples in the neighbourhood of the great one. Bodh Gaya’s magnificent sculptures were used by local people as doorsteps or grindstones or were carried off by visitors, and this was stopped only when George Grierson made complaints about it to the Mahant,” RL Mitra, Buddha Gaya, p. 139. “On the 15th March, 1871, I took charge of the Sub-Division of Bihar, and ever since that time, have devoted such of my leisure as I could spare from my official duties, to the examination of the antiquities of the country, be they Muhammadan, Hindu or Buddhistic; but in the following pages I speak only of the last; the others will, I trust, one day form the subject of separate papers.” AM Broadley, ‘The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar,’ first published in 1872, this edition, Sundeep Prakashan, Varanasi, 1979, p. 3. Ibid., p. 18. He divides the relics of Buddhism found in Bihar into five groups: (1) ruins of temples, (2) those of monasteries or Viharas, (3) votive stupas, (4) figurines and sculptures, (5) Inscriptions. Ibid., p. 13. Ibid., p. 2. In the context of his excavations at Bargaon, Nalanda, he mentions, “Subsequent to the excavations of October 1872, I employed with permission, for some three or four weeks, the labour of about twenty prisoners, and succeeded in making a deep cutting on the north face of mound VII.” Ibid., p. 97. Speaking of the votive stupas Broadley writes, “The Chaityas vary in height from four inches to two feet. I have about 25 five distinct varieties in my collection. Buddhism has now-a-days disappeared even in tradition from the minds and recollection of the people of Bihar, and the dedicatory chaityas of the pious followers of Tathagata are commonly supposed to be nothing else than a different form of the sacred linga of the Hindus.” Ibid., p. 20. Frederick M Asher, Nalanda: Situating the Great Monastery, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 2015, p. 40. Frederick M Asher, ‘The Former Broadley Collection, Bihar Sharif,’ Artibus Asiae, Volume 32, Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1970, pp. 105–124. Ibid. Asher has discussed the curious case of a colossal Vishnu image which Broadley had found at Dapthu. The right hand and Gadadevi of Vishnu has broken away from the main image, and this fragment is now stored in the Patna Museum while the rest of the Vishnu image is still with the Indian Museum. The two parts of the same image now have different accession numbers and lie in two different museums detached from the shrine where it was originally meant to be. Sometime during the transfer of the Broadley collection from Bihar Sharif to Calcutta and finally to Patna the Vishnu image would have been damaged since it survives whole in photographs of the Bihar Museum. Ibid. Ibid. John Marshall, Indian Archaeological Policy 1915, Superintendent Government Printing India, Calcutta, 1916, Directive no. 22, p. 21.

Making of museums

91

28 “So, the people of this region, had hardly any opportunity to know their ancestral heritage. Therefore, a great necessity of a Museum of their own was being badly felt by them since long; but it could not materialize till Bihar and Orissa were separated from Bengal.” PL Gupta, Foreword to Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities, 1965, reprinted in Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Stone Sculptures and Other Antiquities, Patna Museum, Patna, 2001. 29 Presidential Address on the inauguration of the Patna Museum in Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society (JBOR), Volume 15, 1929. 30 Sraman Mukherjee, ‘New Province, Old Capital: Making Patna Pataliputra,’ IESHR, Vol. 46, No. 2, 2009, Sage Publication, New Delhi, pp. 241–279. 31 “Even if most of us cannot take up the spade and seek to unearth the valuable remains of the past, we may each of us in our own way help forward the aims of the Society by giving information and other assistance to actual workers. All that we have to do is walk with our eyes and ears open.” JBOR 1918, p. 13. 32 Presidential Address on the inauguration of the Patna Museum in JBOR, Volume 15, 1929. 33 JBOR, Volume 1, 1915, p. 292. 34 Vivek Kumar Singh and Sudhir Kumar Jha (ed.), Patna a Monumental History, Vitasta Publishing, Patna, 2010. 35 JBOR, Volume 2, 1916. 36 Ibid. 37 Ibid. 38 “Many of our most interesting remains have already left the province. Enquiries will be made to ascertain whether it will not be possible at a reasonable cost to obtain for our Museum plaster casts of some of these, such as have already been made for other Museums.” Ibid. 39 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1918–19. 40 PL Gupta, Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities, p. xii. 41 Annual Report of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum, 1927. 42 Ibid. 43 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1918–19. 44 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1919–20. 45 JBOR, Volume 15, 1929. 46 JBOR, Volume 2, 1916. 47 Ibid. 48 PL Gupta, Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities, p. xiii. 49 Annual Report of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum, 1923. 50 Annual Report of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum, 1924. 51 Annual Report of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum, 1925. 52 Birth of Buddha figure from Mathura, Annual Report of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum, 1928. 53 Hariti figure and a Mahayana figure of a female trampling upon Ganesha. Ibid. 54 “Mathura sculpture was valued because it was seen as the purely local precursor to the art of the Gupta period, the period that nationalist historians had identified as India’s Golden Age.” Kavita Singh, The Museum Is National.

92

The making of museum collections

55 Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Stone Sculptures and Other Antiquities, p. 7. 56 Ibid. 57 Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Terracotta and Metal Images, Patna Museum, Patna, 2001, p. 3. 58 The Museum obtained Bronze celts from Museums at Cambridge in 1920, JBOR, Volume 5, 1919, JBOR, Volume 6, 1920. 59 JBOR, Volume 4, 1918, p. 11. 60 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1919–20. 61 JBOR, Volume 15, 1929. 62 Education Department File number XI E-47 of 1922, Bihar State Archives, Patna. 63 Archaeological Survey of Central India File number XIE 25/21, Bihar State Archives, Patna. 64 Frederick M Asher, Nalanda, p. 96. 65 As noted in the display labels at the Museum. 66 Frederick M Asher, Nalanda, p. 96. 67 A Ghosh, A Guide to Nalanda, 3rd Edition, first published in 1939, this edition, Manager of Publication, New Delhi, 1950. 68 “By far the richest collection is that of stone and bronze images of gods and goddesses of the Buddhist, and, in a few cases, of the Brahmanical pantheon. The images are found in an abundance in the monasteries where they were worshipped and in all probabilities manufactured,” Ibid., p. 21. 69 “The presence of not a negligible number of Brahmanical images in the centre of Buddhist theology and ritual is intriguing. Probably their introduction and existence were tolerated, but it must be remembered that this was the age when the Buddhist were conceiving and erecting such deities a Trilokyavijaya trampling on Shiva and Parvati. It is no doubt that there were mutual exchange and borrowing of deities, but it is not possible to think that a Brahmanical deity whose image we find at Nalanda was ever absorbed in the Buddhist pantheon.” Ibid. 70 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1903–04. 71 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1914–15. 72 Annual Report of the Eastern Circle of the ASI, 1917–18. 73 Bernard S Cohn, ‘The Transformation of Objects into Artifacts, Antiquities and Art in Nineteenth Century India.’ 74 Ibid. 75 Tim Barringer and Tom Flynn (ed.), Introduction to Colonialism and the Object: Empire, Material Culture and the Museum, Routledge, London, 1998. 76 Ibid. 77 Tapati Guha Thakurta, ‘“Our Gods, Their Museums:” The Contrary Careers of India’s Art Objects,’ Art History, Vol. 30, No. 4, September 2007, pp. 628–657. 78 Claudine Bautze-Picron, The Art of Eastern India in the Collection of Museum für Indische Kunst, Berlin, Dietrich Reimer Verlag, Berlin, 1998. 79 The two images have been published by Thomas E Donaldson in his exhaustive volumes on Shiva and Parvati icons. Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, in Perspectives in Art and Archaeology, Volume 8, DK Printworld, New Delhi, 2007, p. 409, figure 383 and p. 405.

Making of museums

93

80 HP Ray, The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation, Routledge, New Delhi, 2014, p. 252. 81 HD Sankalia, The University of Nalanda, BG Paul and Co., Madras, 1934, p. 62. 82 Ibid., p. 36. 83 Yet Sankalia asserts that a lot of what the Chinese writers recorded was based on their “love for legends” and “from heresy,” Ibid., p. 37. 84 Ibid., p. 86. 85 Ibid., p. 87. 86 Ibid., p. 128. 87 Ibid., p. 133. 88 Coomaraswamy’s classification of images from Nalanda were as follows: The Early Mahayana images included those of Buddha, Boddhisatva and votive stupas; the development of Tantrayana marked the appearance of Shaiva images; and finally the Kalachakra tradition which included Vaishnava images. Ibid. 89 According to I Tsing’s records, images of Haritis depicted with babies and children were often placed in the dining halls and daily offerings were made to her to ensure abundance and benevolence. 90 HD Sankalia, The University of Nalanda, p. 135. 91 Ibid., p. 136. 92 Ibid., p. 139. 93 Ibid., p. 221. 94 Ibid., p. 225. 95 These themes are also the five sections of Barbara Stoller Miller’s edited volume, a compilation of selected writings of Stella Kramrisch with a Preface by Kapila Vatsyayana, Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Arts: Selected Writings of Stella Kramrisch, Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts Series, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, p. 12. 96 Verena Widorn, ‘Is There a Vienna School of Asian Art: Early Considerations on Indian and Oriental Art by Viennese Scholars at the Beginning of the 20th century,’ Unpublished paper, presented at XXIV ESCAS, Warsaw. 97 Preface by Kapila Vatsyayana in Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Arts, p. 12. 98 Ratan Parimoo, ‘Stella Kramrisch’s Approach to Indian Art,’ in Parul Pandya Dhar (ed.), Indian Art History: Changing Perspectives, DK Printworld and National Museum Institute, New Delhi, 2011, pp. 69–88. 99 Ratan Parimoo, ‘Stella Kramrisch’s Approach to Indian Art’ 100 Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Arts, p. 249. 101 “She explicitly refused to use the illustrations published by Fergusson or other ASI publication like the one from Burgess since she noticed that drawings, sketches and woodcuts do not support any relevant art historical conclusions. She believed in actually seeing the object at its original location and hence made it a point to visit many archaeological sites,” Verena Widorn, ‘Is There a Vienna School of Asian Art.’ 102 “Stella had been engaged to do the catalogue, but when she presented her work, Prof. Banerji Shastri, who was excavating Buxar in the 1930s demanded that Stella date and name certain objects to support his theory

94

The making of museum collections

103 104

that the site was as old as Mohenjodaro. She refused and the catalogue was later published without her name.” Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Arts, p. 17. PL Gupta, Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities, 1965. Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Stone Sculptures and Other Antiquities. Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Arts, p. 205. Ibid.

105 106

Part II

The icon in context

3

Sacred sites

As this country was the scene of the Buddha’s early career, as a religious reformer, it possesses a great number of holy places connected with Buddhism than any other province of India.1

Alexander Cunningham’s description of the sacred landscape of Bihar gives a brief glimpse of his passion as well as those of his colleagues for tracing the sites connected with the life of the Buddha. Through my construction of the history of British archaeology in South Bihar and the founding of museums, I have tried to reflect upon how sacred sculptures and religious sites came to be viewed by colonial writers and archaeologists. An understanding of sacred images as illustrative of texts and as specimens of aesthetic and artistic merit devoid of architectural and ritual contexts, as they appear in the colonial discourse, limits their understanding and scope. Several questions remain unanswered: Where were the images originally placed before their discovery and relocation to museums? The most crucial question pertains to the absence of monuments contemporary to these images. If there are so many surviving images, why are there no corresponding monuments? The absence of monuments leads to a second set of issues and the question of the architectural placement of the icons. Most images appear to be architectural fragments. If so, where were these images placed on the monuments? The third question concerns the purpose behind creating these icons: what was the cultic and architectural prescription behind creating them? This chapter is meant to form a bridge connecting the two sections of the book and takes the reader back in time to trace the ritual topography of South Bihar and provide a spatial, ritual and temporal context to sacred images before their discovery and relocation to museums and galleries in the nineteenth century. The chapter begins by chronologically mapping the origins of the earliest shrines in rock-cut caves and

98

The icon in context

their gradual expansion and reorganisation into stand-alone temples. Next, I discuss how single shrines gradually evolved into multi-religious architectural complexes containing a series of smaller shrines dedicated to different deities, sacred tanks and other motifs such as trees, pillars, rocks, etcetera. In the course of the chapter I draw upon living traditions and oral histories to trace how a series of shrines came to be integrated through ritual networks, communities of people, ritual specialists, devotees and pilgrims and through patterns of economic exchange. I then reconstruct the original placement of Uma Mahesvara icons and explore how they became crucial indicators of Shaiva temples and their importance in the contemporary sacred and architectural configuration. In the second section of the chapter, I supplement the archaeological mapping of the shrines with ritual prescriptions on temple architecture and placement of religious icons provided by the Mayamatam, a Shilpa Shastra dated to the ninth–tenth centuries from South India. Through this juxtaposition I highlight how the prescriptive norms were accommodated during the process of jirnodhaar of shrines and icons. Moving away from looking at the sacred topography of the micro region, the next chapter focuses on the Uma Mahesvara icon in particular and examines the evolution and the distinct character of this motif in South Bihar. Against the background of shrines and sacred spaces I construct the original ritual and architectural setting of the image and its significance in larger religious processes in the region. In the last chapter, by examining the medium of sacred icons, their placement and successive spatial relocations, I approach a period in the history of South Bihar for which little has been written. I trace how redactions in mythology such as the Itihasa Purana tradition and the popularisation of esoteric practices lead to reinvention of earlier sites and added several layers of meaning to them. Through the scope of the three chapters in this second part, I, on the one hand, discuss the formulation of a particular sacred motif, the Uma Mahesvaramurti; and on the other, by mapping the sacred landscape of the region, I correlate it with the contemporary architectural and philosophical idiom. By discussing the modification in religious practices over several centuries, I highlight how this ancient motif survives in popular culture today.

The rock-cut cave temple Some of the earliest shrines in South Bihar are rock-cut shrines dated to the centuries before the Common Era and dedicated to the Buddhist, Jain and Ajivika sects. As textual traditions suggest, the early tenets of

Sacred sites

99

Figure 3.1 Façade of Lomas Rishi Cave, Barabar Hills, Gaya Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

Buddhism and Jainism took shape in the Magadha region, corresponding with the present-day Patna-Gaya districts, and soon gained royal and popular favour. So far, no free-standing temples dated to this early period have been found in the region, nor is there any iconographic evidence available from these early sites for the corresponding period. Details of the architecture and iconography of the rock-cut shrines in the regions have been listed in Table 3.1. The largest cave complex and perhaps also the oldest in the region is found at Barabar Hills, in Gaya.2 Inscriptions at the site indicate that the four caves were dedicated to the Ajivikas by Asoka and his grandson Dasaratha. The Hill and its surroundings also show some Buddhist remains in the form of broken images and other ruins from a later date.

Shrines

Third–second century bce

Gurpa, Gaya

Son Bhandar, Third–second Rajgir bce

Sitamadhi cave, Gaya

Barabar Hills, Karan Chaupar, Gaya Sudama cave, Lomas Rishi cave, Vishva Jhopri cave. Third to second centuries bce Nagarjuni The Gopi cave, caves, Gaya Vapi cave 214 bce to fifth century ce

Site and district

Inscriptions: earliest dated to 214 bce; a fourth – fifth century CE inscription; a seventh century inscription mentions the installation of a Parvati image by a Maukhari chief. Later Buddhist and Hindu additions made to the shrines in about fourth – fifth century. Cave associated with legends from the Ramayana. Later-day Muslim tomb made from the debris of a Hindu temple.

Polished cave walls with “Egyptian doorframe.” Gopi cave: oblong chamber with semi- circular ends. Vapi cave excavated by Dasaratha as per inscriptions and now contains an old well in the front. Brick debris of later Buddhist and Islamic structures. Rock-cut caves similar to Barabar caves with Egyptian doorframes. Buddhist sculptures worshipped as Rama, Sita, Lakshmana, Lava and Kush and a wavy line on the wall is called Hanuman’s tail. Another image of Durga on lion. Dedicated to Jains; contains a door and a window, polished, vaulted roof and a sloping doorframe. Second cave in a more ruinous state with evidence of a verandah, carved Jain images in relief on walls, dated to third to fourth century CE. A second storey built in brick approached by rock-cut stairs. Buddhist caves containing images of the Buddha in bhumisparamudra and Tara. Tanks, two brick built miniature temples and a votive stupa.

Caves mentioned by Xuan Zang.

Later-day Jain Chaumukha image. Image of Jina Neminath with inscription of Chandra Gupta II. Second storey has Vishnu image riding on Garuda, dated to the fourth to fifth centuries CE.

Inscription of Asoka and his grandson Dasaratha along with inscriptions of Maukhari dynasty which records the installation of Krishna image. Hillock also contains a Shiva temple dated to seventh century; rock-cut sculptures, tanks and remains of fortifications.

Placement Other remains of Uma Mahesvara

Ajivika and Buddhist caves, polished interiors, sloping doorways, vaulted roof and carved elephant frieze. Later-day Lingas enshrined in the caves. Lomas Rishi cave, the earliest cave in India with horseshoe-shaped doorway and an apsidal plan. Some caves also contain a pedestal on one wall for placing image.

Architectural remains

Table 3.1 Early rock-cut shrines in South Bihar: third century bce–first century ce

Sacred sites

101

Similar caves from a slightly later period are found at a nearby site, called the Nagarjuni caves. An inscription at the site dated to 214 bce records the cave as commissioned by Dasaratha and is similar in architecture. The site is marked by the presence of a Buddhist monastery from a later date. A third cave from Gaya district is the Sitamadhi cave and is associated with the legends of the Ramayana. Buddhist icons are enshrined in the cave and worshipped as Rama and Sita.3 Also located close by are the Gurpa caves whose antiquity is difficult to establish. These caves contain Buddhist remains such as: miniature temples, votive stupa and images (the details are listed in Table 3.1). One of the most significant examples of rock-cut architecture in Bihar is the Son Bhandar caves located at Rajgir. Inscriptions at the caves indicate these as contemporary to the Barabar caves and can be dated to the third to second centuries bce. The sanctuaries contain a rectangular entrance hall followed by an apsidal end. Inscriptional and sculptural remains at the site indicate that the Son Bhandar caves were dedicated to Jain monks. An adjacent cave in a much more ruinous condition shows evidence of continued usage by the Jains till about third to fourth centuries ce.

The early shrine The growing popularity of the Hindu religious traditions probably brought about marked changes in the sacred landscape of South Bihar from about fifth to seventh centuries. Free-standing brick temples began to appear, the credit for which is usually given to the Gupta dynasty. As summarised in Table 3.2, the earliest surviving remains of brick temples in the region suggest the existence of a single-celled shrine with a bhadrapitha embellished with pilasters and a garbha griha placed on top.4 The next stage of temples assignable to about the seventh century show provisions of a roofed pradakshina path around the garbha griha, a mandapa and a general elaboration of the superstructure. Gradually more details came to be added: doorframes became ornamented, sculptures came to adorn the temple walls and at a later stage a stepped pyramid shikhara was added over the garbha griha.5 The popular building material continued to be brick, the outer walls were embellished with terracotta tiles and stone doors, pillars and windows were introduced. The single-celled shrine A survey of temples dated between the fifth and seventh centuries outlined in Table 3.2 indicates shrines dotting the entire landscape south of the River Ganga from Rohtas district in the west to the

Architectural remains

Circular, well-like structure covered with a conical tiled roof with projections in the four cardinal directions. At the base of the circular part, ten stucco images found arranged in niches separated by pilasters. Each image about 2 feet in height included Shiva linga, Ganesha, Vishnu, dancing Shiva, Nagas and Nagi. Remains of Vishnu temple: images of Varaha, Tara and other Hindu and Buddhist deities.

Siteand district Shrines

Maniyar Math Fourth–fifth century

Fifth century

Ruins of Shiva and One of the earliest temples in Bihar. First Vishnu temples mound contains ruined heaps of three stone and brick temples and original granite pillars. Second mound has one large temple with antarala, mahamandapa, mandapa, brick sanctum and stone doorways. Doorways carved with Ganga standing on makara. Over the lintel: Shiva, Brahma and Vishnu. Probably a Vishnu temple but the enshrined Vishnu missing. A large standing Vishnu found lying under a tree. A second Shiva temple indicated by a large broken linga and smaller lingas and figure of Shiva with Nandi.

Rajgir, Nalanda

Apshad, Gaya

Pali, Gaya

Table 3.2 Early shrines in South Bihar: fifth–seventh centuries ce

Third mound; several Hindu figures lined up amongst which one Uma Mahesvara

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Inscription records the erection of the temple by mother of Gupta King Adityasena. A tank and monastery mentioned though not found. Another Shiva temple found under a tree but the tree had enveloped the argha and linga. Large tank and several broken pedestals found.

Modern Jain temple. Low brick built platforms, pottery jars with snake hood spout, terracotta snake hoods indicate to the possible existence of the Naga cult. Inscriptions dated to first– second centuries ce.

Other remains

Mundesvari Hill, Rohtas6

Konch, Gaya

Temple now contains a square sanctum, a pillared mandapa, broken granite pillars. Sanctum contains linga and niches on the inside walls for holding lamps. Vaulted brick spire, arched on the inside and the second floor above the vaulted roof can be approached from the front. Externally, the tower is curvilinear with faces, recesses and ornamentation. Later mandapa was added and the shrines have number of Hindu and Buddhist sculptures. Shiva temple of octagonal plan with possibly Mundesvari pillared porch in front which no longer exists. Temple Fifth–sixth century Four entrances to the shrine on cardinal points with carved doorways. Eastern doors: figures of the river goddesses. Western door: Shiva figures. Northern door: Durga and a female figure. Southern door: Dvarapala. Latticed windows are present on north and south doors. The outside face of the temple has niches with carved pilasters and vase and foliage design. Images originally kept in the niches now disappeared. Inside the shrine a Chaturmukhalinga enshrined along with other images. Temple might have had a spiral roof but now only a flat stone roof survives. Various Shaiva images arranged in the premises. Shaiva temple was known as Vinitesvara now the temple is named after the goddess Mundesvari enshrined and worshipped as the principle deity.

Konchesvara Mahadeva; Sixth century

A seventh century inscription records the erection of this shrine dedicated to Shiva. Also mentions an additional shrine for Vishnu which no longer exists. A little way down from the hillock, a large oval boulder carved with a six armed Yaksha accompanied with an elephant, a seated female figure and a jackal. This relief is much older than the temple and carries an inscription dated to fifth–sixth centuries. Uma Mahesvara lined up along with other Hindu images: Surya, Vishnu, Parvati, Ganesha, Yama, Kubera etc. One Uma Mahesvara found carved on the stone lintel of a door. A second free-standing Uma Mahesvara dated about seventh century now in the Patna Museum.

(Continued)

Presence of numerous sculptures indicating other shrines at the site which contained these sculptures. Present temple architecturally comparative to the Mahabodhi Temple. Temple originally ascribed to Sun god, not known when it became associated with Shiva.

Uma Mahesvara lined up along with Hindu and Buddhist sculptures.

Fifth–sixth century Site of early Hindu temple. Temple no longer survives but sculptures of Ganesha, Uma Mahesvara, Vishnu and Garuda found.

Fifth–sixth century Ruins of brick and stone temples. Several lingas found along with a Ganesha image. At the foot of the hill a Vageshwari Sthana which contains an inscribed black stone slab of a later period.

Ruins of the temple contain a linga called Burha-Natha Mahadeva. In the niche of this temple found a copper plate inscription belonging to the time of Budhagupta and mentions the name of the village. Mound called Choki mound remains of a Shaiva temple lie to the west of which is the ‘Buddhist mound.’ Contains sculptures of Uma Mahesvara and Ganesha. A temple of Vishnu and three small four-armed Vishnu images. Remains of a large Shiva temple and two pillars of blue stone with ornamentation. The four faces of each of the two pillars are carved.

Burha-Natha Mahadeva 489 ce

Seventh–eighth centuries

Kheri Hill, Bhagalpur

Nandapur, Munger

Rajaona, Munger7

Architectural remains

Garohat, Rohtas

Siteand district Shrines

Table 3.2 (Continued)

One face of each of the two pillars carries an image of Uma Mahesvara.8

Uma Mahesvara images littered amongst remains of the temple

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Site contains three mounds. Northernmost probably a monastery where two Buddhist images in black basalt were found: a seated Buddha and Avalokitesvara. A tank called Balguzar Jhil. North of Choki mound a square mound where images of Kali and Ganesha a linga, figures of Shashti and Bhavani, a Navagraha panel and Parvati found. Inscription dated to the seventh or eighth centuries written in a perpendicular line on a pillar.9

Remains of brick buildings and ramparts of a fort. Site is important since it is associated with Mundesvari and dated contemporary to it. Extensive site with low mounds covered with bricks, several tanks and remains of a fort. Stones of fort walls inscribed and there are 22 inscriptions in late Gupta, ‘shell’ character. Brick built well also present. Site discovered in 1953 and contains remains of an ancient settlement, partly washed away by the Ganga.

Other remains

Fourth–fifth centuries Temple Site No. 2 Sixth–seventh

Temple of Buddha Sena 800–1200

Siddhesvaranatha Temple seventh century

Sitakund, Munger Nalanda, Nalanda

Kauva Dol, Gaya

Barabar Hills, Gaya

Series of small shrines located near hot water springs and contain Hindu sculptures. Square plinth of a sanctum with stone mandapa; unlike other brick built structures at Nalanda. The plinth contains 211 dados of sculptured panels depicting scenes from the Hindu mythology and sculptures of Hindu deities: Shiva, Parvati, Surya, Gajalakshmi, Kubera, etcetera. Face of hill carved with Hindu and Buddhist images among which a majority are of Durga. Site strewn with brick bats and potsherds. Temple has an image of Buddha in bhumisparamudra worshipped as Bhairav. Temple consists a brick sanctum, with antarala, mandapa and mahamandapa with 13 pillars. The Buddhist ruins seem to be older. Present temple stands on basement of original temple and contains a linga. Has a collection of Hindu and Buddhist images.

(Continued)

Remains of later day fort, defensive walls and tanks. Lifesize image of Durga carrying a Gupta inscription also found.

Unique rock formation where a huge rock precariously balances on the hill and rocks even when a crow sits on it. The site was visited by Xuan Zang. Also located is the house of a local Raja and a mosque both dated to later periods.

Uma Mahesvara carved on the rock face.

At least nine Uma Mahesvara images freestanding and rock-cut found on the ascent to the temple and also at the peak of the hillock.

Might have been a Surya temple as mentioned in the Shahpur inscription of Salapaksha, an army officer of Adityasena, dated to seventh century CE.10 Pilgrims’ graffiti on stone slabs.

Uma Mahesvara images appear on the dado

Pachar, Gaya

Site in ruins with heaps of brick mounds. Sanctum of the shrine and stone doorway with a linga enshrined. Life-size statue of Harihara found.

No details of Hindu temples known but an 18-armed black basalt image of female divinity found. Shrines located on the Ganga on a rocky island of granite. Rock-cut shrines with façade carved with images of Hindu deities include Shiva, Vishnu, Ganesha, Krishna, Radha, Hanuman, Surya and Ganga.

Telhara, Patna

Jahangira, Bhagalpur

Tank associated with Jain tradition from which two brass images found, now lost. Two Hindu temples one each of Shiva and Parvati with a collection of sculptures. Old images and carvings scattered all over the mound.

Champanagar, Bhagalpur

Hindu temple and monastery seventh century Original rock-cut shrine dated to fifth century. Later exteriors done in eighteenth century. Late inscriptions of seventh–eighth centuries Fifth century

Architectural remains

Siteand district Shrines

Table 3.2 (Continued)

Uma Mahesvara found among ruins.

Several Uma Mahesvara images carved on the walls.

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Other remains include Buddhist sculptures; carved boulders on the bank, facing the Ganga called Bais Karan, rock-cut linga and Rudra Pada or Shiva’s feet; a sixteenth-century mosque; and inscriptions dated fifth–sixth centuries A natural rock-cut Jain cave shrine with built portico and image of Parashwanath.

Site ascribed to Karna of the Mahabharata. Considered an important Jain pilgrimage centre. Jain temple dated to fifteenth – sixteenth centuries found along with tomb of a Muslim saint. A number of buildings of the Muhamaddan period.

Other remains

Patharghata Complex, Bhagalpur

Mandar Hills, Bhagalpur

Ruins of temples around the Sita Kund, a natural tank. Madhusudan Temple, a rockcut image of Narasimha found inside a cave with vaulted roof. Other rock-cut sculptures include Rama, Lakshmi, Saraswati, etcetera. Shiva temple is also located at the peak.

Rock-cut sculptures surround the Akasaganga and Papaharini tanks. Inscriptions of Gupta King Adityasena, his queen Konadevi and his officer Baladhar dated to seventh century record the excavation of tank. Another inscription dated to sixth century has not been deciphered. Several modern Hindu and Jain temples. Other six caves are plain Carvings near Contains series of seven caves. Small shrine Patalpuri cave, without much ornamentation. the ghat at with verandah on two sides, walls of the Chaurasi Muni Stone inscription dated to the foot of the verandah contain niches. Old images and sculptures, eighth – ninth century mentions hills include Bateshvara temple, bronze and silver relics, a four-faced, Ganesha, linga, annual festival in honour of 12-armed standing Bhairav figure found. Bhagwati temple Uma Mahesvara god Vateshvara, held at the Gateway with two pilasters and a carved sixth century. site. Temple is mentioned in and Parvati. capital and ornamented ceiling. Rock-cut Uma Mahesvara tenth-century inscription of sculptures at various parts of the hills. and other Hindu Jajilpara (Maldah, West Bengal) Chaurasi Muni Relief: 84 rock-cut relief of Pala King Jayapala. Buddhist sculptures of different avataras of Vishnu. Bateshvara remains located at foothills scattered in temple situated to the west of the caves and including images and brick below the Chaurasi Muni; a linga is enshrined Bateshvara structures. Rock-cut sculptures temple. here. 50–60 images are scattered around. at Patharghata hills carved at Bhagwati temple: with image of Ganga. various spots on the hill. Some Temple contains a platform with Buddhist evidence of fresco art but in a and Hindu deities. much-deteriorated state.

Shaiva, Vaishnava and Jain temples seventh century

108

The icon in context

Figure 3.2 Mundesvari temple, one of the earliest stone temples in the region, as it now survives without its shikhara Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

Bhagalpur district in the east. Fairly early shrines are to be found at Apshad, Pali and Konch in the Gaya, at Rajgir and Nalanda. Two temples of Rohtas district, at Garohat and Mundesvari, are dated as some of the earliest Hindu temples in the region. In the BhagalpurMunger pocket early shrines can be seen at Kheri, Rajaona, Nandapur and Sitakund. A detailed listing of archaeological remains in Table 3.2 further indicates the presence of Uma Mahesvara icons at almost all of the early shrines such as at Pali, Konch, Rajgir, Nalanda, Garohat, Mundesvari and Rajaona though it is difficult to indicate the precise architectural placement of the Uma Mahesvara icons. Fieldwork in the region indicates that at most sites sculptural fragments are now lined up and stored in the temple compound detached from their original architectural location. Some sites, however, do give possible clues to the original placement of the Uma Mahesvara icons; for instance, at Mundesvari, one Uma Mahesvara image still survives on a door lintel of the temple. At Rajaona, the temple no longer survives but Uma Mahesvara panels carved on pillars have been found.

Sacred sites

109

Reuse of sacred space Between the fifth and seventh centuries, free-standing shrines became popular while the early rock-cut temples came to be appropriated and re-used by the Hindu sects. One way of the reuse of sacred space was through an architectural reconfiguration of the site; brick built additions such as porticos, niches on the walls and pedestals were introduced to pre-existing rock-cut shrines to suit the requirements of the new religion. For instance, the Jain cave adjacent to the Son Bhandar at Rajgir indicates the addition of a second brick built level to the original shrine, sometime around the early centuries of the present era. From this second storey, an image of Vishnu on Garuda has been discovered, indicating Hindu presence. This is also the case with the Siddhesvaranatha temple at Barabar Hills and the shrine at Kauva Dol also in Gaya. Both these early centres associated with the Ajivikas and Buddhists respectively seem to have been later appropriated by the Shaivas. The temple of Siddhesvaranatha came up in about the seventh century, in close vicinity of the ancient caves, on the peak of the Barabar Hills.11 The reuse of a site considered sacred since antiquity provided legitimacy to the new shrine; the spot continued to be sacred, only its religious affinity changed.12 The original basement of the temple still exists and a stone linga is enshrined in the garbha griha. Kauva Dol is the other significant site of appropriation; from the Buddhist to Hindu, where an early shrine containing a Buddha in bhumisparamudra was later worshipped as Bhairav. Somewhere between the eighth and twelfth centuries, sculptures were carved on the face of the hillock to establish its Hindu leanings. Uma Mahesvara sculptures are conspicuously present to establish the Shaiva character of this originally Buddhist site.

Introduction of icons and motifs A second way in which re-appropriation occurred was through the introduction of specific iconographic programmes: Hindu icons and motifs were introduced at the ancient sites to alter their religious affiliation. At the Karan Chaupar cave on the Barabar Hills, for example, two human figures and a linga are carved on the outside walls to indicate Shaiva presence.13 A similar process is noticed at the Lomas Rishi cave, where an inscription dated to the seventh–eighth centuries records the installation of an image of Krishna at the site by the Mukhari chiefs, a feudatory of the Guptas. Another inscription of the Mukhari chiefs dated to the fifth–sixth centuries records

110

The icon in context

the installation of images of the Hindu goddess Katyayani and other Hindu deities by the chiefs in the caves on top of the Hills.14 Hindu cave sanctuaries Apart from the reuse of the earlier rock-cut caves, from about the fifth–sixth centuries, Hindu cave temples also began to appear at different sites across South Bihar. The rock-cut shrines of this later phase seem to be especially popular in the Munger-Bhagalpur pocket, the hilly terrain of the region; the monolithic granite islands that jut into the Ganga seem to have provided the natural backdrop for these temples. At the Jahangira hillock, an island in the Ganga, near Sultanganj in the Bhagalpur district, an elaborate religious complex developed around the seventh century.15 The hillock is surmounted by a Shaiva temple known as Ajgaibinatha, inside which a “rare” Shiva linga is enshrined.16 Hindu sculptures from the contemporary period are carved on the rock face of the island and on the banks of the Ganga. The sculptures found from Sultanganj are of Vaishnava, Shaiva and Saurya cults.17 Three Uma Mahesvaramurti panels dated to the seventh century are also found here. Several other rock-cut shrines are located in the Bhagalpur district like those on the Mandar hills and at Kheri. On the basis of inscriptions found here, these can be dated between the fifth and seventh centuries.18 The details of the shrines have been outlined in Table 3.2. Moving further east along the Ganga, a series of seven rock-cut caves, dated to circa sixth century, can be found at the Patharghata Hills, near Kahalgaon in Bhagalpur.19 In the vicinity are three more hillocks with rock sculptures dated to the same period.20 A broken brick structure is also located on a hillock in the middle of the Ganga called the Vateshvara temple.21 All these mid-stream rocks are indicative of the fact that they belonged to a series of rock-cut caves in the region. The Patharghata Hills are dominated by sculptural narratives representing Vishnu and his incarnations, especially the heroics of Krishna popularly called the Chaurasi Muni relief. The presence of Shiva is also attested at all these sites by several icons of the Shaiva tradition including Ganesha, Parvati and Uma Mahesvara.22 A study of Table 3.2 indicates that at each of these sites, temples dedicated to Shiva were present and Uma Mahesvara icons are conspicuous at all of these Shaiva temples. It can hence be suggested that the Uma Mahesvara image is seen as one of the manifest rupas of Shiva present at sites even at such an early date.

Sacred sites

111

Expansion and reconfiguration of the shrine The architectural landscape of South Bihar perhaps underwent another phase of transformation from about the eighth century when several new sites with elaborate architectural edifices came into existence.23 The older temples were reorganised, embellished with new ornamentation and often enshrined with brand new icons: typically, the black basalt images common in east India between the eighth and twelfth centuries. In this spate of reorganisation, a large number of sculptures were moved from their original location to suit the architectural and cultic requirements of the new shrines. It was common to reuse materials from older structures to build new ones, in case of dilapidation and decay. Table 3.3 elaborates upon the details of temple renovation: the patterns in which shrines came to be organised into layers of relationships with other sacred landmarks such as tanks and trees and the ways enshrined icons were moved about or even replaced. The panchayatana temples The temples became more elaborate in their layout as the plan of the earlier centuries of a simple shrine with a square sanctum and a mandapa was now modified and extended.25 A new kind of panchayatana plan evolved.26 The stand-alone structural shrines of the earlier centuries moreover began to evolve into more elaborate religious complexes where a group of at least three to four temples dedicated to different Hindu deities were placed around a central courtyard. Typically, the complex would have a large tank, on the banks of which would be shrines dedicated to Surya, Shiva and Vishnu. Gateways, residences for monks and other structures would be in the vicinity of the main temple and the entire complex would then be enclosed by parapet walls. Several prominent temple complexes of South Bihar can be dated to this period between the eighth and ninth centuries such as those at Dapthu and Guneri in Gaya, Deo, Deo Barunark, Deo Markandaya in Aurangabad, Ghosrawan in the Nalanda, Simaria, Uren and several shrines in Munger. Rebuilding and renovation of shrines The temples of the earlier centuries which had possibly undergone deterioration were rebuilt on this new architectural layout. Often the rebuilding was carried out on top of the older brick shrines, using fragments, sculptures and carvings from the earlier structures.

Architectural remains

Dapthu, Gaya

Group of four temples dedicated to Shiva, Surya, Vishnu and Krishna along the west of a dried-up tank, seventh century.

Images of a dancing Shiva, mukhalinga and Vishnu. Shiva temple with simple sanctum, granite columns, ornate doorway and linga. Surya temple: brick built single shrine, stone porch, doorway and pyramidal spire. Inside the shrine, Surya figure and Lakshmi Narayana. Other Hindu images are lined up in the porch. Curious image of a prince riding a horse, accompanied by archers, musician, women and dogs is locally worshipped as Bhairav. Vishnu temple has an image of Vishnu and broken images and pillars. Krishna temple: dilapidated but enshrined Krishna still in place. Deo, Surya temple Surrounded by large courtyard, built of solid stones Aurangabad with stone tower. Temple faces west. Sculptures of Sun god dominate. Deo Barunark, A group of seven Brick temples. Main temple: square shrine, large Aurangabad temples, pillared hall with ornamented pillars, brick spire eighth century. with stone vaulting and many stages of repairs. Inside the shrine: standing Chaturbhuj Vishnu and two Sun god images later than the temple. Other Hindu images lined up against the wall. Second smaller temple of similar plan and square sanctum and double storied spire. In the sanctum, a blue basalt pedestal and a smaller brick pedestal of a later period on which is placed a Sun god image too small for the pedestal. The original image is not found.

Site and district Shrines

Table 3.3 Expansion and re-organisation of shrines: seventh–tenth centuries ce

Ruined mud fort on the hill. Largest temple is now a Jain temple called Parashwanath temple but contains Buddhist carvings and sculptures.

Uma Mahesvara inside the sanctum on side wall of Shiva temple. Several Uma Mahesvara lined up in porch of Surya temple.

The mound contains two tanks and forts of the local Raja. Tank called Dvapara Two Uma Pokhara. Monolithic Mahesvara carved on pillars, column carries a capital 8 feet in height. Square in dated to sixth lower half then becomes century. Seven circular ornamented by other Uma a square abacus, which Mahesvara at the site; lined up carries four niches each with other deities containing an image: Shiva, Parvati, Bhairav and inside the main Ganesha.

Other remains

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Deo Markandya, Aurangabad

Sun temple and Shiva temple, seventh to eighth centuries.

The Sun temple: square shrine, spire and flat roof porch, on a pedestal images of Surya and Ganesha, too large for this temple, brought from elsewhere. A large Vishnu found among debris along with ornate stone doorway and smaller images of Sun god. Three mukhalingams found. Shiva temple also brick built with a mukhalingam called Gauri Shanker. Bas relief of Kali carved on the wall and other images in the shrine are Parashurama, Vishnu, Nandi bull, etcetera.

The pedestal is carved with images of the horses of the Sun god. Next door is a flat roofed room, facing the west in which a linga is enshrined and houses a collection of Shaiva images. Two other smaller temples found one containing a linga.

sanctum of the first temple and in a subsidiary sanctuary of second temple.

(Continued)

On top of capital four other deities the guardians of the cardinal points: Indra, Kubera, Varuna and Yama. Contains Navagrahas and Rahu. Inscription of Jivagupta on an ornamented pillar. Another temple lying in ruins and also contains debris of sculptures. A large ornamented monolithic column.24 Site is littered with NBP Ware on the basis of which dated to 600–200 bce. A later fifth–sixth century inscription reported by Cunningham. The original inscription is lost. Tank located close by: Suraj Pokhar. Mound contains brick ruins of two other temples and a habitational site probably a colony of priests. Also a fort of the local Raja.

Shiva temple.

Balgudar, Munger

Ghenjan, Gaya

Dharawat, Gaya

Barantpura, Bhagalpur

Modern temple structure with early sculptures and temple fragments.

Matangesvara Temple.

Bakraur, Gaya

Hindu and Buddhist sculptures and temple remains some of them inscribed.

Chaturmukhalinga and other sculptural fragments. Three images bearing inscriptions dated between ninth and twelfth centuries. Chandi temple, Built on the site of an earlier Buddhist temple eleventh century. the present temple contains a colossal female figure worshipped as Chandi and a male warrior riding a horse worshipped as Buddhai. Several carved fragments including an inscribed doorway. Inscription on door frame mentions the goddess Mahesvari and Buddhesa. Ninth–tenth Small modern temples lining the Chand Pokhar and centuries. contain sculptures and carvings from earlier period. Life-size Avalokitesvara worshipped as Bhairav.

Architectural remains

Site and district Shrines

Table 3.3 (Continued) Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Other sculptures carved with inscriptions of ninth– tenth century collected in a tree shrine. Also a fort mound with pottery sherds. An annual fair held. Tank called Chand Pokhar is bound by earthen embankments. Sculptures moved to Indian Museum.

Ruins of a fort associated with King Virata of the Mahabharata.

Matangavapi tank, Suraj Kund, ancient embankments lining the tanks and remains of a stupa and a Hindu matha.

Other remains

Hindu and Buddhist temple remains. Vihara and Shiva temples ninth–twelfth centuries. Sun temple and Shiva temple.

Tenth–twelfth centuries

Gowar, Patna

Keur, Gaya

Hilsa, Patna

Guneri, Gaya

Sinha Vahini Sthan, Vajrasana Vihara, Temple of Asha Devi, ninth century

Ghosrawan, Nalanda

Brick mounds with large size bricks and large Buddhist images. Two inscribed Buddhist images. Site so extensive it has been compared to the site of the Nalanda monastery.

Modern Sun temple with older images. Shiva temple rebuilt and contains Buddhist images as well.

Broken sculptures and carvings including image of Mahisasuramardini, Buddha and other Buddhist and Hindu deities. Numerous Buddhist and Shaiva sculptures; only two Vaishnava ones. Several of the sculptures inscribed.

Sinha Vahini Sthan: Buddhist divinities; including 8 feet high, four-armed Vajrapani and eight-armed female figure sitting on a lion. Vajrasana monastery mound: brick remains of basement, pillars and sculptures and pot of coins of the Pala period. Temple of Asha Devi a goddess shrine located on the top of a hill has a collection of Buddhist and Hindu sculptures while the main deity is Mahisasuramardini.

Uma Mahesvara along with other Hindu and Buddhist images in courtyard of Asha Devi temple.

(Continued)

Tomb and mosque of a Muslim saint. One inscribed Tara image. Number of tanks surround the village in a somewhat narrow formation. Site was earlier wrongly identified as Vikramsila.

Tank.

Located close by are the remains of a fort. Inscribed sculptures found on site including an inscription which records the erection of Vajrasana Vihara. Two inscribed images of Mayadevi found from Asha Devi’s temple. A tank called Sahu Pokhar. Remains of a fort.

Ruins of Hindu temples.

Mubarakpur, Patna

Sun temple, Nagasthan, Jagdamba temple.

Goreya Devi temple.

Ongari, Gaya

Jamuna Dih, Patna

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Several brick mounds. Broken lower half of Buddha image enshrined in the temple while two granite pillars and lingas. Brick built sanctum with linga inside and a stone pillared hall with flat roof. Another temple with linga in sanctum and sculptures of dancing males all around. West-facing Sun temple with two images in worship: Sun god and Vishnu. Numerous sculptures lying about in the vicinity. Nagasthan located to the east of the tank, built in mud clay. Jagadamba temple with images and carvings. Modern temple built on the site of an earlier Shaiva Uma Mahesvara temple. with other sculptural remains.

Modern, brick built Tara temple, built on remains of earlier building. Many images built into the wall and several are lined up near the doorway. A life-size image of a male deity, worshipped as Tara Devi, with an inscribed halo. Nearby another temple in ruins, rebuilt several times and contains more structural fragments. Also found Vishnu riding Garuda. More than 50 sculptures, both Hindu and Buddhist in various stages of completion found.

Tara temple, ninth–tenth centuries

Kispa, Gaya

Narawat, Gaya Buddhist and Hindu temple remains. Ner, Gaya

Architectural remains

Site and district Shrines

Table 3.3 (Continued)

Mauryan site with several large jars with clay play things, stone pestles and brick buildings.

Suraj Pokhar on the west of Sun temple.

Tank, site of a temple or vihara, and a structure recognised as a sculptors’ studio on the basis of many unfinished sculptures. Old dry tank and several other Buddhist and Hindu images scattered.

Several lingas and other Hindu sculptures strewn indicate there may have been a Hindu temple.

Other remains

Uren, Munger

Six Shiva temples.

Simaria, Munger

Modern temple made of materials of an earlier shrine of considerable plan and size and reused old carved doorway. Pillared hall made of pillars of different shapes and designs. Figure of ascetic Buddha in the shrine worshipped as Trilokanatha. Another ruined temple on the mound called Narting.

Six Shiva temples built in a group inside a rectangular compound on the banks of large tank which surrounds it on three sides. Temple can be accessed from the south. Largest temple dedicated to Dhanesvaranatha. Several Buddhist images including an inscribed Buddha. Remains of Hindu temple and sculptures on the Shiva temple, stupa mound. Rock carvings: figures of stupas, water Buddhist vessels and inscriptions found along with images monastery, stupa and Rock- scattered in the village. Ruins of brick built temple called Kali mata ka mandir, eleventh–twelfth century cut sculptures, contains several Hindu images. Kali mata shrine. Buddhist remains dated to seventh century. Hindu remains to eleventh– twelfth century

Trilokanatha temple, tenth century

Punawan, Gaya

One Uma Mahesvara in the village along with image of Agni and Buddhist statues. Second Uma Mahesvara in Kali mata ka mandir.

(Continued)

Buddhist ruins recognized as Lorik ka ghar, a footprint mark on a rock with an inscription, believed to be the footprint of the Buddha. Stupa ruins: brick mound with plastered walls. Extensive remains of brick monastery with terraces and cells.

Two significant tanks: a large and square tank called Budhpokhar Tal and smaller one called Karamar Tal. Village located between the temple mound and Budhpokhar tank. Area littered with sculptures including that of a three-headed goddess.

Shiva temple on Vaibhara Hill.

Rajgir, Nalanda

Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger

Rajgir, Nalanda

Square sanctum with pillared hall in the front and flat roof. Linga enshrined with Nandi. Doorway flanked by two female figures and pot and foliage design. Pillars of the mandapa quite plain. Later brick enclosures surround the mandapa.

Mahadeva temple on Vaibhara Hill, eleventh–twelfth century.

Rajgir, Nalanda

Shiva Temple, Chandisthan, rock carvings and temples at Manpatthar, tenth century.

Built over remains of earlier Hindu and Buddhist temples, Buddhist and Hindu sculptures, carvings including seals with Buddhist creed. Pieces used in construction of walls of Munger Fort.

On the banks of Suraj Kund are a series of temples. A Shivalaya with image of Buddha and other Buddhist figures. Jain temple dated to 1150 containing footprints now called the temple of Dattatreya. Four other temples in a series, two of Shiva, one of Tulsi and one of Hatakeswar; another rupa of Shiva. Venuvan Area, Foundations of a room and 9 Buddhist stupas. eleventh century. Jars with clay tablets with Buddhist creed and Boddhisatva image.

Architectural remains

Site and district Shrines

Table 3.3 (Continued)

Uma Mahesvara found.

Found among Buddhist antiquities is one Uma Mahesvara.

Uma Mahesvara among many other Hindu images in the temple of Hatakeswar.

Uma Mahesvara found near the hot spring amongst ruins of a Shiva temple.

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

This ‘Bamboo Garden’ identified with the life of the Buddha, who is supposed to have stayed here while in Rajgir. Tank with a large mound and Muslim tombs. Associated with Ramayana legends. A tenth-century inscription records erection of the Shiva temple by King Bhagiratha of the Ramayana.

Other remains

Temples in ruins only brick remains survive along with fragments of images.

Utrain, Gaya

Buddhist and Hindu temples.

Sringirikh, Munger

Three Shiva temples.

Tapoban, Gaya Shiva temple.

Two Shiva temples, eighth–ninth century.

Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur

Rohtasan temple dedicated to Shiva as Rohitesvara contains a sanctum with mandapa while the shikhara is broken. Outside walls have niches for images which have now disappeared. Ornamented doorway with dvarapalas and Ganesha at lintel. Inside the sanctum: linga and Nandi. Harishchandra Temple: dedicated to Vishnu, sanctum with verandah on four sides. Sanctum has dome with four smaller side domes. Image inside is broken. Ganesha Temple: sanctum with mandapa and plain walls and a modern image of Ganesha is housed inside. Mahadev Temple: sanctum with hall. First temple: remains of a brick temple with sandstone pillars and door jambs. Second temple: monolithic rock-cut temple with gabled roof. Carved out of single granite boulder, square sanctum and porch. Horseshoes vault roof. Originally dedicated to Shiva now abandoned. Site of Buddhist and Hindu temple remains, sculptures and inscriptions. Sati pillar with three panels, containing images of linga, elephants and women. Shiva temple built on the remains of Buddhist temple, has collection of Hindu sculptures, mostly Shaiva.

Rohtasan Hill, Rohtasan Temple, Rohtas Harishchandra Temple, Ganesha Temple, Mahadev Temple.

Uma Mahesvara found.

Three Uma Mahesvara: one is inscribed with a Buddhist creed. Uma Mahesvara found.

Portions of temple used in nearby Muslim tomb.

Located near the reservoir of a waterfall. Site is associated with legends of the Epics and Puranas. Five springs, four of which are hot springs.

120

The icon in context

Evidence from Deo Barunark and Deo Markandya, as appear in Table 3.3, indicate original brick shrines dated to the fifth–sixth centuries. Both these temples dedicated to Surya underwent considerable renovation at various stages between the seventh and eleventh centuries.27 Older stone pillars were reused at both sites to create new porches while new stone shikharas were added. At Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger a Shivalaya dated to the tenth century similarly indicates the use of fragments from older Buddhist and Hindu temples. As part of the redevelopment project, at certain sites the earlier brick temples started to acquire newer extensions in stone. Such seems to be the case of Temple 2 outside the Nalanda Monastic Complex locally known as Patthar Ghatti where on the foundations of the original brick built shrine an entirely new stone edifice was built.28 On the basis of graffiti marks or pilgrims records on the north-east part of the jagati, the addition of the stone edifice to the temple has been assigned to the sixth or seventh centuries.29 Change in the sectarian character of older temples The second way of expansion and reorganisation of temple complexes was often marked by a change in the cultic and sectarian affiliation of the earlier shrines. Often temples originally dedicated to Buddhist deities and to Surya were converted into temples for Vishnu and Shiva. In most cases, merely the old image was removed and a new one was installed as the primary deity. Several instances of this have been cited in Table 3.3; for instance, at Deo Barunark, in the primary shrine dedicated to the Sun God, a Chaturbhuj Vishnu replaced Surya as the principle deity. Smaller images of Surya and motifs associated with the Sun god from the earlier periods, however, continued to co-exist with the new deity. In a subsidiary shrine, similarly, the pedestal seems too small for the image which presently stands, indicating that the original images were replaced. The same process is evident at Deo Markandeya, another Sun temple, where the principal shrine has Vishnu and Ganesha images too large for the pedestal. At Ongari in Gaya, the shrine of the Surya temple faces the west hence suggesting that this was originally not a Surya shrine, which usually face the east. Inside this Surya shrine moreover two images are currently in worship: one of Surya and the other of Vishnu. Nearby at Deo, a popular temple site a similar process of assimilation is noticed where Surya images abound in the shrine to mark his definite presence though the door of the shrine faces the west. The appropriation of Buddhist shrines involved a slightly different and a simpler process. In case the identity of an older Buddhist shrine

Sacred sites

121

was altered into a Hindu one, the images of the Buddha, Boddhisatvas and other Buddhist divinities were retained; these were merely given new identities and names. The Buddha and Boddhisatvas became either Bhairav in the case of a Shiva temple or an avatara of Vishnu in a Vaishnava temple. Several such instances of appropriation of early Buddhist sites as Hindu shrines have been outlined in Table 3.3. At Dharawat, an almost life-size Avalokitesvara statue is worshipped as Bhairav. A Chandisthan at Barantpura, Bhagalpur, contains colossal figures of a female and a male figure riding a horse; the female figure is worshipped as Mundesvari and the male as Buddhai a local deity. At a Shiva temple at Narawat, Gaya, the broken lower half of a seated Buddha statue is enshrined in the sanctum while the principle object of worship are the lingas scattered nearby. At Simaria in Munger, a group of six Shiva temples are arranged in a courtyard, the approach to the temples is from the South, indicating that originally it might not have been a Shiva temple which generally faces the east. The temples include several Buddhist images in worship, including an inscribed Buddha image. At Vaibhara Hill, Rajgir, a Jain temple dated to 1150 includes an enshrined footprint, though it is used as the shrine of the Hindu deity Dattatreya. There are several other sites which give evidence of Hindu temples being constructed at ancient Buddhist sites such as at Keur, Hilsa, Rajgir, Uren and Tapoban Evolution of elaborate iconographic schemes The third aspect of reconfiguration involved the introduction of new elements of design in the brand-new shrines which were erected during this period. The overall plan and surface ornamentation of shrines became increasingly complex where the web of divine relationships was displayed through the sculptural arrangement and architectural layout of the temples. Sculptures were now carved on the outer walls of the new stone temples; in the case of brick temples, niches were created on the outside walls on which stone sculptures were placed. Simultaneous modifications were also carried out inside the garbha griha, where apart from the principle icon in the sanctum, alcoves were created on the side walls on which images of other deities could be placed. For instance, in a Shiva temple the side niches would ideally have images of Ganesha, Parvati or Uma Mahesvara. This structural design of the new temples accounts for the very large number of stone images produced during the period.30 As I have pointed out earlier, the Uma Mahesvara image seemed to have become one of the defining images of a Shaiva temple. There

122

The icon in context

are instances of the Uma Mahesvara placed on side niches of a Shaiva sanctum such as at Dapthu. There are several pillar fragments which carry the Uma Mahesvara image, as in the case of a pillar at Deo Barunark, where there are pillar remains from Rajaona and several double-sided steles with Uma Mahesvara on one face. Archaeological remains as listed in Table 3.3 indicates that most of Uma Mahesvara images which now survive in temple precincts, lined up outside the shrines or placed in subsidiary shrines such as at Deo Barunark, Deo Markandeya and Dapthu, in the precincts of the Asha Devi Temple in Ghosrawan, as also at Uren, can be dated to this period.

The sacred complex In the last two sections of this chapter, I have cited several instances of conversion of Buddhist shrines into Hindu temples either by architecturally reconfiguring the earlier shrine into a Hindu one or merely by giving the images of the Buddha and other Buddhist divinities a Hindu identity either as an avatara of Vishnu or as another rupa of Shiva. By the tenth century, this process of appropriation somewhat ceased, instead an attempt was made towards the accommodation of different religions into the same architectural space. This was marked by the evolution of large sacred complexes in South Bihar where shrines dedicated to different religions could be seen in the same temple space. Table 3.4 indicates several instances of such multi-religious architectural complexes. The tenth century marks a new spate of renovation and reorganisation of temple sites in South Bihar when the brick and stone temples of the earlier centuries probably started to crumble and needed repair. More significantly at several ancient sites originally associated with the Buddhist and Jain faith a new spate of construction began to accommodate Hindu shrines as well. This also involved a relocation of icons to suit the modalities and networks within the architectural complexes. I have chosen to elaborate upon the case studies of four significant sacred complexes from the region at Gaya, Bodh Gaya, Nalanda and Antichak. Gaya: mapping the rituals of shraadh The available sculptural and archaeological evidence from Gaya can mostly be dated from the eighth century onwards; literary sources however describe the prominence of the site to a much earlier period. Gaya has been associated with the performance of the shraadh ceremony

Shrines

Vishnupad Temple, Pasupatinath Temple, Mangala Gauri, Markandeyasthan, Janardhana Mandir, Gau Pachar, Narasimha Temple, Gadadhar shrine, Krishna Dwarka, Parpitamahesvara, Surya temple built by Yakshapala, Surya temple at Brahmani Ghat, Akshyavata, Patalesvara Mahadeva Temple, Gayesvari Temple, Sitala Mata Mandir, Shiva temples at Pretsila and Ram Gaya Hill, Dhanukaranya Temple.

Bodhi Tree, Vajrasana, Stone Railing, Mahabodhi Temple, Jewel Walk Shrine, Vageshwari Temple, Tara Devi temple, Pancha Pandava Mandir, Buddhapad, Mahant’s Compound, Dharmaranya, Sujata Stupa.

Siteand district

Gaya, Gaya, eighth–twelfth centuries.

Bodh Gaya, Gaya, thirrd century bce– eighteenth century ce.

Inscriptions mention Visvarupa who built several shrines in and around Gaya. Numerous sacred hillocks like Ramsila, Brahmayoni, Pretsila and Ram Gaya Hill. Also sacred tanks like Rukmini talao, Suryakunda, etcetera. Dhanukaranya temple where offerings are made to the cow, offerings made to Phalgu river as well and the river is an important part of the shraadh circuit. Tanks in the vicinity of the Mahabodhi Temple such as Buddha Pokhar. Sacred Bodhi tree and a banyan tree to the north of the temple. Uma Mahesvara found at all Shiva temples: Parpitamahesvara, Akshyavata, Mangala Gauri, Surya temple at Brahmani Ghat, Phlaguesvara. One inscribed Uma Mahesvara at Brahmayoni Hill dated to tenth century. Also present on walls of Gayesvari temple. Several Shiva temples at Pretsila and Ram Gaya Hill where Uma Mahesvara can be seen.

Inscribed Uma Mahesvara in a tree shrine to the North of the Temple along with several other Hindu images. As many as 9 Uma Mahesvara images dated between ninth and eleventh centuries found in the Mahant’s collection.

Oldest sculpture is a rock-cut Vishnu at Gau Pachar temple, fifth– sixth century. Mangala Gauri and Markandeyasthana have several eighth-century sculptures. Janardhana mandir contains images from the ninth century. Gadadhar, Krishna Dwarka and Parpitamahesvara shrines dated to eleventh century. Phalguwesvara temple in the courtyard of Vishnupad is dedicated to Shiva while the Gayesvari temple to Durga.

Tara Devi and Vagesvari Temple contain images of Buddhist male divinities worshipped as the goddesses. Images enshrined obtained from the ruins of the Mahabodhi Temple.

(Continued)

Other remains

Placement of Uma Mahesvara

Architectural remains

Table 3.4 Evolution of multi-religious architectural complexes in South Bihar: tenth century ce

Shrines

Includes villages: Bargaon, Begumpur, Jagdishpur, Kundalipur and Kapatya

Siteand district

Nalanda, Nalanda, fifth–thirteenth century.

Table 3.4 (Continued)

Monastery Area on a north–south axis made of burnt brick with stucco embellishments. Monasteries on east while temples on west. Oldest probably Temple 3, with as many as nine levels of construction. Temple 2: probably the only Hindu temple and the only structure made of stone. Begumpur: ruins of Hindu, Vaishnava, Shaiva and Surya shrines around the Suraj Pokhar with numerous images. Temple of Teliya Baba with a colossal seated Buddha in Dharmachkara pose with offerings of oil smeared on the statue. Suraj Temple, Bargaon: modern temple made from the ruins of ancient temple fragments, contains Buddhist and Hindu images. Jagdishpur, Rukmini Sthan colossal Buddha worshipped as Rukmini. The Temple of Kapatesvari at Kapatiya: pot- bellied Buddhist divinity worshipped as Goddess Vageshwari. Temple also has a collection of ancient images.

Architectural remains

Other remains Several tanks located in the vicinity, the largest being the Suraj Pokhar.

Placement of Uma Mahesvara Several Uma Mahesvara found from the neighbouring villages outside of the monastery area. At Bargaon a unique miniature temple found with the image of Uma Mahesvara in the central niche.

Antichak, Bhagalpur, ninth–twelfth century.

Believed to be the site of the Vikramsila Monastery.

Brick remains of the monastery. Principal temple cruciform shaped. Rectangular hall with reservoir. Hindu temple to the north, outside the Monastic Complex. Dharohar Mound outside the complex on which temple of Junglinath located: dedicated to Shiva.

In the Hindu Temple outside the monastery gate, found along with other Hindu and a few Buddhist sculptures, a fairly large Uma Mahesvara. A second Uma Mahesvara at the temple of Junglinath along with other Hindu and Buddhist figures. One very large Buddha in bhumisparamudra, Bhairav and Navagraha panel.

126

The icon in context

ever since the time of the Buddha as indicated by the Buddhist traditions.31 It is probable that, like elsewhere in South Bihar, the earliest shrines in Gaya were also brick built which in due course started to disintegrate. Reconstruction and renovation probably began at Gaya around the eighth–ninth centuries as a majority of the sculptures found in the temples of Gaya at present can be dated to this period.32 Scholars generally believe that at this point new temples replaced the brick structures of much greater antiquity. Some of the material used for construction also seems to have been reused from older sites.33 By the middle of the eleventh century, antecedents of the shrines important in Gaya today were established and newer sculptures were also added to the temples probably around this time. The architectural and sacred landmarks of Gaya were now provided a history and legitimacy being linked through the shraadh ceremony where the worshipper was required to visit and make offerings at a series of shrines and geographical landmarks: hillocks, tanks, trees for the successful completion of his rites. The most important shrine associated with the shraadh ritual at Gaya is the Vishnupad temple.34 The temples at Gaya are mostly associated with the Vaishnava cult; while the Vishnupad contains the sacred foot marks of Vishnu, several other shrines in Gaya are dedicated to his different mythologies and incarnations: the Janardhana Mandir, Gau Pachar,35 Narasimha temple, Gadadhar shrine and Krishna Dwarka, to name just a few. Most of the temples contain images which are definitely older than the structures. The predominance of Vishnu can also be gauged from the fact that several Surya images are also worshipped as Vishnu.36 The profusion of Navagraha panels at all Gaya temples predating Vishnupad indicates the possible existence of a strong Surya cult here before Vishnu’s takeover. Several Surya temples still dot the sacred landscape, as listed in Table 3.4. In addition to Vishnu and Surya, Shiva’s presence at the site is overtly manifest in the number of shrines associated with his mythologies: Pashupatinath, Pita Mahesvara Phalguesvara, Akshyavata, Parpitamahesvara, Pataleswara Mahadeva and several temples at Ramsila and Pretsila Hills. Each of these shrines has its own mythology and has also been linked with the shraadh rite. Even the Vishnupad is not without monuments to recall Shiva’s presence. For example, in the temple’s compound is a platform essentially a long altar elevating a dozen Shiva lingas above a row of niches each with an image of Vishnu. At Ramgayabedi temple, there are innumerable Shiva and Parvati images which are worshipped as Rama and Sita. Similarly, at the Akshyavata, the last stop of the shraadh pilgrimage the main shrine is a Shivalaya,

Sacred sites

127

Figure 3.3 One of the many Uma Mahesvara icons reused in the walls of the Vishnupad temple complex, Gaya Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

one of the oldest temples in Gaya. Outside is a long platform where several lingas and Uma Mahesvara images are installed, collected from other ancient shrines of Gaya. At each of the other Shiva temples, Uma Mahesvara images dated between the ninth and eleventh centuries are found in profusion (see Figure 3.3). The sacred circuit at Gaya also includes several shrines for the Devi. Table 3.4 lists several significant Devi shrines of Gaya: Sitala Mata Mandir, Gayasuri and Mangala Gauri being the most important.

128

The icon in context

The Sitala Mata Mandir located on top of a hillock is significantly old and includes a collection of sculptures including several Uma Mahesvara images. A significant shrine is that of Gayasuri located near the Vishnupad in which is enshrined a Mahisasuramardini image. Most important among the Devi shrines in Gaya is the Mangala Gauri which is a Shakti pitha located on a small hillock in the heart of Gaya town. Mythology links the Mangala Gauri temple to the Parpita Mahesvara temple of Shiva, located at the foot of the hillock. In all these Devi shrines, several Uma Mahesvara images are conspicuously present. The Pindadaan is centred at the Vishnupad but the network includes shrines dedicated to Vishnu, Shiva, Devi, Surya and the Buddha. The route also touches important geographical features including the Phalgu River, tanks, sacred trees such as the Akshyavata and the many hillocks which dot around Gaya. A sacred complex is thus created to tie up the many shrines and hallowed landmarks around this ancient religious centre. A larger route of the shraadh pilgrims also connects Gaya to Bodh Gaya located 11 kilometres away. It is generally assumed that Gaya is ‘Hindu Gaya’ while Bodh Gaya is exclusively Buddhist; the two sites, however, cannot be studied in isolation. Bodh Gaya: the site of ‘enlightenment’ Literary texts have ascribed an earlier date to Gaya on the basis of which scholars have argued that it was Gaya that originally drew the Buddha to the place which is now called Bodh Gaya. The earliest structure in Bodh Gaya is dated to about third century bce and is credited to Asoka. It is, however, only from around the sixth to seventh century ce that one can start visualising the Mahabodhi Temple and its environs in terms of an architectural complex as we can see it today.37 The original brick structure of the Mahabodhi Temple can be dated to this period, as also the gateway to the temple complex which may have been added.38 Two subsidiary shrines were also erected close by, associated with other incidents from the Buddha’s life: the Aniemeshlochana Chaitya, which is popularly known as the Tara Temple,39 and the Vageshwari temple. A major round of renovations probably took place at the Mahabodhi complex somewhere around the eighth century. As in the case of Gaya, a large number of sculptures at Bodh Gaya can be dated to this period. The Mahabodhi Temple probably acquired a new stone Buddha image enshrined in the sanctum sanctorum; as also is the case with the muchcontested image in the Tara Temple. The stucco images embellishing

Sacred sites

129

the outer walls were now replaced with stone images while a lot of older sculptures could have been moved around. Several other new structures were added which can be dated to the period between the eighth and the tenth centuries such as the Sujata Stupa,40 the Buddhapad Temple,41 Pancha Pandava Temple and the Annapurna Temple.42 The different shrines in the Mahabodhi complex through various legends came to be closely associated with the life of the Buddha. It was from about this time that Shaiva structures in Bodh Gaya became conspicuous and a large Shiva temple complex developed across the Phalgu River at Dharmaranya. Scholars have argued that the Mahant’s Compound was a natural outcome of the deep-rooted Shaiva presence in the vicinity of the Mahabodhi Temple over the previous centuries.43 Despite being a premier centre for the Buddhist faith, sculptural evidence from the site indicates a medley of Hindu sculptures. Several of these dating to the tenth century are now housed in the Mahant’s Compund and recall the long Shaiva presence at Bodh Gaya. The most paradoxical shrine in the Mahabodhi complex stands on a platform under a tree on the temple’s north side and includes an unusual group of Hindu images including Vishnu, Ganesha and Uma Mahesvara. They are provided flowers and other offerings just as the other sacred Buddhist symbols suggesting their inclusion in the larger sacred complex. There are several other images in Bodh Gaya whose identities have changed through time and ritual but are an intrinsic part of the devotional circuit.44 At a site such as Bodh Gaya it hence becomes very difficult to separate the Buddhist from the Hindu; where interactions are historically deep rooted and culturally still alive the site becomes an architectural complex rather than a maze of stand-alone shrines. There are several similarities between the two sacred centres which emphasise upon the overarching historical, ritual and cultic connectivity between Gaya and Bodh Gaya. The Buddhapad Temple is a reminder of devotion to the Buddha’s footprints like those of Vishnu at Gaya. Bodh Gaya along with Dharmaranya are important stops on the extended shraadh route and may have been incorporated at a time when Bodh Gaya was essentially a Shaiva site. “The site generally called Mahabodhi-taru, that is the Bodhi Tree is included in the circuit prescribed by several texts, among them the Gayā Māhatmya, probably dated to 8th or 9th century, and the Tīrtha-chintāmaṅi, datable to the 13th century.”45 Similarity also extends between the cults of tree worship at both sites: one pipal and the other banyan, both being the axial pole between heavens and earth.

130

The icon in context

Nalanda: legends of a Mahavihara A similar fluidity of cults is also perceptible at Nalanda. Through my survey, I shift the focus from understanding the Mahavihara as an isolated ‘University’ campus to emphasising its network of relationships, both sacred and economic, with the neighbouring villages. The sacred complex which hence evolved included remains of the Monastic Complex along with a series of Hindu, Buddhist and Jain temples and tanks in the surrounding villages of Jagdishpur, Begumpur, Bargaon, Kundalipur and Kapatiya. Remains from the neighbouring villages pre-date the Nalanda monastery and continued to exist long after the Monastery had collapsed. These villages are now dotted with several mounds which represent the remains of ancient structures. The earliest remains of the monastery area at Nalanda like other Buddhist monuments in the Subcontinent are attributed to Asoka. Archaeological evidence however corroborates very little to him, and it was probably the Pala rulers who executed temple building in the surrounding villages where a large number of Hindu and Buddhist sculptures and temple fragments dated between the ninth and eleventh centuries have been discovered. The village of Kudalipur is associated with the history of the Jains and Vardhaman Mahavir is believed to have halted at the village during his wanderings. The site is marked by a temple called the Buddha Mandala dated to the fifth–sixth century ce.46 Another modern temple which now survives at the site can be dated to about the fifteenth– sixteenth century. At the village of Bargaon adjoining the University campus a huge tank, Suraj Pokhar, is located, surrounded by several modern temples with a rich corpus of ancient images. The images from Bargaon, as detailed in Table 3.4, are mostly Hindu, typically the black basalt images popular in eastern India. The unusual aspect of the images found at Bargaon is the large size, most images are over 5 feet high.47 The most remarkable find from Bargaon are a set of miniature temples with the image of Uma Mahesvara and a linga enshrined in the central niche (see Figure 3.4). Made of black basalt and granite, the original purpose of these temples is difficult to explain. Uma Mahesvara images abound at all these sites. The nearby village of Jagdishpur contains the Rukministhan, visited by both Buchanan and Cunningham. The site is marked by a high mound on top of which is located a single cell shrine with a tall spire. The shrine contains a colossal image of a seated Buddha with an intricate back slab and is now associated with Vaishnava legends.

Sacred sites

131

Figure 3.4 Miniature temples with Uma Mahesvara image in the central niche along with another Uma Mahesvara icon next to it at the Suraj Pokhra, Bargaon Source: Photograph by author

Similar interchangeable identities are fairly common, with several other images at Nalanda where the Buddha becomes Bhairav, a rupa of Shiva. A stone image of Marici, the Buddhist goddess of dawn, close to Temple 14 is worshipped by the villagers as a Hindu deity.48 It is hence not justifiable to see the evolution of the Nalanda University as a premier Buddhist centre detached from the villages in the vicinity. Inscriptional records indicate that 200 villages were donated for the maintenance and upkeep of the University. The entire locality forms an architectural complex of sacred structures and a meeting place of different religions. By the sixteenth century, when the Monastic Complex was deserted, the area came to be identified with Bargaon, which continued to live as Hindu and Jain centre. In a recent volume, Frederick Asher has suggested new possibilities of looking at Nalanda as stretching beyond the currently defined limits of the Monastic Complex, which he defines as merely the area excavated by the ASI.49 One of the methodologies he has relied on is the use of Landsat images, which have revealed water bodies, tanks or

132

The icon in context

pokhras which surround Nalanda. The tanks fill up in the monsoons and suggest an alternative perimeter of the complex much beyond the excavated remains and also indicate a rich farming belt on which the monasteries would have sustained. He points out that the surrounding villages, namely, Bargaon, Surajpur and Begumpur, would have all been part of the Monastic Complex, as revealed by the rich corpus of antiquities still present in these villages. A second network, Asher suggests, is to place Nalanda, the monastery, within the lives of the greater population around it. He believes that “in antiquity, as in the present, Nalanda did not exist as an isolated entity” but was dependent on a larger catchment area around it for people and for services.50 In this light, he views the built structures at Rajgir, Kundalipur and Pawapuri and traces patterns of artistic exchange and of a “secular urban” base. A third possibility which he suggests is to understand Nalanda within a network of other contemporary monasteries flourishing in the Magadha region, at Uddandapura, Ghosrawan and Telhara, all located within a radius of 25 kilometres.51 Vikramsila: the lost monastery Similar patterns of symbiotic coexistence can also be seen within the Kahalgaon-Antichak complex in the Bhagalpur district, the supposed site of the Vikramsila monastery.52 The present site is surrounded by rocky hills in the west and the south and the Ganga in the north. A fairly large number of brick structures with traces of brick walls and floors dated to the ninth–eleventh centuries have been discovered. Vikramsila is believed to have been founded by the Pala ruler Dharmapala sometime between 783 and 813 ce; the complex, however, reveals several phases of construction and renovations. One of the highest mounds of the monastic complex, centrally situated, is locally known as the Dharohara mound. Excavations have brought to light a massive though extensively ravaged structure with a cruciform stupa complex.53 A series of terracotta plaques have been found which probably once decorated this main stupa: the majority of the plaques depict figures of Buddhist gods and goddesses though figures of Hindu deities and more secular themes are also common. Some of the terracotta plaques also bear traces of red and black pigment. The monastic complex at its heart seems to have been Buddhist though as in the case of Nalanda, it is difficult to visualise the Mahavihara isolated of its surroundings. To the north of the monastic complex, at the distance of about 100 meters is another rectangular structure made of material taken from the monastic area. This is generally taken

Sacred sites

133

to be a Hindu temple built at a later date than the monastery and now houses a good number of both Buddhist and Hindu divinities.54 This shrine is popularly called the Junglinath Temple and the principle deity is believed to be another rupa of Shiva. The archaeological excavations at Antichak have also brought to light a large number of terracotta, stone and bronze sculptures, copper, gold, silver and ivory objects, cowries, stone beads, terracotta plaques, seals and sealings.55 About a dozen bronzes have also been discovered from the village of Antichak and other neighbouring villages. Two Uma Mahesvara images have also been found here. Most sculptures from Antichak typically belong to a later period, datable to around tenth–twelfth centuries. The 100-acre compound revealed at Antichak is scattered with structures of Buddhist and Hindu origins; to view this complex merely as a Buddhist Mahavihara limits its identity and character. To understand the pre-eminence of the site, it is necessary to not just take into account the individual structures but view it holistically as a sacred space shared by the adherents of the Buddhist and Hindu faiths. Owing to the comparatively later date for the site, I discuss it further in a later section on religious traditions in South Bihar postthirteenth century. Textual prescription: the Mayamatam The process of natural decay, restoration and reoccupation has been accepted as the progressive cycle in the life of temples and sacred spaces, somewhat related to the life of the communities and patrons who support these structures and sites. The pattern of replacement, reformulation and sometimes rededication has proved to be part of the process by which these temples might have survived, from the eighth to the thirteenth to the sixteenth century and today.56 These different phases both in the distant and in the recent past are sometimes seen as part of the process of self-preservation of sacred monuments and sites. This process of deterioration and preservation is an issue also accepted by and dealt with in prescriptive texts on architecture. One such text is the Mayamatam, dated to the ninth–tenth centuries; usually believed to have originated in South India, the Mayamatam is a Vastu Shastra.57 The treatise deals with different facets of dwellings of both “gods and men”; from the choice of the site to the iconography of the temple walls, it contains numerous and precise descriptions of the villages and towns as well as of temples, houses, mansions and palaces. It lists specifics such as proper orientation, right dimensions and

134

The icon in context

appropriate materials to be used. The reference to the Mayamatam is also meant to provide a pan Indian perspective from the contemporary period for the architectural context and relocation of sacred images. The early sections of the Mayamatam elaborate in great detail the plans for different types of temples, the process of choosing and demarcating the sacred site of the temples, prescribing the size for different temples, introducing various kinds of gateways, halls, altars, etcetera. The Mayamatam also deals with issues of iconography such as details of iconographic features of enshrined divinities, the choice of materials used for making images, the process of casting images and their subsequent consecration in temples and specificities for the size58 and location of the enshrined images.59 What is of particular relevance is an entire chapter devoted exclusively to temple renovation and reconstruction. Chapter 35 of the Mayamatam acknowledges the fact that temples decay and hence there is a possible need for their renovation. “A temple (may be ruined), broken down, fallen down, aged as to its materials or decrepit, or it may conform to jātī, chanda, vikalpa or abhāsa, modes.”60 As such, the treatise details the correct procedure of renovation (jīrnoddhāra) as well the issue of temporary installation (bālasthapanā): “Now come the rules, complied from other works, relating to the renovation of temples, Liṅga, pedestals, images and other constructions; they are laid out in a brief and systematic way.”61 The first question with regard to renovation raised in the Mayamatam pertains to what qualifies for renovation. The text takes into account the fact that the monument may be in different stages of decay and indicates that the kind of renovation work to be carried out should be in accordance with the current state of the temple structure. The first case is of preservation of temples whose basic characteristics are no longer perceptible. For such temples, the utilisation of new and improved quality material is prescribed.62 In case of temples whose original form and structure can still be surmised, the reuse of the original materials itself is prescribed: “Those (temples) whose characteristics are still (perceptible) in their principle and secondary elements (are to be renovated) with their own materials. If they are lacking in anything or have some similar type of flaw, the sage wishing to restore them, (must proceed in such a way that) they regain their integrality and that they are pleasantly arranged anew; without anything being added (to what originally existed) and always in conformity with the initial appearance (of the building) and with the advice of the knowledgeable.”63 The material used should however always be of a very good quality and preferably better than the material previously used.64

Sacred sites

135

In case of renovation it is essential that the original form and character of the temple is retained. “In the case of a nagāra temple, a nagāra temple is to be rebuilt and in that of a draviḍa temple, a draviḍa (temple), in that of a vesara one it is auspicious that (the temple be) vesara; in the case of a temple with no aisle, the temple (should be) without aisle and, in the case of a temple which is not lacking in such an aisle, the temple should not lack one either.”65 During renovations expansion of the temple enclosure is permitted,66 this should however not alter the original lay-out of the temple.67 When the expansion of the temple precincts is permitted it is pertinent that the shrine is not moved from the original location. “When it is desired that a ruined (building) be (re)constructed in an (existing) sanctuary in another place, he who has knowledge of architecture avoids, making it at the cardinal points or outside the sanctuary; a transgression of this rule brings bad luck and the procedure should thus be carried out according to the appropriate mode.”68 The second issue which the Mayamatam takes into account is the fact that the images enshrined in the temples might also require repair. The text asserts that it is of utmost importance to maintain the purity of the enshrined image.69 Images which have been abandoned for more that 12 years are not to be used.70 There are other possible circumstances in which the image may require replacement or renovation: broken images, distorted images, buried images, wrongly installed images or stolen images.71 The treatise prescribes that images must be immediately rejected if they are incomplete, broken or flawed in any other ways.72 Damaged images may be repaired and reused but only in case that their original limbs are still intact.73 Old or rejected images are to be discarded by immersing them into water or by throwing into fire.74 There are, however, situations when the older image can be reconsecrated and reused such as in case the image had been moved from its original location,75 wrongly consecrated76 or carried away (by flood or thieves).77 Along with the temple edifice and the enshrined images the interiors of the temple might also need to be redone. The Mayamatam delineates suitable arrangements for this, for instance, sections 35.33–36 deals with the issue of renovation of the pedestals of the images. “The pedestal must be rejected instantly if its characteristics are no longer (perceptible), if it is incomplete and if it has cracks and other flaws of the kind.”78 A new pedestal then has to be made similar to the old one, “in that stone is to be used if the old was in stone and brick if it was in brick.”79 The original pedestal may be reclaimed and reused if it is flawless and fitting. “The Brahma stone, other stones, the elements

136

The icon in context

(of the foundation deposit) and the pedestal are to be reinstalled as has been previously given.”80 Even during the course of restoration in the temple complex, ritual worship must not stop. The Mayamatam clearly outlines how the normal ritual activities of the temple should be carried out during the period of renovation with the help of provisional installation or balasthapana.81 The provisional installation is to be done when building a new temple82 and when renovating old ones. The Mayamatam prescribes that “A provisional installation is to be made at the very beginning of the work of construction of a new building or at the same time of the repairing of a decrepit or ruined building or when there has been the collapse of a liṅga or of an image or when they are cracked or when parts of them are missing, or lastly at the time of fixing (of the liṅga (or the image) in the socle.”83 Provisional installation consists of building a small provisional shrine near the construction site and by placing into it a provisional representation of the god. The provisional shrine may be a pavilion or a hall.84 This kind of a shrine is described as a low room sanctum (called as adhogriha) or a three-level building with a flat roof (mandapa) or a building with a hipped roof (sabha). The images used for balasthapana have prescribed dimensions85 and can be made of stone, metal or different kinds of wood.86 The Mayamatam clearly specifies that even the provisional images are, however, to be formally consecrated just like the permanent icon of a temple. “There is to be a perfect manifest image to be installed in the provisional shrine throughout the period of erection of the main shrine until it is accomplished (and it is to stay there) until the desired goal has been achieved.”87 The provisional shrine should, however, not be used for more than 12 years else “all sorts of mistakes are engendered if it is exceeded.”88 Mapping a sacred network The evolution of multi-religious architectural complexes was accompanied by the growth of a host of smaller shrines in the vicinity. Archaeological evidence discussed in Tables 3.2 and 3.3 lists various such sites from which substantial remains of religious establishment and icons have appeared. It is difficult to classify these sites as clearly Buddhist or Hindu since at most sites there have been several layers of occupation and Hindu, Buddhist and Jain remains coexist. This is also confirmed by a host of donative inscriptions. The smaller sites were interlinked to the larger temple complexes through patterns of pilgrimage and other ritual networks.

Sacred sites

137

My survey of sites also suggests that it is not apt to judge religious sites in South Bihar as monotheistic at any given historical period. It is clear that there is, as historically was, much sharing of space and reconfiguration of identity of the sites and sculptures rather than a forceful take-over by one religion. This probably explains the existence of a large number of Hindu icons at what have been perceived as “premier Buddhist sites.” There is moreover a continued history of occupation of the sites, and at a majority of these, there was constant rebuilding and reuse of sacred space and material. It hence becomes difficult to establish the end of religious practices of any particular religion at a given chronological period. Religious space and even sculptures readily acquired new identities and rituals, myths and legends belonging to one cult came to be readily reused by another. It is judicious to employ modes of enquiry which look upon the interaction and reciprocity at the sites rather than conversion and subjugation. This interface occurs at different levels: of cult practices, architectural edifices and even in the exchange of religious icons. Literary references also cite to such sharing of cult. New ways of studying the sites should hence examine them as living sites vis-à-vis merely archaeological ones where pilgrimage, festivals and fairs should be documented that keep these sites alive. For instance, the sites in the region need to be looked at as interconnected, and a sacred route should be mapped which links Gaya, Bodh Gaya and Nalanda along with smaller sites in between which are now marked by mounds strewn with ancient remains and icons huddled in modern shrines, lined with ceramic tiles. Similar is the continuity of sites along the Ganga in the Munger-Bhagalpur belt, where the river itself becomes the thread which ties the sites in a network. This network does not merely include the sacred centres but also secular establishments such as workshops of bronze and brick, hoards of sculptures and other store houses, mathas, monasteries, geographical landmarks, etcetera. While I have tried to locate these architectural complexes horizontally through a web of shrines, I have also located them vertically through time. Archaeological remains show how there was continuous rebuilding and reconfiguration of sacred space, and it is not possible to read a unilinear takeover of sites from Buddhist to Hindu to Islamic for boundaries are blurred and overlapping. At the same time, I have also attempted to trace how icons changed identities when moved through time and space. My details of sites and icons in the last three chapters are interspersed with notes on the presence of the Uma Mahesvara images at most sites. Several of these images have been crucial participants in

138

The icon in context

the history of sites the details of which follow in the next section. As drawn from archaeological evidence, the Uma Mahesvara image came to be used in the Shaiva temple as one of the manifest rupa of Shiva. The icon was generally placed in the side niche of the garbha griha where the central enshrined icon was a linga. Uma Mahesvara images were also found on the entrance of the door to the sanctum, used for ornamentation on faces of pillars or carved on the outside walls along with other Hindu images. The image hence came to be strategically dispersed in and around the great architectural complexes to establish the presence of Shiva.

Notes 1 Alexander Cunningham, Ancient Geography of India, Volume 1, Trubner and Co., London, 1871, p. 455. 2 Documented since the time of the Mahabharata, the caves have been variously known as Gorathagiri and Parvatgiri, Frederick M Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2008, p. 9. 3 DR Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, First edition 1963, Reprint 2006, p. 548. 4 Michael W Meister, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (ed.), Encyclopedia of Temple Architecture, Volume 1: Period of Early Maturity, AIIS and Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1991, p. 22. 5 This plan is represented in the brick temple at Bhitargaon, the temple at Devgadh and the Bodh Gaya brick temple. Ibid., p. 23. 6 Mundesvari is the only surviving stone temple from the seventh century ce in North India. Architectural fragments at the site indicate that the plain masonry walls of the temple, which can now be seen, originally would have had niches and a nagara shikhara. The temple preserves the foundation of the mandapa on the south and an ancient Nandi platform in front of the west door suggesting an original western orientation. The temple has an octagonal plan where the garbha griha has four doorways in the cardinal directions. The interior of the temple now has four central pillars and four pairs of pilasters. The original deity of this garbha griha is lost, replaced by a linga dated to the thirteenth century. The linga is, however, not the principal deity worshipped in the temple; rather an eight-armed goddess riding a bull/buffalo kept in the eastern part of the sanctum is the reigning deity. As per a broken foundation inscription, the temple was built in the reign of Maharaja Udayasena in the year 30 of an unspecified era. If referred to Harsha era, this would give the date 636 ce, Michael W Meister, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (ed.), Encyclopedia of Temple Architecture, Volume 1, p. 118. 7 Rajaona is a village of considerable archaeological significance, the village and its neighbourhood are dotted with mounds of various sizes. A number of stone sculptures are seen in different parts of the village, some enshrined and some still lying astray.

Sacred sites

139

8 The Uma Mahesvara panels from Rajaona were found engraved on pillars along with scenes depicting Arjuna’s penance. The pillars and the images are dated to the fifth–sixth centuries and are now stored in the Indian Museum. The images from Rajaona are one of the earliest depictions of Uma Mahesvara from Bihar, and will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter. 9 BK Jamuar, ‘Rajaona: An Archaeological Study,’ Journal of Bihar Puravid Parshad, Vol. 1, 1977. 10 DR Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, p. 327. 11 The erection of this temple named Siddhesvaranatha is recorded in a seventh-century inscription of a person known Sri Yogananda and his adoration for Siddhesvaranatha, a form of Shiva, Frederick M Asher, The Art of Eastern India: 300–800 AD, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1980, p. 135. 12 Current historiography indicates that the Barabar Hills was “a place where different sects: Ajivikas, Buddhism and Hinduism flourished at different times.” Ibid. 13 DR Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, p. 15. 14 Frederick M Asher, The Art of Eastern India, p. 135. 15 The Jahangira hillock is a solid mass of granite in the mid-stream of the River Ganga, rising about 70 feet above the bed of the river. Many of the granite rocks piled at the base of the rocky island are covered with sculptures in bold relief. Since they are constantly exposed to the weather as well as river action during floods, some of the sculptures are heavily weathered. 200 yards to the west of Jahangira, another hillock of buff rock, about 100 feet in height, juts out boldly in the river and is popularly known as the Murli hillock or the Bais Karan rock. 16 The Shiva linga is about 31 inches high. The linga is circled by 18 thick rings or coils. What is unique of this linga is that it has no yoni pedestal, and it shows eight figures carved around it. The linga is badly mutilated hence it is difficult to establish the identity of these figures. 17 There are, however, two instances of non-Hindu figures here: one of the Buddha and the other of a Jain Tirthankara, Ram Chandra Prasad, Archaeology of Champa and Vikramsila, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1987, p. 84. 18 Most of these sites are unfortunately so ruined that it is not possible to make much out of them. Ram Chandra Prasad has dated Kheri to the fifth to sixth centuries where several temples and lingas, including a granite ekamukhalinga have been found on a plateau near the summit. The Mandar Hills situated 30 miles south of Bhagalpur had been a centre of artistic and architectural activities since the time of Gupta king Adityasena and at least three inscriptions dedicated by him have been found from the hillock. The hill is a monolithic block of granite, an offshoot of the Vindhyas, also known as Mount Sumeru in the Puranas and associated with the tale of Amritmanthana. The Devas in order to receive the nectar of life or amrita churned the celestial ocean, along with the Asuras, where they used the Mandara as the churning rod and the serpent Vasuki as the churning rope. 19 In popular parlance, the complex is also known as Shilasangam since it is located on the confluence of the Ganga and the Kosi rivers.

140

The icon in context

20 Radhakrishna Chaudhary, ‘The Antiquarian Remains of the Patharghatta Vateswara Complex,’ Journal of Bihar Research Society, Vol. 71–73, 1985/87. 21 Ibid. 22 There are at least two Uma Mahesvara images known from the Patharghata hills. The first is a rock-cut sculpture carved along with a host of other Hindu sculptures. The second image is a free-standing bust of Uma Mahesvara enshrined in a miscellaneous shrine in the Patharghata complex. 23 “After the 6th century, temples develop a new kind of focus and coherence. The temples acquire radically differentiated spaces, contrasts between expansive exterior and constricted interior and hierarchically articulated wall surfaces. In sculpture, the break at 550 AD is more apparent. Before this point, the individual unit, whether relief panel, doorway or object of worship forms a self contained composition. In the shrines of the end of the 6th century, as in the great medieval temples of later centuries, independent units are impossible to define; and the sculpture is woven compositely in the fabric of the building,” Joanna G Williams, The Art of Gupta India: Empire and Province, Heritage Publishers, New Delhi, 1983, p. 157. 24 The ruins have undergone three successive phases of construction and repairs: (1) When the original temple of the Sun god had been constructed sometime in the early Gupta period indicated by the Gupta inscription. The temple originally may have been built near the tank hence the main temple now may not be the original temple. It is curious that a carved door frame, which is an essential part of Gupta temples, had not been found as yet in the ruins. Further the present portion of the monolithic column is not at all appropriately related to the main temple. (2) When the Sun temple was destroyed or in ruins, its remains such as the four ornamented pillars and the broken carved pedestal were removed and used in the construction of the main Chaturbhuj Vishnu temple. (3) When the Shaiva temples were erected at the place some time after the Vaishnava temples were converted and a walled enclosure may have been raised. DR Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, p. 102. 25 Michael W Meister, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (ed.), Encyclopedia of Temple Architecture, Volume 1, p. 397. 26 The panchayatana plan involved a cruciform temple set on terraces where the central shrine was surrounded by four projecting chambers, one on each side. The whole structure was surrounded by a pradaksina path and porches. To the simple plain walls of the earlier temples projections and recesses were introduced for surface ornamentation. The shikhara surmounting the garbha griha became taller, the temple became tiered and were placed on a high jagati. The bhadrapitha was often embellished with terracotta plaques. 27 As per inscriptions found at Deo Barunark, the temple can be dated to 1236 ce. The site has however yielded architectural members and Hindu images in sandstone ranging from the sixth to twelfth centuries. The earliest of these are three pillars and fragmentary door frames which can be stylistically dated from 500–550 ce. One pillar was used by a later Gupta king Jivitagupta II to engrave an inscription that refers to the confirmation

Sacred sites

28

29 30

31 32 33 34

141

of land granted to hereditary priests of the Sun-god from the time of Baladitya and the Maukharis. This would imply continued worship of the sungod at the site from at least the sixth century. The mention of a village “Varunika” and the Sun-god’s designation “Varunavasin” confirms that the ancient village was named Varuna. About a dozen images of Surya have been found dated from the seventh to the eleventh centuries. Three images of Vishnu, a door frame of a Vishnu shrine and a Ganesha figure all belong to the same period. Apart from two Uma Mahesvara images on pillars, 7 free-standing Uma Mahesvara have also been found, dated between the seventh and fourteenth centuries. The temple is rather intriguing in its plan and orientation. Most structures at Nalanda are brick built with occasional use of stone in pillars and pillar bases. In contrast, Temple 2 is built entirely of stone. This is also the only temple at the Nalanda monastery which shows Hindu and not Buddhist deities. The temple also does not conform to the general lay-out of the site: it faces east and stands at an oblique angle to the rather carefully aligned rows of monasteries and temples. It hence indicates that this temple might not have grown in tandem with the rest of the complex, indicating a different pace of chronological development and cultic tradition. The temple is characterised by a garbha griha surrounded by a pradaksina path, a mandapa and a mukhamandapa, which are preceded by a flight of stairs and a curvilinear shikhara. There were probably two phases of construction of this temple. The temple was originally set on a stone jagati which fell and was subsequently re-built with some of the older material and new brick work. On this moulded plinth, a stone dado with 211 sculptured panels were carved; symmetrically arranged, 20 appearing on each side of the main entrance and 57 in each of the three remaining walls. There is a variety of scenes depicted on them: human figures in various attitudes, household scenes, kinnaras, the Buddha, etcetera. The panels of the dado also contain various Hindu deities: Shiva, Kartik, Rama, Sita, Balarama, Brahma, Parvati, Uma Mahesvara, Saraswati, Lakshmi, Kubera, Vidyadharas, Gandharvas, etcetera. A Ghosh, A Guide to Nalanda, p. 12. BN Misra, Nalanda, BR Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2008, p. 264 and Michael W Meister, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (ed.), Encyclopedia of Temple Architecture, Volume 1, p. 110. “The Gupta temples had noticeably plain walls with cardinal niches or indentations on its external walls on three sides containing sculptural reliefs. From about the 7th–8th centuries CE temples were marked by elaborate sculptural displays on the outer walls. These niches contained the various aspects of the deity while the main image was enshrined in the sanctum,” Devangana Desai, Religious Imagery in Khajuraho, FrancoIndian Research, Mumbai, 1996, p. 18. Frederick M Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, p. 89. Ibid. Arun Kumar Singh, Archaeology of Magadha Region, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1991, p. 61. The Vishnupad temple is dated to 1787 on the basis of inscriptions found on the temple walls. A short inscription from the eighth regnal year of Mahendra Pala Deva has also been found and another on a Uma Mahesvara image with Nandi seated below is dated to the tenth–eleventh centuries.

142

35 36

37

38 39

40

41

42

The icon in context

All of these indicate that the temple probably underwent several spates of reconstruction. Though the original structure is lost, its remnants in the form of sculptures and inscriptions still survive. “This late 18th century structure enshrines dozens of images from the 8th to 12th centuries but none earlier or later. It also preserves inscriptions that provide snippets of Gaya’s history from 9th to 13th centuries, though a few are pilgrims’ graffiti.” There are several stone panels bearing inscriptions still contained in the present temple structure which make explicit reference to the shraadh ritual at Gaya. A conscious sensitivity to antiquity is represented by this reuse or resurrection of Gaya’s past, a belief that antiquity lent sanctity. Frederick M Asher, ‘Gaya: Monuments of a Pilgrimage Town,’ in Janice Leoshko (ed.), Bodh Gaya: The Site of Enlightenment, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 1988, pp. 74–88. The Gau Pachar has a rock carved four-armed image of Vishnu, which is dated as the oldest image in Gaya, dated between fifth and seventh centuries. One such instance is of the temple on Brahmani Ghat on the Phalgu River in Gaya where the Surya image is cloaked in a Vaishnava mantle by its popular identification as Narayana. This has been identified by Asher as one of the oldest images in Gaya. Frederick M Asher, ‘Gaya: Monuments of Pilgrimage Town.’ Fa Xian in his travelogues records seeing several structures at the site. He records the presence of at least three monasteries though none of the structures appear to be monumental. The pilgrim notes that ‘men of later ages’ raised pagodas and established images at the place where the Buddha attained enlightenment, Frederick M Asher, The Art of Eastern India, p. 8. The present gateway is not the original structure though the location is the same as was originally conceived. Ibid., p. 52. Like the Mahabodhi Temple, this temple has also undergone heavy restoration. The site presently consists of a simple whitewashed structure. The pyramidal nagara shikhara was meant to duplicate the corner shrines of the Mahabodhi Temple. The main image in the temple is however of a Buddhist male deity, identified as Padmapani, Ibid., p. 44. On the opposite bank of the Phalgu river lies a mound where partial excavations have revealed the remains of a stupa, cruciform in plan with projections in the four cardinal directions. It was probably built in various phases between the sixth and tenth centuries. The stupa revealed an inscription that reads Devapalarajasya Sujatagriha or the house of Sujata built by Devapala. Only the lower half of the stupa now survives, Ibid., p. 57. A small temple near the gateway enshrines footprints of the Buddha in the same style as Vishnu’s footprints at Gaya. The Buddha figure mentioned here is found on the porch of the shrine and is dated to the tenth century though it is difficult to date this temple. RL Mitra noted that the temple had been dismantled and its material cast around as rubbish at a mound at a distance. The present temple is a reconstruction of the nineteenth century, Ibid., p. 44. The Annapurna Temple, worshipping Annapurna Devi, is one of the shrines in a series of five temples in the Bodh Gaya complex. The two other shrines enshrine Buddha and Boddhisatva images while the remaining two

Sacred sites

43

44

45 46

47

48 49 50 51 52

53

143

have Shiva lingas, a reminder of the multiple claims at Bodh Gaya. Most of the images can be dated between the ninth and the twelfth centuries. A fifth-century Shiva image is prominent on the railing encircling the Mahabodhi Temple. Here Shiva holds his trident, somewhat as a guard to the entrance of the temple and adorns the railing surrounding a monument that might be seen as the very centre of Buddhism. Another early mention of Shiva is attested in an inscription of the eighth century recording the installation of a Shiva linga at the Mahabodhi Temple. This inscription is found on a pedestal with images of Surya, Vishnu and Lakulisa now stored in the Indian Museum. It bears an inscription of Dharmapla’s 26th year recording the donation of a four-faced image of Shiva by a person identifying himself as Keshava, the son of a sculptor. At least one other image conflates the identity of Shiva with a Buddhist deity, a bronze image usually described as Shiva-Lokeshvara, a work of eighth century, today in the Ashutosh Museum Calcutta. An image of Vishnu at Bakraur, on the opposite side of the Phalgu River, is now worshipped as Boddhisatva. Another image of the Boddhisatva Avalokitesvara placed at the entrance of the Mahabodhi temple is recognised as Shiva. Similarly, another Boddhisatva image is worshipped as Tara Devi in the Tara Temple. At the Panch Pandava Temple nine Buddha images are worshipped as the five Pandavas with Krishna, Draupadi and Kunti. In the Tibetan Temple, a Avalokitesvara image is worshipped as Rama, Frederick M Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, p. 70. Ibid. The temple is similar in style and planning to the Mahabodhi Temple and has hence been assigned a similar date. The Temple shows several stages of renovation. An inscribed doorframe and a votive pillar both dated to tenth century survive, BN Misra, Nalanda, p. 267. An almost life-size inscribed Vishnu image is placed in a tree shrine. A Surya temple in the heart of the village shows several periods of reconstruction the earliest phase is ascribed to eleventh century and enshrines a very interesting collection of Hindu and Buddhist images including Surya, Vishnu, Uma Mahesvara, Avalokitesvara, etcetera. A striking image of Parvati about 5 feet high attracts immediate attention. A Ghosh, A Guide to Nalanda, p. 20. Frederick M Asher, Nalanda. Ibid., p. 104. Ibid., p. 110. The site was first excavated by the Department of Ancient Indian History and Archaeology, Patna University in 1959–1960 and later by the ASI. Excavations so far have not succeeded in bringing to light any conclusive evidence with regard to the precise identification of the site with that of the Mahavihara. The site has been dated and linked with the Palas and shows existence of a large Buddhist monastic establishment, the exact name of which is unknown. “The method of construction of this brick c̣aitya was peculiar. Two parallel brick walls were constructed at a distance from one another and the intervening spaces were filled with debris and brick bats and rammed. On the floor thus constructed the same process was repeated leading to the dome of the c̣aitya.” Ram Chandra Prasad, Archaeology of Champa and Vikramsila, p. 85.

144

The icon in context

54 SC Saran, ‘Brahmanical Stone Sculptures from Antichak,’ Journal of Bihar Puravid Parshad, Vol. 2, 1978. 55 Ram Chandra Prasad, Archaeology of Champa and Vikramsila, p. 71. 56 Michael W Meister, ‘Temple Restoration and Transformation,’ Ellen Raven (ed.), South Asian Archaeology, 1999, proceedings of the fifteenth International Conference of European Association of South Asian Archaeologists, held at the University of Leiden, 5–9 July 1999, Egbert Forsten, Groningen, 1999, pp. 123–134. 57 Bruno Dagens (ed. and transl.), Mayamatam: Treatise of Housing, Architecture and Iconography, Volumes 1 and 2, first published in 1994, this edition, IGNCA and Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 2000. 58 Ibid., 33.37a. “The dimension of a temple (may be calculated) from those of the Liṅga placed in the temple.” Such canons are also useful in ascertaining the size and layout of the temples which have crumbled or where the edifice has disappeared and only the images survive. 59 Ibid., 33.37b. “The sage places the Liṅga or the image, in the centre of the shrine to the left of that line (which passes through its exact centre) so that it is slightly displaced towards the north-east.” 60 Ibid., 35.2b–3a. 61 Ibid., 1–2a. 62 Ibid., 35.5–7. “Those (temples) whose characteristics are no longer (perceptible) are (to be renovated) with regard to the specific type of liṅga found there. In this case different, or better materials (than those employed during initial construction) should be used, as well as new pitchers and the heights, widths and other dimensions which conform to the ayādi formulae, and, as well (suitable) ornaments.” 63 Ibid. 64 Ibid., 35.40b. 65 Ibid., 35.8–9. 66 Ibid., 35.12b. “The extension of the enclosure may be, made according to the rule, towards the north or the east, or towards all points on the periphery.” 67 Ibid., 35.12a. “In a temple the (buildings of the) courtyard are to be arranged according to the rule which I lay down with precision here: (these edifices) may be the same (height) as the original shrine or may be bigger, either being acceptable; (those which are arranged) at the cardinal points should, however, be the same height (as the original shrine); on the other hand those at the corners or elsewhere, (may be higher but) should not be more than an eight or a quarter, according to circumstances, of the height of the original shrine.” 68 Ibid., 35.14. 69 Ibid., 35.18b–20. “If a fallen liṅga is installed by some ignorant person, another liṅga is to be installed in its place, one which has not yet been touched by the fierce rays of the sun. A liṅga is called ‘mean’ if it is placed in the very midst of impure things or if it touches the bottom of the mortice (of a pedestal) or if it is not visible from the top of the pedestal; it is the same if its ‘face’ is not oriented in the appropriate direction; yet one who knows may improve (such liṅga) and that goes for a twisted liṅga or one found to be imperfectly rounded, when it is measured (to the end of seeing

Sacred sites

70 71

72

73

74

75 76 77

78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88

145

if it is of the prescribed direction). A ‘liṅga’ can be ‘lifted out’ by thieves who want to steal the precious components of the foundation deposit.” Ibid., 35.32. Ibid., 35.15–18a. “A liṅga may have (fallen) may be split or may be hard to walk around, may be imperfectly circular or twisted; (it may) be a liṅga gone down from a liṅga or it may be gone up from a liṅga; it may have been installed according to the fantasies of qubblers [someone who disputes established norms or argues over trivial matters] or by the ignorant; it may have been bruised, scorched by fire or may be decrepit, split or broken; (it may have been) lifted out by the thieves; it may have been lost or put in place by sullied people or it may have been knocked over; such liṅga always are improper and if found in this world are declared to be pernicious by those who, amongst the universe of creatures, know it all.” Ibid., 35.37–38. “A stone or wood image which is incomplete is to be rejected instantly and a new image installed in its place. An image of required height or thickness, but which is split or which has any flaw of that kind, must be rejected and another image installed in it place according to rule.” Ibid., 35.39–40a. “A metal or earth image lacking hands, nose, adornment, ears or teeth is to be restored to its original condition but if it is a principal limb which is missing it must be thrown out and a new one put in its place.” Ibid., 35.33a. “The sage must make haste to throw into the water stone (liṅga or image) that has been rejected” and 35.44 “To be rid of a clay image, one throws it into water, a wooden one is put into the fire and a metal one melted by fire and the purified metal recovered.” Ibid., 35.23. “A liṅga which has fallen in the river must be installed afresh and according the rule pertaining to the ‘divine’ linga.” Ibid., 35.24–26. “A liṅga that has been installed, by mistake, according to erroneous rituals and formulae, should be installed (anew).” Ibid., 35.29–31. “When an image is concerned, once it has been taken to a new place chosen according to circumstance, there is not error in installing it, and everything that has not been prescribed for her is to conform with what has been prescribed for the liṅga.” Ibid., 35.29–34b. Ibid., 35.29–35. Ibid., 35.29–35b. Dagens has given the literal translation of balasthapana as ‘infant installation’, which however implies transitory installation of images. Ibid., 33.161. “The wise man installs a small linga in a finished temple; it is when a temple is half built that a medium linga is to be installed and a large one is installed when the base has been constructed.” Ibid., 35.48. Ibid., 35.50. Ibid., 35.51. Ibid., 35.56. Ibid., 35.58. Ibid., “The ancients say that it is not proper for a provisional shrine to last more than twelve years.”

4

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

Whenever anyone will undertake to write the history of sculpture in India . . . (they) contain a good deal, but they do not contain all the information available on the subject; and they require to be studied and confirmed by what is built or carved, which alone can give precision and substance to what is written.1

James Fergusson established a vital link between mythology, sculpture and architecture yet he argued that sculptures by themselves are not a compendium of knowledge but have to be studied as adjuncts to architecture. Contrary to what Fergusson believed, through the course of this chapter, I will use sacred icons as a primary source to understand contemporary historical processes. My methodology casts off the traditional focus of looking at religious icons for their aesthetic value or in comparison with texts and mythology. I thus begin the chapter by presenting a historiographical survey to introduce the significant methodological approaches taken so far to study religious images. In the second part of the chapter, I collate data from over over 100 Uma Mahesvara images from 10 districts of South Bihar to understand their historical context, patterns of their geographical and architectural placement, stylistic evolution and purpose of casting. I then trace the shift in the physical location of images from their original placement vis-à-vis current location, to understand the changing meanings and use of religious sculptures. In the last section of the chapter, I present the case study of bronze Uma Mahesvara icons, which through ritual processes acquire a human persona, as chala pratima or mobile icons and extend the realm of the sacred beyond the walls of the temples. Unlike stone images which are fixed onto the sanctum walls, bronze sculptures were meant to be mobile, and can travel large distances for purpose of donation or for

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

147

inhabitation in domestic shrines. By outlining the dynamics behind their movement from workshops to temple complexes, to domestic shrines, to monasteries and souvenir shops attached to temples, I endeavour to establish significant ritual networks.

The image and its iconography TA Gopinatha Rao’s Elements of Hindu Iconography, first published in 1914, is perhaps one of the earliest treatises on Brahmanical iconography written by an Indian.2 In this comprehensive, four volume series, Gopinatha Rao carried a diligent search into the beginnings of image worship in India, outlining the meanings, symbols, mythology and physical description of Hindu sculptures. He argued that texts existed before images were made and that texts prescribed the norms for making these images.3 With this presupposition, he took up various categories of Hindu images, Vaishnava, Shaiva and Shakta, mentioned textual prescriptions for each and then substantiated them with actual images from different regions of India. Doing so he resorted to a one to one comparison between texts and images where the latter merely became illustrative of the surviving texts. Gopinath Rao, though engaged with the physical descriptions of images, failed to delve with the emotions and mudras. He viewed sculptures as ‘free standing’ and devoid of any background or context and was unable to connect religious iconography with the larger social or architectural setting. The Development of Hindu Iconography by JN Banerjea, can probably be seen as the next milestone in the field of iconographic studies.4 Banerjea started from where Gopinatha Rao had left off, and studied in greater detail the origin and development of image worship in India and also delved into the technicalities of iconometrics. JN Banerjea adopted a methodology significantly different from Gopinatha Rao where he selected various themes within Hindu iconography and cited noteworthy instances. Unlike Gopinatha Rao he studied images minus the textual backdrop, hence, did not just deal with a surface analysis of images but a deeper understanding of mudras, expressions, chronology and regional variations. For Banerjea, an image is not just the symbol or representation of god5 but the very embodiment of the god.6 He extended the scope of study of iconography to coins, terracotta and sealing, as also the study of monuments and epigraphy. Banerjea was the first to draw out an intimate association between religion and art arguing that images are illustrative of the general social and cultural traits of their makers.7

148

The icon in context

Both of these seminal works raised issues and established patterns which successive generations of art historians and students of iconometrics have worked around. The foremost of these is whether sculptures are representative of texts and mythology. A second trend has been the typical art historical approach of analysing the physical attributes of sculptures and appreciating their aesthetics along with charting out the chronological evolution of images on the basis of styles. A more recent study of sculptures as art objects from across the Indian Subcontinent has been taken up by Pratapaditya Pal in his two-volume series Indian Sculptures.8 Pal takes into consideration the vast scope of Indian sculptures – secular and religious; metal, stone and terracotta images; covering the time period from the Indus Valley Civilization to the Chola period – and understands them as architectural fragments meant for aesthetics and ornamentation. Pal belongs to the school of art historians who believe that texts came before images,9 but he agrees that though sculptors were probably expected to adhere to certain basic principles, they otherwise enjoyed considerable freedom.10 For Pal, “symbolic meaning is encapsulated in each detail of an image, including the various emblems, symbols, whether attributes or gestures”11 hence the idea of rasa plays a significant role.12 By tabulating the chronological evolution of the Uma Mahesvaramurti, elaborating upon the bodily postures of Shiva and Parvati, their facial expression, mudras, rasa and attributes, I chart the geographical context of the icon without examining any textual prescriptions. Within the South Bihar region, there are noticeable variations in the Uma Mahesvara sculptures, and I draw comparisons across sites, shrines and time periods which might explain the exchange of ideas between different religions and cults. In the last two decades or so, there has been a shift in the approach to study the meanings and purpose of religious images independent of sacred literature. I have attempted to draw out some of these methodologies in my approach to the Uma Mahesvara motif. Devangana Desai in her monograph Religious Imagery in Khajuraho has highlighted the importance of placement of sculptures on temple walls as an indicator of their purpose and context.13 Citing the example of Khajuraho, she recommends viewing the sculptures at the temples at Khajuraho not merely in light of eroticism but as a part of a well-integrated religious universe. It is relevant to know the exact location of images in the sculptural scheme of the temple since their placement indicates their rank in the enshrined pantheon. Much like Desai, my study traces the original placement of Uma Mahesvara images in shrines and in the garbha griha, as decorative motifs on pillars on doorways, etcetera,

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

149

to understand the changing meanings and ritual usage of the icons. In this process I discuss how the ritual arrangement of icons in temples is predetermined; for instance, in Shaiva temples, Shiva is present in his manifest and un-manifest forms and so are the other members of his pantheon. By approaching the Uma Mahesvara icons I also examine the shrines where the images were located to understand how the icons and ritual spaces have modified over time by interaction with the communities who used the shrines. In this context I borrow Michael Meister’s methodological stance of tracing the after lives of images through the use of ethno-archaeology; a means of studying the past through the application of knowledge of the present.14 Meister has argued that an object of art cannot be seen as static but in a dynamic relationship with time and historical and the cultural context.15 In the same manner temples should not be studied in isolation rather be examined how their identity is defined by the culture and practices of people using them. I have moved away from the art historical approach of examining the original life of icons and temples by looking at how they renegotiate through time and audiences to have varied cultural meanings. I also explore the evolution of the Uma Mahesvara motif in the early medieval period in light of contemporary religious and societal processes. Scholars have argued that the popularisation of certain cults and the motifs associated with them were determined by human society and that artists are largely socially conditioned. Krishna Mohan Shrimali emphasises on this inter-dependence of art, religion and society and argues that the study of art in India is somewhat one dimensional and text-aided.16 Taking the cue from Srimali, my methodology relooks at religious sculptures, and attempts to present a “total” history where the focus is on micro-level studies. In line with Shrimali’s model for studying religious icons is Anita Raina Thapan’s work where she has mapped the evolution of the Ganapati cult.17 Thapan has situated the deity in the contemporary society and examines how the idea of Ganapati was absorbed within the different religious contexts: Buddhism, Jainism and Brahmanism.18 Falling in the same genre is Nilima Chitgopekar’s work on the Shaiva cult in Madhya Pradesh.19 Chitgopekar has also worked within the framework of understanding religious ideology, rituals, art and architecture as shaped by forces of political warfare, economic deterioration and Brahmanisation operating in North India in the early medieval period and in this light how each geographical region developed its own brand of religious indices.20 My sculptural data also includes a small corpus of Uma Mahesvara icons in metal, mainly ashta dhatu; the strategies for examining these

150

The icon in context

images become somewhat different from the stone ones. In her volume on Chola bronzes, Vidya Dehejia21 has addressed the bronzes as utsavamurtis, “mobile forms or embodiments for deities to inhabit during the processions of temple festivals.”22 As such, the modes of looking become different and one has to imagine bronzes in varied settings: temple festivals, temple setting as a subsidiary deity and as an art object placed in modern museums. My study will hence contextualise the bronze Uma Mahesvara icons in light of bhakti tradition, and raise questions around embodiment, darshan, ritual significance, the moulding and casting of images and breathing life into them, rituals of cleansing and purification; thus, attempting to outline their original purpose.23 An analysis of my corpus of sculptures also brings out the several layers of negotiations and accommodations between the different contemporary religions and how the Uma Mahesvara motif was absorbed by each of these. By using iconography, I discuss how through a process of synthesis and absorption Shaivism and Buddhism become accommodative of marginal divinities which resulting in a mélange of local traditions. I have hence attempted to move away from evolutionary history to understand the processes behind religious reconfigurations and amalgamations. The Uma Mahesvaramurti The Uma Mahesvaramurti depicts Shiva and his consort Uma seated together on the same pedestal and caught in an intimate embrace. In this vivid depiction of conjugal bliss, Uma sits on Shiva’s lap bedecked with fine jewellery. Uma is always depicted as having two arms while Shiva may have two, four or more arms.24 Most images show Shiva as embracing Uma; variations also show him caressing her breasts, feeding her betel leaves, lifting her chin or applying tilak on her forehead. Uma coyly responds to Shiva’s embrace or at times overcomes inhibitions and herself embraces him. At times, the couple share the same halo; there are instances where each is crowned with a separate halo and in some cases Shiva’s halo over-shadows that of Uma. The couple is depicted as nature mostly depicts man and woman: Uma is always shown smaller, sometimes almost child-like or reaching up-to Shiva’s shoulders or chin. Most images show the couple with their regal paraphernalia: heavily bejewelled and elaborately draped. They are shown carrying different ayudhas and pose different hand mudras. The couple may face each other or look away from each other but the rasa is definitely that of shringara. The overall vision of the icon

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

151

is not merely one of physical closeness but also that of emotional intimacy, compatibility and vibrancy. Pratapaditya Pal labelled the Uma Mahesvara images as “action icons,” where the couple is engaged in expressing their love for one another, a rather unique way of describing this composite image.25 Traditional modes of looking at the image have generally situated it within the folds of Shaiva iconography where Uma is subsumed within Shiva’s aura and ambiance. Gopinatha Rao described Uma Mahesvara as a lilamurti of Shiva met with in all Shaiva temples. When the Devi is seated on the same seat, under the same prabhamandala, on the side of the image of Shiva and faces the latter, the group is known as Umasahitamurti.26 The Devi is to be on the left of Shiva; she should have only two arms and should be as high as his shoulder. When Shiva and Uma are seated on the same seat embracing each other, this motif is known as Uma Mahesvara.27 JN Banerjea argued that the Uma Mahesvara icon depicts Shiva as the primeval Father God.28 He brackets Umamahesvaramurti as a saumya type Shaiva icon but not necessarily associated with any particular Shaivite story.29 With a similar perspective NK Bhattasali called the Umamahesvaramurti as Umalingana Murti “which depict Shiva, with his wife seated on his left thigh.”30 Bhattasali adhered to this nomenclature on the basis of “short inscribed labels (that) are sometimes met with on the pedestals of images.”31 He further points out that the contemporary inscribed labels read different names but denote the same image, so different Tantras and Puranas also give the image different names. Bhattasali classifies Uma Mahesvara as Shaiva images, with the god as ordinarily represented sitting on a lotus with the pendant right leg resting on a lotus or on the back of the bull placed below. His consort Uma sits on his left thigh while her left leg hangs out and is placed similarly on a lotus or on the back of her vehicle, the lion. The god and the goddess are represented as embracing each other. He also emphasises that of all Shaiva images, this variety is the one most commonly met in Bengal. Bhattasali also traces the image of Uma Mahesvara as receiving worship from very ancient times as is evident from the invocatory opening shloka of Mrichchhakatika where the lightening-like arm of Gauri placed against the blue neck of Shiva is referred to.32 The trend of looking at Uma Mahesvara as a manifestation of Shiva continued in later writings. Stella Kramrisch in her book Manifestations of Siva describes Uma Mahesvara as “an image of Mahesvara, the great Lord, seated in his togetherness with the great goddess as Uma-Parvati, his wife and embracing her.”33 Kramrisch, moreover, does not consider Uma even as a separate entity but as subsidiary of

152

The icon in context

Shiva and a part of his ambiance. “She (Uma) is the other half of Sri Ardhanarisvara, the Lord whose half is woman.”34 Kramrisch also sees multiple meanings in this union of Uma Mahesvara: “The togetherness of god and goddess is full of meaning on more than one level: Umā Maheśvara may be seen as wedded divine lovers, exalted in their embrace; they may be realized in their togetherness as Puruśa and Prakṛti, spirit and matter, essence and substance.”35 Recent studies have, however, challenged this perspective and have highlighted the role of Uma as predominant in this divine representation. Thomas E Donaldson’s volumes on the iconographic forms of Shiva and Parvati are perhaps the most comprehensive study of the many different forms in which they appear together.36 For Donaldson the study of Shiva and Parvati is especially pertinent since “no other male deity in early Indian iconography has been shown with his consort. Even in his un-manifest form, which is as the liṅga, she is present as the circular seat of the liṅga.”37 Donaldson sees the Umamahesvaramurti as the ultimate culmination of Shaiva iconography: “Umā Maheśvara image is perhaps the most complex in respect to physical and emotional interaction and thus most challenging to the sculptor, who must combine physical/emotional intimacy with hieratic deportment.”38 Unlike earlier secondary works on iconography, Donaldson is the first to see seven basic variants of the Uma Mahesvara image based primarily on the bodily pose, facial expression and hand mudras of Uma.39 Donaldson also points to variations in the ornaments, clothes, ayudhas, prabhamandali, seat and the subsidiary figures in the background. AL Srivastava in his book on Umamahesvaramurti follows the somewhat same model as Donaldson and sees Uma in the icon at almost the same footing as Shiva.40 He believes that in Umamahesvaramurti, Shiva normally sits in lalitasana, sukhasana or ardha-paryankasana and embraces his spouse Uma who sits on the left thigh or lap, and reciprocates and embraces him by throwing her right arm unabashedly over his shoulders. Looking at this broad canvas of writings brings forward a variety of issues pertaining to religious icons and to Umamahesvaramurti from South Bihar in particular, which I discuss in the course of this chapter. The icon and its archaeology It is difficult to conform to any single textual definition for this composite icon as the existing sculptural evidence from South Bihar suggests innumerable variations in the Uma Mahesvara image. The classic

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

153

composition from the region depicts Shiva as 2 or 4 armed while Uma always has 2 arms. The couple is shown as longingly facing each other or with faces turned away but bodies caught in an embrace; even when Uma’s body is turned away she continues to gaze at Shiva. There are numerous variations in the mudras and ayudhas of both Uma and Shiva. Shiva is seen as embracing Uma, holding her by her waist, touching her chin or breast or feeding her betel leaves. Uma touches Shiva on his shoulder, thigh, knee or groin with her right hand. Her left hand holds either a darpan or a lotus or the end of a garment or is in varada or abhaya mudra or rests on her left leg. The respective vahanas of Shiva and Uma, the Nandi bull and the lion, often appear along with other divine and human figures which surround them: Skanda, Ganesha, Vishnu and a variety of human attendants, apsaras, maladharas and kinnaras often crowd the background. The majority of the Uma Mahesvara icons from the region can be ascribed to the period between the eighth and the fourteenth centuries. Donaldson argued that “images depicting Shiva and Parvati appear as early as the beginning of the Christian era”,41 though the couple in their manifestation as Uma Mahesvara appear only around the fourth–fifth centuries. The motif became more common from the sixth–seventh centuries and continued to be popular well into the tenth and eleventh centuries.42 Pratapaditya Pal traced the origins of the Uma Mahesvara images to the classic composition of amorous couple represented in terracotta and stone plaques found from various sites across North India.43 Donaldson agrees with Pal that the Uma Mahesvara image is a motif of lovers synonymous with “terracotta mithunas from Ahicchatra, with yaksa-mithunas at Mahakuta, with naga and nagi at Ajanta and Jogeshwari, with royal figures in pillars and medallions at Ajanta.”44 Srivastava supports the theory and cites instances of terracotta plaques carrying images of Uma Mahesvara, some as early as the Sunga period; and he cites the example of one such plaque found at Bhita near Allahabad, now kept in the Indian Museum, Calcutta.45 Srivastava argues that Uma Mahesvara icons first appear in North India from the time of the Kushana in the first century ce and became popular in Gupta art, by the fourth–fifth centuries. Srivastava dates the Uma Mahesvara reliefs found in the Elephanta caves, near Mumbai, on the Western Ghats as the oldest in India to circa 550. He dates the Uma Mahesvara images from Nepal as being older, some as early as third–fourth centuries. He also mentions a gold coin inscribed with the Uma Mahesvara image, dated to Harshvardhan’s reign, to 606 ce.46 He argues that the coin does not show the couple as embracing but just as seated together since this was probably the first stage of the development of

154

The icon in context

the motif.47 Srivastava supports his arguments with 3 other terracotta plaques from Uttar Pradesh, dated to the fifth century, which show a six-armed male seated with a female on a cushion.48 He concludes his arguments saying that the Uma Mahesvara motif which is now seen came into its present form somewhere around the sixth century and continued till the thirteenth–fourteenth centuries with its climax of popularity between the eighth and eleventh centuries. Naseem Akhtar traces the Uma Mahesvara images from Bihar to a gold plaque from Patna depicting a male and a female figure, identified as Shiva and Parvati, dated to the Mauryan period.49 The plaque was first identified as Uma Mahesvara by KP Jayaswal though earlier historians like Motichandra and PL Gupta had identified it as a simple mithuna representation and placed it to the second century bce. Akhtar however feels that the earlier label did not give any justification for the placement of the crescent-like band over the jata of the male figure.50 South Bihar has historically been the core region of ancient Magadha, with its capital Pataliputra identified with Patna located in the heartland. The area shot into prominence in the age of the Janapadas around the sixth century bce and is associated with the early wanderings of Vardhaman Mahavir, the Buddha and the Ajivika sect. For almost all the subsequent ruling dynasties of North India: the Mauryas, the Sungas, the Nagas and the Guptas, the region remained the hub of political, economic and religious action. Each succeeding dynasty tried to vie with its predecessor for control over this significant region and its resources. Within the time frame of the present study, the area of South Bihar was principally occupied by the Pala and the Sena dynasties. The Palas came to power with Gopala in about the year 750 ce. For the first two centuries of their rule, the rulers were embroiled in suppressing successive invasions of the Gurjaras and the Rashtrakutas. The Palas successfully suppressed these, but it meant that the borders of their empire were constantly redefined. By the beginning of the ninth century, their borders reached as far as Rajasthan. Later, however, it remained contained mostly within the modern-day states of Bihar and Bengal. By the early eleventh century, the Pala domain was invaded by the Cholas of South India, when the Palas lost the eastern part of their Empire and it came under the rule of a Kannada chief of the Cholas army. By the twelfth century, the areas under the sway of the Palas were taken over by the Senas. The six centuries of artistic productivity that I focus on were marred by changing political boundaries and military strife. Hardly any pieces of art were personally commissioned by the Pala-Sena rulers

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

155

themselves, as they were preoccupied with politics and warfare. Their rule, however, provided the economic resources and artistic proclivity necessary for the flowering of contemporary art. It is within this politico-geographic domain that I attempt to situate the Uma Mahesvara images keeping in mind political patronage, geographical terrain, availability of resources, transport networks and mobility of people. It is hence crucial to locate the crystallisation of the Uma Mahesvara motif in its distinct “Eastern Indian” flavour and underline the multiplicity of meanings and artistic forms. Chronology and evolution To understand the historical context of the icons I will now examine approximately 136 Uma Mahesvara images, cast in stone and in metal, from various districts of South Bihar. A century-wise concentration of images is represented in Figure 4.1. Table 4.1 gives further details of the images. Uma Mahesvara images begin to appear in South Bihar as early as the fifth century; images are, however, few and scattered. Of the total 136 images, only 6 can be assigned to the period between the

5th - 8th 8th - 9th 9th - 10th 10th - 12th Post 12th Undated

Figure 4.1 Century-wise distribution of images Source: Prepared by author

800–900 30 images

700–800 7 images

Maharamau, Gaya Rajaona, Munger 2 images

400–700 6 images

Mundesvari, Rohtas Bihar Dharmaranya, Gaya Jahangira Rock, Sultanganj, Bhagalpur 3 images Deo Barunark, Aurangabad 2 images Bihar 2 images Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger Pachar, Gaya

Site and district

Century-wise distribution

On a pillar. Shiva-Parvati seated on Mount Kailasa with Arjuna kneeling while Ganga looks on. A second image on pillar Shiva- Parvati seated on Mount Kailasa. Shiva holds a betel plate for Parvati while a female attendant with child looks on On door lintel Unknown Provenance. Museum of Asian Art, San Francisco Enshrined in modern Shiva temple On cave wall

Lined up

Original provenance unknown. Ashutosh Museum Calcutta

Granite/ Sandstone

Stone Stone

Dark grey sandstone

Black stone

Black stone Patna Museum Patna Museum

Schist

Granite

Stone

Architectural fragment. Double-sided stele with Vishnu on the back

Nature of remains

Sandstone

Material

Table 4.1 Chronological break-down of Uma Mahesvara images51

Munger, Munger 2 images Nalanda, Nalanda Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Marara, Nawadah Bihar Bihar Bihar Bihar Rajgir, Nalanda Nalanda Nawadah Mahant’s Compound, Bodh Gaya 9 images Vishnupur, Gaya Bodh Gaya, Gaya Bihar Bihar

MET, New York State Museum Lucknow Featured in Sotheby’s catalogue 12/1/93

Bronze Stone

Stone

(Continued)

Patna Museum Bodh Gaya site Museum Original provenance unknown. Panasia Gallery of Far Eastern Antiquities, Zurich Original provenance unknown. Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya, Mumbai Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin

Sandstone Grey stone Stone Black schist

Phyllite

Nawadah Museum Original provenance unknown. Cleveland Museum of Art Original provenance unknown. Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, New York Original provenance unknown. Denver Art Museum, Denver Original provenance unknown. National Museum of Oriental Arts, Rome Ashutosh Museum, Calcutta Nalanda Museum Nawadah Museum Original provenance unknown

Black basalt Bronze Bronze Stone Black schist Stone Black basalt Black stone Grey stone

900–1100 44 images

Century-wise distribution Philadelphia In Vishnu temple, rebuilt several times

Patna Museum, Broadley Collection Nalanda Museum Patna Museum Patna Museum

National Museum, New Delhi National Museum, New Delhi Allahabad Museum Indian Museum Indian Museum Indian Museum Indian Museum Allahabad Museum

Stone

Basalt stone

Schist Basalt stone Sandstone

Bronze

Basalt stone

Black basalt Black schist Sandstone Stone Black basalt Black basalt Grey schist

Bihar, Unknown Provenance Deo Barunark, Aurangabad 3 images Bihar Sharif, Bihar Nalanda, Nalanda Nandua, Nawadah Kurkihar Hoard, Gaya 3 images Nalanda, Site 9, Patna Bihar Gaya Bihar Bihar Bihar Bihar Gaya

Nature of remains

Material

Site and district

Table 4.1 (Continued)

Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, New York Los Angeles County Museum of Art MET, New York Baltimore

Bronze

Bronze

Bronze

Stone

(Continued)

State Museum Lucknow State Museum Lucknow

Stone Black basalt

Black stone

Surajpur village, Gaya Bihar Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar/ Bengal

Pipal Tree shrine north of Mahabodhi temple National Museum, New Delhi Patna Museum Miniature temple at site with Uma Mahesvara in central niche. Modern temple built out of remains of an older temple in which many ancient images are consecrated. Same as site. Unusual image, Uma not seated on Shiva’s lap but separately. Main deity enshrined, Surya. Uma Mahesvara placed in a Shivalaya on left outside the main shrine. Central image, here, is a panchamukhalinga. Several images all in black stone enshrined here on all four walls Same as site

Grey stone Grey stone Bronze Black stone

Black stone

Modern temple built with remains of older temple. Images lined up outside the temple. At site, atop Shiva Mandir and embedded in wall on the way to the temple

Black stone

Suraj Mandir Bargaon, Nalanda

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya 8 images Bodh Gaya, Gaya Bihar Kurkihar, Gaya Suraj Mandir, Bargaon, Nalanda

1100–1200 11 images

Century-wise distribution Harsa Dehejia Collection Patna Museum Govt Museum Mathura Ashutosh Museum Calcutta

Patna Museum National Museum Patna Museum Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin Patna Museum State Museum Lucknow Patna Museum Nawadah Museum Nawadah Museum Gaya Museum Patna Museum

Stone

Stone

Stone

Stone Slate Bronze Grey stone Phyllite Stone Stone

Grey stone Bronze Grey stone Stone

Green- grey stone

Bihar Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Gaya Bodh Gaya, Gaya Kurkihar, Gaya Unknown Bihar/Bengal Bihar, Unknown Marora, Roh, Nawadah Upardih, Gaya Kurkihar, Gaya Unknown Bihar, Unknown Provenance Pipra, Gaya

Nature of remains

Material

Site and district

Table 4.1 (Continued)

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

161

fifth and eighth centuries. The earliest image in my data is a doublesided sandstone stele from Mahramau, Gaya district, now stored in the Patna Museum.52 Dated between the fourth and seventh centuries, the stele carries Shiva-Parvati on one side and Vishnu on the other and is inscribed. Similar double-sided steles that are probably architectural fragments have been found from several sites of South Bihar. Though the faces of both Shiva and Uma are mutilated, the finesse and details at even such an early date is striking.

Figure 4.2 One of the earliest Uma Mahesvara, Mahramau, Gaya; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 11260 Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

162

The icon in context

Other early Uma Mahesvara images appear on pillar fragments at the temple remains of Rajaona, Munger district, and have been dated to the fifth century.53 There are two such pillar fragments now stored in the Indian Museum, Calcutta.54 Meant for pillar ornamentation, these sculptures do not depict Uma Mahesvara in their conventional pose. The pillars show scenes of Arjuna’s penance on Mount Kailasa. The first pillar depicts Shiva seated to the left of Parvati, on Mount Kailasa with a snake on his shoulder and three attendants. He holds out his hand to Arjuna kneeling below while Ganga, personified as a woman looks on. The second pillar depicts a human-headed bird beneath which Shiva and Parvati are seated on the rocks with Arjuna. Shiva holds a plate of betel for Parvati while a female attendant carrying a child looks on. Another fairly early image dated to the seventh century is now a part of the Avery Brundage Collection at the Museum of Asian Art, San Francisco; the original provenance of this image is, however, unknown.55 This stone image depicts Uma Mahesvara with Shiva’s vahana, Nandi. Another stone Uma Mahesvara enshrined in a modern Shaiva temple at Dharmaranya also appears fairly early though the original provenance of this image is not known.56 This architectural fragment dated to the eighth century is the only one in this chronological bracket which is under worship. Two other images dated to this period come from the Mundesvari temple and can be dated to the sixth century.57 While one image appears on the door lintel58 of the temple, the other is stored in the Patna Museum. Geographically the early Uma Mahesvara icons are not confined to a particular region but are evenly spread. The stylistic evolution and peculiarities of images as outlined in Table 4.3 show that in the early images, Shiva is mostly two armed except for in the Mahramau image. In these early images though the deities are captured in an amorous pose, their bodies are separated and faces frontally oriented; thus, they lack the intimacy of the icons from the later periods. The images are still simple, the back slab plain and round. Shiva and Uma are shown seated on stone seat or on rocks, probably depicting Mount Kailasa, without the cushion or double petalled lotus which later appear. Uma sits on Shiva’s left thigh or on his lap, her hands rest on Shiva’s shoulders or on her lap and both sit with their legs folded. During this phase, sandstone and granite were the popular medium, the tendency was to use whatever was locally available. The icons do not seem to have gained much popularity til about the ninth century and only 7 icons can be dated between the eighth and ninth centuries. Among these, 3 Uma Mahesvara images come

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

163

from Hindu rock-cut shrines at Sultanganj. The Hindu cult probably appeared at Sultanganj between fifth and seventh centuries and is now the living cult there. The hillock is surmounted by a Shaiva temple known as Ajgaibinatha. Many of the granite rocks piled at the base of the rocky island are covered with sculptures in bold relief associated with the Vaishnava, Shaiva and Surya cults. The first panel shows a seated Uma Mahesvara with attendants and devotees, while the second shows them with Shiva’s bust and the third depicts Uma Mahesvara with Vishnu. As outlined in Table 4.3, from about the eighth to ninth centuries there are significant stylistic changes in the Uma Mahesvara icons. The typical black stone, variously called black basalt or kashti patthar, popular in Bihar-Bengal sculptures comes into use. The back slab continues to be round and overall images appear similar to the earlier period. Shiva continues to be two armed, with legs folded, coiled hair, and snake around neck as he looks at Uma. Donaldson points out that by the eighth century the format with Uma’s lower torso and legs facing away from Shiva, placing her hand on his thigh and turning back to gaze at his face, appears throughout most of India. In many cases, Shiva reciprocates her gaze rather than looking straight ahead.59 This tendency is visible even in the earliest images from the region, those from Mahramau and Dharmaranya. The same is also apparent in the Sultanganj images where the divine couple gaze at each other while their bodies are turned away. Donaldson adds that in these early examples the couple often appear more separated than united as the sculptors struggled to develop an aesthetically pleasing yet hieratic composition.60 Uma at this stage is shown seated close to Shiva but not on his lap as the later examples show. The couple invariably is of equal size and, despite their physical closeness, is very erect and regal in posture.61 All of these indices discussed by Donaldson can be seen in the images from the earliest period in South Bihar. Although the lalitasana pose with the right leg pendant was gradually adopted for Shiva as being most suitable for supporting Uma on his folded left leg, in numerous early images, other postures are also seen to be employed, as cited in Table 4.3. The examples from Mahramau and Dapthu seem to be almost exceptions because in both of these figures Shiva is already four armed and embraces Uma who sits on his left thigh. Both the images show Shiva and Uma covered by a common halo. The back slab of the Mahramau image is round with a lotus scroll while that from Dapthu is a little more ornate and also shows the vahanas of the two

164

The icon in context

deities and maladhari kinnaras. It seems that even at this early stage, artists from Gaya district were more experimental with their work. The number of sculptures dated to the ninth century increase substantially as evident from Figure 4.1. As many as 30 icons can be dated to the next 100 years, and Uma Mahesvara images were executed in both stone and bronze. A variety of stones now come to be used, and one can guess that, apart from the local quarry, stones required for artistic use might also have been transported from elsewhere. In addition to stone, three ashta dhatu images, which I discuss later in the chapter, have also been dated to this period. By the ninth century the Uma Mahesvara image is found at many more sites of South Bihar, and this classic “Hindu” figure is also found in large numbers in the so-called “Buddhist” monastic sites such as at Nalanda, Bodh Gaya, Kurkihar and the Barabar Hills. A substantial part of this collection, 10 images, is now stored in the Mahant’s Compound in Bodh Gaya. The similarity in style and execution of Uma Mahesvara images in the Mahant’s Collection suggests that they might have all come from the same temple complex. By the ninth century, the “classic” Uma Mahesvara icon emerged, as evident from the stylistic details listed in Table 4.3. Images were carved on a round, rectangular or elliptical back slab often ornamented with a lotus scroll. The double petalled lotus seat was introduced and the couple sits on a cushion. Shiva is four armed, probably to exaggerate his magnificence and power. While his lower right hand touches Uma’s chin, the front left hand fondles her breast. His trishula now appears at various positions on the back slab. His upper right hand either sports the trishula or the nilotpal flower, his upper left hand variously appears behind Uma’s head, either in abhayamudra or holding his damru, rosary, skull cap or trishula. Uma sits on his left thigh, her left hand holds a darpan or a lotus or the end of a cloth or rests on her knee, her right-hand rests on Shiva’s left shoulder or on his lap. Interestingly, in most icons, while the couple faces each other and pose an erotic stance, their bodies betray their pose and are turned away, yet the pose is altogether very rhythmic. Both sit in identical pose, in lalitasana: Shiva’s right leg is pendant and rests on his vahanas or on a lotus while his left leg is folded while Uma’s right leg is either pendant or folded but the left is always folded. The back slab continues to be sparse, though a few subsidiary images begin to appear in the background: the vahanas, kneeling devotees, Vishnu, Skanda, Ganesha and sometimes the lotus motif. Both Shiva and Uma are bejewelled; a pointed jatamukuta is characteristic of sculptures of this period.

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

165

Shiva’s stance while now seems more or less defined; it is Uma who is more flexible in terms of bodily postures, facial expression, hand mudras and ayudhas, as outlined in Table 4.3. Donaldson summarises that a variant with Uma’s right elbow resting on the left shoulder of Shiva which appears in the ninth century in scattered images in Bihar reveals attempts on the part of the sculptor to involve Uma in a more active role by reversing the action, that it is she who rests an arm on the left shoulder of Shiva.62 To do this she not only, has to move closer but also, has to turn her body towards him. In another pose, still more

Figure 4.3 Uma Mahesvara, Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger, represents the icon in its ‘classic’ Eastern Indian pose; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 6837 Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

166

The icon in context

conducive to intimacy, the right arm of Uma is no longer placed on the thigh of Shiva for support but is draped around his shoulder. The variant with Shiva lifting the chin of Uma or offering her betel with his left hand introduced in this period becomes conventional with Uma Mahesvara images of Bihar and Bengal. Mention must be made of two distinct images from this period. The first is an image from Rajgir, now in the Ashutosh Museum Calcutta, somewhat different from the above model. Here the couple sit in lalitasana but now have their opposite legs pendant.63 Shiva feeds betel leaves to Uma with his lower left hand, while his lower right hand is in the bhumisparamudra. The second figure is from Kashtaharini Ghat, Munger, and is now in the Patna Museum: where Shiva holds a rosary in his upper left hand, the back slab gets a little crowded with a female worshipper and the vahanas and now a tiger appears in between Shiva and Uma. Starting from this period onwards, a few images such as this one show Uma’s body unusually closer to Shiva’s. The artists were now probably striving to enhance bodily intimacy. Similar features are also seen in another image from Munger, now stored in the Museum fur Indische Kunst. Three bronze images also dated to the ninth century require special mention. As listed in Table 4.3, not much stylistic differentiation can be seen in the bronzes. Shiva continues to be two or four armed, his right leg is pendant and left folded. Uma sits on his left thigh. In two of the images Shiva feeds Uma betel leaves with his right hand while his left hand embraces her breast. Uma’s arms are seen resting while her legs are pendant or folded.64 The couple sits on the lotus seat with kneeling devotees and the vahanas. None of the stone images of the period were carved in the round but to add three dimensionality to the images a new technique was introduced in the case of stone images. When seen in front and from the side the figures are connected only by thin struts with the back slab.65 One such Uma Mahesvara image is found from Marara, Nawadah district, and now stored in the Nawadah Museum. This technique becomes more popular in the following centuries. The subsequent period between the tenth and twelfth centuries seems to be a high point in art. The largest number of Uma Mahesvara images, 40, can be ascribed to this time as outlined in Figure 4.1. The number of bronze images also increases to 7. Apart from free-standing images, evidence now appears on cave walls, miniature temples and rock surfaces. The sculptures become more concentrated in the Gaya region; as detailed in Table 4.2, 20 of the 44

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

167

Figure 4.4 Uma Mahesvara, Nandua, Gaya; the figures of Shiva and Uma are cut away from the back slab to introduce a three-dimensional effect; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 11065 Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

images can be ascribed to the Gaya district alone. A greater number of temple sites can also be dated to this period which somewhat attests to the growing popularity of Shaivism, a spate of building activities at temple sites and the growing acceptance of Uma Mahesvara images. Simultaneously, several of the earliest temple sites of Bihar such as Deo Barunark, Nalanda, Barabar Hills and Bodh Gaya re-appear on

Gaya

Munger

Centuries 10–12

Antichak, Vikramsila Pirpainti

Deo Barunark 5 images Gaya

Kashtaharini Ghat

Rajaona 2 images Munger 2 images

Sculptural fragment mounted at a new temple

Brahmanical rockcut cave

900–999

700–999

800–899

Standing figure

Total numbers for Munger District: 5 images Brahmanical temple

Centuries 9–10

Total numbers for Bhagalpur District: 7 images Century 5 Temple remains Pillar face

Monastic complex

Cave Walls

Brahmanical rockcut cave

700–799

Jahangira Rock, Sultanganj, 3 images Patharghata Hills 2 images

Bhagalpur

Original Location

Nature of architectural remains

Date

Site

District

Table 4.2 District-wise distribution of Uma Mahesvara images

On site

Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin Patna Museum

Indian Museum

Unknown

Junglinath Temple

Miscellaneous shrine

Same as original

Current Location

Ornamentation

Worship

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Keur village Dapthu Village

Gaya

Gaya

Kurkihar Hoard

Kurkihar Hoard

Kurkihar Hoard

Pachar Nandua Bodh Gaya

Maharamau

Vishnupur

976–999

Temple remains with Mounted onto wall porticos and pillars of new temple

Wall fragment

Centuries 8–14, 800–999 Centuries 4–7, Double-sided stele with Vishnu on the back 800–899 Century 11 1100–1199 Shiva and Parvati in a niche 900–1099 Hoard of Brahmanical and Buddhist images 900–1099 Hoard of Brahmanical and Buddhist images 948 CE Hoard of Brahmanical and Buddhist images 1000–1099

Same as site

Allahabad Museum Allahabad Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum Patna Museum Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

(Continued)

Worship

Display

Storage Storage

Storage

District

935 ce

1101–1200

801–1100

Centuries 8–13

Century 8

Kurkihar

Kurkihar

Bodh Gaya

Surajpur village

Dharmaranya Gaya

Enshrined in modern Shiva temple

In a niche in the wall

Centuries 8–13

Mahabodhi Temple, Bodh Gaya

Modern temple with remains of older temples Ancient temple remains, complete with porch and pillars

Modern Shivalaya Mounted onto wall built from of new temple fragments of older temple Tree shrine adjacent Temple fragment to the Mahabodhi temple Hoard of Brahmanical and Buddhist images Hoard of Brahmanical and Buddhist images

Centuries 8–13

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills 10 images

Original Location

Nature of architectural remains

Date

Site

Table 4.2 (Continued) Purpose

Same as site

Bodh Gaya Site Museum Same as site

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Worship

Worship

Storage

Display

Storage

Same as site, atop Ornamentation Shiva Mandir, lined up outside the temple Mahabodhi temple Worship complex

Current Location

Parampita Mahesvara temple

Tree shrine beside a stepped tank Temple of Mahisasuramardini

Suraj Kund, near Vishnupad Gayasuri temple, Vishnupad 2 images Akshayavat temple, Gaya 6 images

Modern temple using fragments of several older temples. Main image chaturmukhalinga in black stone.

Under a banyan tree whitewashed Shivalaya, renovated several times

Vishnupad temple

Century 13 Century 12

Vishnupad temple 3 images

Pipra Upardih

Enshrined Enshrined

In tree shrine New temple

(Continued)

New temple Ornamentation On left of entrance On right is a Vishnu. 2 images on outside right wall of shrine and 2 more in a subsidiary shrine built on a platform at the back of the temple Outside the sanctum Outside the garbha Worship on the right of the griha entrance

On wall opposite the main stone mandapa Cemented on wall under tree Subsidiary shrine

Nawadah Museum Gaya Museum On display Gaya Museum On display Placed in a newer Ornamentation temple

District

Markandeya Baba temple

Markandeya Baba temple

Mangala Devi shrine

Mangala Devi shrine,

Site

Table 4.2 (Continued)

Date

Located on top of a hill dedicated to Mangala Devi; a shakti pitha where the Sati’s breasts fell. No Devi image but two mounds with a Shiva linga next to it. Main shrine rock-cut cave. Lies outside rockcut temple under a pipal tree. Rock-cut Shiva temple with a linga. Outside edifice modern. Several old images enshrined here. Rock-cut Shiva temple with a linga. Outside edifice modern. Several old images enshrined here.

Nature of architectural remains In garbha griha

On left of main image inside sanctum. On right Narayana Lakshmi

Main deity of subsidiary shrine

In a subsidiary shrine on the left of the entrance

Enshrined

Outside the garbha Enshrined griha

Enshrined

Worship

Purpose

In a niche to the left of the entrance at the mandapa

Tree shrine

Current Location

Original Location

Bihar Sharif

Rohtas

Sitala Devi Mandir, Maghara 2 images

Mundesvari

Mundesvari

Mahant’s compound, Bodh Gaya 9 images

Baitarni Talao 2 images

Lined up along the wall of the shrine

In a niche to the left of the entrance and on the outside wall

Total number of images found from Rohtas: 2 Brahmanical temple All images kept dedicated to goddess in the courtyard outside the shrine Sitala, brick and Uma Mahesvara mortar containing kept at left of both Brahmanical entrance of garbha and Buddhist images. All Buddhist griha images named and worshipped as Brahmanical. Images found in the adjacent tank

Total number of images found from Gaya: 68 Century 6 Temple dedicated On door lintel to goddess Mundesvari, early stone temple Century 6 Temple dedicated to Free standing goddess Mundesvari, early stone temple

800–899

Single cell Shivalaya. Outside walls covered with images from a different time period Housed inside the Mahant’s compound in a room serving as a museum/ shrine

On site

On site

Enshrined outside the main sanctum of akhanda jyoti

New temple

(Continued)

Worship

Patna Museum

Ornamentation

Worship

Ornamentation

Nalanda

District

Centuries 8–13

Centuries 8–13

Nalanda

Suraj Mandir, Bargaon

Bargaon 2 votive temples

Nalanda Nalanda, Site 9, Patna Bargaon

900–999

Bihar Sharif

Part of Broadley Collection

Nature of architectural remains

Original Location

Found on a platform outside the east facing Shivalaya Buddhist temple remains Modern temple in which many ancient images are consecrated

Found on a platform outside the east facing Shivalaya

Lined up outside wall of main shrine. Uma Mahesvara in votive temples only found in Bargaon

Image found from adjacent tank. Dumped on the platform next to talao along with votive temples and several votive lingas Image dumped on the platform next to talao along with votive lingas

Total number of images found from Bihar Sharif: 3 900–999 900–999

Date

Site

Table 4.2 (Continued)

Worship

Displayed

Patna Museum, Broadley Collection

Purpose

In miniature Worship temple with image of Uma Mahesvara in front niche Nalanda site location Same as site Ornamentation

Nalanda Museum National Museum, New Delhi Same as site. On platform

Current Location

Century 9 Century 9

Nalanda Rajgir, Nalanda

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Centuries 8–13

Suraj Mandir Bargaon, Nalanda Placed in a Shivalaya on left outside the main shrine Central image panchamukhalinga Several images all in black stone enshrined here on all four walls

On right of entrance Rock-cut Devi of modern shrine temple. Main image of Devi on lion. Cave temple has a modern whitewashed super-structure with courtyard and subsidiary shrines. In the room, next door, several images under worship

Modern temple in which many ancient images are consecrated

MET, New York Ashutosh Museum Calcutta New location. Original temple believed to be located at a distance

Same as site

(Continued)

Storage

Worship

District

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Site

Table 4.2 (Continued)

Date

Rock-cut Devi temple. Main image of Devi on lion. Cave temple has a modern whitewashed superstructure with courtyard and subsidiary shrines. In the room next door, several images under worship Rock-cut Devi temple. Main image of Devi on lion. Cave temple has a modern whitewashed superstructure with courtyard and subsidiary shrines. In the room next door, several images under worship

Nature of architectural remains

Storage

Centre of modern shrine

Purpose

Storage

Current Location

On right corner of modern shrine

Original Location

Nawadah

Lakshmi Narayana Temple, Basti Bigha, Kosala, Nawadah

Marara

Nalanda

Shankar Parvati mandir, Bargaon

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Nalanda Museum Collection

Fragment of temple remains

Modern temple with several ancient images enshrined

In reserve collection

Enshrined

Storage

(Continued)

Worship

Nawadah Museum Displayed, display no. 31

New temple

Cemented on wall of modern temple

Inside left corner of modern shrine

Total number of images found from Nalanda: 17 800–899

KuberaCenturies 9–10. Uma Mahesvara: Century 12

Rock-cut Devi temple. Main image of Devi on lion. Cave temple has a modern whitewashed superstructure with courtyard and subsidiary shrines. In the room next door, several images under worship North facing temple beside a tank, several images lined up

Hilsa

District

Site

Bholenath Mandir on Tilha, Akbarpur 2 images

Nature of architectural remains

Original Location

Total number of images found from Nawadah: 4 Embedded in Brahmanical temple. Main deity wall on the left of entrance to garbha lingam. Rebuilt, older temples walls griha. still concealed behind modern structure. Images found dumped Inside garbha griha Main deity a in a niche on south mukhalingam. wall and one kept Temple on a high outside the shrine mound with tall shikhara and whitewashed. Built on older temple with black stone parapet and lintel still visible. A huge talao on east of temple

Century 12

Marora, Roh, Nawadah

Budhva Mahadev Mandir, Hilsa

Century 9

Date

Nawadah

Table 4.2 (Continued) Purpose

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

On site

On site

Nawadah Museum On display collection Nawadah Museum On display. collection Display no 27

Current Location

Unknown Provenance

Total number of images found from Hilsa: 4 1000–1099

700–799

1000–1099

700–799

1000–1099

1000–1099

1000–1099

800–999

Century 13 1001–1100 Century10 Centuries 9–10

Century 9

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Unknown Bihar Bihar Bihar

Bihar/Bengal

Ashutosh Museum Calcutta Indian Museum Calcutta Asutosh Museum Calcutta Indian Museum Calcutta Indian Museum Calcutta Indian Museum Calcutta Cleveland Museum of Art Patna Museum National Museum Lucknow Museum Panasia Gallery of Far Eastern Antiquities Zurich CSMVS, Mumbai

National Museum

(Continued)

Display

Storage

District

Site

Centuries 10–11 Century 7

Centuries 9–10

Bihar

Asian Art Museum, SFO Denver Art Museum

MET, NY

Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, NY Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, NY LACMA

800–899

Century 10

Philadelphia

Centuries 9–10

Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar

Sotheby’s 12/1/93

Centuries 9–10

Centuries 10–11

State Museum Lucknow

Current Location

Centuries 9–10

Original Location

State Museum Lucknow

Nature of architectural remains

Century 10

Date

Bihar, Unknown

Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown Provenance Bihar, Unknown

Table 4.2 (Continued) Purpose

Century 9

Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown Bihar, Unknown

Display Display

Patna Museum

Number of images with unknown provenance: 35 Number of images in situ at original location: 10 Number of images still in worship: 28 Number of images reused in new temples: 52 Number of images in museums in India: 47 Number of images in museums abroad: 17

Centuries 10–11 Century 9

Century 10

State Museum Lucknow Govt Museum Mathura Ashutosh Museum Calcutta Patna Museum

Century 12

Storage

Storage

Patna Museum

Harsa Dehejia Collection Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin National Museum, New Delhi Patna Museum

Baltimore

Century 13

Century 11

Century 12

Bihar/Bengal

Bihar

Centuries 10–11 Century 11

Bihar/Bengal

182

The icon in context

the list and suggest a possible reorganisation of older temple sites. The Umamahesvaramurti continues to be conspicuous at Buddhist sites, such as at Nalanda, Bodh Gaya and Kurkihar, as noted in Table 4.1. Ritual spaces probably continued to be shared by different faiths, a hypothesis which I have suggested earlier. Table 4.2 gives details of how several of these images have now been enshrined in modern temples of both Buddhist and Hindu following. These icons might have originally been reused for ornamentation and continue to be worshipped to the present day. In most images from this period both Shiva and Uma are heavily bejewelled, while Shiva continues to wear the tall jatamukuta, Uma’s hairstyle changes, and she now sports a large juda. The back slab becomes round, heavily ornate, crowded with subsidiary figures and with a lotus scroll border. The square and angular back slabs also occasionally appear. A certain ornate niche also sometimes appears around the divine couple and is called the mundi niche. It gives the appearance of the deities as placed in the garbha griha of a shrine. A panchalinga now appears either at the apex of the slab or separately in the back ground.66 Table 4.3 lists the other subsidiary figures which appear prominently in the back slab: the vahanas, Shiva’s ganas, Bhringi, Skanda, Ganesha, Vishnu, Lakshmi, Brahmani, Maladhari vidyadharas, apsaras, kinnaras and several kneeling devotees. The throne of the couple continues to be the double petalled lotus, and the triratha and pancharatha pedestals are now introduced. The halo becomes more prominent and Shiva and Parvati are no longer just divine but also regal in their appearance. Stylistically, while the icons become much more detailed, the excessive ornamentation is somewhat distasteful. A look at Table 4.3 gives the broad stylistic trends of this period. Shiva continues to be four armed: his upper right arm holds either the trishula or nilotpal while his lower right arm lifts Uma’s chin or offers her betel nuts. He embraces Uma or touches her breast with his lower left arm, and his upper left arm mostly holds a skull cap/kapala. Uma sits on his left thigh and both are now in lalitasana. A new model is now introduced where Shiva and Uma are seated in mirror image, with Shiva’s right leg pendant and his left leg folded while Uma’s left leg is folded and her right pendant. An unusual group of sculptures which belong to this period and require a special mention, are a set of three miniature temples with the image of Uma Mahesvara in the central niche while a fourth miniature temple has a linga in the central niche. All of the miniature temples have been found from Bargaon and are reminiscint of similar

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

183

replicas of the Mahabodhi Temple. Two of the miniature temples are now found at a modern Suraj Temple in Bargaon, lined up outside along with several contemporary images. The other two are found at a platform adjacent to a large temple tank along with a free-standing Uma Mahesvara sculpture. One such miniature temple also appears in pictures of the Broadley Museum (Image 3.5). Post-twelfth-century Uma Mahesvara images once again become sparse and start to decline in popularity. Only 11 images can be dated to this period, as appears in Figure 4.1. The images are now confined largely to a single geographical region, mainly in the Gaya belt, a Shaiva centre, which is also the source of much raw material. A glance at Table 4.3 outlines the broad stylistic trends of the period: a variety of stones continue to be used, images become excessively grandiose and distastefully ornate, the back slab is round but now also has a pointed top and the relief is divided into three tiers, reminding one of the mandala-type images.67 As almost a general trend, a panchalinga is placed at the apex of the back slab along with two maladhari vidyadharas placed prominently below it. At the next level the divine couple is seated beneath arches giving the impression of the image as placed in a niche. The lotus flower appears prominently at the centre of the relief. Both Shiva and Parvati are heavily bejewelled and wear tall jatamukutas. The couple sits on a double petal lotus, in lalitasana as mirror images of each other: Shiva’s right leg is pendant and left folded and Uma’s left leg folded and right pendant. Uma sits on Shiva’s thigh. The efforts of the earlier centuries seemed to have resolved the confusion over bodily orientation. The couple looks at each other longingly while their bodies are enraptured in a tight embrace. Shiva appears four armed and as lifting Uma’s chin and embracing her breasts with his front arms. His upper arms hold the trishula, flower or skull cap variously. Uma now embraces Shiva unabashedly with her right hand while holding a darpan in her left. The next level, the area under the seat is divided into recesses with figures placed in each of the alcoves: the vahanas, the snake, devotees, Shiva’s ganas, Skanda, Ganesha, kinnaras and maladharas. Overall the sculptures become increasingly busy and crowded, a trend which started in the preceding period. At the same time, the images become refined, conceptually well rounded and examples of artistic perfection. Mention must be made of probably the largest Uma Mahesvara image found in South Bihar and can be dated to this period. This image now in the Gaya Museum is broken head up and is about five feet high and shows the divine couple seated in a mundi niche along with their vahanas, devotees, a linga and even a stupa at the top.

184

The icon in context

Figure 4.5 Uma Mahesvara, Bodh Gaya, representing the later mandala style icons; now at Patna Museum Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

On the basis of this classification of the sculptural data, certain broad conclusions can be drawn regarding the evolution and chronology of the Uma Mahesvara icons. First, the five chronological phases of evolution do not suggest a unilinear, unidimensional progression of the motif from one phase to another; as seen, within the same chronological period, divergences in style appear from different sites. Neither is the movement from one chronological phase to the next always to

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

185

a more refined image. Second, in the early phase there was greater experimentation with forms and idioms and there seem to be no prescribed textual cannons which were followed. The overall picture was a result of trials, individual preferences of the patrons and experiments of artists. By the twelfth century, a general schema seems to have come about probably defined by artistic manuals. The images in the last phase, around the thirteenth century, became more stereotyped, and individual expression seems to have taken a backseat. Third, the purely Tantric leanings of the icons suggested by current historiography can also be questioned. If the images were meant to be meditational aids for Tantric use, they would not be present in Hindu temple spaces in such large numbers. The images moreover would also be much smaller in size, which is not the case with the majority of Uma Mahesvara images from South Bihar. Fourth, the assertion made by Kramrisch that the Uma Mahesvara image was invented in the Pala period can be clearly refuted. The available data shows that the image was present in the region from a much earlier time. Geographical distribution A cartographic delineation of the available sculptures from South Bihar reveals within this larger area two principle pockets of concentration. The first pocket covers the modern-day districts of Rohtas, Aurangabad, Jehanabad, Patna, Nalanda, Nawadah, Bihar Sharif and Gaya. A second, smaller pocket stretches along the River Ganga from Munger to Sultanganj, Bhagalpur and Vikramsila, covering the modern-day districts of Munger and Bhagalpur. Table 4.2 lists the individual sites and the districts at which Uma Mahesvara images have been found. The images can be dated almost simultaneously at different sites across South Bihar. A district-wise delineation of images in Figure 4.2 reveals Gaya district with the densest concentration of Uma Mahesvara icons: 68 of the total 136 images can be ascribed to 17 sites in Gaya.68 A preliminary survey of sites in the region has revealed extensive and tangible evidence of continuous structural activities and image making at different centres in the area from about the eighth century onwards evidenced by the architectural ruins and sculptural remains. Some of the earliest temples of Bihar can be found within this pocket confirmed by a host of donative inscriptions. The region around Gaya might also have been a centre for stone sculpting because of its proximity to raw material.69 Gaya has also been an area of simultaneous coexistence of multiple faiths: Shaiva, Vaishnavas, Buddhists and Ajivikas.

Jahangira Rock, Sultanganj, Bhagalpur

Rock-cut Uma Mahesvara

Rock-cut Uma Mahesvara, Shiva bust

Rock-cut Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Deo Barunark, Sahabad, Gaya

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

eighth– ninth

Deo Barunark, Sahabad, Gaya

Deo Barunark, Sahabad, Gaya

eighth– ninth

eighth– ninth

eighth– ninth

eighth– ninth

Date century

Deo Barunark, Sahabad, Gaya

Jahangira Rock, Sultanganj, bhagalpur

Jahangira Rock, Sultanganj, Bhagalpur

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Basalt stone

Basalt stone

Black stone standing figure

Black stone standing figure

Granite

Dark grey sandstone

Dark grey sandstone

Material

78.5 × 45.5 cm

124.5 × 59.5 cm

Measurements

Table 4.3 Evolution of the Uma Mahesvara icon

Cave temple

Cave temple

Cave temple

Description

Cave Walls

Cave Walls

Cave Walls

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Free-standing Standing temple figure

Rock-cut caves

Rock-cut caves

Rock-cut caves

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Same as original

Same as original

Same as original

Current location

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Rounded

Rounded

Back slab

None

None

None

Halo

Double petal lotus

Lotus seat

Stone seat without cushion

Seat

Uma’s body turned away

Facing each other

Facing each other

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Bodies oriented straight

Uma’s body None turned away

Facing each other

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva and Uma seated separately

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Touching chin

Touching chin

Varada mudra

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

On her Trishul left breast

Resting Trishul on Uma’s left shoulder

Touching None chin/ offering betel

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Touching Resting on left breast left knee

Uma’s right hand

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

Folded

Pendant

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Vahanas

Maladhari kinnaras, vahanas

Vishnu

Kneeling devotees

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

8

9

10

11

12

13

Serial Name of no. image

Pachar, Gaya

Kashtaharinighat, Monghyr

Maharamau, Gaya

Vishnupur, Gaya

Gaya

Deo Barunark, Sahabad, Gaya

Site and district

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

seventh– eighth

ninth– tenth

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

Date century

Granite

Schist

Sandstone

Sanstone

Dark grey sandstone

Grey stone

Material

33 × 20 cm

61 cm

20 cm

Measurements

Shiva’s: with tall jatamukuta, bejewelled, tiger skin and urdhavalinga. Gauri: bejewelled, wears sari. Serpent around the trisula

Double-sided stele with Vishnu on the back

Description

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Current location

Storage

Storage

Purpose

Rounded with lotus scroll

Rectangular with lotus scroll

Rounded with lotus scroll

Rounded and damaged

Back slab

None

None

Around both

None

Halo

On cushion on rocks

On cushion on rocks

Stone seat without cushion

Damaged

Seat

Orientation of faces

Facing each other

Facing each other

Facing each other

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Damaged

Uma on left lap

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s lower right hand

Trishul

Touching chin

Nilotpal Touching and snake chin

Shiva’s upper right hand

Bodies Trishul towards each other

Touching chin

Bodies Trishul and Touching towards each serpant chin other

Bodies oriented straight

Bodies oriented straight

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

On her Flower left breast

On her Rosary left breast

On her Kapala left breast

Shiva’s left leg

Resting Lotus on Shiva’s shoulder

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Folded

(Continued)

Female worshipper, Nandi, Lion, Tiger on Shiva’s thigh

Kneeling devotee, Nandi and lion

Pendant Snake and resting on lion

Pendant Folded and resting on lotus

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Engraved on either side

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Shiva’s right leg

Resting Holds cloth Pendant Folded on Shiva’s and shoulder resting on Nandi

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Extended Damaged Resting Darpan behind on Shiva’s her shoulder

Shiva’s lower left hand

Bihar Sharif, Bihar

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

14

15

16

17

eleventh– twelfth

eleventh– twelfth

Bodh Gaya, Gaya

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

Date century

Nandua, Shahabad, Gaya

Nalanda, Patna

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Slate standing figure

Sandstone

Basalt stone

Schist

Material

Shiva has tall jatamukuta and Parvati has high Juda. Shiva and Parvati seem to be placed in a nich. A decorative flower appears prominently.

36 × 19 cm

Shiva and Parvati seated together in amorous attitude.

Shiva four armed, tall jatamukuta and Uma has a big bun

Description

51 × 33 cm

66 × 42 cm

61 cm

Measurements

Broadley Collection

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum Arch

Patna Museum Arch

Nalanda Museum

Patna Museum, Broadley Collection

Current location

storage

Displayed

Storage

Purpose

Around Shiva

None

Halo

Round and pointed at top

None

Square stele None with pointed triangular

Rounded

Rounded with lotus scroll

Back slab

Double petal lotus

Sitting on rocks

Lotus seat

Lotus seat

Seat

Orientation of faces

Facing each other

Facing each other

Facing each other

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left lap

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Bodies Abhaya towards each mudra other

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Offering betel??

Varada mudra

Bodies Trishul Touching towards each with notch chin other

Bodies Trishul towards each other

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper left hand Darpan

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Resting Holding ??? Pendant Folded on Shiva’s and shoulder resting on Nandi

On her Trishul left breast

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Resting Resting on on Shiva’s left knee shoulder

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Lotus stalk

Uma’s right hand

On her Serpent left breast

On her Kapala left breast

On her Kapala left breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Folded

Folded

Folded

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Pendant and resting on lotus

Pendant

Pendant and resting on lotus

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

Stone carving. Annonymous artist.

(Continued)

Panchalinga, kinnaras, kneeling devotee, Nandi and lotus motif

Panchalinga, kneeling devotee, Nandi, lion, Ganesh, figure??

Panchalinga, kinnaras, kneeling devotee, Nandi and Ganesh

Ganesh, Nandi and Lion

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Kurkihar Hoard Gaya

Nalanda, Site tenth– 9, Patna eleventh

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

20

21

22

23

Bihar

Kurkihar Hoard Gaya

Kurkihar Hoard Gaya

Uma Mahesvara seated

19

eleventh– twelfth

948 CE

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

ninth– tenth

Marara, Nawadah

Uma Mahesvara

18

Date century

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Black basalt

Basalt stone

Bronze

Bronze

Bronze

Black basalt

Material

70 cm

16 × 10.5 40.5 × 25.5 cm

17.8 cm

17.8 cm

16.5 cm

62 × 39 cm

Measurements

The images are advanced in technique and are cut along the body of the deities to give a three dimensional effect.

Description

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

National Museum, New Delhi

National Museum, New Delhi

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Nawadah Museum

Current location

Display

Displayed, display no. 31

Purpose

Round

Rounded with lotus scroll

Round with ???? Figure on top

Rounded with lotus scroll

Back slab

None

None

Around both

Around both

Around both

Halo

Sitting on cushion on stone surface

Double petal lotus

Lotus throne

Rectangular pedestal

Double petal lotus

Seat

Orientation of faces

Facing each other

Facing each other

Damaged

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

Trishul

Turned Trishul towards each other

Damaged

Turned Trishul towards each other

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Touching chin

Touching Kapala breast

Damaged Damaged Kapala

Touching chin

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Damaged Damaged

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

pendant and resting on????

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

Folded

Lion and Nandi

Lion and Nandi

Lion and Nandi

Nandi, lion and snake

(Continued)

Subject: Anno 32 of Rajyapala

Patron: Kalanda

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Pendant Nandi, lion and snake and resting on lion

Damaged Raised and folded

Folded

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Gaya

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara seated

24

25

26

27

28

29

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Bihar

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

eleventh– twelfth

eleventh– twelfth

eighth– ninth

eleventh– twelfth

eighth– ninth

eleventh– twelfth

Date century

Black basalt

Stone

Black stone standing fugure

Sandstone

Black stone standing fugure

Black schist

Material

68 × 63 cm

91 × 57 cm

52.5 × 31 cm

59 × 34 cm

48 cm

Measurements

Description

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Indian Museum

Indian Museum

Ashutosh Museum, Calcutta

Indian Museum

Ashutosh Museum, Calcutta

Allahabad Museum

Current location

Purpose

Rectangular with mundi niche

Damaged

Round

Round and pointed as top

Back slab

None

Around Shiva

None

None

Halo

Double petal lotus

Double petal lotus

Double petal lotus

Sitting on cushion on stone surface

Seat

Orientation of faces

Facing each other

Facing each other

Facing each other

Looking straight

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Uma’s body Damaged turned away

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Uma’s body Lotus/ turned away nilotpal

Orientation of bodies

Touching chin

Touching chin

Touching chin

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s left leg

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lotus

Pendant Pendant and resting on lotus

Uma’s right leg

Touching Kapala breast

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lotus

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Uma’s right hand

Touching Damaged Resting Darpan????? Pendant Folded breast on Shiva’s and shoulder resting on Nandi

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Trishul breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Nandi and lion

Nandi and lion

(Continued)

Panchalinga, Nandi, Lion, Snake, Kneeling devotee?????

Nandi, lion and snake

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bihar

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara seated

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

30

31

32

33

34

35

18 cm

Measurements

Fixed on wall

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple

63.5 cm

Black stone

Sculptural fragment

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple

Wall fragment

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Standing figure

30.5 cm

Description

71 cm

Black stone

Grey schist 40 cm

Bronze

Black basalt

Material

Black stone

976–999

ninth– tenth

eleventh– twelfth

Date century

Keur village

Patharghata Hill

Gaya

Bihar

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Same as site

At a miscellaneous shrine

Allahabad Museum

Cleveland Museum of Art

Indian Museum

Current location

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Damaged

Damaged

Round

None

None

Round

Back slab

Damaged

Damaged

Double petal lotus

Double petal lotus

Seat

Damaged Damaged

Damaged On cushion on rocks

Around Shiva

Around Shiva

None

None

Halo

Orientation of faces

Looking straight

Facing each other

Facing each other

Looking straight

Looking straight

Damaged

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left knee

Uma on left thigh

Damaged

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

???

Lotus/ nilotpal

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Damaged

Turned None towards each other

Poised straight

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Orientation of bodies

Touching chin

Touching chin

Touching chin

Varada mudra

Abhaya mudra

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

?????

?????

?????

?????

Resting Resting on Shiva’s left knee/ groin

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulder

Uma’s right hand

Damaged Damaged Damaged Resting on left knee

Touching Damaged Resting Darpan on Shiva’s breast shoulder

Damaged Trishul

Embracing None Uma

Touching ???? breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Folded

Uma’s left leg

Folded Raised across and right knee folded

Folded Pendant across right knee

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lotus

Uma’s right leg

Vishnu

Nandi, lion,kneeling devotee, maladhari kinnaras and ????? On left

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Pendant

Folded

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant

Pendant

Folded

Folded

Damaged

(Continued)

Nandi, lion and a number of other figures??????

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Pendant Folded and damaged

Pendant

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Bargaon, Nalanda

Uma Mahesvara on mounted cement slab

Uma Mahesvara in niche of votive temple

Uma Mahesvara in niche of votive temple

Uma Mahesvara

36

37

38

39

Unknown

Bargaon, Nalanda

Bargaon, Nalanda

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Grey stone

Grey stone

Grey stone

Material

thirteenth Grey stone

Date century

43 cm

15 × 7.6 × 5 cm

56 × 25.4 × 7.6

35.5

Measurements

Description

Found on a platform next to Suraj Pokhar.

Found on a platform next to Suraj Pokhar.

Found on a platform next to Suraj Pokhar. Badly damafed and survives only till the waist.

Current location

Standing figure

Miniature temple.

Miniature temple.

Worship

Purpose

Patna Museum

Storage

In Worship miniature temple with image of UM in front niche

In Worship miniature temple with image of UM in front niche

Standing Same as figure. Image site. On dumped on platform the platform next to talao alongwith the votive temples and several votive lingas.

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Round

None

Round

Back slab

Seat

None

None

Cushion on stone surface

Damaged Double petal lotus

Halo

Orientation of faces

Damaged

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Lotus/ nilotpal

Shiva’s upper right hand

Turned Lotus/ towards each nilotpal other

Poised straight

Orientation of bodies

Touching chin/ offering betel

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Trishul breast

Touching Trishul breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting ????? on Shiva’s shoulder

Damaged Darpan

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Uma’s right leg

(Continued)

Nandi, lion and damaged figures

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Pendant Nandi and and lion, snake resting on lotus

Pendant

Uma’s left leg

Dapthu Village, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

40

41

42

43

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Black stone

Black stone

Material

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

Date century

50 cm

42 cm

Measurements

Description

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple.

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple.

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple. Temple remains complete with remains of porticos and pillars

Fixed on wall

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Same as site, now installed on way to Shiva mandir

Same as site

Current location

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Worship

Purpose

Round

Round

Round

Damaged

Back slab

Round

Damaged

None

Around both

Halo

???

Damaged

Cushion on stone surface

Seat

Facing each other

????

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Poised straight

Facing each other

????

None

Turned Damaged towards each other

Trishul

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Damaged

Shiva’s upper right hand

Uma on left thigh

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Touching chin

Touching chin

Damaged

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

????

None

????

????

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s left leg

????

????

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

????

Folded

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

????

Raised and folded

??????

Uma’s left leg

Vishnu

(Continued)

Nandi and lion and????

Nandi, lion, maladhari kinnaras, kneeling devotees and other damaged figures??????

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Nalanda

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

44

45

46

47

48

49

Bihar

Bodh Gaya, Gaya

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Material

eleventh– twelfth

Grey stone

68.5 × 40.6

In a tree shrine under a pipal tree adjacent to the Mahabodhi temple

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple

Temple remains

Standing figure

Standing figure

Standing figure

Fixed on wall

Fixed on wall

Standing figure

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

eighth– Grey stone thirteenth

Description

Temple fragment mounted at a new temple

66 cm

Measurements

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

Date century

National Museum, New Delhi

Same as site, in Mahabodhi temple complex

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Nalanda site location

Current location

Worship

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Rounded

Round with lotus scroll

Damaged

Damaged

Round

Round

Back slab

Damaged

Double petal lotus

Seat

None

None

Cushion on stone surface

Cushion on stone surface

Damaged Damaged

Damaged Damaged

Round

Round

Halo

Orientation of faces

Damaged

Damaged

Damaged

Damaged

Facing each other

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

Damaged

None

None

Turned Trishul towards each other

Turned Lotus/ towards each nilotpal other

Damaged

Damaged

Damaged

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching chin

Touching chin

Damaged

Touching chin

Touching chin

Uma’s left hand

Damaged Damaged

Damaged Damaged

Damaged Damaged

Uma’s right hand

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Trishul breast

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Touching None breast

Touching None breast

Damaged/ Damaged/ Kapala touching touching chin/ breast offering betel

Shiva’s lower right hand

Folded

Folded

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Uma’s left leg

Lion and Nandi/ damaged

Folded

Folded

Nandi and lion

Pendant Nandi and and lion resting on lotus

Raised and folded

Damaged Damaged Ganesh

Damaged Damaged Damaged

(Continued)

Burmese inscription

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Damaged Damaged Damaged

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Kurkihar, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

50

51

Kurkihar, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Bronze

Material

Twelfth– Bronze thirteenth

935 CE

Date century

17.7 cm

17.7 × 7.62 cm

Measurements

Two-armed Shiva and Parvati seated in amorous attitude complete with halo

Shiva and Parvati seated in amorous attitude. Shiva’s matted hair tied with a snake. Damaged prabhamandala

Description

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

Current location

Display

Storage

Purpose

Elaborate, eleptical prabhamandala

Eleptical and broken

Back slab

Prabhamandal serves as halo

Halo

Double petal lotus

Cushion

Seat

Orientation of faces

Facing each other

Facing each other

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Uma’s body turned away

Uma’s body turned away

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Touching breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

Embraces Darpan Shiva

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Folded

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

Pendant

Raised and folded

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Uma’s right leg

Inscription on the back. Records the gift of the image by Mulaka, the wife of Gopala Mahiaru, a resident of the Apanaka monastry in the 32nd regnal year of Rajyapala

(Continued)

Nandi, lion, devotee, ??

Nandi and lion. Snake tie his hair. Snake on Parvati’s left leg

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

Grey stone

Uma Mahesvara

ninth– tenth

54

Bodh Gaya, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Material

53

Date century

Miniature Suraj Mandir, eighth– Black temple Bargaon, thirteenth stone at site Nalanda with Uma Mahesvara image in central niche

Site and district

52

Serial Name of no. image

36 cm

48 cm

56 × 25.4 × 7.62

Measurements

Damaged

Description

Modern temple with remains of an older tmeple

Modern temple in which many ancient images are consecrated

Several images lined up outside the temple

Two more votive temples: one with linga in niche, other with UM in niche. Temple is a modern structure with rich remains of older structure. UM in votive temples only found in Bargaon

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Bodh Gaya site museum

Current location

Storage

Purpose

Round with lotus scroll

Round

Back slab

None

None

Halo

Cushion on stone surface

Cushion on stone surface

Seat

Orientation of faces

Looking straight

Looking straight

Placement of the couple

Uma on left thigh

Uma on left thigh

Flower

Shiva’s upper right hand

Uma’s body Trishul turned away

Bodies oriented straight

Orientation of bodies

Touching chin

Damaged

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

Damaged Darpan

Uma’s right hand

Touching Damaged Resting Resting on breast on Shiva’s left knee shoulders

Damages Trishul

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Pendant

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Pendant

Vishnu, a noticebly large bull head in between, probably Nandi

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Pendant Nandi, lion, and Ganesa, resting on Kartik lion

Uma’s left leg

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

55

56

Material

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

Date century

Suraj Mandir eighth– Black Bargaon, thirteenth stone Nalanda

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

91.5 cm

Measurements

Damaged. Image cut around the deities to give threedimensional effect

Damaged

Description

Main deity is Suraj with Adityanath on right and Avalokiteshvara worshipped as Chatti mata on left

Modern temple with remains of an older tmeple

Placed in a Shivalaya on left outside the main shrine. Central image here is a panchamukhalinga. Several images all in black stone enshrined here on all four walls

Several images lined up outside the temple

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Same as site

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Current location

Worship

Purpose

Rounds with criss cross marks

Damaged

Back slab

Seat

Each has a halo

Cushion on stone surface

Damaged Cushion on a double petalled lotus seat

Halo

Looking Shiva’s body Trishul, towards each straight; damaged other Uma’s turned towards Shiva

Uma not seated on Shiva’s lap but separately

Bodies Trishul, towards each damaged other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva.

Looking straight

Shiva’s upper right hand

Uma on lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Abhaya mudra

Damaged

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Around Not clear Lotus Uma’s stalk shoulder

Resting on seat

Damaged Damaged Damaged Damaged

Shiva’s lower left hand

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Folded and raised

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Pendant

Pendant

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Lakshmi, Ganesa, Nandi, lion, two devotees

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Surajpur village, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

57

58

59

Bihar

Surjangiri, Barabar Hills

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Material

tenth– eleventh

Stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

eighth– Black thirteenth stone

Date century

20 cm

Measurements

Back slab depicts Ganesa, Skanda and Panchalinga at the apex

Various Hindu sculptures including UM and Vishnu on the way to top of Shiva mandir

Back slab broken and then cemented together. Both have elaborate jatamukuta and hairdos. Heavily bejewelled

Description

In a niche in the wall of the present temple

Modern Lined up temple with on way to remains of an temple older tmeple

Modern temple with remains of an older tmeple

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Lucknow Museum

Same as site, atop Shiva mandir

Same as site

Current location

Ornamentation

Worship

Purpose

Damaged

Back slab

None

Halo

Double petal lotus

Seat

Looking Uma’s body Trishul towards each turned away other

Shiva’s upper right hand

Uma on lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Kapala

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Touching Around Resting Darpan chin/ shoulder on Shiva’s offering shoulders betel

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Skanda/ Ganesh, panchalinga at apex of back slab

Various Brahmanical sculptures including UM

Nandi, lion, devotee, dancing Bhringi and probably other (now damaged)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Rajaona

Pillar remains with UM images

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

60

61

62

63

Bihar/Bengal

Bihar

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

C5

Date century

Phyllite

Black schist

Stone

Granite/ Sandstone

Material

20 × 10 cm

21 × 12 cm

53 × 15.5 cm

Measurements

Both sport tall jatamukutas and are heavily bejewelled. Faces mutilated. Backslab broken

Both sport tall jatamukutas and are heavily bejewelled

Both sport tall jatamukutas and are heavily bejewelled

Places on a pillar face

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Shiva and Temple Parvati seated remains on Mount Kailasa with Arjuna kneeling while Ganga looks on.

Description

Ornamentation

Purpose

Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin

CSMVS, Mumbai

Panasia Display Gallery of Far Eastern Antiquities, Zurich

Indian Museum

Current location

None

None

Halo

Round wuth None scroll and broken

Round with detailed design

Round with lotus scroll

Back slab

Double petal lotus

Double petal lotus

Double petal lotus

Rocks

Seat

Looking towards each other

Looking Uma’s body Trisula towadrs each turned away other

Looking towards each other

On Shiva’s lap

On Shiva’s lap

On Shiva’s lap

Bodies Flower towards each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva

Uma’s body Trisula turned away

Bodies oriented straight

Loking straight

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Shiva’s left thigh

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Not clear

Touching chin

Touching chin

Abhayamudra

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Missing chin/ offering betel

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Placed on Uma’s shoulders

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on lotus

Pendant and resting on lotus

Folded and raised

Shiva’s right leg

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Placed on Placed on her lap her lap

Uma’s right hand

Folded and raised

Folded and raised

Folded and raised

Uma’s left leg

Pendant Folded and and resting on raised lion

Pendant and resting on lotus

Pendant and resting on lotus

Folded

Uma’s right leg

(Continued)

Vahanas and devotee?

Vahanas

Vahanas

Arjuna, kneeling, Ganga

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Monghyr

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

64

65

66

67

68

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Nalanda

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

tenth– eleventh

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

Date century

Stone

Stone

Black basalt

Bronze

Stone

Material

68.5 cm × 35.5 cm

20 cm

Measurements

Shiva with tall jatamukutas and heavily bewjewelled

Shiva with tall jatamukutas and heavily bewjewelled

Description

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Sotheby’s 12/1/93

State Museum Lucknow

State Museum Lucknow

MET, NY

Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin

Current location

Purpose

Round with detailed design. Divided into two parts

Round with detailed design

Round

Back slab

None

None

Intricate round back slab which also serves as halo with sun rays and flower design

Halo

Lotus seat

Double petal lotus seat on a triratha pedestal

Double petal lotus seat on a triratha pedestal

Seat

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Trisula Touching with snake chin

Looking Uma’s body Trisula Touching towards each turned away with snake chin other

On Shiva’s lap

Touching Trisula breast

Shiva’s upper left hand

Looking Bodies towards each oriented other straight

Touching chin/ offering betel nut

Shiva’s lower left hand

On Shiva’s lap

Varadamudra

Shiva’s lower right hand

Looking Bodies towards each oriented other straight

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Uma’s left hand

Resting Not clear on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Resting on on Shiva’s left knee shoulders

Resting Resting on on Shiva’s left knee shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Folded and raised

Pendant

Uma’s left leg

Pendant Folded and and resting on raised lion

Folded

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Snake

Vahanas, snake, maladharas

(Continued)

Mt. Kailasa, vahana, seated Bhringi, Skanda and Ganesa

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

69

70

71

72

73

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

ninth– tenth

ninth– tenth

Date century

Bronze

Bronze

Bronze

Bronze

Stone

Material

16.5 cm × 11 cm

13 cm

13 cm

Measurements

Tall jatamukuta for both and very ornate

Four-armed Shiva and Parvati sitting on a pancharatha pedestal

Two-armed Shiva, trisula stands separately

Description

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

MET, NY

LACMA

Asia Society, Rockefeller collection, NY

Asia Society, Rockefeller collection, NY

Philadelphia

Current location

Purpose

None

None

Eleptical

Back slab

None

None

Intricate round back slab which also serves as halo with sun rays and flower design

Halo

Double petal lotus seat on a pancharatha pedestal

Double petal lotus seat on a pancharatha pedestal

Double petal lotus seat on a triratha pedestal

Seat

Looking Bodies towards each towards other each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva

Looking Bodies Flower towards each towards other each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva

Looking Uma’s body Broken towards each turned away other

On Shiva’s left thigh

On Shiva’s left thigh

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Offering betel nuts

Offering betel nuts

Offering betel nuts

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Broken breast

Touching ?? breast

Touching breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Broken on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

Pendant

Folded and raised

Pendant Folded and and resting on raised lion

Pendant Folded and and resting on raised lion

Uma’s right leg

Vahanas, kneeling devotee, Skanda and Ganesa

Vahanas, kneeling devotee, Skanda and Ganesa

Vahanas, female devotee

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bihar

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

74

75

76

77

78

79

Kurkihar, Gaya

Bihar

Bihar/ Bengal

Bihar

Dharmaranya Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

eleventh– twelfth

eleventh– twelfth

tenth– eleventh

ninth– tenth

eighth– ninth

seventh– eighth

Date century

Bronze

Stone

Stone

Stone

Stone

Stone

Material

20 cm

43 × 20.5 cm

52.5 cm

Measurements

Pancharatha pedestal. Tall jatamukutas and heavily bejewelled

Two-armed Shiva, elaborate hair dressing for both

Two-armed Shiva, trisula stands separately

Description

Ancient temple remains, complete with porch and pillars

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

National Museum, New Delhi

Harsa Dehejia Collection

Baltimore

Denver Art Museum

Enshrined in modern Shiva temple

Museum of Asian Art, San Francisco

Current location

Worship

Purpose

Back slab serves as halo

Only around Uma

Halo

Eleptical and Back slab very ornate serves as halo with sun ray motif

Round, plain

Round, plain

Back slab

Double petal lotus seat on a pancharatha pedestal

Rock seat

Rock seat

Seat

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Trisula breast

Arround shoulder

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting ? on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Folded and raised

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Looking Bodies ?? towards each towards other each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva

Offering betel nuts

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

On Shiva’s lap

Bodies oriented straight

Shiva’s upper right hand

Folded

Looking straight

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Seated Looking Bodies separately on towards each oriented the same seat other straight

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Folded

Folded

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Pendant and resting on lion

Folded and raised

Folded

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Skanda, Ganesa, two devotees, vahanas

Snake

Nandi, snake

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bihar

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara fragment

Uma Mahesvara

80

81

82

83

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Material

thirteenth

eleventh– twelfth

ninth– tenth

Black schist

twelfth– Phyllite thirteenth

Date century

28.5 cm

2.5 cm

76.2 cm × 35.5 cm

Measurements

Very badly damaged

Four-armed Shiva touching parvati’s face.

Tall jatamukutas and heavily bejewelled

Description

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum

Patna Museum

National Museum of Oriental Arts, Rome

Museum fur Indische Kunst

Current location

Storage

Storage

Purpose

Halo

Round, ornate

Round top

Roundish None with pointed top. Very ornate. Prominent flower motif. Divided into three spheres and niches in pedestal

Back slab

Double petal lotus seat

Double petal lotus seat

Seat

On Shiva’s lap

Looking Bodies Flower towards each towards other each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva.

Trisula

Looking Bodies Flower towards each towards other each other. Unusual posture where Uma totally turned towards Shiva.

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Shiva’s left thigh

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Abhayamudra

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Trisula breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Touching Trisula breast

Crossed to Holding touch Uma Parvati

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on lotus

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Pendant and resting on lotus

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Bull and lion

Maladhari kinnaras, vahanas, Ganesa devotees, etcetera

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Pillar remains with UM images

Uma Mahesvara

84

85

86

87

88

Nalanda

Rajaona Munger

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Bihar, Unknown Provenance

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Material

C5

tenth– eleventh

tenth– eleventh

Stone

Granite/ sandstone

Stone

Stone

twelfth– Stone thirteenth

Date century

134.6 cm × 39.3 cm

Measurements

Shiva is urdhavalinga, wears a necklace of bells, third eye covered with cobra hood, matted hair with crescent. Parvati is mutilated

Placed on a pillar face

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Shiva and Temple Parvati seated remains on Mount Kailasa.

Tall jatamukuta and bejewelled

Tall jatamukuta and havily bejewelled

Description

Indian Museum

Ashutosh Museum, Calcutta

Govt. Museum, Mathura

State Museum, Lucknow

Current location

Ornamentation

Purpose

Round

Round with lotus scroll

Round and ornate

Back slab

None

Around Shiva

Halo

Rocks

Double petal lotus seat

Double petal lotus seat

Seat

Loking straight

On Shiva’s left thigh

Bodies oriented straight

Trisula

Trisula

Loking straight

On Shiva’s lap

Bodies oriented straight

Looking Uma’s body Trisula towards each turned away other

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Abhayamudra

Touching chin

Offering betel nuts

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Placed on Uma’s shoulders

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Placed on Placed on her lap her lap

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Shiva’s left leg

Folded

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Folded and raised

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Pendant Folded and resting on Nandi

Shiva’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

Folded and raised Pendant Folded and resting on lion

Folded

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Pendant Raised and and resting on folded lion

Uma’s right leg

Vahanas, snake, maladharas

Female attendant

(Continued)

Bull and lion

Vahanas and maladharas

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Rajgir, Nalanda

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

89

90

91

Mundesvari, Rohtas

Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

C6

tenth– eleventh

ninth– tenth

Date century

Stone

Stone

Material

Measurements

Uma’s face damaged

Shiva, parvati and Nandi

Unusual fig. Tall jatamukutas, snake on Shiva’s right shoulder. Placement of hands very odd. Devotee placed in a cove

Description

On door lintel

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Ashutosh Museum, Calcutta

Current location

Purpose

Round with lotus scroll

Back slab

None

Halo

Rock seat

Seat

Looking Bodies towards each oriented other straight

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Trisula

Shiva’s upper right hand

Touching floor?

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Offering Touching Resting Placed on betel nuts breast on Shiva’s her lap shoulders

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant Folded and resting on lotus

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas, snake, devotee

(Continued)

Bears a fragmentary inscription

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Budhva Mahadeve Mandir, Hilsa, District

92

Uma Mahesvara

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Material

22.8 × 30 cm

Measurements

Face damaged, lower half damaged

Description

Main deity lingam. On right of door Sarswati. Huge Vishnu at entrance. Subsidiary temple Parvati, new image. Modern yajna kund with Vishnu on two sides. Small donatory lingas on side of pokhra. Samadhis of older pujaris behind temple. Rebuilt temple UM embedded in wall on the left of entrance to grabha griha

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

On site

Current location

Ornamentation

Purpose

Round

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Looking Bodies towards each oriented other straight

On Shiva’s lap

Orientation of bodies

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Shiva’s upper right hand

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Trisula breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan? on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Raised and folded

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Bholenath Mandir on Tilha, Akbarpur, Hilsa

Uma Mahesvara in garbha griha

Uma Mahesvara outside temple

93

94

Bholenath Mandir on Tilha, Akbarpur

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Grey stone

Black stone

Material

25.5 × 30 cm

22.8 × 30 cm

Measurements

Description

A number of images lined up outside temple along west, UM one of them. Other: Vishnu, Naga, pillar remains, votive lingams, Maladharas

Main deity a small mukhalingam. North facing temple. Temple on a high mound with tall shikhara. Whitewashed. Built on older temple with black stone parapet and lintel still visible. A huge talao on east of temple Outside temple

Inside garbhagriha in a niche on south wall

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

On site

On site

Current location

Storage

Ornamentation

Purpose

Damaged

Round

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Skull cup

Shiva’s upper right hand

Touching breast

Touching breast

Touching chin

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan? on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Sitala Devi Mandir, Maghara, Bihar Sharif

95

Uma Mahesvara

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Material

30 × 45.7 cm

Measurements

Description

Temple with Hindu and Buddhist images. All Buddhist images named and worshipped as Hindu. Main temple of Sitala Devi old, made of brick, surkhi and lime. All images lined up in courtyard of temple. Huge talao with modern ghats. Subsidiary temple of Shiva with a 17 ft lingam, half buried Kept at left of entrance of garbha griha

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

On site

Current location

Ornamentation

Purpose

Round

Back slab

Halo

Lotus seat

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s lower right hand

Touching chin

Shiva’s upper right hand

Trisula

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Flower breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Shiva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Folded

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Uma Mahesvara stele with Vishnuon other side

Uma Mahesvara on right corner

96

97

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Black stone

Material

43 × 28 cm

53.3 × 35.5 cm

Measurements

Round backslab. Damaged. Four-armed Shiva: chin, breast, trisula, skull head. Uma: face, hands, legs damaged. Lower portion of images damaged. Shiva with a tall jatamukuta

Description

Rock-cut Devi temple. Main image of Devi on lion. Cave temple has a modern whitewashed superstructure with courtyard and subsidiary shrines. Cave roof still visible, painted red, with many niches and alcoves. Other images: Ganesa, Parvati, standing Buddhist sculpture called Bhairav baba, another sitting sculpture. Outside cave in courtyard one big linga and votive lingas. Another linga submerged in ground. One votive stupa worshipped as linga On right corner of modern shrine

On right of entrance of modern shrine

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

New location. Original temple believed to be located at a distance

Current location

Storage

Storage

Purpose

Round, damaged

Round

Back slab

Halo

Lotus seat

Seat

On Shiva’s lap

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Shiva’s upper right hand

Trisula

Turned away Trisula

Orientation of bodies

Touching chin

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Damaged

Resting Darpan on Siva’s shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Folded

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Vahanas and two devotees

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Uma Mahesvara in centre

Uma Mahesvara inside left corner

98

99

Asha Devi Temple, Ghosrawan, Giriyek, Rajgir

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Grey stone

Material

48 × 35.5 cm

48 × 30 cm

Measurements

Four-armed armed Siva: chin, breast, trisula, skull cap. Uma: right hand on right shoulder and left on thigh. Both have right leg pendant and left folded. Vahanas. Uma’s breast damaged. Something behind Uma

All in black Centre of stone. In the modern room next shrine door, several images under worship. At entrance on right a Vishnu stele with UM at back. VishnuLakshmi with child on left of entrance. From right other images: UM, Shalabhajika, Vishnu, UM, standing Buddha with attendants, UM, sitting Inside left Buddha in corner of bhumspara- modern mudra, shrine standing Vishnu, standing Vishnu, Buddha 2, pedestal with female fig, Matrakas, standing Buddha

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Four-armed Siva: chin, breast, trisula, skull cap. Uma: right hand on right shoulder and left on thigh. Round backslab. Uma on Siva’s lap. Mirror images: Siva right leg pendant and left folded, Uma left pendant and right folded. Both vahanas, lotus seat, devotees, tall jatamukuta and jooda. Face damaged. Something behind Uma

Description

Current location

Storage

Storage

Purpose

Round

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s lower right hand

Touching chin

Touching chin

Shiva’s upper right hand

Trisula

Trisula

Shiva’s upper left hand

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Resting on on Siva’s knee shoulders

Resting Resting on on Siva’s knee shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Folded

Pendant

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas

Vahanas, devotees

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Shankar Parvati mandir, Bargaon, Nalanda

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Nalanda Mahesvara on double sided stele with Kubera on one side and Uma on another

Uma Mahesvara fragment

Uma Mahesvara

100

101

102

103

Nawadah

Lakshmi Narayana Temple, Basti Bigha, Kosala, Nawadah

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

ninth– tenth

Kubera: ninth– tenth. UM: twelfth

Date century

Black stone

Pink sanstone

Black basalt

Material

45.7 × 45.7 cm

57 × 44 × 8.8 cms

Measurements

Broken fragment. Four-armed: flower, chin, breast. Twoarmed Uma. Fig only til waist. Face damaged

Badly damaged

Badly damaged

Description

North facing temple beside the talao. Huge Ganesa and Vishnuand a line up of several other images Fragment of temple remains

Cemented on wall of modern temple

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Nawadah Museum collection

Nalanda Museum collection

New temple

Current location

On display

In reserve collection

Enshrined

Purpose

Placed in a niche

Round

Back slab

Halo

Lotus seat

Seat

Looking towards each other

On Siva’s thigh

Damaged

Orientation of faces

Placement of the couple

Flower

Touching chin

Touching chin

Flower

Touching chin

Trisula

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s upper right hand

Turned away Trisula

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Touching breast

Touching breast

Touching Damaged Resting Resting on breast on Siva’s knee shoulders

Touching Damaged breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Pendant

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Folded

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas

Vahanas, devotees, Ganesa, Skanda, Vishnu

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Vishnupad temple, Gaya

Vishnupad temple, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

107

108

109

Black stone

Black stone

Grey stone

twelfth– Grey stone thirteenth

Uma Mahesvara

106

Upardih, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

105

twelfth– thirteenth

Material

thirteenth Greengrey stone

Marora, Roh, Nawadah

Uma Mahesvara

104

Date century

Pipra, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Approx 23 cm

Approx 23 cm

Atleast 152 cm high. Biggest Uma Mahesvara so far

Measurements

Architectural fragment

Architectural fragment

Broken head up. Image cut along body. mundi niche

Description

East facing Vishnupad temple

East facing Vishnupad temple

On wall opposite the main stone mandapa

On wall opposite the main stone mandapa

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Placed in a newer temple

Placed in a newer temple

Gaya Museum

Gaya Museum

Nawadah Museum collection

Nawadah Museum collection

Current location

Round

Round and ornate

Back slab

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

On display Mundu niche

On display Round plain

On display. Display no. 27

Purpose

Halo

Lotus seat

Lotus seat

Rock seat

Lotus seat

Seat

Touching chin

Touching chin

Touching chin

Trisula

Damaged

On Siva’s thigh

Touching chin

Shiva’s lower right hand

Turned away Trisula

Trisula

Shiva’s upper right hand

On Siva’s thigh

Orientation of bodies

Bodies oriented straight

Orientation of faces

On Siva’s lap Facing straight

Placement of the couple

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s left hand

Resting Darpan on Siva’s shoulders

Resting Darpan on Siva’s shoulders

Resting Resting on on Siva’s knee shoulders

Uma’s right hand

Touching Damaged Damaged Damaged breast

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Touching Kapala breast

Shiva’s lower left hand

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant

Shiva’s right leg

Folded

Folded

Folded

Folded

Shiva’s left leg

Pendant

Pendant

Pendant

Folded

Uma’s right leg

Raised and folded

Raised and folded

Raised and folded

Raised and folded

Uma’s left leg

Vahanas, devotees, stupa and linga

Vahanas, devotees

(Continued)

Vahanas and kinnaras

Vahanas and kinnaras

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Suraj Kund, near Vishnupad, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

110

111

Gayasuri temple, Vishnupad, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Black stone

Material

Measurements

Architectural fragment

Architectural fragment

Description

East facing. Principal image: Mahissuramardini. Two subsidiary sanctums on the left, outside main shrine in the mandapa Subsidiary shrine

Enclosed Cemented tank with on wall ghats. At under tree one end is a banyan tree under which several images mounted. One UM here. Also a Surya temple here

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

New temple

In tree shrine

Current location

Enshrined

Enshrined

Purpose

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Gayasuri temple, Vishnupad, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

112

113

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone images

Black stone

Material

Measurements

Temple fragments

Architectural fragment

Description

East facing temple. Principle item of worship banyan tree. Under this a whitewashed Shivalaya. Rebuilt several times. one of the oldest shrines in Gaya

East facing. Principal image: Mahissuramardini. Two subsidiary sanctums on the left, outside main shrine in the mandapa On left of entrance On right is a Vishnu

Subsidiary shrine

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

New temple

New temple

Current location

Ornamentation

Enshrined

Purpose

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

114

115

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone images

Black stone images

Material

Measurements

Temple fragments

Temple fragments

Description

On the outside walls of this temple are six UM. Two on left side of the entrance, (there is a Vishnuimage on right), Two on right side walls of the shrine and two on a little ramp behind the temple. All images are whitewashed in white along with the temple. A stone temple fragment is used as the pataka of this brick temple On outside right wall of shrine

On left of entrance. On right is a Vishnu

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

New temple

New temple

Current location

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara fragment

116

117

118

119

Parampita Mahesvara temple

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Akshayavat temple, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone images

Black stone images

Black stone images

Material

Measurements

UM images damaged. Cemented in concrete

Temple fragments

Temple fragments

Temple fragments

Description

Outside this temple lie stone pillars, porches and steps of an abandoned temple. A second abandoned brick temple lies next to it. A modern temple stands behind it. This temple has used pillars, dome, steps, etcetera from the earlier shrine. Main image here a chaturmukhalinga in black stone Outside the sanctum on the right of the entrance lies a UM half buried in concrete with a modern Ganesa image

On a subsidiary shrine built on a platform at the back of the temple

On outside right wall of shrine

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Worship

Worship

Ornamentation

Purpose

Outside Storage/ the garbha- worship griha

New temple

New temple

New temple

Current location

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Mangala Gauri devi shrine, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara fragment

Uma Mahesvara fragment

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

120

121

122

123

Markandeya Baba temple, Gaya

Markandeya Baba temple, Gaya

Mangala Gauri devi shrine, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

Date century

Black stone

Black stone

Sandstone

Black stone

Material

60 cm

Measurements

Broken in three parts

Description

Rock-cut Shiva temple outside Baitarni Talao. Cave temple with a linga. Outside is a huge concrete temple edifice covered in modern tiles. Several modern images enshrined here

Located on top of a hill is a group of temples. Principle shrine of Mangala Devi, located where the Sati’s breasts fell. Main shrine rockcut cave In garbhagriha

Current location

Enshrined

Worship

Purpose

In a subsidiary shrine on the left of the entrance

Main deity of subsidiary shrine

Enshrined

First is Outside Enshrined outside the the garbhasantum, in a griha niche to the left of the entrance at the mandapa

Lies outside Tree shrine rock-cut temple under a pipal tree

On left of main image inside sanctum. On right Narayana Lakshmi

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Baitarni Talao, Gaya

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

124

125

126

Mahant’s compound, Bodh Gaya

Baitarni Talao, Gaya

Site and district

Serial Name of no. image

ninth– tenth

Date century

Black stone

Black stone

Black stone

Material

Measurements

Description

Housed inside the Mahant’s compound was a section of the verandah, cordoned off and kept under lock and key. In this room lined up against the wall was a host of sculptures, temple fragments of both Buddhist and Brhamanical structures. Served as a museum/ shrine

Single cell Sivalaya. Outside walls covered with images from a different time period

Current location

Lined up along the wall of the shrine

On the outside wall

Ornamentation

Ornamentation

Purpose

Enshrined worship outside the main sanctum of akhanda jyoti

New temple

In a niche to New the left of the temple entrance

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

Uma Mahesvara

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

Serial Name of no. image

Site and district

ninth– tenth

Date century

Phyllite/ Basalt stone

Material

37 × 23 cm

Measurements

Description

Area under lock and key. Enshrined. Main item of worship was a akhanda jyoti. As many as nine UM found here. Smallest about 12 inches tall and tallest about 24 inches

Gallery

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum

Current location

Museum display

Purpose

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

(Continued)

Other Inscription accompanying figures

136

Uma Mahesvara

Serial Name of no. image

Site and district

Date century

Basalt stone

Material

Measurements

Seated on double petalled lotus. Uma holding lotus in left hand. Siva fourarmed but only three visible. Uma: right hand on siva’s shoulder. Both have right leg pendant. Siva left leg folded, Uma’s left leg raised. Bodies turned away. Inscribed. Broken backslab. Tall jatamukuta. One devotee

Description

Gallery

Nature of Placement architectural of image remains

Patna Museum

Current location

Museum display

Purpose

Back slab

Halo

Seat

Placement of the couple

Orientation of faces

Orientation of bodies

Shiva’s upper right hand

Shiva’s lower right hand

Shiva’s lower left hand

Shiva’s upper left hand

Uma’s right hand

Uma’s left hand

Shiva’s right leg

Shiva’s left leg

Uma’s right leg

Uma’s left leg

Other Inscription accompanying figures

Figure 4.6 Map showing district-wise distribution of Uma Mahesvara images from various sites in South Bihar Source: Prepared by author

Gaya Bhagalpur Munger Rohtas Bihar Sharif Nalanda Nawadah Hilsa Unknown Provenance

Figure 4.7 District-wise delineation of images Source: Prepared by author

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

257

The second largest concentration of images comes from Nalanda district; Table 4.2 lists 17 images found from Nalanda. There may have been various reasons for this: like Gaya, Nalanda also shows the evidence of simultaneous coexistence of multiple faiths. The presence of the Monastic Complex would have acted as a major stimulus to artistic and cultural dynamics in the area, and large hoards of images have been found from the villages in the vicinity; 3 Uma Mahesvara images have been documented from the excavated ruins itself. The village of Bargaon, lying just outside the Monastic Complex, has revealed as many as 5 Uma Mahesvara images.70 Other important sites lie in the vicinity of Rajgir71 and Pavapuri, both being significant centres of the Jain faith.72 Moving eastwards along the Ganga, a second pocket of concentration lies in the in the Munger and Bhagalpur districts. This pocket is situated immediately south of the Ganga, sharing its border on the east with West Bengal.73 Geography seems to have played a decisive role in the evolution of sacred sites in the region and archaeological evidence from the area from about the fifth–sixth centuries indicates that much artistic and religious activity seems to have been focused along the banks of the Ganga. Sculptural evidence taken under purview points to an almost continuous series of archaeological sites from Munger to Antichak, a distance of approximately 30 miles along the Ganga. The southern portions of the two districts consist of a hilly terrain and offshoots of the Vindhya Mountains; small granite hillocks dot the somewhat flat landscape. Frederick Asher has identified two ancient stone quarries here and has suggested that the mine at Kharagpur near Munger might have been a major quarry during this period apart from the ones located around Gaya and Rajgir.74 Interestingly, however, no Uma Mahesvara icons in granite have been found from the region. Little hillocks of granite that jut onto the banks of the Ganga and into the river all the way from Munger to Antichak are living hubs of rockcut sculptures in the region. Two such hillocks, the Jahangira hill near Sultanganj and the Patharghata hills further east, have both revealed evidence of Uma Mahesvara images.75 The meanders of the Ganga also gave birth to various mythological beliefs and sacred sites. At the site called Kashtaharini Ghat in Munger, the river takes a bend towards the North. It becomes Uttar-Vahini, a fact that had made the spot especially sacred to the Hindus. A schist Uma Mahesvara icon dated between the eighth and the fourteenth centuries now preserved in the Patna Museum has been found from this site. The river once again resumes its eastward course at Patharghata in Bhagalpur. Patharghata literally means rocky ghats and here the hill

258

The icon in context

projects into the river with its piles of granite rocks. Half-way up the hill on its western and northern faces are caves known as Guhasthanas, a few are three-roomed with stone cut doors. A series of rock-cut sculptures, some from as early as the fifth century, cover the hill at different levels.76 An inscription from the ninth century refers to a ceremony called Varsavardhana in the honour of the god Vateshvara.77 Besides being a place of religious importance, Patharghata was also probably on the important riverine trade route and had much economic and commercial significance. The river would have facilitated an easier movement of men and material probably resulting in the great many architectural sites on its banks. Another remarkable site is a rock-cut temple, carved out of a single boulder of granite block, surrounded by the river Ganga east of the Patharghata complex at Kahalgaon in the Bhagalpur district.78 Casting in stone A quick glance at Table 4.1 indicates that of the 136 images, 124 are made of stone. There is a remarkable paucity of metal images and only 12 metal Uma Mahesvara images have appeared from the region so far. Table 4.1 lists at least eight different varieties of stone, used over a span of six centuries to make the Uma Mahesvara icons. As the table indicates, sandstone, granite, phyllite, basalt and slate seem to have been the most popular stones. In the early period sandstone seems to have been preferred, and the early images are typically carved out in brown and grey sandstone. By about the ninth century, the typical black stone associated with sculptures from eastern India comes into use and remained popular for the next several centuries. This stone, which has been variously identified as phyllite, slate and basalt was probably easier to work on, was locally available and gave a slightly polished look.79 Data also indicates that a certain grey stone, often identified as a variety of basalt, also seems to have been used in particular pockets like in Gaya and Shahabad. Granite, the naturally occurring stone on the Jahangir Hills at Sultanganj, was the obvious choice for the early cave temples. Artists obviously preferred to use whichever was readily available. Occasional use of stones such a slate could have been a personal choice of a particular artist or patron. Both granite and phyllite were popularly used, and the stone would probably have been quarried from the Rajmahal hills running along the southern parts of Bihar and Bengal.80 In contrast to the stone sculptures which are abundant and found from numerous sites, metal images appear meagre and the data inadequate.

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

259

The bronze icons have moreover come to surface primarily through isolated chance finds. The relative scarcity of bronze and other metal images may be due to the intrinsic value of the material itself which may have resulted in the melting down of old sculptures for new purposes.81 Other images may have been carried away from India by pilgrims, monks and other travellers.82 The next section discusses metal images in more details. Eastern Indian bronzes Bronze icons, being mobile by nature as chala pratima, extend the ritual space beyond the sacred precincts where the divine inhabit to merge with the profane where the human devotee lives. The stone icons were meant to be permanently enshrined as deities in the sanctum of the temple or as adornments on the temple walls. The bronzes had a more fluid status; being smaller in size and portable, they oscillated between the sacred garbha griha, the temple compound, chosen routes outside the temple walls and even inhabited personal shrines in domestic households. Darshan, crucial to the Hindu worship, entails the main exchange between the deity and his worshipper: “by presenting himself or herself for darshan the deity bestows blessings upon the worshipper, who, by their act of ‘seeing’ have made themselves receptive to the transfer of grace.”83 Whether cast in stone, metal or terracotta, it goes undisputed that the majority of the images served as objects of veneration and the image became a living symbol of a deity. From around the late eighth century, processional images probably began to be crafted in bronze.84 The deity came to be visualised as assuming a public persona much like a human monarch and was required to appear in person in public and to participate in a number of festivities that became a part of a temple’s ritual cycle.85 The deity hence also became available to a wider audience for darshan, especially to people who were considered ritually impure and not permitted within the garbha griha. The bronze icons hence served as chala pratima, utsava murtis or dhruv beras to be carried about in ceremonial processions as also to inhabit personal shrines. Compared to other mediums, particularly stone, bronze had some definite points of advantage, size of course was the first consideration. A stone image, generally heavy and immovable, could only be installed in a temple for its regular worship. Only an affluent devotee or a royal patron could afford commissioning it. A bronze icon with its small size was much lighter and easily portable and was useful for personal possession and private worship. In the context of South

260

The icon in context

Bihar, it has been suggested that the monastic orders in the region initated the trend of creating a vast number of miniature icons in bronze as a means of reviving and popularising Buddhism.86 Such images could be kept not only by the monks as their personal icons, but could also be taken by thousands of pilgrims as souvenirs to be kept in their own homes for worship and adoration.87 Most bronzes hence are much effaced both from constant ritual use; perhaps applications of unguents and from prolonged burial in the ground. Metal sculptures could also have served alone or in groups as objects of meditation and devotion and many must have formed a part of a three-dimensional mandala.88 The sculptural data contained in Table 4.4 indicates 12 Uma Mahesvara images located from South Bihar so far. 7 of these images were found in the Kurkihar hoard and one from Nalanda. The provenance of the remaining 4 images is not known. Chronologically there are 3 images which can be dated to the ninth century and 1 each to the eleventh and the twelfth centuries. The majority of images can be dated to the tenth century. 3 of the Kurkihar images are inscribed and carry the names of the donors at the back. 2 of the inscriptions also record the dates for donation. 4 of the Kurkihar Uma Mahesvara are now stored in the Patna Museum while the other 6 have travelled to museums in the USA: to Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Cleveland Museum of Art and to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LCMA). This is a stark testimony to the high demand for Indian bronzes in foreign markets. While there is no evidence of gilding on any of these Uma Mahesvara images, the image from LCMA does show traces of pigmentation. Most surviving metal icons from Bihar, including the Uma Mahesvara, are made of a bronze alloy. The specifics of the alloy, however, vary, suggesting possibilities of various bronze workshops in the region. Textual and iconographic cannons indicate that the alloy was to consist of 8 metals, all of which needed to be present for ritual correctness.89 NK Bhattasalli coined the term octo-alloy, or ashta dhaatu, for these images; the alloy includes copper, tin, lead, antimony, zinc, iron, gold and silver in varying proportions. Some bronzes have also been found enamelled with a thin layer of kaolin clay, green or brown, patina like in its effects.90 This, however, has not been seen in any of the Uma Mahesvara icons. The metal alloys used in Bihar and Bengal provide the images with a rather red or coppery colour indicating a high copper content.91

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

261

The metal icons were mostly cast hollow, using what was traditionally called the ghana method. Smaller works are often solid, using the sushira method.92 Sculptural evidence from most of the casting centres indicate that the sculptures were cast as per the cire-perdue, or the ‘lost wax’ process.93 The technique is still popular in the region and is known as dhokra art. Sanskrit treatises call this process as the madhucchistavidhana.94 Gilding with liquid gold pigment, silver and gold inlaying and setting gems and jewels are noticeable in the eleventh– twelfth century images. A large number of bronzes from South Bihar have been parts of large hoards of metal sculptures, found by accident from several sites in the region; the largest of such hoards came from Kurkihar in Nalanda district. Images and other ritual implements were often cached in secret vaults in temples, to be saved from threats of vandalism or iconoclasm. It is not only difficult to ascribe the dates for deposition for most of these hoards, but also to ascribe a geographical context to the metal images on account of their easy portability. Votive images were routinely made for Buddhist and Jain monks to carry around and eastern Indian bronzes seem to have travelled to China, Tibet and South-east Asia with Buddhist monks and pilgrims.95 A stylistic break-up of the icons has established some broad patterns. Scholars have suggested that the first phase began around the eighth century, and it was probably centred at Nalanda. Similar to the tradition in stone sculpting, a distinct style of art evolved in metal casting, revealing debts to earlier traditions, but synthesising these into something completely new.96 In this phase the majority of bronzes are framed and supported by a stele which in earlier instances was evidently the prabhamandala, round or elliptical in shape with its borders decorated by bead or/and flame motifs and the style continues through the next four centuries. The stele was mounted on a round, double lotus pedestal which rested on a square or rectangular plinth with or without one or three projections on which the vahanas of the gods and goddesses rested. Style and evolution The next phase, which is supposed to have lasted between the ninth and tenth centuries, is marked by the rise of a new school; in addition to Nalanda, Kurkihar is believed to have emerged as an important centre of bronze casting. The renowned sculptors Dhiman and Bitpal, as recorded in Taranath’s account, might have been the important

262

The icon in context

promoters of style.97 From this time onwards, the prabhamandala started to become very intricate and ornate and now consisted of an arrangement of frames. The outer rim of the frame consisted of a pointed arch which rose vertically upwards and converged into an apex just above the centre of the sculptural composition.98 The pedestals of images also started to get more elaborate and acquired steps or cornices attached to legs. The pedestals also contain small figures of donors and worshippers. Initially the pedestals were short and plain and later three steps or the triratha pedestals were cast to represent the ground plan and elevation of medieval temples.99 Others believe that this pedestal was meant to serve as the throne or the stone carriage of the deity.100 From the ninth century, images appear with inscriptions which record the names of the king during whose reigns the icons were executed.101 Though the numbers of images increase during this period, there are only a few Hindu ones.102 These have been recovered from both Nalanda and Kurkihar. The artists and craftsman possibly worked in the same workshop for both Buddhist and Hindu clients, and this may be one reason that in form and style, there is hardly any difference between Hindu and Buddhist icons.103 The situation changed somewhat by the tenth century when more Shiva, Uma Mahesvara, Vishnu, Surya, Ganesha, Durga, etcetera, appear, but these are still outnumbered by the Buddhist ones. The third phase is suggested to have begun from the eleventh century and may have been centred at Kurkihar. The images show elongated faces, sharp chins and heavy lips; the same steles begin to contain a number of side figures and animals, the back slab becomes richly decorated with scroll work. While the goddesses start to wear a flat and high chignon, the gods acquire a high, conical kiratmukha. Niharranjan Ray notes that from the tenth century onwards the numbers for metal icons increases, and he attributes this to the expanding Buddhist pantheon which introduced new gods and goddesses. He suggests that besides Kurkihar and Nalanda, other smaller centres for the manufacture of cast metal icons also came up patronised by the small local clientele alone, while Kurkihar and Nalanda must have met the demands of wider markets. The last phase which is supposed to have begun from the twelfth century has been described as a “stage of degeneration and petrification.”104 Just as in the case of stone images from this period, ornamentation became excessive, designs flamboyant and motifs on the aureoles and pedestals became more crowded. Attempts were made to produce the rounded form and three-dimensional effect by cutting

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

263

Figure 4.8 Bronze Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 9624 Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

along the back-plate behind the image was now perfected.105 The high pancharatha type pedestal became common. Silver inlay often came to be used to accentuate certain features of the icons. Niharranjan Ray has attributed these “changes in style (were) not due to monarchical influences, but rather to monastic influence occasioned by

264

The icon in context

changes in ideas and progressive cultism on the casting of images by monastic establishments where most of them appear to have been fashioned.”106 The current historiographical stance on bronzes from South Bihar and the art historian approach of making attributions to metal icons on stylistic grounds alone pose several problems.107 While the chronological break up corresponds with the regnal years of Pala kings thus attaching dynastic categories, the question of provenance and purpose also becomes tricky since inscribed images are in a minority and the entire corpus of metal images of any given era is not available thus studies are carried out on limited and partial evidence.108 Bronzes were sometimes also recut in later periods to enhance minutiae that had worn off in earlier images. This can derail dating efforts that generally assume that the more worn out images are older than those that are relatively intact. An ideal case of this is the Kurkihar hoard. While museums and collectors continue to label examples from the Kurkihar hoard as “Pala” and “Kurkihar style,” the available inscriptions show the time period as extending over about three centuries. Not a single Pala ruler seems to have been personally involved in patronage of art works. Stylistically, icons seem to have been created at different centres and the find spot of a sculpture is not necessarily a meaningful clue to its date or provenance.109 Current historiography has also advocated for a regional shift and variation in style and execution of icons. Susan Huntington has suggested that not only were there separate centres of metal casting in Bihar and Bengal but also that with the progression of centuries, there was a gradual migration of casting centres from western areas of Bihar to eastern parts of Bengal.110 As evidence of this fact she cites the example of Nalanda, which was apparently the casting centre in the eighth century, followed by Kurkihar in the ninth, Antichak in the tenth, and by the eleventh–twelfth centuries, the centres had shifted to present-day West Bengal and Bangladesh. She also cites this as the reason for fewer bronze icons from Bihar in the eleventh– twelfth centuries. Judging from the substantial remains of metal images dating between the ninth through the twelfth centuries from South Bihar, it is plausible that the region might have had several important centres of metal casting. The widespread use of metal may have been partially due to the rich ore deposits throughout Magadha that had made the region wealthy even in early historic times.111 Some ateliers, like Nalanda and Bodh Gaya, would have served as a source of stylistic and iconographic

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

265

inspiration for smaller, less prominent establishments. Several other casting centres in the proximity of Gaya are known, such as Kurkihar and Fatehpur, Antichak, Chandipore and Patharghata in Bhagalpur and Alaura further south in Dhanbad. Nalanda and Kurkihar are particularly important for this study since huge hordes of hundreds of images have been recovered from these two sites. Other centres in North Bihar have also been discovered such as those at Chausa in Buxar, Imadpur, in Vaisali district and Dhanurbasti in Muzaffarpur which might have facilitated artistic and technological exchange. The Nalanda images seem to predate the Kurkihar examples, and in general they are much simpler and smaller. There is however a stylistic homogeneity which scholars believe might have originated at Nalanda and spread across different sites in Bihar.112 What accounts for the sudden appearance of bronze images in such large numbers in and around Nalanda from about the eighth century? Frederick Asher relates it to contemporary political developments related to the reign of the Palas and their control of the copper mines in the region known as Ghatshila, in South Bihar, now in the state of Jharkhand.113 These mines continue to be India’s leading source of copper to the present day. A second possibility which Asher suggests is India’s trade relations with kingdoms of Southeast Asia under the Pala dynasty and the import of copper and casting techniques from Sumatra and Java may have provided the impetus behind metal casting.114 Until the discovery of the Kurkihar hoard in 1930, the Nalanda finds formed the largest body of metal sculptures from eastern India. The images range from the seventh and eighth centuries to approximately the twelfth century. The specific location of most of these images as they were excavated at Nalanda is known. It is, however, difficult to establish a definite chronology to these as icons of different periods seem to have been in use simultaneously in individual chapels.115 The Nalanda images are characterised by flame-like projections on the prabhamandala, the leaf and flower motif above the figures, leogryphs at the sides of the thrones the structure and proportion of the thrones, the lions at the corners of the throne bases are all designs common on the Nalanda bronzes.116 The images from Nalanda are smaller in size and the halo behind the divinities were often carved separately and then joined to the back of the figure. The images are chiefly Buddhist with a few Hindu ones.117 The relative abundance of sculptures from Nalanda between the seventh to ninth centuries suggest that there was a great deal of artistic activity at the time, and

266

The icon in context

that this period may have been one of the very productive ones. Some images from Nalanda also reveal a high copper content while others indicate evidence of gilding and inlaying.118 Evidence of metal casting is found in a series of ovens on the courtyard in some of the monasteries as a place of casting bronzes. Current historiography attempts to establish a continuity of traditions between Nalanda and Kurkihar. Susan Huntington has claimed that while the majority of the images from Nalanda date between seventh to ninth centuries, those from Kurkihar are between the tenth to twelfth centuries on the basis of strong stylistic similarities between the late Nalanda images and the early Kurkihar tradition.119 It cannot be said definitely that the Kurkihar metal sculpting tradition continued from where Nalanda left off or that there was a shifting of centres. The Nalanda School could only have served as a model for Kurkihar since the former was a much larger monastic centre and already well established by the time metallurgy at Kurkihar came along. Inscribed images from Kurkihar attest that images possibly were manufactured at different workshops and suggest definite contact between different centres. The Kurkihar hoard The site of Kurkihar is overshadowed with contestations and controversies ever since it was first noticed by Markham Kittoe in 1846. In 1848, Kittoe returned to the site and spent four days collecting 10 cartloads of stone images, supposedly all Buddhist and many “Tantric” in nature. He did not carry any systematic excavation of the site or a cataloguing of the images which he gathered and to the present day this site has not been systematically excavated. Kittoe presented these sculptures to the Asiatic Society of Bengal in December 1848. A list of images but no photographs or drawings were published by the Asiatic Society in their journal.120 At the time John Anderson wrote his catalogue of the Indian Museum collection, he felt that most of the images had been correlated to the list and therefore were identified properly.121 The very character of these images as chala pratima has caused problem for their contextualisation. Textual traditions mention the site of Kurkihar and a monastery being located there from very early dates and the site may indeed have had importance to the Buddhist religion. Sculptural evidence, however, does not seem to be earlier than the ninth century. In 1930, a hoard of 226 metal objects was unearthed by villagers quarrying for bricks

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

267

among the ruins of what might have been the Kurkihar monastery, thus defining a definite place of the site in the religious landscape of Bihar. The objects were found packed in two large earthen jars possibly within a partly exposed room inside the largest mound. Of the 226 metal objects nearly 150 are images, the rest being chatras, ghantas and metal fragments and a small crystal stupa. More than 200 of the objects, including 148 Buddhist and 8 Brahmanical images, are now stored in the Patna Museum. At least 7 Uma Mahesvara images have been found from the Kurkihar hoard. Kurkihar images are characterized by rich foliation, abundant quantities of jewellery, elaborate thrones, high pedestals, large halos and the presence of animal figures often inlayed with gold, silver and gems. Kurkihar seems to have been a prolific centre of metal casting and the images show exquisite workmanship though some of the images might have come from other sites such as 15 images and 3 bells with festoons were donated by the monks from Kanchi. The majority of the Buddhist images are inscribed containing the Buddhist creed and short dedicatory labels, in one case there is a poetical composition in 4 verses and in another a fairly big dharani. 8 of the images are dated to the reign of the Pala kings Devapala, Rajyapala, Mahipala and Vigrahapala and hence can be dated between the ninth and the twelfth centuries. The inscriptions are written in Sanskrit and the characters of the writings are either Siddhamatrka or Gaudiya. Based on style and features, scholars note gradual changes in the design in the images and suggest that either Kurkihar maintained an active workshop for several hundred years, from approximately the ninth to twelfth centuries, or that sculptures were constantly being brought from other ateliers.122 The aesthetic design of the images establishes connections with other casting sites from the Gaya region. As in the case of stone images, the abundance of metal images from the ninth–tenth centuries suggest that this might have been an active period for sculpture production possibly reflecting on the building of a number of temples in the region, as I have discused earlier. It is, however, not possible to state for certain that all of the works are necessarily of Kurkihar. It may be conjectured that some of the pieces are from other sites, having been brought to Kurkihar by other means such as the Kanchi images.123 Again, it is difficult to surmise whether all images were made by one group of artisans. It is also possible that artists from various ateliers were in contact with each other and at certain times produced strikingly similar works.124

268

The icon in context

Kurkihar as it stands today is located on a straight highway between Nalanda and Gaya. There are no road signs to indicate where the site is despite its considerable importance in the Buddhist circuit and frequent textual references. There are 3 significant sites of interest within Kurkihar village. The first is an old monastery located on the top of a hillock and is called the site of the Kurkvihar. The current shrine houses images of Rama, Lakshmana and Sita. This whitewashed, modern structure is made of many old architectural fragments including pillars and sculptural panels. This was the site where the Kurkihar hoard of bronzes had been found and is marked by a big depression in the ground where excavations had first taken place. The site was subsequently acquired by the ASI. This was probably the site of the ancient monastery reported by Kittoe. At the end of the village is a Devi Temple where a large number of older images are enshrined. The shrine is situated under a pipal tree and faces north suggesting that it might have originally been a tree shrine and a permanent shrine was later built. Two ornate votive stupas, mounted on the gate, greet visitors. The garbha griha and the preceding mandapa are made of stone and now coloured bright red and green with enamel paint. The principle deity of the shrine is a Buddhist deity worshipped as a Sankatharini Devi. Under the stone mandapa several other images in black stone are enshrined including images of Buddha, Tara and Avalokitesvara. There is also one inscribed image at the entrance, one stone linga and one stone carved Hanuman placed on the ceiling of the mandapa. The stone sanctum and porch appear much older and probably a concrete circumambulatory path was later added. Many other inscribed sculptures and fragments are also found here. The villagers informed that many of these images were first located on the vihara mound but when the images started to disappear the villagers relocated them to the Sankatharini shrine. The original context of most images is hence now difficult to establish. The shrine is located about a kilometre away from the hillock which Cunningham and others had established to be the “Cock Foot Mountain” and is still visited by Buddhist tourists. A third significant shrine in the village is of Surya, which contains a black basalt Surya image recovered from a tank in the temple’s vicinity. The history of the site indeed is of great complexity where images from several sites have been found, and the site abounds with both stone and metal images which have undergone several spates of relocation. The site is also marked by a multiplicity of religions and hence is not justifiable to locate it merely within the Buddhist circuit.

Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, 948 ce

Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, tenth century

4

17.8 cm Patna Museum

17.8 cm Patna Museum

17.8 cm Patna Museum (9772)

3

2

20.3 cm MET, New York

Uma Mahesvara seated, Nalanda, ninth century Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, 935 ce

1

Current Location

Size

Serial Image No.

Description

Uma and Shiva seated on Kailash with vahanas, Skanda, Ganesha and seated Bhringi. Inscribed. Gift of image Shiva’s matted hair tied with a snake. Parvati seated in by Mulaka, the wife rajalilasana with right leg of Gopala Mahiaru, a pendant. A snake to the resident of Apanaka left of Parvati. Damaged Monastery in the 32nd regnal year of Rajyapala. prabhamandala. Inscribed. Gift of image by Mulaka, the wife of Gopala Mahiaru, a resident of Apanaka Monastery in the 32nd regnal year of Rajyapala. –

Inscribed

Table 4.4 Bronze Uma Mahesvara images from South Bihar

(Continued)

AIIS, Pramod Chandra Collection. PMC 154.

AIIS Pramod Chandra collection. PMC 153.

Susan and John Huntington 1970, 0002070.

Donaldson: p. 409, fig. 394.

Reference

8

7

17.8 cm Patna Museum (9624)

LA County Museum of Arts National Museum, New Delhi

Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, tenth century Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, eleventh – twelfth century Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, twelfth century

6

17 cm by 11.4 cm 19.6 cm

16.5 cm Patna Museum (9660)

Uma Mahesvara seated, Kurkihar, tenth century

5

Current Location

Size

Serial Image No.

Table 4.4 (Continued)

–

–

–

Inscribed. Patron: Kalanda

Inscribed

Donaldson: p. 426.

AIIS, Pramod Chandra collection.

Reference

–

Susan and John Huntington 1970, 0002099.

Shown with Skanda and Ganesha Donaldson: p. 454, fig. 504.

Uma and Shiva seated on pith placed on rectangular pedestal. Shiva in lalitasana, embracing Uma seated on left lap in same pose, touches her chin with front right hand and embraces her with front left hand, holds trishula and skull cap. Uma’s right hand around him and in her left is a darpan. Vahanas shown. Copper alloy with traces of pigment.

Description

12

11

10

9

Size

18 cm Uma Mahesvara seated, unknown provenance ninth century Uma Mahesvara 14 cm seated, unknown provenance tenth– eleventh century Uma Mahesvara 14 cm seated, unknown provenance ninth – tenth century Uma Mahesvara seated, unknown provenance tenth century

Serial Image No.

Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, New York Asia Society, Rockefeller Collection, New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York

Cleveland Museum of Art

Current Location

–

–

–

–

Inscribed

Depicted with the vahanas and kneeling female devotee

Depicted with the vahanas, kneeling devotees, Skanda and Ganesha

Description

Donaldson: p. 425, fig. 426. Rockefeller 1994.002 Donaldson: p. 425, fig. 423. Rockefeller 1979.014 Donaldson: p. 426.

AIIS. CMA (1996), p. 232

Reference

272

The icon in context

Other centres A hoard of 12 metal sculptures similar to Kurkihar, dated to about eleventh to twelfth century was discovered from Fatehpur also located in the Gaya district, 20 kilometres from Kurkihar.125 These sculptures offer distinct evidence of the existence of schools of metal casting throughout Magadha which were highly individualised and not particularly derivative of more well-known centres like Nalanda and Kurkihar. The bronzes from Fatehpur like those from Nalanda and Kurkihar include both Buddhist and Brahmanical divinities. Antichak the probable site of the Vikramsila Mahavihara could probably have been another bronze casting centre as suggested by the furnace, crucibles and unfinished images available from the site. An image of Vajrapani Avalokitesvara was found in a furnace located in the south east corner of the courtyard of the monastery.126 Perhaps the image was left in the furnace in the course of processing. The sculptural evidence so far revealed is, however, very meagre, only 6 bronzes have been found from the regular excavations of the monastery debris at the site.127 Some bronze figurines were procured from the possession of some of the villagers. Out of the 6 bronzes from Vikramsila 4 are of Buddhist deities and 2 are animal figurines. These images are smaller in size as compared to those from other sites in Bihar. The images have mostly been dated from the tenth–twelfth century. Some images are also inscribed, mostly containing the Buddhist creed.128 The knowledge of metal sculptures from South Bihar remains sporadic and unfulfilled due to a paucity of sculptures as well as an unscientific handling of the available material. Moreover, the entire corpus of metal works form Bihar is still not available, much probably still remains buried. The problem is further compounded by the fact that small metal images were easily transportable so that the find spot of an image is not necessarily indicative of its place of manufacture or original geography.

Visualising Uma Mahesvara The sculptural data cited through the course of the chapter not only indicates the popularity of depiction of Shiva and Parvati as Uma Mahesvara in South Bihar but also that within the same geographical area and chronological frame, the motif appears in a variety of styles. The patrons and artists might have had varying expectations from the divine which would be one of the factors which determined the unusual ways in which they envisaged their gods and goddesses and

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

273

explains the variations in medium of production, size and orientation of the icons.129 There, however, seems to be no historiographical consensus on the purpose of these images. Most stone Uma Mahesvara sculptures seem to be architectural fragments placed in temples for ritual and ornamentation. Gopinatha Rao suggests that “the image of Umā Maheśvara is a symbol to show that living with one’s wife happily in this world as does Śiva with his consort Pārvatī in heaven, is also considered moḳṣa.”130 AL Srivastava argues on somewhat similar lines to say that the conjugal union of Shiva and Parvati as Uma Mahesvara depicts marital harmony and procreation. Srivastava believes that the cult of Shiva and Parvati in their form as Uma Mahesvara was especially popular among married women and women patronised the creation and donation of these icons to obtain conjugal bliss.131 Deities of the temple complex In the Hindu world no puja is deemed complete without darshan: seeing or benefitting from the physical presence of the deity and a physical icon of the divine is an essential ritual requirement. The Uma Mahesvara icons would have served the purpose as formally consecrated deities of temples, worthy of receiving homage from human devotees and granting the desired boon. The image as such was conceived of as a microcosm of the world.132 The image of Uma Mahesvara was not just the portrait of the god and the goddess on which the devotee could focus his concentration, but became an entire religious experience. Starting from the tenth century, various subsidiary figures and sacred symbols were often assimilated in a single Uma Mahesvara image just as in a temple space. The early images depicted Shiva and Parvati with their respective vahanas: the Nandi bull and the lion. After the tenth century, the icons became more complex, and Ganesha, Kartikeya, Vishnu, the Saptamatrakas and Lakshmi variously appeared. To complete the divine experience just as in a shrine, several maladharis, kinnaras, apsaras and devotees are also often depicted on the back slab. The panchalinga also appeared at the top of the back slab thus embodying Shiva in his manifest and un-manifest form on the same icon. The ritual purpose of the Uma Mahesvara images can be deduced by their placement in the temple complex. Shiva is present in the garbha griha in his unmanifest form as the lingam, while his different manifest forms appear on the sanctum walls. Parvati as the consort of Shiva is also always present in a Shaiva temple. The Uma Mahesvara image

274

The icon in context

hence becomes essential in the context of a Shaiva temple where both Shiva and Parvati are conspicuous in their form as Uma Mahesvara. The Uma Mahesvara icon is often found in either the side niche of the sanctum walls, at the entrance of the shrines or in a subsidiary shrine of the main temple. In rare instances, the icon also serves as the principle icon of the temple. The majority of the stone sculptures under consideration seem to be fragments of larger architectural structures, and some of the sculptures still reveal architectonic marks suggesting that these were in most likelihood used for ornamentation and decoration on temple walls. A reading of Table 4.3 indicates that these vary in size from 1 inch to 42 inches. Similarly, Table 4.2 lists the placement of Uma Mahesvara images at different junctures of the temple. A fragment from Surajpur, Gaya, is still in its niche, and a similar wall fragment with Uma Mahesvara from an unknown location is now stored in the Patna Museum. Mention must be made of several double-sided steles found at various locations which contain Uma Mahesvara image on one side and another divinity at the back. At least 3 such steles have been found which in most likelihood were pillar fragments. There are other similar remains of pillar with the image of Uma Mahesvara from Rajaona, Munger. Once again the dearth of surviving temple complexes in South Bihar inhibits a complete contextualisation of these floating architectural remains. The gods of the domestic shrines The Hindu temple is often recreated in homes in a miniature form as domestic shrines, and it is common to have one’s favourite god or goddess inhabiting these personal shrines. The personal shrines house both stone and metal images. During the period from the eighth century onwards, a strong bhakti wave was dominant in North India. Bhakti demanded utmost devotion and surrender to a personal deity in their many manifest and unmanifest rupa and varied avataras. The large numbers of Uma Mahesvara icons suggest the popularity of Shiva amongst his bhaktas in the householder form. At a time when Buddhism was still fairly popular, Uma Mahesvara would have represented an alternate mode of existence and the bliss of conjugal union. The image was popularised to show the devotees that one need not give up worldly existence and family life to pursue the divine. Even by living a householder’s life just as the Divine himself, one could aim for salvation. This motif of the union of Shiva and Parvati hence became fairly popular in the contemporary religious order. This mode

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

275

of intimacy was so fascinating in its depiction and delineation, that it later introduced similar composite images of other deities in their dampati form; particularly those of Vishnu, Narasimha, Brahma, Ganesha and Kuber. Looking at the size of images, it is difficult to say how many of these could have possibly inhabited domestic shrines. As Table 4.3 suggests, there are only a handful of images which are small enough to occupy domestic shrines. The Uma Mahesvara images cast in stone are anywhere from 1 foot to 6 feet high. They moreover give definite evidence of being architectural fragments indicating that they would be a part of the temple edifice. The case of the bronze images is different. Being smaller, their size ranging between 5 inches to 8 inches could more likely have been used in domestic shrines very much like they are to the present day. Of the 12 bronze icons included in this study, 3 are inscribed at the back which suggests that these were probably donated and did not inhabit personal shrines. Donation Within eastern India a remarkable variety and multiplicity of objects and relics form the objects of benefaction. Apart from icons and sculptures, the usual list includes relics for ritual use, religious structures, miniature temples and stupas, caves, cisterns, wells, tanks, etcetera. The object of benefaction could largely have been decided by the economic standing of the donor and the purpose of donation. Many images are known to have been dedicated under the rule of the Pala and Sena dynasties, and dedicatory inscriptions from the time of the various Pala rulers appear on almost two dozen Pala reliefs and fragments of reliefs. As listed in Table 4.3, there are 7 Uma Mahesvara images both in stone and metal which are inscribed with dedicatory inscriptions. They mention the name of the donor and on a few occasions also the date and residence. Yet no image has been found with an inscription of any of the Pala rulers themselves.133 This suggests that no personal patronage of art might be expected from the rulers and that “they were solely interested in the dedication itself, through which they expected to acquire religious merit. Nominally this attitude remained the same under the Senas.”134 An unusual form of Uma Mahesvara which I have mentioned earlier have been found at Bargaon, in the form of miniature temples with the image of Uma Mahesvara carved in the central niche. Measuring about 2 feet in height and constructed in the nagara style these miniature temples are made granite and of the typical black stone

276

The icon in context

Figure 4.9 Front view of inscribed Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 966 Source: of AIIS, Gurgaon

used in eastern India. I have been able to locate at least 5 such miniature temples, out of which 3 temples have Uma Mahesvara in the central niche and a fourth temple depicts the linga in its central niche. A fifth temple appears in photographs of the Broadley collection and was later moved to the Indian Museum; it is, however, difficult to decipher the image in the niche. The temples have been dated to the ninth–eleventh centuries and are reminiscent of the miniatures of the Mahabodhi Temple, found at Bodh Gaya and from other parts of the Buddhist world. Like the Bodh Gaya miniature temples, the temples at Nalanda might have been for votive or donatory purposes. No inscription, however, is found on the miniatures to accurately determine their purpose. Not much is evident from the inscribed Uma Mahesvara images available for this study since the quantity of record is too meagre.

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

277

Figure 4.10 Back view of inscribed Uma Mahesvara, Kurkihar; now at Patna Museum, accession no. 966; inscribed ‘Kalanda’ Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

Out of the corpus of more than 100 Uma Mahesvara icons, only 3 bronze images from the Kurkihar hoard are inscribed as donative, and the available inscription is too simplistic, merely recording the donor names. Evidence indicates that there are 2 almost identical Uma Mahesvara images found from Kurkihar, and both these images have the same donors. This suggests that the votive objects were procured from the same workshop: either personally commissioned or readily available. All 3 images are approximately 7 inches in height and are inscribed at the back as discussed in Table 4.3. 2 of the images, in fact, record the name of the same patron ‘Mulaka,’ while the third was donated by a certain ‘Kalanda.’ Susan Huntington has been able to identify at least 4 such metal images from Kurkihar executed in the same style and carrying similar inscriptions.135 The earliest of the inscribed Kurkihar pieces is a pedestal with the main image now missing but showing 2 nagas emerging

278

The icon in context

out of the base. Two more images carrying similar inscriptions and dated to 31st or 32nd regnal year of Rajyapala are of the Buddhist goddess Vasudhara. The fourth image identified with this group is one of the Uma Mahesvara images from Kurkihar, and Huntington has dated it to the reign of Rajyapala. The inscription indicates that it was dedicated at the same time as the two Vasudharas that is in the 31st or 32nd year of Rajyapala around the middle of the tenth century. The inscriptions on all the images are nearly identical: they record the gift of each image by the wife of Gopalo-Hino in the Apanaka monastery, in the 31st or 32nd year of Rajyapala. In one case the wife’s name is Gauka; in the other, it is Vatuka, and on the Uma Mahesvara, it is Mulaka. From the inscriptions, it appears that it was cast by someone named Gopalahora. Based on stylistic similarities of some Kurkihar images with Nalanda, it has been suggested that either artists from Nalanda might have come to work at Kurkihar or that images from Nalanda were brought to Kurkihar.136 There are several interesting issues which come up with the patterns of donation of the Uma Mahesvara images. What appears striking is that the Buddhist and the Hindu images have been handled in a virtually identical manner. Though the Apanaka Monastery of the inscriptions appears to be a presumably Buddhist monastery, it had a common artistic community shared by people of all faiths. Just as the other sacred complexes in the region, our present-day distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism probably did not hold ground, and sacred space was fluid and shared. The stylistic similarity between the two Vasudharas and the Uma Mahesvara images and the fact that all three were dedicated within a very short time of each other by people hailing from the vicinity of the Apanaka monastery strongly suggests that the images had been commissioned from one workshop, perhaps one which was patronised by this special monastery. This workshop may have been at Kurkihar itself and, much in the way of a modern souvenir shop attached to temples and centres of pilgrimage, may have served in the provision of images for pilgrims and worshippers visiting the site. A second issue is regarding royal donations where the ‘Pala appellation’ is commonly used as a substitutive nomenclature for the art of eastern India though this supposed patronage of religion and art by the Pala rulers has not been corroborated by inscriptions or other historical documents. “We do not know of even one specific building, monument, sculpture or painting which was donated by a Pala king.”137 It is known that the kings patronised and sometimes founded religious institutions and works of art but it not known that this money was

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

279

spent in the creation of images or paintings or if so whether the kings had any influence over the artists in the creation of their works. This suggests that almost no personal patronage to art came from the Pala rulers themselves or the royal family that one so far knows of. The fact that a particular icon is dated in the regnal year of a king suggests convenient nomenclatures adopted by modern historiographers of Indian art to give a rough idea of the time or period to which the relevant art object belongs to.138 Keeping in mind the fact that not a single Uma Mahesvara image carries a royal inscription, it can be concluded that the cult was certainly not subscribed by the royal family. On the other hand, the records of Mulaka the wife of Gopala and Kalanda as they appear in the inscription without any familial connection are indices of the fact that these were people with not much of a social standing and in most likelihood were commoners. The third question that the inscribed Uma Mahesvara icons touch upon is the identity of the Apanaka Monastery. Out of the 226 metal pieces found from Kurkihar, almost half of those are inscribed and 9 are dated.139 Of this large collection, 15 Buddhist images and 3 bells with festoons are recorded as donations by the monks from Kanchi and this forms a very valuable document for the presence of so many monks of Kanchi at the monastery of Kurkihar.140 Strangely enough in none of the inscriptions mention is made of the Kukkutapadagiri vihara, the ancient name of Kurkihar which Cunningham and his colleagues were looking for; instead the Apanaka mahavihara has been referred to. On this basis, historians suggest that the largest mound in which the hoard of metal objects was found is most probably the ruins of the Apanaka mahavihara.141 The donations of the Kanchi monk at Kurkihar highlight another aspect of patronage related to the inscribed Kurkihar bronzes: the question of community or collective patronage. The donation of images by Kanchi monks at Kurkihar is evidence of individual acts of patronage. But this kind of sustained donations over a long period by a particular community of monks has been cited as evidence of collective patronage.142 Such acts indicate the collective psyche of a particular group: of what is considered meritorious by them. Continued patronage at this particular site also indicates the importance of the site; the Apanaka Monastery seems to be quite sacred and the community was able to sustain a continuous traffic of monks, pilgrims and donations between two geographical points located so far apart. Once again the need to examine patterns of long-term usage of sacred space is important; where was this Apanaka Monastery located, who were the pilgrims visiting it, what was the religious denomination of this monastery and so on.

280

The icon in context

Another aspect of patronage raised by the available inscriptions on the Uma Mahesvara icons is the question of female patronage. While the gender of Kalanda is not known, the other two Uma Mahesvara images have been donated by the same woman, (Mulaka, who refers to herself as “a wife of Gopala Mahiaru”), and she clearly reveals her place of residence as Apanaka Monastery. On the one hand, Mulaka seems to have enough means and standing to be able to make her own donations. Yet, she is not able to define her identity without that of her husband Gopala Mahiaru. The lack of any royal or feudatory titles attached along with the names of Mulaka or her husband also indicate their status as a commoner. Once again this negates the role of royal patronage and the art of South Bihar of the early medieval period as being “Pala Art”. Chala pratima The ritual aspect of metal icons is somewhat more complex than stone ones, and historians and art critics tend to view bronze icons mostly as mobile icons: utsavamurti or chala pratima used during temple festivals and processions. In some of the major temples, once a year the principle deity, with his divine family and retinue of attendant divinities, set foot outside the sacred precincts of the temple to meet his devotees on chariots just as a human king travels his empire to meet his subjects and see to their well-being. None of the available metal Uma Mahesvara sculptures, however, show any evidence of being a part of temple festivals. The bronzes from eastern India in most likelihood were used to serve as cult icons: set up in chaitya halls, viharas, in temples or in private homes. These were made smaller in size, to ensure their easy portability from one place to another. Richard Davis believes that the bronze images might have been used as subsidiary deities in the shrines when not in procession and points this as the case especially in the Shaiva temples. The primary immobile icon in the central sanctum represents the Shiva in his unmainfest form, “without attributes,” the moving form or chala pratima, by contrast, is finite in form “with attributes” and so embodies Shiva in his more accessible aspect.143 This also corresponds to the iconographic programmes of the Shaiva temples where the linga is enshrined as the central icon while processional images embodying Shiva’s in more anthropomorphic forms were meant to be circulated. The Buddhist figurines have also been discussed in light of the growing popularity of the Mahayana and Vajrayana creeds with their

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

281

extensive pantheon and ever-increasing number of deities which might have led to the making of a large number of metal images. The Chinese monk-pilgrim I Tsing recorded that in Buddhist monasteries, the monks kept copper icons in niches carved in their cells.144 He also refers to images which were of large size, made for public halls and chapels, while the small bronzes were for personal worship in the cells. It has hence been suggested that monasteries probably had workshops for making metal images in large numbers, not only for the monks but also for being taken away by pilgrims. Metallurgy was one of the disciplines believed to have been taught at the Nalanda Mahavihara, and the finds of hoards of bronze icons located within the viharas or sites close by has been cited as evidence of this.145 Actual remains of workshops with finished and unfinished images including ovens and braziers have been found among the ruins of some of the vihara sites such as at Nalanda and Vikramsila and has been cited as explanation for Hindu metal images having been found in Buddhist monasteries. Inscriptional evidence indicates that it was also common for lay folk to dedicate such images, and the find spots of such images indicate that dedications were often made to monastic establishments. Bronze icons might also have been popular as souvenirs from important pilgrimage sites like Nalanda and Bodh Gaya or to be used by pilgrims for votive purposes.146 This issue of movability and removability of ritual images and their ritual placement in view of the growing popularity of Vajrayana traditions will be further discussed in the next chapter. The chapter will extend the biography of Uma Mahesvara sculptures beyond the moment of their fabrication to discover what happened to the shrines and the enshrined images through prolonged usage. I will explore how through interaction with varied communities of people, the identities of sites are negotiated, and names, meanings and purpose of sacred images change; this does not necessarily involve religious strife but can be realised as a harmonious and integrative social processes.

Notes 1 James Fergusson in TA Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography, Volume 1, Part I, first published in Madras 1914, this edition, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. 2 TA Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography. 3 “The textual descriptions are carried out with scrupulous accuracy and the workmanship is superb,” TA Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography, Volume 2, Part I, p. 134.

282

The icon in context

4 JN Banerjea, Development of Hindu Iconography, 2nd Edition, Calcutta University, 1956. 5 For Gopinatha Rao a religious image is an external object to concentrate upon during the act of meditation and is understood to ‘represent’ the deity intended to be worshipped. 6 JN Banerjea, Development of Hindu Iconography, p. 1. 7 Ibid., p. 5. 8 Pratapaditya Pal, Indian Sculptures, Volumes 1 and 2, Los Angeles County Museum in association with University of California, Los Angeles, 1988. 9 “The great diversity of styles encountered in Indian sculpture indicates that notably different canons of proportion were in use in different regions,” Ibid., Volume 1, p. 38. 10 He also points to the use of some Puranas such as the Vishnudharmotarapurana and Matsayapurana, which have sections on art and iconography as of considerable help. He also attributes the divergence from the texts to regional differences between the northern and southern traditions. 11 Pratapaditya Pal, Indian Sculptures, Volume 1, p. 39. 12 Pratapaditya Pal says that just as every edible object has its distinctive flavour or taste, so each sculpture or painting, each poem or song, has its own rasa, which in the aesthetic context seems to imply mood. Ibid., p. 35. 13 Devangana Desai, Religious Imagery in Khajuraho. 14 Ethno-history must start with ethnographic evidence in the present and traces of similar evidence from the past and work back through time’s transforming patterns to represent or illuminate a past reality. Michael W Meister (ed.), Ethnography and Personhood: Notes from the Field, Rawat Publications, Jaipur, 2000, p. 21. 15 Meister has variously called this method as “horizon of expectation,” “aesthetic of reception,” “reception theory,” “expressive potential” and “social function of art.” 16 “Among the many facets of art and literature mutual borrowings of the two have been favourite themes.” Krishna Mohan Shrimali (ed.), Essays in Indian Art, Religion and Society, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1987, p. xx. 17 Anita Raina Thapan, Understanding Ganapati: Insights into the Dynamics of a Cult, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. 18 Thapan traces the process whereby this elephant-headed yaksa gradually became popular in Buddhism and was accepted as the basis of iconography as a syncrestic Brahmanical deity, Ganapati. 19 Nilima Chitgopekar, Encountering Sivaism: The Deity, the Milieu, the Entourage, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1998. 20 “Geography of religion remains a neglected theme. Bearing this in mind an attempt is being made here to question whether the religion of a country or a region is controlled by its geographical features.” Ibid., p. 1. 21 Vidya Dehejia (ed.), The Sensuous and the Sacred: Chola Bronzes from South India, Mapin Ahmedabad and American Federation of Arts, New York, 2003. 22 Richard Davis, ‘Chola Bronzes in Procession,’ in Vidya Dehejia (ed.), The Sensuous and the Sacred: Chola Bronzes from South India, Mapin Ahmedabad and American Federation of Arts, New York, 2003, pp. 47–63.

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

283

23 Vidya Dehejia, ‘Chola Bronzes: How, When and Why,’ in Vidya Dehejia (ed.), The Sensuous and the Sacred: Chola Bronzes from South India, Mapin Ahmedabad and American Federation of Arts, New York, 2003, pp. 10–27. 24 Thomas E Donaldson makes a reference of Uma Mahesvara icons where Shiva has more than four arms. In one icon he is 8 armed and in another at Cleveland Museum of Art he is 18 armed. Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 364 and p. 434. 25 Pratapaditya Pal, Indian Sculptures, p. 33. 26 TA Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography, Volume 1, Part II, p. 130. 27 Ibid., p. 132. 28 JN Banerjea, Development of Hindu Iconography, p. 446. 29 Ibid. 30 NK Bhattasali, Iconography of Buddhist and Brahmanical Sculptures in the Dacca Museum, first published in 1929, this edition, Indological Book House, Varanasi, 1972, p. 120. 31 Ibid., p. 124. 32 Ibid. 33 Stella Kramrisch, Manifestations of Shiva, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, 1981, p. 58. 34 Ibid. 35 Ibid. 36 Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images. 37 Ibid., p. 1. 38 “The more intimate Uma Mahesvaramurti is the most popular form of representing Siva and Pārvatī in North India. Siva and Umā should be seated embracing each other. Siva should have a jatā-mukuta adorned with a crescent moon. He should be two armed and should hold a nilotpal in his right hand while the left hand embraces the left shoulder of Umā. Umā should embrace the right shoulder of Siva with her right arm while her left arm holds a mirror. She should have a handsome bust and hip and both figures should be sculpted in a beautiful form. Four armed Siva descriptions are by far the most popular and these can be grouped into four modes.” Ibid. 39 Donaldson has introduced a schema for studying Uma Mahesvara images by classifying the images into various formats and variants essentially from the sculptor’s viewpoint. He elaborates that while some of the solutions were introduced by artists as short duration experiments, others were readily accepted and were long lasting, indicating that visual paradigms were available. He also says that in some regions the introduction of a new format often superseded an earlier solution while in other cases both coexisted. In some cases, specific formats were not introduced in particular regions. The various formats are: Format A: With Uma’s lower body facing away from Shiva but her head turned back towards him and her right hand on his leg. This format is rare in Bihar and Bengal but can be seen in the Rajaona panels. Variant A: Shiva awkwardly resting his left arm on the right shoulder of Uma

284

The icon in context Variant B: Uma’s right elbow resting on the left shoulder of Shiva. There are scattered examples of this from Bihar. Variant C: Uma reciprocating Shiva’s embrace. There are isolated examples of this variant found in Bihar. Variant D: Shiva lifting the chin of Uma or offering her betel with his left hand is distributed evenly all over north India and Bihar. In the more popular form it is Shiva’s right hand which offers the betel or lifts her chin, the motif is limited almost exclusively to Bihar and Bengal. Format B: Uma’s left knee raised and her stretched right leg folded, is especially popular in the 10th and 11th centuries and is primarily found in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Orissa and Nepal. Format C: Shiva and Uma assuming duplicate poses with one leg folded and the other pendant. A transitional format from Format A, Variants (c/d) appears on various images especially bronze images from Bihar and Orissa. Format D: Shiva and Uma seated in a duplicate pose with both legs crossed, appear sporadically throughout north India but are most prevalent in Bihar, North West India and Nepal. Format E: Shiva and Uma in mirror image lalitasana with their outside legs pendant is by far the most popular format for Uma Mahesvara generally superseding the earlier formats. It is particularly prevalent in Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Orissa and Nepal. Format F: Both legs of Uma pendant, appears scattered throughout India in variant forms. Whether galloping, standing, or reclining, the vrisavahana-murti is conspicuously absent or rare in Orissa, Bihar and Bengal. Ibid., p. 3.

40 AL Srivastava, Umā-Maheśvara: An Iconographic Study of the Divine Couple, Sukarkshetra Shodh Sansthan, UP, 2004, p. 10. 41 Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 1. 42 Ibid., p. 367. 43 Pratapaditya Pal, Indian Sculptures, Volume 1, p. 22. 44 Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 367. 45 AL Srivastava, Umā-Maheśvara, p. 121. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid., p. 49. 48 These three plaques have been identified as Uma Mahesvara and published by Amy Poster, AL Srivastava, Umā-Maheśvara, p. 49. 49 Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Terracotta and Metal Images, p. 154. 50 The gold plaque is now present in a private collection called the Jalan Bagh Palace Museum in Patna. 51 Of the 136 images taken under consideration, only 98 of these can be dated. 52 Listed in the Patna Museum Catalogue as Hara-Gauri, Accession no. 11260, collected by the Curator Patna Museum. 53 Joanna G William, The Art of Gupta India, p. 150. 54 Joanna G Williams comments that a lot has been written about these pillars from Rajaona. The pillars were first described by Cunningham

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

55 56 57

58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

66 67 68

69

285

in situ at Rajaona (ASI, III [1871–1872]). At that time the first pillar was more complete, including a scene of “two figures fighting to the left beside a prostrate figure” (of which a corner still remains), as well as the now missing face with a “seated goddess with an attendant holding an umbrella over her head, and two standing and one kneeling figure with joined hands before her.” The pillars were subsequently published and mis-ascribed to Chandimau in Patna District, the first pillar at that point being split in two (ASIAR 1911–12). This was later corrected by RD Banerji in his Age of the Imperial Guptas in 1924; Ibid. Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 437. Ibid., p. 438. Mundesvari Temple is the only surviving stone temple from the seventh century in Bihar. The original deity of this garbha griha is now lost, replaced by a linga dated to the thirteenth century. The Shiva linga is however not the principal deity worshipped in the temple today. An eight-armed goddess riding a bull/buffalo kept in the eastern part of the sanctum is the reigning deity. Chitta Ranjan Prasad Sinha, Early Sculptures of Bihar, Indological Book House, Patna, 1980, p. 85. Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 372. Ibid., p. 367. Ibid., p. 369. Ibid., p. 391. Donaldson points out that the introduction of mirror images for Shiva and Uma is an experiment that tends to separate rather than unite the couple. Ibid., p. 368. Donaldson points out that this new format with Uma’s left knee raised and her stretched right leg folded was now introduced to emphasise more intimacy and aesthetic harmony. Ibid., p. 410. To this Kramrisch writes that during the Pala and Sena periods, the relief becomes more and more independent from its backgrounds, Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School,’ in Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Art: Essays by Stella Kramrisch, p. 218. AL Srivastava feels that since the Uma Mahesvara images symbolise procreation, the panchalingas are meant to represent the five elements of nature, AL Srivastava, Uma-Mahesvara, p. 38. Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 385. The area around Gaya shows continuous occupation from pre-historic levels. The earliest site of occupation has been excavated at Jethian Valley in the Gaya district and can be dated to the lower and middle Paleolithic levels and Paleolithic tools such as hand axes, cleavers, choppers and scrapers have been found. Apart from pre-historic tools and implements, varied finds in the form of copper implements, terracotta, sculptures, domestic wares, epigraphs, coins and monuments have come to light from a number of sites belonging to different periods, Arun Kumar Singh, Archaeology of Magadha Region, p. 1. The art of stone sculpting continues in the area till the present date. The region known as Pattharkatti lies just outside of Gaya city and derives its name from its association with stone sculpting which is still popular in the region.

286

The icon in context

70 The Surya cult is very strong in Bargaon. It is centred at the Suraj Mandir where an annual fair is also held to celebrate the festival of Chhath dedicated to the Sun god. 71 The Nalanda-Rajgir region is extremely rich in archaeological material with various levels of occupations extending up to Palaeolithic levels. Rajgir was the oldest capital of Magadha. The area has a naturally hilly terrain and the city of Rajgir has the advantage of being fortified by five hills. Rajgir finds mention in the Mahabharata; it is called Giriraj and is associated with the stories of Jarasanda. Rajgir is also connected with the lives of the Buddha and Mahavir, and the monuments in the area are associated with Buddhist and Jain mythology. According to Buddhist legends, the Buddha tamed a wild elephant at Rajgir and one of the Buddhist sutras: the Prajaṅaparamita is also supposed to have been dispensed here at Rajgir. 72 One such significant site is the temple of Goddess Asha Devi, located in Ghosrawan on the outskirts of Pavapuri which has a rich concentration of images including four Uma Mahesvara images. 73 Sites such as Rajaona, Sultanganj and Patharghata have been regarded as significant centres of art from about the fifth to sixth centuries. Terracotta plaques in the region can be found from as early as the Sunga period from the site of Champa, a small village in the district of Bhagalpur. Historically it is often recognised as the ancient capital of the state of Anga, contemporary with Magadha. Joanna G Williams, The Art of Gupta India, p. 153. 74 Frederick M Asher, ‘A Source Located,’ in Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Art and Archaeology of Eastern India, Patna Museum, Patna, 2003. 75 Both the sites show significant rock-cut architecture dating between the fifth and seventh centuries. Sultanganj has a very strong Shaivite presence. Patharghata lies a stones’ throw from Antichak, the site of the Vikramsila monastery. As in the case of Nalanda the cultural dynamics of sites in the vicinity might have been determined by the large monastic complex of Vikramsila. See Chapter 5 for more discussion on this. 76 Radhakrishna Chaudhary, ‘The Antiquarian Remains of the Patharghatta Vateswara Complex.’ 77 Ibid. 78 The city of Kahalgaon is located on the confluence of the Ganga and the Kosi rivers, and from Kahalgaon, the Ganga once again resumes its northwardly meander. From the descriptions of Xuan Zang the Kahalgaon temple is often dated to the seventh century. Though the temple is incomplete and lacks an image, it has often been compared to the Pallava style of temple architecture. 79 The use of this black stone became the most outstanding characteristic of stone sculptures of Bihar and Bengal from about the ninth century. Stella Kramrisch refers to this stone as kashti pathar. This stone is found in two varieties: one coarse grained which she identifies as phyllite and the other of a fine and even structure which she calls slate. Kramrisch also points out that both the stones when newly quarried were relatively softer and easily workable. Exposed to air, they hardened quickly but scarcely weathered and the finished images had a highly polished

The Uma Mahesvaramurti

80

81 82

83 84 85

86 87 88 89 90

91 92 93

287

look. Kramrisch further adds that in the early centuries when bulkiness and dignity were features of the images the coarse stone sufficed. Later with an increasing accumulation of ornaments and with features growing sharper the finer stone came more in demand. By the twelfth century, the latter stone was used almost exclusively and its surface became wrought with metallic precision. Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School,’ p. 215. Asher has identified this stone as chloritoid phyllite and has argued that it was probably locally quarried since it was used in such large quantities. Being locally quarried it would have reduced the cost of transporting raw material to the sculptors. He has also identified a quarry for this stone located at Jamalpur near Munger. Another quarry which might be a possible slate quarry is located close by at a place called Jalkund also in the Munger district, Frederick M Asher, ‘A Source Located.’ AM Broadley reported from the site of Telhara in Nalanda district that bronze images when found were often melted for copper to make bangles for women. AM Broadley, The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar p. 43. Susan Huntington argues that this can be verified by a number of images which have been brought out of Nepal, Tibet and China, Susan Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, Volume 10: Of Studies in South Asian Culture, EJ Brill, Leiden, 1984; Ibid. p. 134. Vidya Dehejia, ‘Chola Bronzes: How, When and Why,’ p. 13. Ibid., p. 15. Vidya Dehejia cites rituals like the daily round of the sacred enclosure of the temple, nightly retreats in the sacred bedroom, swing festivals, wedding ceremonies of the god and the goddess, etcetera. For all of these, the heavy stone image of the sanctum could not be carried to and fro and the smaller and lighter processional images began to be made to satisfy these ritual requirements. Karl J Khandalawala, ‘Eastern Indian Bronzes: The Pala Period,’ in Karl J Khandalawala (ed.), The Great Tradition: Indian Bronze Masterpieces, published on behalf of Festival of India, New Delhi, 1988. Simon Lawson, ‘Votive Objects from Bodhgaya,’ in Janice Leoshko (ed.), Bodh Gaya: The Site of Enlightenment, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 1988. Susan L Huntington and John Huntington, The Art of Ancient India: Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, first edition 1985, this edition, Weather Hill, New York, 1993, p. 389. Ibid., p. 388. Robert E Fisher has compared the bronzes from Bihar with those from the Himalayas. He feels that for the metal used for casting images, the term “brass” would be more appropriate for the high copper content. Robert E Fisher, ‘Art from the Himalayas,’ Orientations, Vol. 19, No. 7, July 1988, p. 72. Susan L Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 2. Niharranjan Ray, Karl J Khandalawala and Sadashiva Gorakshkar (ed.), Eastern Indian Bronzes, Lalit Kala Series of Indian Art, Lalit Kala Akademi, New Delhi, 1986. In this process the image was first modelled in wax and then evenly coated in clay. When it dried, the earthen mass was heated so that the

288

94 95

96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117

118 119

The icon in context wax melted away. The vacuum thus created, was filled with molten metal or alloy for casting a solid image. When this metal solidified, the clay mould was broken and then the final finish was worked out by the master craftsman. In the case of hollow casting, the figure to be produced was first modelled in clay. It was then coated with wax, which in turn was coated with another layer of clay. When dried, the wax was melted by heating and the mould thus obtained was used for casting the bronze image. Niharranjan Ray, Karl J Khandalawala and Sadashiva Gorakshkar (ed.), Eastern Indian Bronzes. Sharada Srinivasan, ‘Chronology of Metal Sources of South Indian Images: Some Insights and Scientific Analysis,’ in HP Ray and Carla M Sinopoli (ed.), Archaeology as History in Early South Asia, ICHR and Aryan Books, 2004, p. 222. Susan L Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 2. Sisir Kumar Mitra (ed.), East Indian Bronzes, Centre for Advanced Study in Ancient Indian History and Culture, Calcutta University, 1979, p. 2. Bimal Bandyopadhyay, Metal Sculptures of Eastern India, Sundeep Prakashan, New Delhi, 1981, p. 32. Ibid. Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School’, p. 222. Naseem Akhtar (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Terracotta and Metal Images, p. 159. Niharranjan Ray, Karl J Khandalawala and Sadashiva Gorakshkar (ed.), Eastern Indian Bronzes. Ibid. Bimal Bandyopadhyay, Metal Sculptures of Eastern India, p. 42. Ibid. Ibid. Sharada Srinivasan, ‘Chronology of Metal Sources of South Indian Images,’ p. 219. Susan L Huntington and John Huntington, The Art of Ancient India, p. 388. Susan Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 105. Ibid., p. 201. Susan L Huntington and John Huntington, The Art of Ancient India, p. 400. Karl J Khandalawala, ‘East Indian Bronzes: The Pala Period.’ Frederick M Asher, Nalanda, p. 91. Ibid., p. 92. Susan L Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 105. Ibid., p. 137. The artefacts from Bargaon include: bronze stupas, images of Buddha and the Boddhisatva and images of Hindu deities. Rama Chatterji, ‘Important Hoards and Finds,’ in Sisir Kumar Mitra (ed.), East Indian Bronzes, Centre for Advanced Study in Ancient Indian History and Culture, Calcutta University, 1979. CC Mullick, Aesthetics of Nalanda Sculptures, in CP Sinha (ed.), Archaeology and Art, Volume 2, Ramananda Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1990. Susan L Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 142.

The Uma Mahesvaramurti 120 121 122 123

124 125 126

127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

289

Ibid., p. 102. Ibid. Ibid., p. 103. A whole group of images in the Kurkihar hoard have been donated by pilgrims from Kanchi as attested by the inscription on them. These images are of a different style and period and represent a continued tradition of interaction rather than limited to one time or period. For more on Kurkihar images donated by Kanchi monks, see Enamul Haque, ‘Kanchi Monks at Kukkutapada Giri Vihara,’ in Enamul Haque (ed.), Essays in Buddhist, Hindu and Jain Iconography and Epigraphy, Volume 1: Of Studies in Bengal Art Series, The International Centre for Study of Bengal Art, 2000. Susan L Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 141. Bhagwant Sahai, ‘The Bronzes from Fatehpur,’ Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, Vol. 1, 1977. CP Sinha, ‘The Buddhist Art of Vikramsila Mahavihara,’ in BR Mani and SC Saran (ed.), Purabharti: Studies in Early Historical Archaeology and Buddhism, Commemoration Volume in Respect of Prof. BP Sinha, Sarda Publishing House, New Delhi, 2006. Ibid. Ibid. Stella Kramrisch remarks that each age and school of art and each sculptor realised Uma Mahesvara in a separate way. Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School.’ TA Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Iconography, p. 130. Kramrisch, however, differs on this issue and advocates for Tantric leanings of Uma Mahesvara icons: “Other people think that this image symbolizes conjugal bliss.” Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School.’ “The plinth was regarded as an altar on which was built a superstructure representing the residence of the gods, Mount Kailāśa and the mythical Mount Meru.” Ibid., p. 476. Stella Kramrisch believes that this might be because the Palas had an itinerant residence, always close to the battlefield. Ibid., p. 208. Ibid., p. 209. Susan Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 52. Ibid. Ibid. Niharranjan Ray, Karl J Khandalawala and Sadashiv Gorakshakar (ed.), Eastern Indian Bronzes. Susan Huntington, Pala and Sena School of Sculptures, p. 141. Enamul Haque presumes that there was probably a large Buddhist monastery at Kanchi. No Buddhist monument has so far been found here but a large number of Buddha images dated between the seventh and the fourteenth centuries have been found. Scholars and monks from the Kanchi monastery probably travelled to various places to study Buddhism including to Bodh Gaya and resided in the monasteries in Magadha, for studying and teaching. Enamul Haque, ‘Kanchi Monks at Kukkutapada Giri Vihara,’ in Gauriswar Bhattacharya and Enamul Haque (ed.), Essays on Buddhist, Hindu, Jain Iconography and Epigraphy, International Centre for Study of Bengal Art, 2000.

290

The icon in context

141 Enamul Haque, ‘Kanchi Monks at Kukkutapada Giri Vihara.’ 142 Romila Thapar in her article ‘Patronage and Community’ speaks at length of this lacuna in Indian history where the concept of patronage is usually restricted between the patron and the recipient of patronage: “often visualized as the king and the artist who works for him.” She feels that this in part also explains the frequency with which monuments are labelled by dynasty and rarely by the name of the architect even when this is known. See Romila Thapar, ‘Patronage and Community,’ in Barbara Stoller Miller (ed.), The Powers of Art, p. 23. 143 Richard Davis, ‘Chola Bronzes in Procession,’ p. 48. 144 Karl J Khandalawala, ‘East Indian Bronzes: The Pala Period.’ 145 Sisir Kumar Mitra (ed.), East Indian Bronzes, p. 10. 146 Simon Lawson, ‘Votive Objects from Bodhgaya.’

5

Shifting centres

As Hindus recognize, divine images enter into a host of complex ritual, personal, material and spiritual relationships with the human devotees who worship and attend to them. Even as the images hang on to their distinctive insignia they may find themselves carried off to new places, where they encounter new audiences, who may not know or appreciate their earlier significances. Or, even staying in their original locations, the images may take on new roles and new meanings in response to the changing world around them. The objects are repeatedly relocated, reframed and reinterpreted by new communities of response in new historical settings.1

Monuments and sites speak their own histories. Narratives centring on their origins, construction, aesthetics and purpose freeze sculptures and structures at the moment of their creation. In this chapter, I endeavour to trace a continuity of usage, where shrines are seen as alive and in interaction with the various communities of people who use them over a long period of time. I argue that the use of sacred space is not limited to a single sectarian group, rather through constant renegotiation of rituals, iconography and lay-out, sacred space comes to be shared. Demarcating spaces as Hindu, Buddhist or Islamic limits their scope as present day theoretical categories do not necessarily fit into the past. By unravelling the different layers of history of monuments and sites, the various points of merger of communities and cults are emphasised. Buildings and their histories hence do not become sites of tension and conflict. Rather they hint at creative appropriation and reuse of objects from the past that blend into a harmonious relationship with the present. In the present chapter, I seek to create a cultural biography of images after the thirteenth century until their rediscovery in the eighteenth– nineteenth centuries. Based on field study of various temple sites and

292

The icon in context

museum collections I will discuss how sacred sculptures are not stray architectural fragments but crucial participants of the cultural and religious landscape. When placed in their original context vis-à-vis their present ones’ sculptures become alive with meanings. They narrate their own biographies of how they were made, consecrated, dislocated, handled, kissed, buried, drowned, burnt and broken. I argue that sacred images are not passive beings with a fixed agenda or biography but in a dynamic relationship with the communities that produced and used them. They hence need to be approached as significant historical actors steeped with social, religious, archaeological and architectural connotations. By understanding the current arrangement of architectural fragments, religious images and motifs and inscriptional and archival material, I hope to recreate the sacred landscape of the period and propose a cultural biography of the sites and icons. The cultural biography highlights three aspects, first, the fate of individual shrines, how they survived, crumbled or were rebuilt to be given a new lease of life after the thirteenth century. Second, the afterlife of large architectural complexes where sacred space was reconfigured such that shrines of different religions could be included in the same sacred complex. Finally, to examine how the identity and purpose of sacred sculptures were redefined once moved around due to the spatial reorganisation of shrines and dislocated from their original architectural location. Examining cultural biographies Cultural biography examines the impact that a surrounding culture has on persons, institutions or even on objects. The reason for creating cultural biographies is that nothing exists in a vacuum.2 Understanding objects, artefacts and buildings as more than inanimate physical structures; and establishing relationships between structures and settings, between monuments, people and ideas, between the material, the social and the symbolic, helps to trace the connections between architecture and everyday life. Most histories for sites and architectural edifices are constructed by modern historical writings based on the history of rulers and dynasties that created them. Such histories are often devoid of the human lives intertwined with the creation and perpetuation of the landscapes and its superstructures. To view architectural complexes as a direct outcome of political developments is to connect with only one of the many strands of the dialogue. It is within this uni-dimensional mode that the developments in architecture post-thirteenth century have so

Shifting centres

293

far been studied: as a direct corollary to the advent of Islam in North India. Historical and current textual accounts go into great lengths to describe the plunder and havoc caused by the invading Muslim armies: Buddhist and Hindu monuments were desecrated; the fabled treasuries of temples looted with rapine pleasure; and on this debris of older monuments Islamic edifices like masjids, madrasas, dargahs and tombs were erected. Not only were the material from older buildings recycled to create new structures, the same sacred space was reorganized and reused. I have argued earlier that this linear argument of invasion, wreckage and replacement of monuments and sculptures was largely a creation of colonial biographies written in the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries. The history of sites of South Bihar is somewhat bleak and unrecorded for the period after the thirteenth century, when shrines started to fall apart, at many sites temples were repaired but at several others they crumbled and were forgotten. This was probably the crucial phase when images were removed from their original locations to be repaired or replaced. The original provenance of a large number of images was forever disturbed. Through the course of the chapter there are three aspects of this reutilisation of sacred space, its structures and icons which I will discuss. First, the survey reports, travellers’ accounts and memoirs of archaeologists documenting the sites through the eighteenth–nineteenth centuries provide a momentary glimpse into what might have been happening at the sites and monuments post thirteenth century. Cunningham’s reports provide variegated but comprehensive insights to contemporary geography, historic landscape and ethnographic, cultic and cultural practises. The Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India under John Marshall appear more systematically organised and give detailed accounts of the state of preservation of the sites in the early twentieth century, a comprehensive list of artefacts and sculptures recovered during excavations, early attempts at conservation setting up of museums and the consolidation of museum collections. The main drawback with both Cunningham’s and Marshall’s reports, however, is that they report mostly surface finds and fail to acknowledge the different layers of inhabitation at the sites. In the second part of the chapter, I examine how the sites continued to exist in popular memory through the utilisation of the Itihasa Purana tradition, when new histories and mythologies of sites were fabricated and where older icons acquired new identities so that they could be integrated within the themes of the Epics and the Puranas. It was hence not a Hindu resurgence but a renegotiation where older

294

The icon in context

myths were retold; new legends were formulated and various participants were introduced to the existing pantheon. The surviving images and shrines were used to fit into this tradition through living traditions, oral narratives and ritual networks and were legitimised through centuries of repetition and practice. Finally, I conclude the chapter by discussing how from the period after the eleventh–twelfth centuries, there was a blurring of religious boundaries, and Shaivism and Buddhism began to merge into each other. Buddhist monasticism began to decline such that in ritual and philosophy it became more assimilative of other religious traditions which granted the laity leniency of practice. Similar to Buddhism, Shaivism also acquired the practice of acharyas, and it is in this light that the Shaiva matha at Bodh Gaya can be understood. The sacred landscape and its rituals were then reinvented, and certain icons and shrines acquired identities which were neither Hindu nor Buddhist. Finally, an esoteric component was added to religion, and the Uma Mahesvara icons have most often been studied in this context.

Figure 5.1 Modern Mahadev Temple, Akbarpur, Hilsa, Patna. Rebuilt on the still visible plinth of an older shrine, the present temple sits on a high mound and contains a rich medley of Hindu and Buddhist sculptures. Next to it is a tank from which the sculptures had been recovered. Source: Photograph by author

Shifting centres

295

Recreating the sacred landscape The forgotten shrine: The most apparent change in the architectural landscape was the gradual deterioration, disintegration and finally disappearance of temples and monumental complexes due to natural decay or human intervention. On several instances, the temples sites survived only as small mounds strewn with sculptures and architectural fragments. At other occasions, the area became cultivable tracts, and the sacred complex was erased from living memory. In 1861–1862 when Cunningham tried to locate Kurkihar from the accounts of the Chinese monks, all that stood at the spot were several ruined mounds, in which numerous statues and votive stupas “of dark blue stone” were found.3 In the same report, Cunningham writes that on reaching Bargaon, the site of the Nalanda Mahavihara, several masses of brick ruins were visible.4 Cunningham also noticed a conspicuous row of lofty conical mountains running north-south which he conjectured were probably the remains of gigantic temples attached to the famous monastery. Living memory, however, attributed the remains as the ruins of the palace of one Raja Srenika and the birthplace of Rukmini. Much of the remains of the great monastery were covered by square patches of cultivation. The transformation at certain sites was sometimes quite drastic and change could be seen within a period of ten to fifteen years. The site of Dharawat in Gaya boasted of a Buddhist establishment. When Cunningham visited the site in 1861–1862 not much could be found except for “two brick terraces with broken Buddhist figures dated to the 9th–10th centuries AD.” Beglar, on visiting Dharawat in 1872–1873, reports a somewhat different picture; all he saw was the remains of brick structure and masonry. These had been excavated by villagers for bricks which disclosed several statues; “The smaller ones have gone to adorn the various shrines in the village and one colossal Buddha has been left in situ.”5 In the report of 1880–1881, Cunningham mentions that when he visited Deo Barunark, the famous compound of the Surya temple, which Francis Buchanan had reported earlier in 1811: “Buchanan reports seeing a smaller temple near Temple 3. This small temple has however now disappeared.”6 Renovations and reintegration of shrines: Sacred structures also underwent different spates of rebuilding and reorganisation postthirteenth century. These included repairs on the external façade of the temple, renovation of the inner precincts or fixing sculptures or ornaments which might have fallen off. Larger renovation projects

296

The icon in context

also included building additional wings or mandapas attached to the existing edifice or laying out subsidiary shrines in the temple compound. The material used for construction and renovation was both a combination of old and new. Contrary to textual prescriptions, extensions to existing boundaries of temple compounds were made on a number of occasions which often altered the character and layout of the structure.7 Cunningham records in his reports of 1880–1881 from Konch how the arrangement of the mandapa was changed during the course of later restorations which modified the external facade of the temple.8 In the same report of 1880–1881 Cunningham also describes similar spates of renovation in the Sun temple of Deo Markandeya where during the course of his excavations, he found a life-size statue of Vishnu based on which he laid out the original plan of the temple. He believed that the Vishnu image buried in the courtyard of the temple was the original statue, which was replaced by the Surya image in the sanctum. This would imply that a later renovation would have altered the core character of the temple. A similar change in the sectarian affiliation of the temple is also seen in the Sun temple at Deo Barunark, one of the earliest temples in the region, dated to sixth–seventh centuries. In his report of 1880–1881, Cunningham records that the statue in the sanctum was of Vishnu though the inscription on the pillar outside recorded that the original temple was for the Sun god. In Temple 2 of the same complex, similarly the original Sun icon was missing and had been replaced by a smaller statue of the Sun. The pedestal with seven horses which now survived was much older and seemed to be that of the original image. This original Surya figure was reported by Buchanan when he had visited the temple in 1811 though this image had been wrongly identified as Kumari at the time. Cunningham also records that the pedestal showed signs of breakage and damage, and it would not be wrong to conjecture that the original statue had been broken on purpose. Examples from both Deo Markandya and Deo Barunark show that the different spates of renovations while renewed the lives of the temple sometimes also altered their sectarian foundations. At Deo Markandeya, at probably a still later stage, the Vishnu image seems to have been discarded and a second Surya image enshrined. Another shrine in the vicinity which underwent several stages of renovation, reconstruction and a change in its religious leanings is the Mahabodhi Temple. When Cunningham reached Bodh Gaya in 1861, he identified the blue brick structure present there same as that mentioned in the accounts of Xuan Zang; the structure was, however, in a much-dilapidated state. The amalaka crowning the pinnacle of the

Shifting centres

297

temple tower was missing, some of the niches on the outer walls still contained the Buddha figures but the gold gilt was gone and the deity enshrined on the main pedestal in the sanctum was missing. One of the most important symbols associated with the site, the vajrasana itself was nowhere to be found. Cunningham further describes that the celebrated Bodhi tree existed but was very much decayed. It was, however, in full vigour in 1811 when seen by Buchanan. When Beglar visited the site in 1872–1873 he reported renovations being carried out at the site by the Burmese. A Uma Mahesvara image, dated to the ninth–tenth centuries and found under the tree to the north of the temple, contains an inscription in the Burmese character giving an account of this renovation. The site underwent another round of renovation under the ASI in 1880–1881 when Cunningham reports of restoration work being carried out in the temple.9 Reuse to recreate: The primary idea behind renovations was to keep the existing structures alive, renew their physical appearance and sometimes to accommodate new deities of the pantheon. There are several instances where as an outcome of renovation projects smaller shrines also emerged from the debris of the older structures. The new temples most often functioned as subsidiary shrines surrounding the main temple though sometimes overshadowed the authority of the original deity. Cunningham reports that in 1861–1862 when he visited Gaya no ancient buildings existed there.10 Most of the temples he saw had been erected on former sites using older materials. “Statues both Buddhist and Brahmanical are found in all parts of the old city are more especially about the temples, where they are fixed in the walls, or in small recesses forming separate shrines in the courtyard of larger temples.”11 The Vishnupad temple, the most hallowed shrine in Gaya was constructed only in the eighteenth century; the images and the inscriptions enshrined are, however, of much greater antiquity. This seems to indicate that the present temple was built on the site of and probably from much of the fragments of the older temple. Cunningham also notes numerous inscriptions to be found at Gaya12 but owing to the destruction of the ancient temples, only a few are in situ or attached to the objects which they were originally designed to commemorate. He makes note of two such inscriptions which he found on the temple of Suraj Kund in the vicinity of Vishnupad.13 He records the temple having a long pillared mandapa. The whole temple had been repeatedly whitewashed so as almost to conceal the ornaments of the pillars, when Cunningham scraped off some of the thick plaster coating, he managed to obtain two long inscriptions.

298

The icon in context

Figure 5.2 Reuse of pillars and sculptures at Vishnupad temple, Gaya Source: Courtesy of AIIS, Gurgaon

The old Gaya town seems to be replete with such examples of rebuilding from older material as evident from the reports of both Cunningham and Beglar.14 To the north of the town on the granite hill called Ramsila, the temple of Pataleshvara Mahadeva is located with

Shifting centres

299

many small Uma Mahesvara. This temple seems to be the most blatant example of a building emerging out of the debris of older structures and Cunningham points out that “the upper portion of this temple is modern, being constructed of various ancient fragments that do not fit well together and in some instances are even placed upside down.”15 A similar example was seen at Punawa, 14 miles to the east of Gaya where the principal shrine was a pillared temple called Triloknath.16 Cunningham records that the “temple is a modern work made of different sized pillars of various patterns, some with and others without capitals so as to bring them to the required height.”17 The temple mentioned by Cunningham had three doorways, all possibly appropriated from elsewhere. While one of the doorways made of hard blue stone was richly sculpted with the figure of ascetic Buddha on the lintel, he other doorways were plain and made of granite but of roughly the same age. The Maniyar Math in Rajgir is another classic case of rebuilding on the foundations of an older structure. When Cunningham visited it in 1861, he saw a whitewashed modern Jain temple which stood at the site of an artificial mound. The mound was formed from the debris of an older structure. When trenches were dug around it, evidence of older masonry structure and an inscription dating the monument to 1781 was revealed. Below this level was another one with a conical tiled roof with a top hemispherical dome. By sticking a shaft in the core, Cunningham found ashes and earth probably from a still earlier shrine. Exquisite stucco work was also revealed around its base. Emergence of tree shrines: what happened of the enshrined images and their ritual worship while the temple buildings underwent renovation? The Mayamatam states that even while the temple is undergoing renovation, the worship must never stop. Preferably, a provisional shrine should be created for the worship of the images.18 Often when the temple edifices crumbled or the temples were being rebuilt, images were temporarily stored under a tree. At other instances when images were taken away from one temple and before being installed at a new location they were kept under a tree. In many cases, these images started receiving homage under the tree and acquired a permanent residence there. Archaeological reports mention several such tree shrines dotting the villages of South Bihar with typical “Pala images dated to 9th–10th centuries AD” enshrined in these. One such tree shrine worthy of a special mention, is located in the Mahabodhi Temple Complex itself where a Uma Mahesvara image along with a Ganesha image is placed together with explicitly Buddhist images on a platform on the temple’s

300

The icon in context

north side. They are provided flowers in an act of daily worship just as the Buddhist ones are, suggesting that the iconographic distinction may be more important to art historians than to its devotees.19 Buchanan also reports seeing this image in 1811. Later in 1825–1830, it formed the subject of a painting of Charles D’Oyly called ‘The Bodhi Tree at the Bodh Gaya Temple.’ When the Burmese came for renovation of the Mahabodhi complex in 1881, they left an inscription on this same Uma Mahesvara image enshrined here. More recently the same painting of this tree shrine has graced the cover of Janice Leoshko’s book ‘Sacred Traces.’20 Icons as removable antiquities: some of the earliest shrines of South Bihar, as I have discussed earlier, were made of bricks with stone sculptures used on the outer walls for ornamentation. Being brick built, the temples suffered the ravages of environment and time and subsequently collapsed. Often even after the temple structure collapsed, the sculptural fragments survived and were reused as architectural fragments elsewhere.21 On several occasions, once the structures underwent renovation or reconstruction the images were often temporarily stored elsewhere, for instance, under a tree, in a temporary shrine or even in storehouses and courtyards within the temples; this was especially the case with bronzes. The most obvious problem in dealing with these images is that these were loose and isolated objects, which already lay detached from the monuments to which they were linked. Cunningham came across several such hoards surviving in temple premises during his visits. For instance, in his report for the years 1875–1876 and 1877–1878, Cunningham reports from Ghosrawan, Nalanda, where in the temple of Asha Devi a collection of Buddhist and Hindu sculptures were stored. An unusual collection is also mentioned from Deo Barunark, where a linga found from the temple compound was enshrined in a long roofless room, serving as a makeshift sanctum. “What was even more unusual was that images from elsewhere were also hoarded within this room and deposited around the walls.”22 Cunningham also found at Deo Barunark several images collected in a mandapa, and many others had been hoarded by the temple Hindu and buried under the pavement. On Cunningham’s insistence, these images were exhumed. In a number of cases, during the process of relocation images were broken, displaced and lost, in still other cases even after their “rediscovery” images were often misplaced. Cunningham mentions one such inscription of the Gupta period from Apshad discovered by Kittoe. In 1879–8180, Cunningham, however, reports that though the translation of this inscription survived, the original had been lost.

Shifting centres

301

Similar is the case at Dharawat, when Kittoe visited, he saw a series of extensive brick ruins and mentions seeing a twelve-armed Buddhist sculpture. Cunningham visited the site in 1861–1862 but this sculpture was no longer visible. When Beglar visited the site later in 1872–1873, he reported the ruins of a brick structure and masonry and adds, “Here the excavations of the villagers for bricks have disclosed several statues; the smaller ones have gone to adorn the various shrines in the village and one colossal Buddha has been left in situ.”23 The 12-armed Buddhist figure is, however, not mentioned. In the next report from Dharawat, when Cunningham went back to the site in 1880–1881, he saw a collection of numerous fragments of sculpture and two small stupas collected at the modern-looking temple.24 These were probably the sculptures which Beglar had mentioned in his report. Beglar in his report of Islampur, Nalanda district mentions in 1872– 1873 how from one particular ruin sculptures had been appropriated and put to different uses.25 When Buchanan had visited Islampur in 1811, it was fairly rich in sculptural remains. When Beglar went, there only some large squared stones and fragments remained; he recorded that the best sculptures had been removed to Broadley’s Museum in Bihar. Another set of sculptures was used in modern buildings and huts while still another group was found in a modern Hindu temple several of which were in different stages of neglect. Perhaps the most controversial site in terms of relocation of sculptures is Bodh Gaya. Today numerous sculptures are placed in clusters close to the temple, in wall niches on all sides of the temple while others have been collected in the Bodh Gaya site museum, in the temples located in the Mahabodhi compound and in the Mahant’s residence. The original location of these is not known though when Francis Buchanan visited the site in 1811, they were scattered in the vicinity of the Mahabodhi Temple.26 The most interesting is the case of the carved railing pillars from Bodh Gaya. These pillars have remained over time the most valued and intensely scrutinised relics at the site, the ones most urgently sought out from different nooks to be refurbished and reconstructed around the renovated temple. When Cunningham visited the site in 1861–1862, the principal statue at the Mahabodhi Temple had disappeared but its pedestal still remained in good order. The stone with vajra designs was found in the temple of Vageshwari Devi. He also noticed several sandstone pillars in the Mahant’s compound along with similar granite pillars. Cunningham was able to locate 33 such pillars of which 5 or 6 bore inscriptions. Later excavations around the temple revealed more than

302

The icon in context

100 granite pillars forming a colonnade around the temple with several of the lower horizontal bars still attached to the broken pillars. In 1907–1908, the Bodh Gaya pillars were relocated from the Mahant’s house back around the temple. Later a large number of these pillars came to be assembled within the site’s archaeological museum when it came up in the 1950s, where they narrate the artistic testimony of the site but stand there gathering dust and devoid of any architectural context. Desecration of icons: Images often became objects of deliberate desecration where their face, especially the nose or the head and genitals were smashed as has been the case with a number of Uma Mahesvara icons. In the Reports of the year 1872–1873, Beglar makes special reference to a large number of Hindu and Buddhist images with mutilated faces found at Kispa.27 In the neighbourhood of Vishnupad are several hills esteemed holy and are crowned with temples. The highest of these, to the south of the temple, is called Brahma-yoni, and the temple on the summit is dedicated to shakti. The pedestal of the deity is older than the image and carries an inscription dated to 1633 ce. The destruction of this image has been ascribed to Aurangzeb.28 Re-enshrinement of sacred images: Sculptural fragments found from one site are often re-consecrated and reused at other sites. There are several instances of this in South Bihar where the temples are relatively younger but the images enshrined are mostly dated to the ninth–tenth centuries. At Vishnupad the temple was built in 1789, the images in the shrines are however much older.29 Similar is the case at Kurkihar, where at the corner of the village is a small temple, in and about which a large number of statues have been collected. The temple is dedicated to the Buddhist goddess Vageshwari but the statue inside is that of Durga. The principle figure outside the temple is that of Akshobya represented in the same manner as the Buddha and carries the Buddhist creed. Several inscriptions dated between the eighth and tenth centuries are also found here. Takeover by another religion: the sacredness of a site is further reiterated by the fact that not only is there a continuity of worship and temple building but also a sharing of space by followers of different faiths and communities. In the centuries following the Christian era, Buddhist and Hindu monuments often came up in close proximity to each other sometimes also in the same architectural complex. The overlapping was not just limited to sacred space but also to ritual praxis. In the period following the thirteenth century despite having divergent religious practices, Islamic structures came to inhabit the same sacred

Shifting centres

303

Figure 5.3 Re-enshrinement of older sculptures and architectural fragments in a new shrine, Vageshwari Temple, Kurkihar Source: Photograph by author

space as the earlier Buddhist and Hindu temples; masjids, dargahs, madrasas and tombs began to dot the sacred landscape. As early as 1861–1862 Cunningham writes about Rajgir: “The existing remains at Rajgir are not numerous. The place has been occupied at different times by Mussalmans and Brahmans, by whom the Buddhist stupas and viharas were pulled down to furnish materials for tombs, masjids and temples. All the eminences that must have once been crowned by objects of Buddhist worship are now covered with Muhammadan graves and all the Brahmanical temples about the hot springs have been constructed with the large bricks of Buddhist stupas.”30 The same report records five modern Jain temples that stood on Mount Vaibhar at Rajgir besides which the ruins of an old Shaiva temple with four remaining granite pillars also stands. Similarly, the site of Maniyar Math in Rajgir was occupied by a modern Jain temple, excavations below the modern structure, however, revealed many layers of building and occupation including stucco sculptures of Buddhist, Hindu and Jain deities. The report of 1905–1906 notes that one of the most sacred mounds in Rajgir identified as Buddha’s Pipala Stone

304

The icon in context

Vihara, where the Buddha sat in meditation, was found littered with debris of ruined structures. The same mound, however, also contained the grave of a Muslim saint and other tombs that prevented further excavation at the site. Later Bloch was able to dig a trench around these to recover what “could have been the remains of a stupa with Buddhist clay tablets.”31 The same was the case with several other mounds in Rajgir, each being simultaneously used by Jains, Buddhists, Vaishnava and Muslims.32 A similar phenomenon is recorded at the Barabar Hill caves. Inscriptions attest these caves originally dedicated to the Ajivika sect. Cunningham writes about the site in 1861–1862:33 “From the various inscriptions we learn that these caves were successively occupied by Buddhists and by Brahmans. They were originally excavated by Asoka for occupation by Buddhist monks. About the 3rd or 4th century bce, the Kings Sardula Varmma and Ananta Varmma placed Hindu images of Devamata, Katyayani and Mahadeva. At a somewhat later date, in the 6th or 7th century, the teacher Yogananda recorded his adoration of the Siddheswara lingam. Still later the Nagarjuni caves came to be occupied by Muslim Fakirs. The idgah outside the Gopi caves is said to be only 150 years old, but the numerous graves on the raised terrace denote a much longer period of occupation; not less than 300–400 years.” The report further cites that the idgah partially blocked the stairs leading to the caves. As further evidence of sharing of space, is a modern brick platform inside the cave said to be the seat of a Muslim saint. Cunningham also acknowledges this sharing of space in his rather interesting remark about the temple at Parbati: “A glance at the map will show that the position at the very centre of the hill must be the site of a temple originally. That this was the holiest spot on the hill is proved by the fact that it is now occupied by the dargah of Haji Chandar, the Musalman cuckoo having occupied the Hindu nest.”34 In 1879–1880, when Cunningham visited Jahangira near Sultanganj in Bhagalpur, he once again makes note of the mingling of faiths in the same ritual space. The Jahangira rock contained a Pathan style mosque generally attributed to the Mughal ruler Jehangir. Nearby, several Brahmanical sculptures, probably the remains of an ancient temple, were carved on the walls of this monolithic hill while the peak was crowned by a Jami Masjid. Going back further into the antiquity of the site, Cunningham comments that originally the place was “a Buddhist sanctuary which the Brahmins had appropriated for themselves since the downfall of Buddhism.”35 A Jain temple also existed on one side of the rock, to which a few pilgrims come to offer their adoration to a carved sculpture of Parashwanath.

Shifting centres

305

Beglar makes similar observations at a number of other sites. At Dharawat in the vicinity of a tank sacred to Hindus, a brick dargah was located. A small stone resembling a sati pillar also stood nearby.36 Apart from the reuse of sacred space in later buildings, architectural fragments like doorways, pillars, brackets, capitals and even sculptures were often appropriated and used across religious faiths. At Kauwa Dol and Pali, several temple ornaments, doorjambs and hinges are used in dargahs and tombs. A curious dargah at Jaru, located on the Phalgu River in Gaya, sported a sculptured gargoyle probably from a Buddhist temple as a drain outlet. In his 1872–1873 report, Beglar mentions another such masjid built on a temple at Hilsa. Local legends acknowledged this rebuilding and claimed that the principal image of the temple was buried within the floor of the masjid to be “trodden daily under the foot of the faithful.”37 Kittoe noted another interesting example from Umga, Gaya, where a Vishnu temple was appropriated by Islam but later reclaimed by Hindus. The present temple still carries an Arabic inscription on its doorway. Kittoe observes that it was probably the presence of these Arabic inscriptions which saved the temple “from the destructive hands of the Muhammadan fanatics.”38 From sacred to profane: the reuse of ancient bricks, stone, architectural fragments and other building material was not restricted to sacred complexes. At several sites across the region brick, stone and rubble were robbed from ancient sites to provide cheap and durable building material for houses, bridges, roads and other secular edifices. One of the earliest concerns of British conservation in India was to stop the massive brick robbery and erosion of architectural fragments from their original sites. In 1848, Kittoe wrote that he himself saw brick being robbed by boys from the temple at Ghosrawan.39 Cunningham also reports of the reuse of temple sculptures and bricks in the village huts at Nalanda40 and temple sculptures used as ornamentation in the zamindar’s house at Jagdishpur.41 Similar reports were also given by Beglar from Kispa where “several fragments of pillars and capitals were appropriated by villagers to be used as door steps or foundations to their huts.”42 At Kheri, Beglar noticed in 1872–1873, that a fort complex was built at an erstwhile temple site using much of the building material from the ruins of the temple. Cunningham makes a similar report from Ghosrawan where a fort was built on the foundations of a vihara while a village had come up on what could possibly have been the remains of a stupa.43 At some sites, brick robbery was so intense that the architectural landscape completely changed within a brief period. As in the case of

306

The icon in context

exploration of Stupa 3 at Nalanda, JF Blakiston in the Report of 1925– 1926, mentions: “About 35 years ago when my Excavation Assistant Babu Hari Das first saw the stupa mound, it was about 15 feet higher than now. In the interval the ruins have been much exploited by the villagers for the bricks they yield; and if excavation had been taken up before, it is likely that much more of this uppermost sanctum would have been left to reveal.”44 At several other sites British endeavours to create infrastructure and communication grids was also responsible for the denudation of building materials off ancient structures. In 1872–1873 Beglar reports from Dharawat and Konch that much of the brick from the temples there had been carted away to metal roads. Cunningham writes in 1879–1880 from Parbati: “It would appear that the ruined buildings on the hills were used as a quarry for road building to furnish materials for the Gaya-Lakhi Sarai road. Bricks were also possibly exhumed by villagers. Wedge shaped bricks probably belonging to a stupa have been found in the houses here.”45 In this respect the case of Sultanganj, Bhagalpur, is especially interesting. When excavations were carried out on cultivable land to build railway lines, the trenches revealed extensive remains of a Buddhist establishment. RL Mitra examined the remains and declared these to be of an ancient monastic complex. After Mitra excavated the area, the trench remained open for a long time and subsequently, a house for the British station master came up in the proximity of the trench. When Cunningham and Beglar came here in 1879–1880, they pulled down the house, carried out ‘systematic’ excavation and concluded this to have been the site of an ancient stupa. What was originally a “Buddhist” structure over centuries became cultivable land, a possible site for railway line and a house for the stationmaster, to be dug up again to reveal a “Buddhist establishment”. The Itihasa Purana tradition Having discussed the physical reconfiguration of the landscape, my second approach is to understand how sites lived in popular memory over centuries through oral archives such as the Itihasa Purana. The core of the Itihasa Purana tradition comprising of the Epics and the Puranas was initially preserved through memory and oral renditions and can be dated to the seventh century bce. The Itihasa Purana tradition has three main constituents: myth, genealogy and historical narrative.46 The remote past was described through myths; the more immediate past was recorded in the form of genealogies, while historical literature provided narrative history. In the past, this tradition was

Shifting centres

307

largely ignored by historians because of its largely mythological content. A closer analysis of this tradition in the context of South Bihar becomes especially relevant since it reimagines the myths and reintegrates Buddhism and Hinduism thus elaborating upon the changing religious landscape. The Dasavatara Stotra of the Vayu Purana, dated to the eighth century, reintroduced the Buddha as an avatara of Vishnu and visualised him as a yogi seated in a meditative position. Through instances such as these, earlier myths were recomposed, the existing sacred structures and icons were reintegrated within these myths and sometimes entirely new characters were introduced into the pantheon. The invisible strands of the myth created a sacred geography comprising of shrines, hills, tanks, trees and rocks through many centuries of reintegration. The horizontal linkages between the different points reveals a more complex web of social networks and religious processes and religious icons can be used to understand these. Several sites maintain almost continuous inhabitation through a series of ritual traditions where the sites are reinvented with the help of living traditions like tirtha, festivals, fairs, poetry and literature. In many instances the shrines which once stood at the site may have crumbled down and forgotten but the sacrosanctity of the site and certain continuity of ritual enactment was maintained.47 Cunningham cites an instance from Deo Markandeya, where the veracity of local traditions upheld the sanctity of a site for centuries. The current Shiva temple there was originally that of a kadamba tree; later this site became the temple of an ascetic or baba who was a great admirer of this tree and subsequently a Shivalaya came up at the site.48 Beglar reports from Kheri in 1872–1873, that the inscription at the Vageshwari temple indicated it to have been the site of an older Shaiva temple.49 Cunningham writes a similar report from Umga, where extensive remains of a temple of Mungeshwari Devi stood attested by an inscription in nagari on a tablet at the temple site attested to its antiquity. When Cunningham visited the site in 1875–1876 and again in 1877–1878, the grounds where the temple once stood had become the site for an annual fair.50 Cunningham mentions similar fairs being organised at Bakror the mound of Sujatagarh, situated across the Phalgu River at Bodh Gaya. In his 1879–1880 report when Cunningham travelled through Munger-Bhagalpur district, he mentions fairs organised at Jahangira: “These fairs were organised thrice a year: in the months of Vaisakh, Kartik and Magh on the banks of the Ganga.”51 In this section, I will highlight present-day cultic practices from the region to understand the organisation and usage of sacred space, and

308

The icon in context

how the appropriation of this space by other faiths follows a logical pattern. This will reiterate my earlier postulate of how communities using the sites change but the space continues to be sacred. The entire locality comes to form an architectural complex where shrines and icons of one religion are readily appropriated and worshipped by another and where sacred space and areas of human inhabitation merge into each other. A temple is not one structure of one period or even of a single community. It moves through time and must be constantly repositioned to survive. Both temples and the communities they serve continually redefine their pasts and renegotiate the present.52 The Vishnupad Temple in Gaya and the Mahabodhi Temple in Bodh Gaya are the two largest sacred complexes in the region and see a considerable traffic of both Hindu and Buddhist pilgrims. Both these sites can be dated to the early centuries of the Christian era yet the sacred complexes continued to evolve spatially and ritually and maintained a vibrant relationship to the communities who used them. Similarly, both the sacred complexes grew on the foundations of pre-existing structures and through time they managed to absorb the subsidiary shrines and other sacred establishments in the vicinity, to carve out a sacred geography for themselves. It is interesting to note that in due course both these complexes got embroiled in various power struggles and controversies regarding ownership and authority. These horizontal linkages provide the continuity which ties up these ancient shrines with present-day ritual and cultural rhythms. Mapping the shraadh circuit of Gaya Gaya’s largest and most important monument, the Vishnupad Temple is a product of the eighteenth century and not one of the ancient temples that dot this pilgrimage centre, dates earlier than the thirteenth century.53 The images enshrined in most of the temples, however, are older as attested by numerous inscriptions found here. Based on the present configuration of shrines and the building material used, it can be concluded that substantial building activity was undertaken here post thirteenth century. The new shrines were built upon the site of the ancient shrines using much of the older images and architectural material. Immediately in front of the Vishnupad Temple are two pillared bell chambers. The first bell was donated by a minister of the Raja of Nepal and the second came from a Collector of Gaya Francis Gillanders in 1798. The courtyard of the temple contains baradari or accommodations for the Gayawal priests, the main priests for the Vishnupad

Shifting centres

309

shrine.54 There are other smaller shrines located in the vicinity of the Vishnupad complex such as the Gadadhar temple, temple of Gayasuri Devi in which an image of Mahisasuramardini is enshrined, a Surya temple close by accompanied by a sacred tank. The Surya temple also holds in its premises a sacred neem tree called Kankhal and the Surya image enshrined here carries two inscriptions: one Buddhist, dated to 1819, and the other to the reign of Firoz Shah Tughlaq who lavishes praise to the shrine. A second Surya temple is located on the sacred Bahamani Ghat nearby, the principal Surya image enshrined there is worshipped as Narayana. As per the inscription of Raja Kulachanda of Gaya found here, the temple was renovated in 1373 ce. Close by is also a rest house or Dharmashala with inscriptions dated to 1424 and 1481 ce. These records from the fourteenth through nineteenth centuries attest various spates of reconstruction in and around the Vishnupad complex when the temple complex seems to have grown larger and more intricate. It seems evident that not merely a series of shrines were woven into a network but a sacred geography was being demarcated.55 Along with the Phalgu River, the other sacred spots came to be marked with trees: the banyan and the neem, and included secular structures like monasteries, mathas, cultivable land and tanks in the vicinity of the principle shrine. The crowning moment in the history of Gaya came sometime post-thirteenth century with the composition of the Gaya Mahatmya an Upapurana, praising this ancient site and establishing its superiority over others. Several Puranic and Epic accounts as to the origin of the Gaya temple were also composed during this period. A series of donatory inscriptions also indicate a continuing traffic of pilgrims and a site alive with activity even after the area came under the rule of Muslims.56 All these textual traditions seem to have been composed to provide additional legitimacy to an ancient site which was being reinvented through building traditions. Other sites in the vicinity of Gaya also came to be tied up with the pinda ritual and included temples dedicated to Shiva, Surya and the Devi, as I have discussed in Chapter 3. Among the many stops to be made for pindadaan is the Akshyavata the site of an ancient Shivalaya under a large banyan tree. A larger shraadh route also came to include Bodh Gaya, lying 11 kilometres away. The Bodhi Tree came to play an important role in the pinda rites and became one of the stops on the pinda circuit. Sometime post-thirteenth century a second pipal tree was planted by the Hindu worshippers at Bodh Gaya for their own sacred rites; the tree stands to the north of the Temple, and a devotee, offering rice-balls to his dead ancestors, has to turn his face to the north, the point of the horizon belonging to the pitras.57

310

The icon in context

Legends of Rukmini at Nalanda In light of the Itihasa Purana tradition, another site which underwent substantial reinvention was the Nalanda monastery and the villages in its vicinity. From the thirteenth century onwards Nalanda, the monastery seems to have gone out of existence and somehow even the name had been totally forgotten both by the local population and in textual accounts. Oral histories from the locality began to relate to the extensive ruins, consisting mainly of earthen mounds strewn with bricks and carvings as representing the site of the ancient town of Kundalipur. The Hindus of the locality started appropriating some of the carvings and images from the ruins for their own worship as Hindu divinities. Rather Bargaon is mentioned as Vatagram or Baragram in Jain chronicles of sixteenth and seventeenth century. The local Hindu tradition called the site as that of Kundalipura mentioned in the Epics and the Puranas as the capital of King Bhimaka of Vidarbha, the father of Rukmini, wife of Krishna.58 A significant site of appropriation of this myth is the Rukmini temple in the village of Jagdishpur, lying about 2 kilometres away from the excavated area of the monastery.

Figure 5.4 Colossal Buddha at Rukministhan, Jagdishpur, Nalanda Source: Photograph by author

Shifting centres

311

The Rukministhan, contains a single cell shrine with a towering shikhara and is a protected monument of the ASI.59 The shrine contains a colossal image of Buddha with an intricate back slab. The temple is now associated with Vaishnava legends, and the Buddha is worshipped as Krishna and the accompanying Boddhisatva as Rukmini, his paramour. Legends believe that the Monastic Complex was the Raja’s palace where Rukmini lived and she came every day to worship at this shrine and as was pre-arranged Krishna abducted her from here. A second version of the legend says that the Monastic Complex and the mound of the shrine are connected through a secret tunnel, and after Krishna abducted Rukmini from her palace, he used this tunnel to escape and reached the shrine. Religion and folklore have invested new meanings in landscape, identifying it with people and events from the past. The shrine shows how Vaishnava fables have been reinvented in the villages around the Nalanda monastery, where not only the identity of the image has been changed but a whole new mythological structure has been created. Whatever be the mythological bearings, recent archaeological excavation at the site have revealed square-shaped cells, terracotta sealings and a number of votive stupas, besides other artefacts. The ASI believes it might be a sacred Buddhist structure or another monastery but not a part of the main Monastic Complex.60 Other sites in the vicinity of the monastery have also been subsumed through Puranic myths. A second site of appropriation lies in the village of Bargaon lying immediately north of the excavated area; the village is marked by a large tank known as the Suraj Pokhar. The tanks are surrounded by ghats around which a series of modern shrines are located with no fixed iconographic programmes. The shrines show a haphazard collection of ancient sculptures and architectural fragments: most times the latter is also worshipped and duly anointed and an invisible network exists between the shrine, the tank and sacred trees. Despite lying in the vicinity of the Monastic Complex, the images from Bargaon are mostly Hindu, typically the black basalt images popular in East India. The unusual aspect of the images found at Bargaon is their large size; the majority of images are over 4 feet high.61 Local legends mention how the images and architectural fragments enshrined in the temples now had been found in the pokhra where they had been hidden during the Islamic invasions. Once the images were recovered they were re-consecrated in the new shrines sometimes also with brand new identities. Once again, legends of Rukmini provide credibility and history to this sacred complex. Raja Sisupala, who wanted to marry Rukmini,

312

The icon in context

contacted leprosy, he came to Bargaon to the Suraj Talao, at the time it was a small patch of water. He accidently washed his hands in this water and his leprosy got cured. He then commissioned the digging of the pokhra, during which these images were discovered. The images were first kept in on the banks of the tanks and later shifted to different temples and installed. During this entire process, some images were also stolen. The banks of the Suraj Pokhra are also the site of a travelling fair which goes around villages in the sub-division and comes to Bargaon on Sundays. The biggest annual event here is however the bi-annual festival of chhath celebrated all over Bihar in honour of Surya. After making offerings to the setting and the rising Sun, the fasting devotees then walk up to the nearby Surya Temple to worship his image in an anthropomorphic form. Inside the village is a modern temple of the Sun God containing a collection of old sculptures, Buddhist and Hindu. The temple faces the north unlike other Surya temples indicating that it might have been appropriated from another tradition. The principle image is a Sun god placed on an island in the middle of the shrine and protected with iron grills. On the left of the Surya image is a Avalokitesvara worshipped as Chhath Maata. Below is a Buddhist image of a female on a lion, and she is called the Singha vahini another name for Durga. Fixed on the wall behind are Vishnu, Satyanarayan and Bholeshankar, the last one being a Buddha image in a mundu niche. The sacred meanders of the Ganga at Munger and Bhagalpur Vishnu abounds in his manifestations in the Gaya region over riding the cult of Surya, Shiva and the Buddha. The Munger-Bhagalpur ritual circuit in contrast is marked by a strong Shaivite presence. I will discuss the cult of Shiva at the Ajgaibinath Temple at Sultanganj in Bhagalpur district and how the shrines in the vicinity are governed by the rhythms of his annual cycle of kanwariyas. As discussed in Chapter 3, the Ajgaibinath Temple dedicated to Shiva in his form as Swayambhu, or self-generating, is located on the Jahangira Hill, an island jutting into the Ganga at Sultanganj. Rockcut cave shrines here can be dated to the seventh century and the rock faces are carved with images of Shiva, Uma Mahesvara, Surya and Vishnu. The island and the facing mainland, known as the Bais Karan rock are shrouded with various Puranic legends such as the Ajgaibinath being the scene of the love of the River Nymph for Shiva hence the river impinges on to this monolithic island here. A second myth

Shifting centres

313

associates the site with the ashram of Jahnu Muni, which is believed to have been located here and was a centre of arts and learning. The Ganga on her way to the ocean interrupted Jahnu Muni’s meditation, and he swallowed her only to be later released by Bhagirath Muni’s intervention; the Ganga hence is also known as Jahnavi. Sultanganj is also associated with the legends of Karna from the Mahabharata and was a part of his territory of Anga. On the ridge of the Bais Karan hill is also built an old mosque, called Jami Masjid, facing the river and “most likely it was once the site of a Hindu temple,” evident from the reuse of older architectural fragments.62 The famous remains of a Buddhist monastery and a stupa have also been exhumed from near the Sultanganj station. The most reverberating myth connects Sultanganj with the Shiva temple of Baidyanath Dham or Deoghar located 109 kilometres away. During the month of Shravana, kanwariyas collect water from Sultanganj and offer it to the linga enshrined at Baidyanath Dham. A Saiva monastery is also located at Jahangira and legends associate it with a Sanyasi Harinath who also became its first Mahant. A second legend which abounds in the Munger-Bhagalpur circuit is around the meanders of River Ganga. At Munger, the meandering river takes a northward turn and becomes “Uttar vahini” at the Kashtaharini Ghat. The site is marked by a series of early shrines based on Puranic and Epic myths. The first temple is a cave shrine, located a little away from the river, dedicated to goddess Chandika, and is believed to be the site where Sati’s left eye fell and is now one of the sixty-four Shakti-pithas. It is believed that Karna offered prayers at this shrine every morning and at the end of the Mahabharata war, the Devi brought back to life, Karna’s body. The shrine comes to life during the bi-annual Navratra celebrations. The ghat also has shrines dedicated to Rama-Lakshmana-Sita as well as various Shaiva shrines. The ghat is supposed to have been the resting spot for RamaLakshmana and Sita hence the Hindu sage Mudgal Muni established two significant shrines here. Located close by is also the Manpathar or Sita Charan, where Sita’s footprints are embedded in a rock. The site is marked by a temple. By recounting local legends preserved through oral narratives, I have tried to trace how a single shrine can have various histories and be integrated into a series of real and abstract networks. The legends were also the modes of legitimising and maintaining the sanctity of the sites and the enshrined icons. In the wake of the threat of desecration and destruction the shrines were protected and provided with a new lease of life by interweaving these into the lives of the people using them.

314

The icon in context

Blurring of boundaries The ubiquitous inter-religious dynamics in South Bihar which saw centuries of assimilation, reinvention and reconfiguration came to its logical fulfilment post-thirteenth century as I have been discussing through the course of this chapter. This went almost hand in hand with two concurrent processes which had their genesis in the mid Ganga Valley several centuries earlier, but had a full-fledged impact from the eleventh–twelfth centuries and has shaped the paradigms within which the religious identity of eastern India and more particularly that of sites of South Bihar have come to be viewed. The first is the burgeoning of Tantric traditions in eastern India which embraced within its mantle the worship of Shiva, Shakti and the Buddha. I will explain how the assimilative tendencies of the Tantric practices resulted in the gradual overlap between Shaivism and Buddhism and in this shared religious milieu how deities, icons and rituals were reformulated. A second powerful tendency was the “shifting geography of Buddhism”; how Buddhism in its Tantric or Yoginitantra aspect started to transition out of eastern Indian and the monasteries and shrines of South Bihar began to develop close ties with Tibet and Nepal.63 Under the umbrella of Tantric traditions certain Hindu deities were also transmitted and absorbed within Tibetan traditions and the Uma Mahesvara became one such motif which found reverberations all across the Himalayan Kingdoms. The inception and growth of Tantric traditions in the Ganga Valley has been variously dated between the third and the eighth century, reaching its peak in eastern India around the eleventh century.64 The popularisation of the Tantric religious practices in the Ganga Valley and its gradual spread to the peripheral areas resulted in the absorption of various cults such as that of Rudra, Shakti, Bhairav and Chamunda as various rupas of Shiva.65 The influence of Shaiva religion on Tantric texts was acknowledged as early as 1828 by HH Wilson who wrote upon examining some Tantric manuscripts that “the Buddha creed has been modified by Tantrika admixture”; though at the point he also suggested that the Shakta form of Hinduism might be the chief source of the notions and divinities foreign to Buddhism.66 This perception was, however, easily dismissed with the nineteenth-century colonial pursuit of the original pristine form of Buddhism. It has been agreed that the aberration of the Tantric religion and its popularisation as a degenerate, corrupt religious tradition has been a twentieth century development which changed its meaning and connotation.67 To the European understanding of religion as linear, where Buddhism

Shifting centres

315

evolved from Hinayana to Mahayana and finally to the “degenerate” Vajrayana, there was no scope for the merger and assimilation of religious philosophy much in the same way as sites and archaeological remains were categorised as Buddhist and Hindu. Hence while the earlier phase of Tantric tradition has received much scholarly attention, that of Tantric Buddhism has not, for misunderstandings about it and negative valuations of it by European and Indian scholars once proliferated.68 Between the seventh and eleventh centuries, under the influence of Shakta-Shaiva tradition and a gradual reworking of literary texts, Mahayana Buddhism underwent a doctrinal rebirth absorbing and adapting non-Buddhist practices when Shaiva legends came to be adopted by the Buddhist. The resultant form in which Buddhism evolved came to be called Vajrayana or Mantrayana which “equipped itself with a repertoire of Tantric ceremonies that paralleled that of the Śaivas and indeed had modelled itself upon it; and came to be recognised as the highest and most direct means of liberation where its deities came to be enshrined in the monasteries as the highest patrons of the faith.”69 The basic characters of Tantric religion which Buddhism thus absorbed involved mandala initiation, principle of identification with the deity through the use of mantras and mudras, fire-sacrifice, Buddhist funeral rite for initiates, consecration rituals for kings etcetera; all of which could bestow Buddhahood on the worshipper. Tantric initiation in Buddhism was moreover open both to monks and married laypersons, thus providing a leniency of practise. Sanderson has traced several stages to what he has been termed as the “Saktisation of the Buddhist Mantrayana” such as: Tathagatas being replaced by goddesses, introduction of sexual intercourse into activities of worship, worship of copulating deities, sexual initiation rites, transformation of Bhairav and his consort into Buddhist deities, a pan-Indian topography of sacred sites modelled in the tradition of Shakti pithas, and the practice of visiting these sacred sites in search of meetings with yoginis incarnate as human women.70 The Tibetans received this form of Buddhism and preserved it in their cannons in its highest and most radical forms. This transformed Buddhism, called “Pala Buddhism” has been seen as particularly well meshed in the contemporary political milieu of the Pala dominion in eastern India where it found royal favours flourishing in the great state monasteries at Somapura, Uddandapura, Vikramsila and Nalanda.71 In the early period as Yoginitantra Buddhism the religious preceptors of the monasteries who also consecrated and legitimised the rulers, persuaded the king to institute a regular fire

316

The icon in context

sacrifice to be performed under his guidance by the Tantric officiates with the purpose of ensuring that the dynasty would be long-lived and consequently Buddhism would be widely disseminated. The second kind of Buddhism called Kalachakra exegesis strongly asserted the supremacy of monks over married Tantric gurus and the revival of monastery building. Whether this intellectual exchange or doctrinal interdependence should be seen as “conterminous, coeval and co-functional”72 or within a “common religious substratum”73 or a “period of revitalisation of Buddhism,”74 both Buddhism and Shaivism became more accommodative and inclusive of religious and cultural elements of other religions including folk traditions. How were these assimilative tendencies and a new philosophical discourse reconfigured on the ground level through shrines and icons? This process of absorption is visible at multiple levels at sites of South Bihar in terms of ritual cofunctionality, architectural configuration and shared iconographies. Tibetan sources refer to the five great Mahaviharas located at Vikramsila, Nalanda, Somapura or Paharpur (now in Bangladesh), Oddantpuri (the location of which is still undetermined), and Jagaddala, known for their Vajrayana preceptors.75 As discussed in an earlier section, the sculptural remains from the Monastic Complex at Nalanda (including many of those that are now in the Nalanda Museum) include a mix of Buddhist and Hindu images including Saraswati, Surya, Vishnu, Lakshmi, Ganesha, Kubera, Kamadeva, Trilokavijaya, Heruka, Marichi, Tara, Vageshwari and so on. Excavations in what is believed to be the living quarters of the monks at Nalanda give a different kind of sculptural evidence; a number of small, bronze images have been found, many of these still in wall niches which indicates that they might have been meant for personal worship. Two motifs frequently found from Nalanda and other monasteries find a special mention: the first is that of Trilokavijaya a Buddhist deity trampling upon Uma and Mahesvara; and a second image of Aparajita, a female divinity trampling on Ganesha. The significance of these images will emerge later in this discussion. At Antichak, believed to be the site of the Vikramsila monastery, a short distance from the excavated area, at the Patharghata hills, on the banks of the Ganga, a strong Shaivite presence is perceptible. In the Bateshvara Sthana, the most popular shrine on this hillock along with an enshrined linga a large collection of images of Hindu and Buddhist divinities have emerged among which is a seated Buddha worshipped as “Bhairon” and a goddess with a seven hooded snake canopy.76 In the nearby Patalapuri shrines, a natural rock-cut cave, a

Shifting centres

317

bronze Bhairav figure of a four-faced, twelve-armed deity standing on two prostrate figures worshipped in a niche was seen first by Bloch. The description suggests that this might have been a Trilokavijaya figure. Due to the scattered nature of the remains: (since most sculptures have been discovered in archaeological debris bereft of their original context and having undergone considerable spatial relocation over the centuries), we have little information regarding the placement of images on religious architecture. Coming back to Nalanda, accounts of the Chinese traveller such as I Tsing have attested to the presence of various shrines with colossal images of the Buddha elaborating upon the ritual worship of these images by priests.77 The images found from the Monastic Complex as well as those from the villages surrounding it are unusually large in size. The most apparent example of these is the Buddha image in the Rukministhan at Jagdishpur, which I discussed in the last section. The image is over twelve feet high. Some of the Hindu images available from Bargaon such as a Parvati image in the Surya Mandir and others now enshrined in temples around the Suraj Pokhar are all over 5 feet in height. It has been suggested that such large images were meant to be enshrined as the principal image of the sanctum.78 Excavations at the temples in the Monastic Complex have also unearthed partial remains of several such large stucco images such as the Buddha in bhumisparamudra in Temple 12; and other broken stucco Buddhas in Temple 13 and Temple 14. An interesting site of assimilation is the shrine of Teliya Baba at Bargaon. Located in between the Temple 14 and Monastery 11 is a small brick enclosure which, though situated within the excavated site, does not belong to it at present. Inside is a colossal image of a seated Buddha, in dharmachakrapravartana mudra about 9 feet high, worshipped by the villagers as the Hindu god Bhairav or as Teliya Baba and by Thai pilgrims as Black Buddha. The Hindus believe the image to have unique healing power, and they besmear it with oil as an act of worship. Other Buddhist images are also seen in the enclosure. It is not clear whether it marks the site of a temple which had disappeared long ago or was removed from one of the Buddhist temples nearby. This image must have been prominently situated and frequently attended to as an object of worship, for all the early explorers encountered it. Buchanan recorded it as Baituk Bairobh Cunningham referred to it as Baithak Bhairav and Broadley as Telia Bhandar. Even in present day, the image is not a part of the protected enclosure of the ASI since the worshippers fought legally for full access to and control over the shrine. It can hence be argued that the Buddha has been assimilated within the Hindu traditions through the Puranic pantheon as an

318

The icon in context

Figure 5.5 Buddha worshipped as Bhairav or Teliya Baba or Black Buddha, outside the Monastic Complex, Nalanda Source: Courtesy of Sonali Dhingra

avatara of Vishnu but is also closely associated with the Shaiva tradition as Bhairav. In a similar tradition at Tetrawan, 14 kilometres from Bihar Sharif, the village is believed to be the site of a Buddhist monastery marked by the existence of a low mound, a big irregular tank and hundreds of Buddhist figures. The tank is called Bullama or Bhairav Pokhar and in a newly built temple adjacent to it is a 285 centimetres high statue of the Buddha in bhumisparamudra, known as Bhairav Babasthana a sacred place visited by locals of all faiths. Also located in the village is the Badki Maharanisthana, where the main image of Marichi is worshipped as per Hindu rituals along with four lingas and other Hindu and Buddhist icons. Similarly at Vikramsila monastery, excavations have revealed a number of scattered structures, including a Tibetan and a Hindu temple. The excavations have also uncovered a mix of Buddhist and Hindu images, predominantly Shaiva, such as that of Shiva himself and in his forms as Uma Mahesvara and Bhairav, and also icons of Mahisasuramardini, Chamunda, Ganesha, Karttikeya, Navagraha, Vishnu

Shifting centres

319

and Surya. The site, owing to its later origin and indicating a single period of occupation is also somewhat different in its planning. The central brick-built stupa at Vikramsila is cruciform in shape, on each of the four cardinal directions fours shrines are located, a protruding chamber with a pillared antechamber and a separate pillared mandapa in front. In the four chambers of the stupa were placed colossal stucco images of seated Buddha of which three were found in situ but the remaining one on north side was possibly replaced by a stone image after the clay image was at some point damaged. A circumambulatory path surrounds the stupa, which also connects the four shrines. It has been suggested that Vikramsila being one of the centres of Vajrayana, this plan of a stupa suggests a mandala with guardian deities in the four cardinal directions. The walls of the terraces around the path are embellished with terracotta panels with Hindu and Buddhist themes: the Buddha, Jambhala, Manjushri, Tara, etcetera, along with Hindu deities like Vishnu, Parvati and Hanuman and hunting scene, snake charming, dancing figures of yogis, drummers, lions, elephants, etcetera. What was the purpose of these colossal icons systematically located around monasteries and dense settlements? Based on the reading of the Tantras, it would not be out of place to suggest that several of the Hindu deities, were assimilated in the Buddhist pantheon either as minor figures in the Tantric mandala or as companions to the major Buddhist divinities. Hindu deities, such as Ganesha and Karttikeya, have been identified as some of the guardians of the different quarters and this might explain their presence in the Monastic Complex at Nalanda and Vikramsila. Similarly the colossal Buddhas worshipped in their Buddhist identity or as Bhairav were also perceived as the guardians and hence enshrined. To the present day in ritual praxis, the role of the icons as protectors and benefactors has overshadowed their religious identities where they are deified and worshipped by Hindus and Buddhists alike. Within this larger ambit of assimilation and coexistence between Shaivism and Buddhism, the Uma Mahesvara icon acquired a peculiar ritual status where it came to be recognised as a Tantric motif and in the mandala or the ritualistic diagram, the image of Shiva and Parvati captured in an erotic embrace became a sexual motif meant for meditational purposes. Within this paradigm, Shiva in his form as a householder probably was used to attract a larger laity population through the idea that the path to liberation is not only through denial, but also through leniency of practise. The Uma Mahesvaramurti has been suggested to have a Tantric disposition, such as in the writings of JN Banerjea who explained the

320

The icon in context

popularity of the motif in Eastern Indian on account of its association with Tantricism; “The Tantric worshippers of Tripurāsundari (another name of Umā) are required to meditate on the Devī as seated on the lap of Śiva and these images are used by them as aids for the correct performance of dhyānayoga.”79 Stella Kramrisch similarly argued that the image of Uma Mahesvara symbolises a “sexual yoga as a permanent form of the world and its life.”80 She contended that when most religious systems around the ninth–tenth centuries were tinctured by the Tantric view of life, Shaivism at this moment invented two very pronounced types, that of the dancing Shiva in its particular East Indian version, and the united group of Shiva and Parvati, in the aspect of Shiva known as Uma Mahesvara or Umalingamurti familiar to the whole of northern India but especially popular in the eastern India.81 Just as the religious experience in its Tantric trend tinctured all the different sects, the artistic conception was also heavily influenced by Tantricism.82 Uma Mahesvara images are hence not representations of god and goddess but merely the manifestation of the god in his form as Uma Mahesvara.83 Donaldson reaffirms the association of the Uma Mahesvara image with Tantric leanings and he connects this with the change in the artists’ conception of the Uma Mahesvara images from about the tenth century. Based on the stylistic evolution of the icons, he argues that the later icons are more detailed and hieratic: they are frontally conceived and became more cluttered with attendant divinities. He also points out that in some cases “seated figures of Brahma, Viṣṅu, Gaṅeśa and Kumāra are introduced in tiers around Umā Maheśvara and the entire composition forms a mandala, which is consistent with the Tantric proclivities of the medieval age.”84 The most remarkable assimilation of the Uma Mahesvara motif came in the Buddhist Tantric tradition introduced through the concept of the twenty-four sacred pithas borrowed from the Shiva-Shakta system of the dhaams or pithas seen as the holy places or dwelling sites of the deity. Through the highly sophisticated Yoginitantra texts, Tantricism came to acquire the concept of pithas, which were seen as sites of inhabitation of the gods. These sites could be both external and actual geographical sites seen as a seat of reverence or an internal subtle location inside the practitioners’ body and as such, it became a point of concentration. It was through this medium that Buddhism also came to acquire the notion of holy places or sites of pilgrimage. A noteworthy Tantric text the Chakrasamvara “explicitly” mentions that Bhairav and Uma dwelt at twenty sites, along with their hoards of yakshas, gandharvas, rakshasa, nagas and so on: “Having taken control of the three realms, they overpowered the world. In these twenty-four places

Shifting centres

321

they behaved like worldly ones, acting out their lust and hatred. Wherever they were, Lord Bhairav and Uma engaged in love play, along with their retinue.”85 The Buddhist forces of Heruka and Vajrayogini were then pictured as conquering Uma Mahesvara and by taking on their names and appearances, came to be incorporated in the mandala. What is also important to note is that some of the original Tantric texts no longer survive in India but their missing sections can be found in Tibetan translations. The commentaries also serve as an important source of ritual and iconography as they show the syncretism of traditions. Several new Buddhist and Hindu divinities emerge out of this syncretism in Tibetan Buddhism; and the Uma Mahesvara motif of the conjugal union of a wrathful/powerful male deity with Shakti is replicated all over the Buddhist world through imageries such that of Chakrasamvara tradition, Guhyasamaja Manjuvajra, Vajrasattva with his consort Sattvavajri, etcetera. In the Chakrasamvara Tantra, Samvara is one of the central deities of the Buddhist mandala and is seen as a form of Heruka. When shown in union with his consort Vajravarahi, they symbolise the highest form of bliss.86 Heruka himself has a strong resemblance with Shiva where he is depicted as wrathful, smeared with ash, a crescent moon and dreadlock. A similar iconography as the Uma Mahesvara is seen in the Guhyasamaja Tantra seen as one of the crucial texts of esoteric Buddhism. Here the Buddhist deity Akshobya (one of the five dhyani buddhas) in his manifestation as Manjuvajra (a deity of the mandala) is seen in union with his consort Sparshavajra, the goddess embodying wisdom and the two together symbolise “wisdom and compassion”.87 Vajrasattva, who similarly symbolises purity of mind is depicted in union with his consort Sattvavajri, embodying wisdom. Hence the motif of a powerful male deity copulating with his Shakti finds various manifestations.88 I contextualise this development of the Uma Mahesvara motif in what has been described as the “shifting geographies” of Buddhism.89 The idea of pitha emphasised upon a ritual/ pilgrimage network between the significant sites, most of these sites were located in the Gangetic Valley, which came to be visualised in Tibetan accounts as the “Holy Land”. Textual records ascertain earliest Tibetan travel to India from the mid-seventh century and between the eleventh to thirteenth centuries there was vibrant pilgrim traffic between Tibet and India.90 This was the period when Vajrayana texts and practices were transferred to Tibet where they were translated and preserved. In 1042 the Buddhist Monk Atisha a resident of the Vikramsila monastery also took a journey across the Himalayas into Tibet, and this migration of Buddhist ideology is often called the “Second Diffusion

322

The icon in context

of Buddhism.”91 His life and action as recorded in Tibetan history has contributed much to our understanding of Tibetan religions. Tibet came to form a ritual network with eastern India and with Bihar in particular which resulted in the absorption of rituals, ideology, imagery and the extensive Vajrayana pantheon. Numerous images of deities from eastern India made their way to Tibet in the form of small bronzes and other votive objects, and many more closely resembling the Indian prototypes were cast in Tibet reflecting this artistic and intellectual exchange. The motif of Mahesvara’s subjugation and then his identification with Buddhist male deities was an attempt at “claiming origins and legitimating authority for a Buddhist form of Tantra” as also establishing connectivity with India seen as the “holy land” in Tibetan culture.92 The creation of this subjugation myth provided the necessary geographical sense to the idea of pithas and the related networks which had already been transmitted to Tibet from India. “The Maheshvara subjugation narrative, as Tibetans maintained it, also had a second significance. It allowed for a certain slippage to occur between cosmographical space and geographical space, and this had important implications for the way in which Tibetans came to view “India” as a sacred territorial or geographical entity.”93 In terms of iconography the myth also provided the context to the representation of Hindu symbols such as the linga and the yoni within the Tibetan Buddhist traditions. By the thirteenth century, there were severe overlaps between Tibetan and Hindu traditions, so much so that not only “toponyms, individual natural features, entire local topographies, deities, cult objects, relics, and more – was claimed to have been transferred from South Asia northward over the Himalayas” but after several relocations and redaction to texts even the pithas, which were so far located in the Subcontinent, were transferred to Tibet.94 Claiming sacred spaces Seen in this light, my two initial hypothesis stand tested: First, the straitjacketed categories of religious affiliation used by colonial historians and archaeologists have been challenged in light of the study of shrines and sites through the use of iconography. By tracing a spatial and temporal context of images, I argue for a shared religious milieu where through the application of the mandala model Hindu deities came to be accommodated into the Buddhist fold and the Buddha and the other divine beings of the Mahayana tradition came to acquire Hindu identities such as that of Bhairav. Similar to Buddhist tradition, Shaivism

Shifting centres

323

also came to acquire religious institutions and monasteries (matha) of celibate monks that received donations from patrons and kings and served the public through charity works such as dispensaries, food distribution, etcetera.95 Within this integrated divine world, the mantras of any sect or religion could be utilised to evoke any of the deities. There also evolved a “common substratum of elements,” and supernatural beings shared by all religions such as nagas, yakshas and vidyadharas.96 To date, this ritual co-functionality is still perceptible in the shrines not merely in the configuration of sacred space but also in the ritual mannerisms and approach to the devotee. To the common villager, the distinction between Buddhist, Jain and Hindu icons and spaces is immaterial. It is the spiritual value of an icon and its placement in the shrine which is important; the gods and goddesses across faiths are then subject to the same degree of devotion and generosity of ritual offerings. The second point I would like to make is that in this changed religious milieu, unlike the colonial claims, Buddhism did not undergo a decline but was revitalised and reinvented. The Tantric Buddhism which developed by absorbing mythologies, tenets and iconography from other traditions was a strategy of attracting newer people into the faith. In Chapter 3 I discussed how the Uma Mahesvara was first used to mark the presence of Shiva at various sites. Within the later period of overlap between Buddhism and Shaivism, the motif was reused in different contexts, one being its adoption in the Buddhist pantheon through mythology. The motif was integrated in the Buddhist space to provide leniency of practice to the Buddhists while also attracting the followers of Shiva to the Buddhist shrines. Buddhism, unlike the colonial perception, was hence not a fixed entity but underwent a profound reinvigoration which stimulated its transmission to Tibet and the other Himalayan Kingdoms.

Notes 1 Richard Davis, Lives of Indian Images, p. 261. 2 Monica Juneja, Architecture in Medieval India, p. 68. 3 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–65, first published in 1871, this edition, Director General, ASI, New Delhi, 2000. 4 Ibid., p. 29. 5 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73, Director General, ASI, New Delhi, 2000. 6 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1880–81, Director General, ASI, New Delhi, 2000. 7 “In a temple the (buildings of the) courtyard are to be arranged according to the rule which I lay down with precision here: (these edifices) may be the same (height) as the original shrine or may be bigger, either being

324

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

33 34 35 36 37 38

The icon in context

acceptable; (those which are arranged) at the cardinal points should, however, be the same height (as the original shrine); on the other hand those at the corners or elsewhere, (may be higher but) should not be more than an eight or a quarter, according to circumstances, of the height of the original shrine.” Bruno Dagens (ed. and transl.), Mayamatam, 35.12a. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1880–81. Ibid. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–65. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. At Kispa, Beglar mentions a small brick building of modern date that stood on a platform, which formed the basement of an ancient temple. Similarly, at Pali he notices a modern shrine built on the site of an older temple. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Bruno Dagens (ed. and transl.), Mayamatam, 33.161. Frederick Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, p. 70. Janice Leoshko, Sacred Traces. In 1861–1862, Cunningham visited the site of Bakror across Phalgu River on the other side of Bodh Gaya. Here he saw a Buddhist stupa with fragments of pillars and one lone pillar surviving. He remembered seeing a similar pillar at Sahibganj. A Persian inscription recorded at Sahibganj ascribed this sandstone pillar set up as the central point in the city as installed by the city magistrate Charles Bodem Saheb in 1789. Janice Leoshko, Sacred Traces. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. Ibid. Ibid. Frederick Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, p. 12. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–62. Ibid. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–65. Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India for the Years 1905–06, Swati Publications, New Delhi, p. 58. Muhamaddan graves on top of Jarasandha ki baithak are mentioned in the Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India for the Years 1928–1929. Reports for the years 1930–1934 mention the Sonbhandar caves in Rajgir as spaces shared by Jains, Buddhists and Vaishnavas. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–65. Alexander Cuningham, Report of a Tour in Bihar and Bengal, 1879–80, Vol. 15, p. 9. Ibid. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. Ibid. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1875–76 and 1877–78, Director General, ASI, New Delhi, 2000.

Shifting centres

325

39 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1875–76 and 1877–78. In Cunningham’s report of 1875–76 and 77–78. 40 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1861–62. 41 Ibid. 42 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. 43 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1875–76 and 1877–78. 44 Annual Report of the Annual Survey of India for the Years 1925–26, Government of Central Publication Branch, Calcutta, 1928, p. 103. 45 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1879–80. 46 HP Ray, The Return of the Buddha, p. 23 47 HP Ray in an archaeological study of a range of temples in the Malaprabha valley maintains that the deciding factor into the sacredness of a temple site was in most cases the proximity of the site to water resources. It was the easy availability of water crucial for not only religious purposes, but more for supporting communities and villages that maintained temples. Ray further reiterates that unlike what is usually believed, the locations of temples did not correspond with political centres or capitals of the emerging elite. Rather it is the religious festivals enacted at temple sites that made them unique. These festivals provided a means of integration for literary culture, dramas, ritual recitation, folk performance and most importantly a platform for the political elite to address a wider public. HP Ray, ‘Creating Religious Identity: Archaeology of Early Temples in the Malaprabha Valley,’ in HP Ray (ed.), Archaeology and Text: The Temple in South Asia, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2010, p. 24. 48 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1880–81. 49 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1872–73. 50 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1875–76 and 1877–78. 51 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1879–80. 52 Michael W Meister, ‘Ethnography, Art History and the Life of a Temple,’ in Michael W Meister (ed.), Ethnography and Personhood: Notes from the Field, Rawat Publications, Jaipur, 2000, p. 24. 53 Inscriptional records suggest that the Vishnupad temple replaced a monument that had been ruined by the time of its construction. The architectural members that comprise the Vishnupad, some believe, were brought from Bodh Gaya, taken from an older monument there. The explicit reference to the Shraadh ceremony in inscriptions on several of the temple’s reused architectural members, however, indicate that Ahalya Bai’s workers had no need to appropriate pieces from any distance, even from Bodh Gaya, as sufficient pieces were available right on the spot at Gaya. As such, the Vishnupad temple grew out of centuries of layering of sacred structures, developing horizontal networks and being embedded in the life and cultural patterns of the people settled there. Frederick M Asher, ‘Gaya: Monuments of Pilgrimage Town.’ 54 Alexander Cunningham, Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Years 1871–72, p. 109. 55 LP Vidyarti, The Sacred Complex in Hindu Gaya, first published in 1961, this edition, Concept Publishing Co., New Delhi, 1978, p. 8. 56 Among the pilgrim records surviving on the slabs of the Vishnupad temple is that of a priest sent by the king of Vijayanagara.

326

The icon in context

57 Frederick M Asher, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, p. 70. 58 DR Patil, Antiquarian Remains of Bihar, p. 301. 59 The image is still in active worship evident from the anointments and offering of hibiscus flowers to the image. A number of smaller Buddhist figures are placed next to the main image. The priest of the shrine told me that the present temple had been built in 1973 and that there were several other images at the site but once they started getting stolen the remaining were removed to the Patna Museum and the Nalanda Museum. There is also a well located nearby, on top of the mound and local legends ascribe that the well contains the tunnel that connects this spot with Rukmini’s palace. 60 “Based on preliminary assessment, it can be said it was a Buddhist religious structure, which might be a part of ancient Nalanda but not the university. The upper parts of the structure belong to the Pal period (8–12th century AD) and lower parts belong to the Gupta period (4th–5th century AD). Nalanda ruins started getting developed around the BC 6th century and it took shape of the university around 4th century AD.” Telegraph, 15 June, 2015, ‘Buddhist Mound found near Nalanda ruins: ASI rules out any direct link with artefacts excavated close to ancient University.’ www. telegraphindia.com/1150615/jsp/bihar/story_25729.jsp. 61 An almost life-size inscribed Vishnu image was found which has been placed in a tree shrine. A Surya temple in the heart of the village shows several periods of reconstruction the earliest phase ascribed to eleventh century. The current Surya temple enshrines a very interesting collection of Buddhist and Hindu images including Surya, Vishnu, Shiva and Parvati, Avalokitesvara, etcetera. A striking image of Parvati about 5feet high attracts immediate attention. 62 DR Patil, Antiquarian Remains of Bihar, p. 180. 63 Toni Huber, The Holy Land Reborn: Pilgrimage and the Tibetan Reinvention of Buddhist India, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2008, p. 8. 64 Alexis Sanderson, ‘Saivism and Tantric Traditions,’ in S Sutherland, L Houlden, P Clarke and F Hardy (ed.), The World’s Religions, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1988, pp. 660–704; Christopher Wallis, ‘The Tantric Age: A Comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra,’ Sutra Journal, February 2016, www.sutrajournal.com/the-tantric-age-a-comparison-of-shaiva-andbuddhist-tantra-by-christopher-wallis#_ftn1 accessed on 16 April, 2017. An alternate date has been suggested by Peter Bisschop, who traces the growth of Tantricism from the Shaivite religion, and he dates it to the court and the royal patronage of Shiva under the Gupta and Vakataka kingdoms, Peter Bisschop, ‘Saivism in the Gupta-Vakataka Age,’ Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, Vol. 20, No. 4, October 2010, pp. 477–488. 65 Alexis Sanderson, ‘The Rise and Dominance of Saivism During the Early Medieval Period,’ in Shingo Einoo (ed.), Genesis and Development of Tantrism, Institute of Oriental Culture, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 2009, p. 252. In an alternate mode of looking, Ronald Davidson has looked at the evolution of Tantric Buddhism as an outcome of the feudal system and that it did not develop over centuries but it was the matter of a few decades, Ronald M Davidson, Indian Esoteric Buddhism: Social History of the Tantric Movement, Motilal Banarsidas Publishers, New Delhi, 2004.

Shifting centres

327

66 HH Wilson, A Sketch of the Religious Sect of the Hindus, Asiatic Society, Calcutta, 1828. 67 Alexis Sanderson, ‘Saivism and Tantric Traditions.’ 68 Christopher Wallis, ‘The Tantric Age.’ 69 Alexis Sanderson, ‘Saivism and Tantric Traditions.’ 70 Ibid. 71 Alexi Sanderson, ‘The Influence of Śaivism on Pāla Buddhism,’ Lecture at the University of Toronto at Mississauga, February 2010. 72 Christopher Wallis, ‘The Tantric Age.’ 73 David S Reugg, The Symbiosis of Buddhism with Brahmanism/ Hinduism in South Asia and of Buddhism with “Local Cults” in Tibet and Himalayan Region, OAW, 2008. 74 Alexi Sanderson, ‘The Influence of Śaivism on Pāla Buddhism.’ 75 HP Ray, Return of the Buddha, p. 187. 76 DR Patil, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, p. 369. 77 HD Sankalia, The University of Nalanda, p. 128. 78 Claudine Bautze- Picron, ‘Crying Leaves: “Some Remarks on the Art of Pala India (8th–12th Centuries) and Its International Legacy,” East and West, Vol. 43, No. ¼, December 1993, pp. 277–294. 79 JN Banerjea, Development of Hindu Iconography, p. 469. 80 Stella Kramrisch, ‘Pala and Sena School.’ 81 Ibid. 82 Kramrisch’s argument, however, does not fit with the dating of the Uma Mahesvara motif as it appeared much earlier in North India. 83 Ibid. 84 Thomas E Donaldson, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, p. 385. 85 Alexis Sanderson, ‘Vajrayāna: Origin and Function,’ Buddhism into the Year 2000: International Conference Proceedings, Bangkok and Los Angeles by Dhammakāya Foundation, 1995, pp. 89–102. 86 John C Huntington and Dina Bangdel (ed.), Circle of Bliss: Buddhist Meditational Art, Serindia Publications, 2003. 87 Ibid., p. 464. 88 Ibid., p. 212. 89 Toni Huber, The Holy Land Reborn, p. 8. 90 Ibid., p. 59. 91 Kert Behrendt, Tibet and India: Buddhist Traditions and Transformations, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New York, Winter 2014. 92 Toni Huber, The Holy Land Reborn, p. 106. 93 Ibid. 94 Ibid., p. 118. 95 As per legends, the Bodh Gaya Matha was given a bowl by Annapurna Devi herself, the goddess of food and nourishment. The bowl is never empty, thus ensuring that the granaries of the matha are never depleted. The matha, hence, distributes food to the needy and feeds all those who visit it. 96 Christopher Wallis, ‘The Tantric Age.’

Conclusion From sacred icons to objet d’art

With the Uma Mahesvarmurti, we have thus travelled many trajectories, many centuries and many shrines; we have even crossed international borders in my attempt to address issues which plague the study of religious iconography. My research has raised more questions than it has answered, foremost of which is how to approach the past? Is it possible to view the past and its relics as fragmented pieces devoid of any chronological and geographical perspective? Should the history of religions and sacred spaces be studied piecemeal or should they be seen as flowing into sacred networks? Why is the sharing of sacred space by two religions seen as contestation and not symbiotic? Is it judicious to understand meanings and purpose of shrines without its worshippers? Do objects from the past have fixed meanings or can they change connotations as per rituals, philosophy and usage? Can sacred images be seen as alive or merely as fossilised museum pieces? After their discovery in the eighteenth and the nineteenth centuries the recovery, mobility and the removability of religious icons posed a fundamental issue and the preservation of such objects became a problem not only for archaeologists and conservationists but also for lay worshippers who encountered them. Thus began the journeys that religious images travelled: of endangerment and recovery; of transformation from objects of devotion to treasures from antiquity; from embodiment of divinity to specimens of art. For the lives of religious images are not frozen at the moment of their creation but are determined by the pedestals they occupy, whether in a shrine or a museum; and the audiences they greet, whether devotees or museum goers. The colonial discourse on the sacred sites, shrines and icons from South Bihar created certain nomenclatures and identities and more importantly fixed permanent religious categories within which to view them. In their quest for discovering the original Buddhist past for South Bihar, archaeological sites were explored and their artefacts listed and

Conclusion

329

documented, texts particularly Greek and Chinese travellers accounts of India were read and interpreted and consequently the region of South Bihar in particular came to be projected as the original “land of the Buddha” the “site of Enlightenment” and so on. Within this colonial mode of looking, any relic which did not suit the vision of a pristine Buddhist past was discarded and treated as merely incidental. The antiquity of Hindu shrines was underplayed as they were understood as relatively later, when religion became esoteric and degenerate and its icons monstrous and obscene. For this is what fitted the British notion of Indian religions as linear, fragmented, ritualistic, morally decadent, and lacking a philosophical idiom. As such, the relics of the original Indian religion, “Buddhism,” needed to be cherished and preserved, and the twentieth-century archaeological practices of colonial British government were focussed on achieving this goal. The beginning of the twentieth century marked a remarkable change in the science of archaeology in India when for the first time the focus shifted from explorations to scientific excavations, preservation and conservation. This phase was governed by the personal vision of Lord Curzon, the then Viceroy of India and his young Director General of Archaeology, John Marshall. “Right from the beginning of his viceroyalty buildings and their restoration were a high priority for Curzon.”1 He outlined a comprehensive agenda through the passing of the Ancient Monument Preservation Act in 1904.2 As an extension of the Act, Curzon added that the British were no longer permitted to cart away antiquities and sculptures to the home country, and all relics of archaeological and historical value were to be conserved in British India.3 The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act (AMP) of 1904 in itself was, however, flawed. The origins of the act have been traced to the on-going campaign in Europe for a uniform code for preservation of monuments in England and in Western Europe by the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) established in 1877. It has been argued that the Society had been putting pressures on the ASI for framing similar rules and laws for the conservation and preservation of Indian sites.4 Thus the agenda of SPAB, which was rooted in the specific cultural concerns of nineteenth-century Europe, was transposed to India, and the ASI was made responsible for its implementation. Most importantly the policies of conservation designed as per European principles took no account of traditional modes of conservation as outlined in the Indian texts such as the Shilpa Shastras and the Vastu Shastras. A second problem with the AMP was its scope in terms of what qualified for preservation. The Act stated that monuments of “archaeological,

330

Conclusion

historical or artistic significance” were declared protected monuments and came under the purview of the Central Government while others that did not fall in this category were left in the care of Provincial Governments. Within such an approach where did shrines and religious structures stand? While a lot many shrines from South Bihar surely were of “archaeological, historical or artistic significance,” they were also centres of worship, ingrained in the daily lives of people who used them. By classifying these as monuments the government wanted to infringe upon their ‘living’ aspect. While rituals and religious practices were permitted to continue, the government held the right to intervene if the structures were in need of repair or religious practice damaged the shrine. The Act clearly gave the colonial state proprietary rights in the temple and the land around it; it authorized the state to acquire land required for preservation of the monument thus creating boundaries to keep off native population who actually had the rights over the shrines. John Marshall’s personal engagement went hand in hand with Curzon’s vision: he interacted with the local population, extensively toured the sites and introduced scientific archaeological practises.5 The Marshall era brought a change in the very outlook of Indian archaeology where a need to get a more holistic picture was stressed upon and, in the process, sites which were not directly linked with Buddhism were examined.6 In 1906 Marshall wrote a pamphlet, Conservation of Ancient Monuments: General Principles for the Guidance of Those Entrusted with the Custody of and Execution of Repairs to Ancient Monuments, which was later published in 1923 as the Conservation Manual.7 The Manual underlined the new focus of the ASI that preservation should take precedence over conservation and laid down stringent rules for monument preservation in the colony. An intrinsic part of the holistic conservation of sites directed by Marshall was the preservation of artefacts and antiquities, including any loose architectural fragments on the site keeping with the principal of in situ conservation. The execution of the AMP through Marshall’s Conservation Manual further concretised boundaries around religious structures since the shrines once preserved could no longer remain integrated in the living traditions but became sites of contestation. In the Indian context a clear-cut demarcation of the sacred area was difficult since ritual praxis often extended beyond the built structure of the shrine. The Conservation Manual stated: “It is the policy of Government to abstain as far as possible from any interference with the management or repair of religious buildings. But if such buildings are of exceptional archaeological interest and if the endowments attached to them are insufficient for their upkeep, the offer of expert advice and guidance

Conclusion

331

or even of financial assistance may be made by Government to the owners or trustees, on condition that the repairs are carried out on lines approved by the Archaeological Department.”8 Marshall then classified the shrines under three criteria: those which could be permanently acquired by the Government, those which could remain under private ownership and last which were in active worship. Once this was decided Marshall advised that the temples which came under the purview of the Government should be fenced off against any people or usage. The case of the living shrines was however different: “It is rarely expedient to spend money on monuments which are still in use for religious purposes, unless their architecture is of exceptional merit, and a permanent right of entry can be secured for the public and for the officers charged with the duty of keeping them in repair.”9 The conservators were moreover anxious of the upkeep and maintenance of living shrines once they had been conserved and given back for active worship. The ritual practise in Hindu shrines such as offerings of ghee, burning of incense, offering of fruit and flower and the traditional restoration of sculptures was seen as problematic, interfering with conservation and preservation and hence a cause of governmental interference.10 Conservation practices also identified certain monuments as more important and of national importance than others. “Important religious shrines of India represented to the colonial administrators of the 19th century a conveniently ruined Indian past which could be recovered, repaired and protected. The process of recovery and protection of the ancient past stands as a living testament to, on the one hand, the ‘contribution’ the colonial government had made in ‘protecting India’s past’, and on the other, the decadence to which the ancient religions of India had fallen due to either desecration or internal degeneration.”11 A second archaeological enterprise which has affected our vision of the past for South Bihar has been the institution of colonial museums. Colonial museums, as have been discussed in Chapter 2, emerged as official devices for creating a visual narrative to written history. Initially by way of exploration and amateur excavation and subsequently through a concerted drive, the colonial archaeologists concentrated their efforts on collecting relics of the Buddhist past and exhibiting them through mechanisms of the museum. The initial repository of this collection was the Indian Museum, Calcutta, where the treasures collected through centuries of exploration were deposited and much of the hoarded antiquities also travelled to museums and private collections in Britain. The artefacts continued to shift locations, with the founding of the Patna Museum and the Nalanda

332

Conclusion

Museum in Bihar in the early twentieth century, and finally, with the establishment of the National Museum, a portion of artefacts from the Indian Museum was dispersed to the other Museums. Changes in the archaeological policies of the ASI in the twentieth century further caused movement of icons. Marshall believed that antiquities, when acquired by the museums, should be in a complete series. With this focus, there was a conscious drive to acquire new artefacts, and the museums came to be dependent on the ASI. There was a determined effort to build collections through purchase, loans and moving antiquities from one museum to another or also from sites to museums to create a particular narrative and display. This had larger ramifications on the lives of religious images since they were removed from their original context and in the case of some images even removed from active worship. Objects of worship hence became objects of art. The British notion of arrangement of sculptures in a narrative series was also different from the traditional arrangement of icons. As such, very often icons of a particular group were separated, so much so that the different parts of a broken icon were sent to different museums to suit the logic of display of the Government. Museums were conceptualised as instruments for disseminating information; however, the museum narratives display and cataloguing were tailored to suit the propagation of only a particular kind of information. The galleries were utilised to popularise the Buddhist history of South Bihar with sculptures and relics gathered from the different sites associated with the life of the Buddha. In the case of the Patna Museum as discussed earlier, this history was reinforced by acquisition of Buddhist relics from other sites in the Subcontinent such as Gandhara and Negapatnam. The galleries of the Patna Museum, through its taxonomies, also reaffirmed the colonial version of a linear history of Bihar as Buddhist, Jain, Mauryan, Gupta, Pala, Sena and so on. The emphasis was on this early history which is now the official heritage of Bihar. In this process, some of the Museum’s valuable collections such as Paintings of the Patna School, watercolours of Company painters and Mughal artefacts have been relegated to the background. So much so that the Museum’s published catalogues concentrate merely on the early stone and metal sculptures and terracotta from the Museum collection.12 Similarly the Nalanda Site Museum failed in its primary function as a “site museum.” Established to store artefacts from Nalanda, Rajgir and other sites in the vicinity, the Museum has no connection with the sites per se. As in the case with the other museums, the labelling of the objects in the collection gives no information of their original find spot or of any context of the site. The overall emphasis of the Museum

Conclusion

333

from its inception till now has been to emphasise upon the history of the excavated area as that of the First Buddhist University. This brings me to my final question: What are the relics from South Bihar’s past which have been appropriated? How have the relics been used to create a certain history for the region? The identities established through colonial archaeology and centuries of knowledge production continue to define the paradigms within which we view the region and its history. Any discussion of the history of Bihar to date is focussed around the themes of its Buddhist past and the glories of Asoka, who was the first to tread upon the footsteps of the Buddha, visiting the sites associated with Buddhism and marking each of these with a monument. By tracing the evolution of the sacred topography of Bihar in Chapter 3, I have mapped some of the earliest Hindu and Jain shrines and icons in the region, thus highlighting their architectural, philosophical and ritual significance. In doing so I have also tried to establish the broad ritual, economic and cultural networks that the shrines were integrated in and how these were enmeshed in the lives of the people using them. At the same time, the patterns of use of shrines and the identities of icons highlight that sacred space in the region was cohabited by Buddhist, Jains and Hindus and that the sites have a multicultural significance shaped through their prolonged usage. Not only was the sacred space constantly reinvented but also the icons, motifs and architectural pieces which defined this sacred space were reused. Against this background, when we analyse the images of Bihar and of South Bihar in particular which appear in popular visual culture, some of the common motifs we see are the Mahabodhi Temple, the Monastic Complex at Nalanda, icons of the Buddha in bhumisparamudra thus memorialising the site of Enlightenment, the Buddhapad, the stupas and Asokan pillars and so on. Even the name of the state Bihar was apparently derived from the fact that the area was dotted with viharas. Based on my discussion in the second section of the book, the Vishnu-Shiva, the Devi and the Surya cults have had an equally significant role in the making of the religious history of the region. The Vishnupad continues to be a significant shrine in the region with a pan-India appeal and a must-stop for making shraadh offerings in the memory of one’s ancestors. Still, the Buddhapad from Bodh Gaya is a more reverberating icon as compared to the Vishnupad enshrined in Gaya. I have also examined how the ritual networks dedicated to Shiva bring under their purview a series of shrines dedicated to the Devi and to Shiva, yet one does not often hear of special trains, airports or other infrastructural facilities to accommodate these ancient ritual circuits. Does independent India still continue to invoke the colonial

334

Conclusion

legacy of Buddhism? Much as in the colonial period, does the state still control and popularise only certain relics from the past? Is the politics of heritage a state-run effort used to market Bihar’s Buddhist heritage through tourism and museums? Does this account for the lopsided development of tourist and pilgrimage facilities at Gaya in comparison to Bodh Gaya? The state-directed construction of history and delineation of what qualifies as heritage continues to echo the nineteenth- and twentiethcentury colonial paradigms of highlighting a certain moment in the history of the region devoid of their archaeological and temporal contexts. A significant indicator of this process is the listing of sites and monuments of “Outstanding Universal Value” as sites of World Heritage by UNESCO in the post-colonial era yet reiterating the legacy of colonial archaeological practices. The UNESCO World Heritage website defines heritage as “our legacy from the past, what we live with today, and what we pass on to future generations. Our cultural and natural heritage are both irreplaceable sources of life and inspiration.”13 These sites belong to “all the peoples of the world, irrespective of the territory on which they are located.”14 Can we attach a “Universal” value to a specific heritage?15 Sophia Labadi in her analysis of the process of nomenclature of World Heritage Sites by UNESCO has argued that the notion of attaching values is extrinsic and relative and that they change with time, individuals, frames of mind and geographical locations. UNESCO’s guiding tenet posits that some sites are so exceptional that they can be equally valued by all people around the world and, therefore, must be protected for mankind as a whole. She agrees that interpretation and representation of heritage contributes to disengaging local populations that are considered to be ignorant of their own heritage and in “need of enlightenment,” much in tune with the colonial policies of documentation and preservation of sites. In 2002, UNESCO listed the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya on the World Heritage List, and in 2015 the Monastic Complex at Nalanda Mahavihara also came to be included in this list as the archaeological site of a Buddhist University. Both these sites interestingly fall in the geographical region under consideration. What does this speak of the religious history of the region and of the making of religious sites? The Mahabodhi Temple Complex at Bodh Gaya is listed as “one of the four holy sites related to the life of the Lord Buddha, and particularly to the attainment of Enlightenment. The first temple was built by Emperor Asoka in the 3rd century bc, and the present temple dates from the 5th or 6th centuries. It is one of the earliest Buddhist temples built entirely in brick, still standing in India, from the late Gupta

Conclusion

335

period.”16 The Outstanding Universal Value of the site has been fixed on the following criterions: (1) The Mahabodhi Temple “of the 5th– 6th centuries is of immense importance” since it is one of the earliest temples existing in the Indian sub-continent and represents the architectural genius of the Indian people. (2) Being constructed fully of brick, it is one of the few surviving examples of early brick structures in India and has had significant influence in the development of architecture over the centuries. (3) The site provides exceptional records for the events associated with the life of Buddha and subsequent worship. (4) The present Temple is one of the earliest and most imposing structures built entirely in brick from the late Gupta period and the accompanying stone balustrades are an outstanding early example of sculptural reliefs. (5) The Mahabodhi Temple Complex in Bodh Gaya has direct association with the life of the Lord Buddha, being the place where he attained the supreme and perfect insight. The listing takes into purview the Mahabodhi Temple, the Vajrasana, the Bodhi Tree, six other sites associated with the event of Enlightenment and the numerous votive stupas in the complex. UNESCO’s nomination is based on “historical evidences and texts” that have revealed that the parts of present Temple Complex date from different periods and the site’s glory, decline and revival since the middle of nineteenth century has remained unchanged. It further states that the site suffered a long phase of abandonment from the thirteenth to the eighteenth century but was extensively restored in the nineteenth and the twentieth centuries that have helped retain its essential features. The authenticity and “supreme value to the world” of the site is based on the belief that the Buddha had attained Enlightenment in this particular place. The site has been documented since the time of Emperor Asoka who built the first temple in 260 bce, when he came to this place to worship the Bodhi Tree and even today Buddhists from all over the world venerate Bodh Gaya as the holiest place of Buddhist pilgrimage in the world.17 This confirms the use, function, location and setting of the Complex for “documenting the evolving worship, particularly since 3rd century, when Asoka built the temple.” This documentation and listing not only limits the scope of the Complex but reminds of a similar process of listing and documentation undertaken by the East India Company in the late eighteenth century. It takes the Temple out of the medley of monuments in its vicinity and freezes it at the moment of construction, ignoring the various phases of expansion and reorganisation of the site. The foundation of the site like many others in the Subcontinent is attributed to Asoka, and the temple building ascribed to the Gupta dynasty. All the associated

336

Conclusion

spaces within this complex are believed to be of Buddhist significance, related to the life of the Buddha and to the great moment of Enlightenment. The strong Shaivite presence at the site is nowhere mentioned. A similar listing for Nalanda is also available on the UNESCO website: “It comprises the archaeological remains of a monastic and scholastic institution dating from the 3rd century bce to the 13th century ce. It includes stupas, shrines, viharas (residential and educational buildings) and important art works in stucco, stone and metal. Nalanda stands out as the most ancient university of the Indian Subcontinent. It engaged in the organized transmission of knowledge over an uninterrupted period of 800 years. The historical development of the site testifies to the development of Buddhism into a religion and the flourishing of monastic and educational traditions.”18 This definition of Nalanda stems from the Dossier for nomination prepared by the Archaeological Survey of India, which recommended the criteria to UNESCO for listing the site for its Outstanding Universal Value.19 The Dossier describes Nalanda as “the first planned university of the Indian subcontinent,” and its built remains exemplify its extraordinary contribution to institution-building, pedagogy, architecture, art and pan-Asian culture.”20 Within this Dossier the Monastic Complex at Nalanda has been acclaimed for its monastic-cum scholastic establishment, spanning a long continuous history from the third century bce to the thirteenth century ce. Nalanda has moreover been described as a centre for knowledge production which made outstanding contributions in institution-building, site-planning, art and architecture and has been compared to a modern day University with a well-planned and diverse curriculum. Stucco art from Nalanda are said to have influenced those of Thailand and the metal art similarly influenced art and social life of Malayan archipelago, Nepal, Burma and Tibet. Defining standards for contemporary mahaviharas Nalanda drew patronage of rulers from beyond the Indian subcontinent and attracted scholars from far-flung corners of Asia thus giving evidence of sustained interchange. Nalanda’s excavated remains provide evidence for the development of architecture and evolution of artistic traditions of South Asia. The iconographic standards which evolved at Nalanda have also been presented as unique since this corpus of moveable and immoveable artefacts and artistic embellishment reflects the changes in the Buddhist belief system. The reassertion of the colonial approach to archaeological sites, where places of inhabitation and worship are studied in light of textual accounts or as architectural ‘wonders’ devoid of participation in living traditions and ritual networks or placed within cultural narratives,

Conclusion

337

is highly problematic. Nalanda has been taken as the point of origin of pedagogy, philosophy, religion, art and architectural design and its impact elsewhere in Asia- in Tibet, Nepal, Sri Lanka and South East Asia, has often elaborated upon; however, a major lacunae has been that its interaction with the immediate hinterland has been ignored though inscriptional evidence underlines the economic dependency of the monastery on the surrounding agricultural belt. Studies have also linked the smelting and metal casting traditions of Nalanda with other sites of Bihar. Moreover, the focus on the structures in the excavated area – the concentration on planning, purpose and orientation of the so-called Buddhist monasteries and chaityas – have neglected to accommodate the context of sculptures and other religious motifs found at the site. In all these studies, the site has been conceptualised merely in terms of its Buddhist remains and as a university with the association of the different chaityas and stupas with the life of the Buddha and his disciples. In such an endeavour the topographies of other religions have been marginalised. The mahavihara has been looked at as a self-contained unit without much interaction with the other sites in its vicinity. To come back to the Dossiers for nominations prepared by the ASI, they have endorsed the colonial perception of the sites and their monuments and have focused upon describing their outstanding architectural, aesthetic and historical values by analysing the monumentality and beauty of the Mahabodhi Temple and the opulence of Nalanda. The Dossiers also convey a sense of continuous importance of the sites and, hence, the continuity of a particular religious tradition. Moreover, the Dossiers have followed a linear and sequential narrative with chronological continuity and various phases of intervention by the practitioners of the same religion. The UNESCO listing is a good instance of what conforms as heritage and in what form is this heritage to be preserved and popularised. It takes into purview a single dimension of heritage which essentially forms only one aspect of the living memory of the site. For instance, in the case of Bodh Gaya, by focussing merely on the temple and the monuments in its vicinity, the UNESCO notification ascertains a moment in its history trying to overlook the various layers of its existence. “However, it needs to be stressed that Bodhgaya is not, and never has been, only a Buddhist site. Hindus have been visiting Bodhgaya since at least the Buddha’s own lifetime, and beginning in the fifteenth century and extending into the twentieth, the site was actually maintained by a lineage of Saiva priests.”21 As I have discussed through the course of the book, Bodh Gaya and Gaya formed a religious complex

338

Conclusion

revered by several sections of society and the sacred space at both the sites underwent both spatial and temporal changes. In the search for origins and chronology, the social history of religious architecture and the modifications that religious structures underwent is eliminated. At the same time by glorifying a particular historical event and the site associated with it is also used to create identities. The emphasis on monuments and built structures leaves no place for oral histories and living memories, and by freezing the site at a certain moment, the symbiotic relationship between the shrine and the people is broken. By endorsing the Buddhist tag to Nalanda and to Bodh Gaya, the World Heritage listing has also defined the limits or imaginary boundaries within which the site is located, much in the colonial fashion. As isolated monuments, devoid of human networks and participation, once again the Western conception of heritage as a homogenous category has been reimposed. The value of a shrine is determined by the faith of its devotees. A site such as Bodh Gaya has a multi-vocal existence in several parallel traditions: while it is the site of Enlightenment it is also a part of the shraadh ritual. “Because values are in our minds and not inherent to objects, site valuation is fundamentally an extrinsic process. . . . At a specific moment in time, varying individuals or communities can also associate different values with a specific site that as a result concentrates webs of meaning.”22 There is hence no “universal meaning” of a monument, it is rather open to interpretations, representations and forms of preservations; the values are created, based on a certain phase of knowledge production of a specific site, as had been the case in colonial India. At the same time by identifying its “Outstanding value” to humanity, the local meaning and significance of the sites have been changed where Gaya and Bodh Gaya have become exclusive of each other; and the over-dominance of the excavated complex at Nalanda has extricated Nalanda as a monastery isolated from the other sites in its vicinity. Sacred spaces have no fixed meanings nor are they isolated monuments of the past. Shrines have a life after their making and form a series of relationships as they interact with different contexts through time. The process of destruction and appropriation of shrines should be seen in terms of their variegated meanings and functions in a new religious and ritual landscape. The temple site thus means differing things to different communities and serves to redefine their past and negotiate their present in varied ways hence it is judicious to view shrines and their histories in tandem with the people who use them. Through my work, I have attempted to offer an innovative way to approach religious iconography: understanding religious icons as an

Conclusion

339

intrinsic feature of sacred architecture, I have traced how their context, meanings and purpose have changed through history. By unravelling the different layers to the history of religious spaces, I have presented how the icons enshrined within also undergo transformations in their connotations. Most sacred icons can be placed within a logical arrangement of other similar images and motifs, hence iconographic studies should involve the study of the placement of sculptures which accrue meanings to them. Religious icons, moreover, do not depict a certain moment of religious encounters but a whole gamut of experiences as crucial components of well integrated ritual networks. Museums provide fixed meanings to sculptures through the narratives of display and exhibition which are artificially created around them. To overcome this narrow interpretation, it is crucial that religious iconography is understood within the religious landscape for which it was originally created. I have tried to trace how the movement of sculptures and architectural fragments every time the temples were reorganised was not entirely arbitrary or idiosyncratic but aimed towards maintaining religious syncretism. It is critical to hear the multiplicity of voices from the past to understand the multiplicity of meaning behind religious structures and iconography. By drawing from the several layers of inhabitation and usage, we begin to understand the scope of religious icons not merely as illustrations to texts and philosophical traditions but as independent of them. A discussion of colonial legacies is crucial to decipher the ways in which they have affected our understanding of presentday ritual practices and religious sites through perceptible influence of knowledge creation from the past.

Notes 1 Nayanjot Lahiri, ‘Coming to Grips with India’s Ancient Past: John Marshall’s Early Years as Lord Curzon’s Director General of Archaeology in India: Part I,’ South Asian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 1, 1998. 2 “The main object of the Act was: to ensure the proper upkeep and repair of ancient buildings in private ownership excepting such as were used for religious purposes; to prevent the excavation of sites of historic interest by ignorant and unauthorised persons; to secure control over traffic in antiquities and to acquire ownership, where necessary and possible, of monuments and objects of archaeological and historical interest. The act invested the executive, for the first time, with sufficient legal authority with regard to monuments in private ownership and was destined to make a new era of preservation of archaeological remains in the country,” Sourindranath Roy, The Story of Indian Archaeology, 1784–1947, Director General Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, p. 85.

340

Conclusion

3 Curzon enunciates why he wished to reassert the control over the Indian heritage: “We shall never get a really representative collection in India if the British museum argument is steadily and logically applied. Our object should be to persuade scholars to come out here, and to study our treasure and relics in India instead of allowing them to be swamped in the overstocked collections of the British Museum.” Nayanjot Lahiri, ‘Coming to Grips with India’s Ancient Past: John Marshall’s Early Years as Lord Curzon’s Director General of Archaeology in India- Part I.’ 4 HP Ray, ‘Legislation and the Study of the Past: The Archaeological Survey of India and Challenges of the Present,’ paper presented at Symposium on “Masters” and “Indigenous”: Digging the Others’ Past, Lausanne University, January 2016. 5 “The large exposed and conserved sites we see, the gardens around monuments we appreciate, the museums we enter and the objects we admire, the objects on which much of our known perceptions of the past is based – these are all ultimately linked with the period which we have here called ‘the John Marshall’ period in the history of Indian archaeology.” Dilip Chakrabarti in Nayanjot Lahiri, ‘Coming to Grips with India’s Ancient Past: John Marshall’s Early Years as Lord Curzon’s Director General of Archaeology in India: Part I.’ 6 For instance, in the case of Rajgir, Marshall wanted to examine the urban complex of the ancient city and make fresh explorations. He wrote, “I visited by the way the ancient site at Rajagriha a week or two ago and was immensely struck by the opportunities it offers for excavation.” Ibid. 7 John Marshall, Conservation Manual: A Handbook for the Use of Archaeological Officers and Others Entrusted with the Care of Ancient Monuments, Superintendent of Government Printing, India, 1923. 8 Ibid., p. 10. 9 Ibid. 10 Deborah Sutton, ‘Devotion, Antiquity, and Colonial Custody of the Hindu Temple in British India,’ Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 47, No. 1, January 2013, pp. 135–166. 11 Umakant Mishra, ‘Shrines as “Monuments”: Issues of Classification, Custody and Conflict in Orissa,’ in HP Ray (ed.), Negotiating Cultural Identity: Landscapes in Early Medieval South Asian History, Routledge, 2015, pp. 236–273. 12 The first catalogue of the Patna Museum was published by PL Gupta in 1965, titled Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities, it concentrated solely on stone sculptures, metal images, terracotta and other minor antiquities. In 2001, the catalogue was revised and published as two new volumes edited by Naseem Akhtar. The catalogues were now titled Patna Museum Catalogue: Terracotta and Metal Sculptures and Patna Museum Catalogue: Stone Sculptures and Other Antiquities. 13 ‘World Heritage,’ http://whc.unesco.org/en/about/, accessed on 10 April, 2017. 14 Ibid. 15 Sophia Labadi, UNESCO, Cultural Heritage and Outstanding Universal Value: Value Based Analysis of World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage Convention, AltaMira Press, 2012, p. 7. 16 ‘Mahabodhi Temple Complex at Bodh Gaya,’ http://whc.unesco.org/en/ list/1056, accessed on 10 April, 2017.

Conclusion

341

17 Ibid. 18 ‘Archaeological Site of Nalanda Mahavihara (Nalanda University) at Nalanda, Bihar,’ http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1502, accessed on 10 April, 2017. 19 ‘Nomination Dossier, Excavated Remains of the Nalanda Mahavihara,’ http://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1502.pdf, accessed on 10 April, 2017. 20 Ibid. 21 HP Ray ‘From Multi-Religious Sites to Mono- Religious Monuments in South Asia: The Colonial Legacy of Heritage Management,’ in Tim Winter and Patrick Daly (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Heritage in Asia, Routledge, London, 2011. 22 Sophia Labadi, UNESCO, Cultural Heritage and Outstanding Universal Value, p. 15.

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words

For the ease of reading, diacritical marks have not been used in the text of the book. This glossary lists the Hindi and Sanskrit words used. Some words, such as stupa, vihara, avatara, which are popularly used and have been adopted in the English language have been excluded. Names of dynasties and places have also been excluded. abhaya, abhaya Ajgaibinātha, Ajgaibinatha āmalaka, amalaka Āpanaka, Apanaka Aparājitā, Aparajita apsarā, apsara akhaṅḍa jyoti, akhanda jyoti Akṣhobya, Akshobya Akśyavaṭa, Akshyavata Aniemeshloc ̣ana, Aniemeshlochana Ardhanāriśvara, Ardhanarisvara arḍha-paryānkāsana, ardha-paryankasana Āśāji, Ashaji Aśoka, Asoka aṣṭa dhātu, ashta dhatu Avalokiteśvara, Avalokitesvara āyudha, ayudhas Bābāsthāna, Babasthana Baḍki, Badki Baidyanāth, Baidyanath Baithak Bhairav, Baithak Bhairav bālasthāpanā, balasthapana Barādari, Baradari

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words Bateśvara, Bateshvara Beṇī, Beni bhadrapīṭha, bhadrapitha Bhaḳti, Bhakti Brahmā, Brahma Brahmaṇi, Brahmani Bhṛṅgi, Bhringi bhūmisparamudrā, bhumisparamudra Buddhapad, Buddhapad C̣akrasaṁvara, Chakrasamvara C̣āmuṇḍā, Chamunda c ̣ala pratimā, chala pratima C̣aitya, chaitya C̣aurāsimuṅī, Chaurasi Muni chatras, chatras Chhath, Chhath daṁpatī, dampati damrū, damru dargāh, dargah darpaṅ, darpan darśana, darshan Daśaratha, Dasaratha Daśavatāra, Dasavatara Daṭtātreya, Dattatreya Devī, Devi dhām, dham dharaṅi, dharani Dharmac ̣akra pravartanmudrā, dharmachakra pravartana dharmaśālā, dharmashala Dhyāni, dhyani dhokrā, dhokra dhruv berās, dhruv beras dhyāna, dhyana dhyānayoga, dhyanyoga Draupadī, Draupadi Draviḍa, Dravida Gadādhar, Gadadhar gaṇā, gana Gaṇapati, Ganapati Gaṅdharva, gandharva Gaṇeṣa, Ganesha

343

344

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words

Gau, gau garbha gṛha, garbha griha Gauri, Gauri Gayāsurī, Gayasuri ghāt, ghat ghora, ghora ghana, ghana ghaṅṭā, ghanta guhasthāna, guhasthana Guhyasamāja, Guhyasamaja Heruka, Heruka idgāh, idgah itihās, itihasa Jagdaṃbā, Jagdamba Jaṃbāla, Jambhala Janārdana, Janardana jatāmukuta, jatamukuta jīrṇodhāra, jirnodhaar judā, juda Juṅglīnāth, Junglinath Kadaṃba, Kadamba Kailāśa, Kailash Kalandā, Kalanda Kāṅwariyā, kanwariya kapāla, kapala Kārtik, Kartik kaṣṭi paṭthar, kashti patthar Kātyāyani, Katyayani kiṅnaras, kinnaras kiratmukha, kiratmukha Kṛṣṇa, Krishna kuṇḍ, kund Kuntī, Kunti Lakṣmaṇa, Lakshmana Lakṣmi, Lakshmi lalitāsana, lalitasana līlamūrti, lilamurti liṅga, linga Māgh, Magh Madhucchiṣṭavidhāna, madhucchistavidhana madrasā, madrasa

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words Mahābhārata, Mahabharata Mahādev, Mahadev Mahārānisthāna, Maharanisthan Maheśvara, Mahesvara Mahisāsuramrdini, Mahisasuramardini Māhātmaya, Mahatmya mahāvihāra, mahavihara Mahāvīra, Mahavira mālādhari, maladhari Maṇgalā, Mangala maṇḍapa, mandapa maṇdir, Mandir Manjuśri, Manjushri Manjuvajṛa, Manjuvajra Māric ̣ī, Marichi Mārkaṇḍya, Markandya Mānpaṭhar, Manpathar masjid, masjid mātā, maata maṭha, matha Mantrayāṅa, Mantrayana melā, mela mithuṅa, mithuna moḳṣa, moksha Mṛcchakaṭika, Mrichchakatika mudrā, mudra Mūlaka, Mulaka muṅḍu, mundu nāga, naga nagāra, nagara Nandī, Nandi Narasiṃha, Narasimha Nārāyaṇa, Narayana Navagraha, Navagraha Navrātra, Navratra Neem, neem Nilotpal, nilotpal Padmpāṇi, Padmapani pañc, panch pañcaliṅga, panchalinga pañcaratha, pancharatha

345

346

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words

pañcāyatana, panchayatana Pārśvanāth, Parashwanath Pārvatī, Parvati Paśupatināth, Pasupatinath Pātāleśwara, Patalesvara piṇḍadāna, pindadaan pīpal, pipal pīr, pir pitā, pita pītha, pitha pitṙa, pitra pokhrā, pokhra prabhāmaṇḍala, prabhamandala pradakṣinā, pradakshina prakṛti, prakriti pūja, puja Purāṇa, Purana puruśa, purusha rājā, raja rākśasa, rakshasa Rāma, Rama Rāmāyaṇa, Ramayana Ṛṣi, Rishi Rudra, Rudra Rukmiṅī, Rukmini rūpa, rupa sabhā, sabha Śakti, Shakti Saṅkaṭharini, Sankatharini Śāstras, shastra saumya, saumya Saptamātṛkas, Saptamatrakas Sattvavajṛi, Sattvajri Siḍdheśvaranatha, Siddhesvaranatha Śikhara, shikhara Siṅgha vāhinī, Singha vahini Śilpa, Shilpa Sitā, Sita Sitalā, Sitala Śiva, Shiva Śivālaya, Shivalaya

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words Skaṅda, Skanda śloka, shloka Sparśavajṙa, Sparshavajra śrāḍdha, shraadh Ṣrāvaṅa, Shravana Ṣrenika, Shrenika Ṣṛī, Shri ṣṛṇgāra, shringara sthāna, sthana stṙota, strota sukhāsana, sukhasana Sujātā, Sujata Surya, Surya suṣira, sushira Swayambhu, Swayambhu Tārā, Tara Tathāgatas, Tathagata Teliyā, Teliya tīrtha, tirtha Trilokavijaya, Trilokavijaya Triloknāth, Triloknath Tripurāsundari, Tripurasundari triratha, triratha triśula, trishula Umā, Uma uṭsavamūrti, utsavamurti Uttar-Vāhinī, uttar-vahini Vāgeśvari, Vageshwari vāhana, vahanas Vaiśākh, Vaishakha Vajrapāṇi, Vajrapani Vajrāsana, Vajrasana Vajrasattva, Vajrasattva Vajrayogini, Vajrayogini varada, varada Vardhamān, Vardhaman Varśavardhana, Varsavardhana Vāstu, vastu Vasundharā, Vasundhara Vateśwar, Vateshvara vāyu, vayu

347

348

List of Hindi and Sanskrit words

Vesara, Vesara Vidyādahara, Vidyadhara Viṣṇu, Vishnu Viṣṇupad, Vishnupad Yakṣas, Yaksha Yoginitantṙa, Yoginitantra yoṇi, yoni

Bibliography

Primary sources Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India from the Year 1861–62. Annual Reports of the Archaeological Survey of India from the Year 1902– 1930. Annual Reports of the Managing Committee of the Patna Museum from the Years 1923 to 1933. Broadley, AM, ‘The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar’, Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, 41(3), 1872. Broadley, AM, The Buddhistic Remains of Bihar, first published in 1872, this edition, Bharati Prakashan, Varanasi, 1979. Broadley, AM, Ruins of the Nalanda Monastery at Bargaon, Sub-Division Bihar, Zillah Patna, Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1872. Chaudhary, PC Roy, Bihar District Gazetteer: Gaya, Printed by the Superintendent Press, Bihar, Patna, 1957. Cunningham, Alexander, Four Reports Made During the Years, 1862-63-6465, Archaeological Survey of India, Cunningham, Published by Indological Book House, 1972. Cunningham, Alexander, Mahabodhi or the Great Buddhist Temple under the Bodhi Tree at Buddha-Gaya, first published in 1892, this edition, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1998. Cunningham, Alexander and JD Beglar, Report of a Tour Through the Bengal Provinces of Patna, Published by Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, 1878. Dagens, Bruno, Mayamatam: An Indian Treatise on Housing, Architecture and Iconography, IGNCA and Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 2000. Fergusson, James, History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, first published in 1876, this edition, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1967. Grierson, GA, Bodh Gaya Math, Printed by the Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1893. Jackson, VH (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Patna and Gaya in 1811–12, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1926.

350

Bibliography

Journal of Bihar and Orissa Research Society from the Years 1915 to 1929. Markham, Clements R, Major James Rennell and the Rise of Modern English Geography, Cassell, London, 1895. Marshall, John, Indian Archaeological Policy, 1915, Superintendent Government Printing, India, Calcutta, 1916. Marshall, John, Conservation Manual: A Handbook for the Use of Archaeological Officers and Others Entrusted with the Care of Ancient Monuments, Superintendent Government Printing, India, Calcutta, 1923. Mitra, Rajendralala, Buddha Gaya: The Hermitage of Sakya Muni, Government of Bengal, Bengal Secretariat Press, Calcutta, 1878. Oldham, CEAW (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Shahabad in 1812–13, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1926. Oldham, CEAW (ed.), Journal of Francis Buchanan Kept during the Survey of the District of Bhagalpur in 1810–11, Superintendent Government Printing, Bihar and Orissa, Patna, 1930. O’Malley, LSS, Bihar District Gazetteer: Gaya, first published in 1906, reprinted by Logos Press, New Delhi, 2007. Rennell, James, Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan: Or the Mogul Empire: With an Introduction, Illustrative of the Geography and Present Division of That Country: And a Map of the Countries Situated between the Head of the Indus and the Caspian Sea, M Brown, London, 1788. Rennell, James, Journals of Major James Rennell, First Surveyor-General of India, Written for the Information of the Governors of Bengal During His Surveys of the Ganga and Brahmaputra River, 1764–1767, Asiatic Society of Bengal, Calcutta, 1910. Thackerey, Edward T, Biographical Notes of the Officers of the Royal (Bengal) Engineers, Smith, Elder and Co., London, 1900.

Secondary readings Books Ahir, DC, Buddhist Shrines in India, first edition 1986, this edition, BR Paperback, 2000. Akhtar, Naseem (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Stone Sculptures and Other Antiquities, Patna Museum, Patna, 2001. Akhtar, Naseem (ed.), Patna Museum Catalogue: Terracotta and Metal Antiquities, Patna Museum, Patna, 2001. Akhtar, Naseem (ed.), Art and Archaeology of Eastern India, Patna Museum, Patna, 2003. Archer, Mildred, Early Views of India: The Picturesque Journeys of Thomas and William Daniell 1786–1794, Thames and Hudson Ltd., London, 1980. Asher, Frederick M, The Art of Eastern India, 300–800, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1980. Asher, Frederick M, Bodh Gaya: Monumental Legacy, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2008.

Bibliography

351

Asher, Frederick M, Nalanda: Situating the Great Monastery, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 2015. Bandyopadhyay, Bimal, Metal Sculptures of Eastern India, Sundeep Prakashan, New Delhi, 1981. Banerjea, JN, Development of Hindu Iconography, Second Edition, Calcutta University, 1956. Banerjea, RD, Eastern Indian School of Medieval Sculptures, ASI, New Imperial Series, XLVII, Manager of Publication, New Delhi, 1933. Barua, BB, Gaya and Buddha Gaya, Volume 1 and 2, Bhartiya Publishing House, Varanasi, 1975. Behrendt, Kert, Tibet and India: Buddhist Traditions and Transformations, The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, New York, Winter 2014. Bhattacharya, Gauriswar and Enamul Haque (eds.), Essays on Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Iconography and Epigraphy, International Centre for Study of Bengal Art, 2000. Bhattacharya, NN, History of Tantric Religion, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1982. Bhattasali, NK, Iconography of Buddhist and Brahmanical Sculptures in the Dacca Museum, first published in 1929, this edition, Indological Book House, Varanasi, 1972. Bloch, Theodor, Supplementary Catalogue of the Archaeological Collection of the Indian Museum, The Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta, 1911. Chakrabarti, Dilip K, A History of Indian Archaeology: From the Beginning to 1947, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1988. Chakravarty, Kalyan K, Early Buddhist Art of Bodh Gaya, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. Champakalakshmi, R, The Hindu Temple, Roli Books, New Delhi, 2001. Chandra, Pramod, The Study of Indian Temple Architecture: Papers Presented at a Seminar Held in Varanasi in 1967, AIIS, 1975. Chattopadhyaya, BD, Studying Early India: Archaeology, Texts and Historical Issues, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2003, First Paperback Printing, 2005. Chitgopekar, Nilima, Encountering Saivism: The Deity, the Milieu, the Entourage, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1998. Davidson, Ronald M, Indian Escoteric Buddhism: A Social History of the Tantric Movement, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 2004. Davis, Richard, Lives of Indian Images, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. Dehejia, Vidya (ed.), Royal Patrons and Great Temple Art, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 1988. Dehejia, Vidya (ed.), Representing the Body, Published by Kali for Women in association with the Book Review Literary Trust, 1997. Dehejia, Vidya (ed.), The Sensuous and the Sacred: Chola Bronzes from South India, Mapin Ahmadabad and American Federation of Arts, New York, 2003. Dehejia, Vidya (ed.), Chola: Sacred Bronzes of South India, Royal Academy of Arts, London, 2006. Desai, Devangana, Religious Imagery in Khajuraho, Franco-Indian Research, Mumbai, 1996.

352

Bibliography

Desai, Devangana, Khajuraho, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2001. Desai, Vishakha and Mason Darielle, Gods, Guardians and Lovers: Temple Sculptures from North India 700–1200 AD, Asia Society, New York, Mapin Publishers, Ahmadabad, 1993. Donaldson, Thomas E, Śiva, Pārvāti and the Allied Images, in Perspectives in Art and Archaeology, Volume 8, DK Printworld, New Delhi, 2007. Edney, Matthew H, Mapping an Empire: The Geographical Construction of British India, 1765–1843, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1997. Elgood, Heather, Hinduism and the Religious Arts, Cassell, London, 1999. Eliade, Mircea, The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion, Harcourt, Brace, New York, 1959. Geary, David, Matthew R Sayers and Abhishek Singh Amar (eds.), Cross Disciplinary Perspective on a Contested Buddhist Site, Bodh Gaya Jataka, London, Routledge, 2012. Ghosh, A, A Guide to Nalanda, Third Edition, Manager of Publication Delhi, Government of India Press, Calcutta, 1950. Goldberg, Ellen, The Lord Who Is Half Woman: Ardhanarisvara in Indian and Feminist Perspective, State University of New York Press, Albany, New York, 2002. Gopinath Rao, TA, Elements of Hindu Iconography, first published in Madras 1914, this edition, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. Gottschalk, Peter, Religion, Science and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India, Oxford University Press, New York, 2013. Guha-Thakurta, Tapati, Monuments, Objects, Histories: Institutions of Art in Colonial and Post-Colonial India, Columbia University Press, New York, 2004. Gupta, PL, Patna Museum Catalogue of Antiquities: Stone Sculptures, Metal Images, Terracottas and Minor Antiquities, Patna Museum, Patna, 1965. Huber, Toni, The Holy Land Reborn: Pilgrimage and Tibetan Reinvention of Buddhist India, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2008. Huntington, John C and Dina Bangdel (eds.), Circle of Bliss: Buddhist Meditational Art, Serindia Publications, 2003. Huntington, Susan L, The Pala-Sena Schools of Sculpture, EJ Brill, Leiden, 1984. Huntington, Susan L and John Huntington, The Art of Ancient India: Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, Weather Hill, New York and Tokyo, 1985. Juneja, Monica (ed.), Architecture in Medieval India: Forms, Contexts and Histories, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2001. Khandalawala, Karl J (ed.), The Great Tradition: Indian Bronze Masterpieces, Published on behalf of Festival of India, New Delhi, 1988. Kinnard, Jacob N, Imaging Wisdom: Seeing and Knowing in the Art of Indian Buddhism, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 2001. Klimburg-Salter, Deborah and Linda Lojda, Changing Forms and Cultural Identity: Religious and Secular Iconographies, Volume 1: South Asian Archaeology and Art, Brepols Publishers, 2014. Kramrisch, Stella, The Hindu Temple, Volume 1 and 2, first published in 1946, this edition, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1976.

Bibliography

353

Kramrisch, Stella, Manifestations of Shiva, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, 1981. Kumar, Brajmohan, Archaeology of Pataliputra and Nalanda, Ramanand Vidya Bhavan, New Delhi, 1987. Labadi, Sophia, UNESCO, Cultural Heritage, and Outstanding Universal Value: Value Based Analysis of the World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage Conventions, AltaMira Press, 2012. Leoshko, Janice (ed.), Bodh Gaya, Marg Publications, Mumbai, 1988. Leoshko, Janice, Sacred Traces: British Explorations of Buddhism in South Asia, Ashgate Publishers, UK, 2003. Mani, C (ed.), The Heritage of Nalanda, Aryan Books International and Asoka Mission, New Delhi, 2008. Mathur, Saloni, India by Design: Colonial History and Cultural Display, University of California Press, Berkeley, 2007. Mehta, Rustom J, Masterpieces of Indian Bronzes and Metal Sculptures, Taraporevala Sons and Co., Mumbai, 1971. Meister, Michael W (ed.), Ethnography and Personhood: Notes from the Field, Rawat Publications, Jaipur, 2000. Meister, Michael W, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Indian Temple Architecture, Foundations of North Indian Style, AIIS and Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1988. Meister, Michael W, Dhaky and Krishna Deva (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Indian Temple Architecture, Period of Early Maturity, AIIS and Oxford University Press, 1991. Miller, Barbara Stoller, The Powers of Art: Patronage in Indian Culture, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1992. Miller, Barbara Stoller (ed.), Exploring India’s Sacred Art: Selected Writing of Stella Kramrisch, edited and with biographical essay by Barbara Stoller Miller, Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts Series, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, New Delhi, 1994. Misra, BN, Nalanda, 3 Volumes, BR Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2008. Misra, RN, Silpa in Indian Tradition: Concept and Instrumentalities, Indian Institute of Advanced Studies, Shimla and Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2009. Mitra, Debala, Buddhist Monuments, first published in 1971, this edition, Sahitya Samsad, Calcutta, 1980. Mitra, Sisir Kumar (ed.), East Indian Bronzes, Centre for Advanced Study in Ancient Indian History and Culture, Calcutta University, 1979. Mitter, Partha, Much Maligned Monsters: History of European Reactions to Indian Art, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977. Mubayi, Yaaminey, Altars of Power: The Temple and the State in the Land of Jagannatha, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2005. Nath, Vijay, Purana and Acculturation, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2001. Pal, Pratapaditya, Nepal: Where the Gods are Young, Asia House Gallery, New York, 1975.

354

Bibliography

Pal, Pratapaditya, Indian Sculptures, Volume 1 and 2, Los Angeles County Museum in Association with University of California, Los Angeles, 1988. Patil, DR, The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, 1963. Poster, Amy, From Indian Earth: 4000 Years of Terracotta Art, Brooklyn Museum of Art, New York, 1986. Prasad, Ram Chandra, Archaeology of Champa and Vikramsila, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1987. Preston, James J, Cult of the Goddess: Social and Religious Change in a Hindu Temple, Vikas Publishing House, New Delhi, 1980. Ray, HP (ed.), Sacred Landscapes in Asia: Shared Traditions, Multiple Identities, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 2007. Ray, HP, Colonial Archaeology in South Asia: The Legacy of Sir Mortimer Wheeler, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2008. Ray, HP (ed.), Archaeology and Text: The Temple in South Asia, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2010. Ray, HP, The Return of the Buddha: Ancient Symbols for a New Nation, Routledge, New Delhi, 2014. Ray, HP (ed.), Negotiating Cultural Identity: Landscapes in Early Medieval South Asian History, Routledge, 2015. Ray, HP and Carla M Sinopoli (eds.), Archaeology as History in Early South Asia, ICHR and Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2004. Ray, Niharranjan, An Approach to Indian Art, Publication Bureau, Panjab University, Chandigarh, 1974. Ray, Niharranjan, Karl J Khandalawala and Sadashiv Gorakshakar (eds.), Eastern Indian Bronzes, Lalit Kala Series of Indian Art, Lalit Kala Akademi, New Delhi, 1986. Roy, Sourindranath, The Story of Indian Archaeology, 1784–1947, Director General Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, 1996. Ruegg, Davis S, The Symbiosis of Buddhism with Brahmanism/Hinduism in South Asia and of Buddhism with “Local Cults” in Tibet and the Himalayan Region, OAW, 2008. Sahai, B, JC French, The Art of Pal Empire of Bengal, Ramanand Vidyabhavan, New Delhi, 1983. Sankalia, HD, The University of Nalanda, Oriental Publishers, New Delhi, 1972. Saraswati, SK, A Survey of Indian Sculptures, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1975. Sengupta, Gautam and Kaushik Gangopadhyay (eds.), Archaeology in India: Individuals, Ideas and Institutions, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi in association with Centre for Archaeological Studies and Training Eastern India, Calcutta, 2009. Shah, Kirit K, The Problem of Identity: Women in Early Indian Inscriptions, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2001. Sharma, Sudhakar, The Heritage of Buddhist Pala Art, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2004.

Bibliography

355

Shrimali, KM (ed.), Essays in Indian Art, Religion and Society, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1987. Singh, Arun Kumar, Archaeology of Magadha Region, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1991. Singh, SK (ed.), ‘Early Medieval Indian Art’, Proceedings of the National Seminar, 2001, Patna Museum, Patna. Singh, Upinder, The Discovery of Ancient India: Early Archaeologists and the Beginnings of Archaeology, Permanent Black, New Delhi, 2004. Singh, Vivek Kumar and Sudhir Kumar Jha, Patna a Monumental History, Vitasta Publishing, Patna, 2010. Sinha, BP, Archaeology in Bihar, KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, 1988. Sinha, BP Directory of Bihar Archaeology: Silver Jubilee Year Publication, Bihar Puravid Parishad, 2000. Sinha, Chitta Ranjan Prasad, Early Sculptures of Bihar, Indological Book House, Patna, 1980. Sinha, Chittra Ranjan Prasad (ed.), Art, Archaeology and Cultural History of India, Part 1, BR Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2006. Sinha, Kamini, Early Bronzes of Bihar, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1983. Srimali, KM (ed.), Essays in Indian Art: Religion and Society, Volume 1: Of Indian History Congress Golden Jubilee Year Publication Ser. Volume 1, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1987. Srivastava, AL, Uma Mahesvara: An Iconographic Study of the Divine Couple, Sukarkshetra Shodh Sansthan, Kasganj, UP, 2004. Stewart, Mary L, Nalanda Mahavihara: A Study of an Indian Pala Period Buddhist Site and British Historical Archaeology, British Archaeological Reports International Series, Oxford, 1861–1938. Thapan, Anita R, Understanding Ganapati: Insights into the Dynamics of a Cult, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, New Delhi, 1997. Vatsyayan, Kapila, Concepts of Space: Ancient and Modern, IGNCA, New Delhi, 1991. Verghese, Anila, Religious Traditions at Vijayanagara, as Revealed Through Its Monuments, AIIS and Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1995. Verghese, Anila, Archaeology, Art and Religion: New Perspectives on Vijayanagara, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2000. Vidyarthi, LP, The Sacred Complex in Hindu Gaya, first published in 1961, this edition, Concept Publishing Co., New Delhi, 1978. Williams, Joanna G (ed.), Kaladarsana: American Studies in the Art of India, EJ Brill, 1981. Williams, Joanna G, The Art of Gupta India: Empire and Province, Heritage Publishers, New Delhi, 1983.

356

Bibliography

Articles Amar, Abhishek S, ‘Buddhist Responses to Brahmana Challenges in Medieval India: Bodhgaya and Gaya’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland, 22(1), 2012, pp. 155–185. Asher, Frederick M, ‘The Former Broadley Collections, Bihar Sharif’, Artibus Asia, 32, 1970, pp. 105–124. Asher, Frederick M, ‘The Bodh Gaya Temple: Whose Structure Is Iṭ’, Religion and the Arts, 8(1), 2004. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘The “Stele” in Bihar and Bengal, 8th–12th Centuries: Structure and Motifs’, Berliner Indologische Studien, 2, 1986, pp. 107–131. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘Provenance and Present Location of Some Images from the Broadley Collection’, in Devendra Handa and A Agrawal (ed.), Ratna-Chandrika: Panorama of Oriental Studies (Shri R.C. Agrawala Festschrift), Harman Publishing House, New Delhi, 1989, pp. 261–267. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘Early Buddhist Sculpture at Kurkihar: The Buddha Images’, in Claudine Bautze-Picron (ed.), Makaranda: Essays in Honour of James Harle, Sri Satguru Publications, New Delhi, 1990. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘Buddhist Slabs from Nalanda’, in Berliner Indologische Studien, Band 6, Reinbek, 1991, pp. 81–100. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘Crying Leaves: “Some Remarks on the Art of Pala India (8th–12th Centuries) and Its International Legacy”, East and West, 43(¼), December 1993, pp. 277–294. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, ‘The Art of Eastern India in the Avery Brundage Collection’, Arts of Asia, July–August 1995. Bautze-Picron, Claudine, The Art of Eastern India in the Collection of Museum für Indische Kunst, Berlin, Dietrich Reimer Verlag, Berlin, 1998. Bisschop, Peter, ‘Saivism in the Gupta- Vakataka Age’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, 20(4), October 2010, pp. 477–488. Chattopadhyay, PK, ‘Bronzes of Eastern India’, in Bhagwant Sahai (ed.), Recent Researches in Indian Art and Iconography, Kaveri Books, New Delhi, 2008. Chaudhary, Radhakrishna, ‘The Antiquarian Remains of the Patharghatta Vateswara Complex’, Journal of Bihar Research Society, 71–73, 1985/87. Cherry, Deborah, ‘The Afterlives of Monuments’, South Asian Studies, 29(1), 2013. Desai, Devangana, ‘Social Dimensions of Art in Early India, Presidential Address to Indian History Congress’, 50th Session, Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur, December 1989, pp. 21–56. Dye, Joseph M, ‘Hindu Sculpture of Northern India’, Orientations, 19(7), July 1988. Fisher, Robert E, ‘Art from the Himalayas’, Orientations, 19(7), July 1988. Guha-Thakurta, Tapati, ‘The Museumised Relic: Archaeology and the First Museum of Colonial India’, IESHR, 34(1), 1997. Guha-Thakurta, Tapati, ‘Our Gods, Their Museums: The Contrary Careers of India’s Art Objects’, Art History, 30(4), 2007.

Bibliography

357

Guha-Thakurta, Tapati, ‘The Production and Reproduction of a Monument: The Many Lives of Sanchi Stupa’, South Asian Studies, 29(1), 2013. Guy, John, ‘The Mahabodhi Temple: Pilgrim Souvenirs of Buddhist India’, The Burlington Magazine, 133(1059), June, 1991. Haque, Enamul, ‘The Pala Patrimony in the Metropolitan Museum of Art’, Orientations, 25(3), March 1994. Huntington, John C, ‘Sowing the Seeds of the Lotus: A Journey to the Great Pilgrimage Sites of Buddhism, Volumes 1 and 2’, Orientations, 16(11), November 1985. Huntington, Susan L and John C Huntington, ‘Leaves from the Bodhi Tree: The Art of Pala India (8th–12th Centuries) and Its International Legacy’, Orientations, 10(20), November 1989. Irwin, John, ‘Some Unknown Gupta Sculptures from Sultanganj’, Artibus Asia, 17, 1954. Jamuar, BK, ‘Rajaona: An Archaeological Study’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 1, 1977. Jamuar, BK, ‘The Koncheshwar Temple at Konch’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 2, 1978. Jash, Prabhanand, ‘Saivism and the Uma Mahesvara Icon’, in Bhagwant Sahai (ed.), Recent Researches in Indian Art and Iconography, Kaveri Books, New Delhi, 2008. Lahiri, Nayanjot, ‘John Marshall’s Appointment as the Director-General Archaeological Survey of India: A Survey of the Papers Pertaining to His Selection’, South Asian Studies, 13(1), 1997. Lahiri, Nayanjot, ‘Coming to Grips with India’s Past: John Marshall’s Early Years as Lord Curzon’s Director-General of Archaeology in India, Part- I’, South Asian Studies, 14(1), 1998. Lahiri, Nayanjot, ‘Archaeology and Identity in Colonial India’, Antiquity, 74, 2000, pp. 687–692. Lahiri, Nayanjot, ‘Coming to Grips with India’s Past and Her Living Present: John Marshall’s Early Years 1902–6, Part II’, South Asian Studies, 16(1), 2000. Leoshko, Janice, ‘Buddhist Art of Northern India’, Orientations, 19(7), July 1988. Leoshko, Janice, ‘On the Construction of a Buddhist Pilgrimage Site’, Art History, 19(4), 1996. Leoshko, Janice, ‘On the Buddhist Ruins of Bodh Gaya and Bamiyan’, Thrid Text, 25(6), 2011. Losty, Jeremiah P, ‘The Mahabodhi Temple before Its Restoration’, in Gaurishwar Bhattacharya (ed.), Akshayanivi: Essays Presented to Dr. Debala Mitra in Admiration of Her Scholarly Contributions, Sri Satguru Publications, New Delhi, 1991. Malandra, Geri H, ‘The Creation of a Past for Ajanta and Ellora’, in Catherine B Asher and Thomas R Metcalf (ed.), Perceptions of South Asia’s Visual Past, Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi, 1994. Meister, Michael W, ‘Juncture and Conjuncture: Punning and Temple Architecture’, Artibus Asia, 41, 1979.

358

Bibliography

Meister, Michael W, ‘Temple Restoration and Transformation’, Ellen Raven (ed.), South Asian archaeology 1999, the fifteenth International Conference of the European Association of South Asian Archaeologists Proceedings, University of Leiden, 5–9 July 1999, Forsten, Groningen, 2008. Mishra, BN, ‘Art and Architecture of Nalanda’, in CP Sinha (ed.), Art and Archaeology, Volume 2, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, 1990. Mitra, RL, ‘On the Ruins of Buddha Gaya’, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 33, 1864. Mukherjee, Sraman, ‘New Province, Old Capital: Making Patna Pataliputra’, IESHR, 46(2), 2009. Mukherjee, Sraman, ‘Configuring Sacred Spaces: Archaeology Temples and Monument Making in Colonial Orissa’, South Asian Studies, 29(1), 2013. Mullick, CC, ‘Aesthetics of Nalanda Sculptures’, in CP Sinha (ed.), Art and Archaeology, Volume 2, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1990. Nath, Vijay, ‘From Brahmanism to Hinduism: Negotiating the Myth of the Great Tradition,’ Social Scientist, 29(3/4), March–April 2001. Pal, Pratapaditya, ‘Sculptures to Make You Marvel: Some Himalayan Bronzes in the Norton Simon Museum’, Orientations, 27(7), July–August 1996. Parimoo, Ratan, ‘Stella Kramrisch’s Approach to Indian Art’, in Parul Pandya Dhar (ed.), Indian Art History: Changing Perspectives, DK Printworld and National Museum Institute, New Delhi, 2011, pp. 69–88. Prasad, Birendra N, ‘The Socio-Religious Dimensions of Dedicatory Inscriptions on Sculptures Donated to a Buddhist Establishments in Early Medieval Magadha: Kurkihar, c. 800–1200 CE’, Journal of the Oxford Centre of Buddhist Studies, 7, 2014, pp. 116–152. Prasad, PC, ‘Aphsad: An Ancient University’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 1, 1977. Preston, James, ‘Sacred Centers and Symbolic Networks in India’, in S Mahapatra (ed.), The Realm of the Sacred, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1992. Ray, HP, ‘Archaeology and Empire: Buddhist Monuments in Monsoon Asia’, IESHR, 45(3), 2008. Ray, HP, ‘From Multi-Religious Sites to Mono-Religious Monuments in South Asia: The Colonial Legacy of Heritage Management’, in Patrick Daley and Tim Winter (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Heritage in Asia, Routledge, London, 2012. Ray, HP, Oceanography in Historical Perspective: Mapping the Past in the Present, Maritime History Society, Mumbai, 2015. Ray, HP, ‘Legislation and the Study of the Past: The Archaeological Survey of India and Challenges of the Present’, paper presented at Symposium on “Masters” and “Indigenous”: Digging the Others’ Past, Lausanne University, January 2016. Reitz, Falk, ‘Exchange of Formal Concepts between Buddhist and Brahmanical Pancayatana Complexes’, in RC Sharma (ed.), Interaction between Brahmanical and Buddhist Art, DK Printworld, New Delhi, 2004.

Bibliography

359

Robb, Peter, ‘Completing “Our Stock of Geography”, or an Object “Still More Sublime”: Colin Mackenzie’s Survey of Mysore, 1799–1810’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, Third Series, 8(2), 1998. Rodd, Rennell, ‘Major James Rennell’, The Geographical Journal, 75(4), 1930. Sahai, B, ‘The Bronzes from Fatehpur’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 1, 1977. Sahai, B, ‘The Metallic Composition of Bronzes from Bihar’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 1, 1977. Sahai, B, ‘Bronze Images of Brahmanical Deities from Bihar’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 2, 1978. Sanderson, Alexis, ‘Saivism and Tantric Traditions’, in S Sutherland, L Houlden, P Clarke and F Hardy (ed.), The World’s Religions, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1988, pp. 660–704. Sanderson, Alexis, ‘Vajrayana: Origin and Function’, in Buddhism into the Year 2000, International Conference Proceedings, Bangkok and Los Angeles by Dhammakāya Foundation, 1995, pp. 89–102. Sanderson, Alexis, ‘The Rise and Dominance of Saivism during the Early Medieval Period’, in Shingo Einoo (ed.), Genesis and Development of Tantrism, Institute of Oriental Culture, University of Tokyo, 2009. Sanderson, Alexis, ‘The Influence of Saivism on Pala Buddhism’, Lecture at the University of Toronto at Mississauga, February 2010. Saran, SC, ‘Brahmanical Stone Sculptures from Antichak’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 2, 1978. Saran, SC, ‘Vikramsila University: A Centre of Tantricism’, in JS Jha (ed.), KP Jayaswal Commemoration Volume, KP Jayaswal Research Institute, Patna, 1981. Sengupta, Indra, ‘A Conservation Code for the Colony: John Marshall’s Conservation Manual and Monument Preservation between India and Europe’, in M Falser and Monica Juneja (ed.), Archaeologizing Heritage? Transcultural Research, Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 2013. Shangraw, Clarence F, ‘Looking at Asian Art Patronage: Some Cross Sectional Views’, Orientations, 20(9), September 1989. Sharma, RS, ‘Material Milieu of Tantricism’, in RS Sharma (ed.), Indian Society: Historical Probings, In Memory of DD Kosambi, ICHR, New Delhi, 1974. Shaw, Julia, ‘Archaeology of Religious Change: Introduction’, World Archaeology, 45(1), 2013. Singh, Kavita, ‘The Museum Is National’, India International Centre Quarterly, 29(3/4), Winter 2002–Spring 2003. Singh, Kavita, ‘Material Fantasy: The Museum in Colonial India’, in Gayatri Sinha (ed.), India: Art and Visual Culture, 1857–2007, Marg Publications and Bodhi Art Gallery, Mumbai, 2009. Singh, Purushottam, ‘Sir Alexander Cunningham’, RK Sharma and Devendra Handa (ed.), Revealing India’s Past: Recent Trends in Art and Architecture,

360

Bibliography

AM Shastri Commemoration Volume, Volume 1, Aryan Books International, New Delhi, 2005. Singh, Rajesh, ‘The Writings of Stella Kramrisch with Reference to Indian Art History: The Issues of Object, Method, Language within the Grand Narrative’, East and West, 53(¼), December 2003, pp. 127–148. Sinha, Chitta Ranjan Prasad, ‘Models of the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 1, 1977. Sinha, Chitta Ranjan Prasad, ‘The Buddhist art of Vikramsila Mahavihara’, in BR Mani and SC Saran (ed.), Purabharti: Studies in Early Historical Archaeology and Buddhism, Commemoration Volume in Respect of Prof. BP Sinha, Sarada Publishing House, New Delhi, 2006. Sinha, Rashmi, ‘The Bronzes from Ikra (Kishanganj)’, in Bhagwant Sahai (ed.), Recent Researches in Indian Art and Iconography, Kaveri Books, New Delhi, 2008. Sutton, Deborah, ‘Devotion, Antiquity, and Colonial Custody of the Hindu Temple in British India’, Modern Asian Studies, 47(1), January 2013, pp. 135–166. Trevithivk, Alan, ‘British Archaeologists, Hindu Abbots, Burmese Buddhist: The Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya, 1811–1877’, Modern Asian Studies, 33(3), June 1999. Verma, BS, ‘Further Excavations at Antichak’, Journal of Bihar Puravid Parishad, 2, 1978. Verma, BS, ‘Bronzes from Antichak’, in Bhagwant Sahai (ed.), BP Sinha Felicitation Volume, Ramanand Vidya Bhawan, New Delhi, 1987. Wagoner, Phillip B, ‘Precolonial Intellectuals and the Production of Colonial Knowledge’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 45, 2003. Wallis, Christopher, ‘The Tantric Age: A Comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra’, Sutra Journal, February 2016, www.sutrajournal.com/the-tantricage-a-comparison-of-shaiva-and-buddhist-tantra-by-christopher-wallis#_ ftn1, accessed on 16 April, 2017. Weiner, Sheila, ‘From Gupta to Pala Sculptures’, Artibus Asia, 25, 1962. Widorn, Verena, ‘Is There a Vienna School of Asian Art: Early Considerations on Indian and Oriental Art by Viennese Scholars at the Beginning of the 20th century,’ Unpublished paper, presented at XXIV ESCAS, Warsaw.

Index

abhayamudra 164, 211, 219, 221 Agni 117 Ajgaibinath 110, 163, 312 Akbarpur 178, 226, 294 akhanda jyoti 64, 173, 248, 250 Akshobya 302, 321 Akshyavata 123, 126, 128, 309 Alaura 265 Allahabad Museum 158, 169, 192, 194 alloy 260, 270, 288 amalaka 296 Amravati 7, 74–75 Amritmanthana 139 Ananda 82 Ananta 84 Ancient Monument Preservation Act (AMP) 329 Anderson, John 266 Aniemeshlochana Chaitya 128 Annapurna 129, 142, 327 antarala 102, 105 Antichak 122, 125, 132–133, 144, 168, 257, 264–265, 272, 286, 316 Antiquarian Map of Bihar and Orissa 76 Aprajita 84, 316 apsaras 153, 182, 273 Apshad 39, 102, 108, 300 Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) 5–6, 12, 14, 43, 46–47, 70, 72, 78–80, 82, 131, 143, 268, 285, 293, 297, 311, 317, 326, 329–330, 332, 336–337 Ardhanarisvara 152 ardha-paryankasana 152 Arjuna 139, 156, 162, 210–211

Asha Devi Temple 115, 122, 175–177, 230, 232, 286, 300 ashta dhatu 14, 149, 164; see also octo-alloy Ashutosh Museum 143, 156–157, 160, 166, 175, 179, 181, 192, 220, 222 Asiatic Society of Bengal 51, 59, 266 Asoka 33, 70, 76, 83, 99–100, 128, 130, 304, 333–335 Atisha 321 Aurangabad 15, 33–34, 111–113, 156, 158, 255 Avalokitesvara 104, 114, 121, 143, 268, 272, 312, 326 avatara 4, 32, 36, 107, 121–122, 274, 307, 318 ayudha 150, 152–153, 165 back slab 130, 162–164, 166–167, 182–252, 262, 273, 311 Badeswar 31 Baidyanath Dham 34, 313; see also Deoghar Bais Karan rock 106, 139, 312–313; see also Sultanganj Baitarni Talao 173, 246, 248 Baker, R. 24 Bakhtiyar Khilji 13 Bakraur 32, 114, 143 Balarama 84, 141 Balasthapana 134, 136, 145 Balgudar 114 Balguzar Jhil 104; see also Rajaona Baltimore 159, 181, 216

362

Index

banyan 123, 129, 171, 238, 240, 309 Barabar Hills 45, 48, 99–101, 105, 109, 139, 159, 164, 167, 170, 194, 198, 200–208, 304; Karan Chaupar Cave 100, 106, 109; Lomas Rishi Cave 99–100, 109; Sudama Cave 100; Vishva Jhopri Cave 100 Barantpura 114 Bargaon 30, 33–34, 39–40, 45, 55, 66, 73, 85, 90, 124, 130–132, 159, 174–175, 177, 182–183, 196, 204, 206, 234, 257, 275, 286, 288, 295, 310–312, 317 basalt 40, 42, 55–56, 104, 106, 111–112, 130, 157–159, 163, 184, 188, 190, 192, 194, 212, 234, 250, 252, 258, 268, 311 Basarah 72, 75 Battle of Plassey 27 Bayley, Charles S 70 Beglar, JD 43, 46–49, 295, 297–298, 301–302, 305–307, 324 Begumpur 124, 130, 132 Behar fort 41–42 Belwa 72 Benaras 74 Bengal Atlas 23, 53 Beni Mahadev 41 betel nut 182, 213–223 bhadrapitha 101, 140 Bhagalpur 13, 15, 30–31, 34, 36–37, 48, 104–110, 114, 119, 121, 125, 132, 137, 139, 156, 168, 184, 255–258, 265, 286, 304, 306–307, 312–313 Bhagwati 107 Bhairav 32, 34, 105, 107, 109, 112, 114, 121, 125, 131, 230, 314–315, 317–322 Bhakti 4, 150, 274 Bharhut 7 Bhattasali, NK 151 Bhavani 104 Bhita 153 Bhringi 182, 209, 213, 269 bhumisparamudra 100, 105, 109, 125, 166, 317–318, 333 Bihar and Orissa Research Society 70–72, 74–76

Bihar Museum 65–67, 90 Bihar Sharif 36, 39–41, 60–61, 65–66, 73, 90, 158, 173–174, 188, 228, 255–256, 318 Biswak 39–40 Bitpal 261 Black Buddha 317–318 Bloch, Theodore 66, 304, 317 Boddhisatva 36, 73, 93, 118, 121, 142–143, 288, 311 Bodem, Charles 32, 324 Bodh Gaya 7–8, 14, 32–34, 36, 38, 45, 47–49, 60–65, 68, 72–73, 75, 80–81, 89–90, 122–123, 128–129, 137–138, 142–143, 157, 159–160, 164, 167, 169–170, 173, 182, 188, 200, 204, 248, 254, 264, 276, 281, 289, 294, 296, 300, 302, 307–309, 324–325, 327, 333–335, 337–338, 340 Bodh Gaya pillars/railing 63, 73, 123, 143, 301–302 Bodh Gaya Site Museum 14, 157, 170, 204, 301 Bodhi Tree 47, 123, 129, 297, 300, 309, 335 Brahma 38, 102, 135, 141, 275, 320 Brahmani 182 Brahmani Ghat 123, 142 Brahmayoni Hill 123, 302 brick temples 31, 33–34, 36–37, 48, 100–102, 104, 111–113, 116–117, 119–122, 126, 138, 143, 242, 244, 300 British Museum 58, 340 Broadley, AM 39–43, 55, 65, 68–69, 74, 90, 287, 317 Broadley Collection/Museum 39, 60–61, 66–69, 77, 81, 158, 174, 183, 188, 276, 301 bronzes 55, 73–75, 77–78, 83, 92, 133, 137, 143, 146, 150, 157–160, 164, 166, 190, 194, 202, 212, 214, 216, 259–269, 272, 275, 277, 279–281, 284, 287–288, 300, 316–317, 322 Buchanan, Francis Hamilton 7, 14, 30–39, 41, 43, 52–53, 62, 130, 295–297, 300–301, 317

Index Buddha 5, 32, 34–35, 39–41, 45, 48, 55, 68, 70, 73, 75, 82–83, 85, 89, 93, 97, 100, 104–105, 109–118, 121–131, 139, 141–143, 154, 232, 268, 286, 288–289, 295, 297, 299, 301–304, 307, 310–319, 322, 329, 332–337 Buddha Mandala Temple 130 Buddhapad 123, 129, 333 Buddhist University 72, 82–83, 333–334 Bulandibagh 72–73, 76 Burmese 201, 297, 300 Buxar 26, 73, 93, 265 Carlleyle, ACL 46 cartouche 25–26 cataloguing 6, 12, 49, 51, 59–60, 78–79, 266, 332 chaitya 41, 43, 90, 128, 280, 337 Chakrasamvara 320–321 chala pratima 146, 259, 266, 280 Champa 286 Champanagar 106 Chamunda 314, 318 Chandi 114, 118, 121, 313 Chandimau 40, 285 Chandipore 265 Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya (CSMVS) 157, 179, 210 Chaturbhuj 112, 120, 140 chaturmukhalinga 103, 114, 171, 244 Chaudhari, PC 73 Chaurasi Muni 107, 110 Chausa 265 chelas 32, 34 Chhath 286, 312 Choki mound 104; see also Rajaona Chota Nagpur 25, 73, 75 cire-perdue 261; see also lost-wax process Cleveland Museum of Art 67, 157, 179, 194, 260, 271, 283 Cock Foot Mountain 268; see also Kurkihar conservation 6, 8, 12, 43, 47–49, 59, 79, 293, 305, 328–331 Conservation Manual 330 Coomaraswamy, AK 84, 93

363

cultural biography 10, 291–292 Cunningham, Alexander 5, 14, 39–40, 43–49, 56–57, 97, 113, 130, 268, 279, 284, 293, 295–301, 303–307, 317, 324 Cunningham’s Memorandum of Instructions 46–47 dados 105 Dagens, Bruno 15, 144–145, 324 damru 164 Daniell, Thomas and William 21 D’Anville 24 Dapthu 35, 38–39, 41, 90, 111–112, 122, 163, 169, 198 dargah 9, 29, 35, 42, 293, 303–305 darpan 153, 164, 183, 185, 187, 189, 191, 193, 195, 197, 201–221, 225, 227, 229, 231, 237, 270 darshan 150, 259, 273 Dattatreya 118, 121 Davis, Richard 10–11, 280 Denver Art Museum 157, 180, 216 Deo 111–112, 120 Deo Barunark 33, 38, 48, 73, 79, 111–112, 120, 122, 140, 156, 158, 167–168, 184, 186, 295–296, 300 Deoghar 313; see also Baidyanath Dham Deo Markandeya 34, 36–37, 48, 111, 113, 120, 122, 296, 307 Devi 4, 36–37, 127–128, 151, 172, 175–177, 230, 268, 309, 313, 320, 333 devotees 10, 50, 98, 163–164, 166, 182–183, 185, 199, 207, 217, 219, 231–233, 235, 237, 271, 273–274, 280, 291, 300, 312, 328, 338 dhaam 320 Dhanukaranya Temple 123 Dhanurbasti 265 dharani 83, 267 Dharawat 48, 114, 121, 295, 301, 305–306 dharmachakrapravartana mudra 317

364

Index

Dharmaranya 123, 129, 156, 162–163, 170, 216 Dharohar Mound 125 Dhiman 261 dhokra 261; see also lost-wax process dhruv beras 259 dhyani buddhas 321 Didarganj 72 documentation 5, 12, 21–22, 28, 33, 44, 47, 49, 59, 65, 81, 334–335 donors 260, 262, 277 Dossier of nomination 336–337, 341 double-sided stele 122, 156, 161, 169, 186, 274 D’Oyly, Charles 300 Draupadi 143 Durga 31, 40, 42, 56, 100, 103, 105, 123, 262, 302, 312 Dvarapala 103, 119 Elephanta 153 Eliade, Mircea 8–9 Ellora 86 English East India Company 21, 23, 25–27, 29, 335 Epics 4, 49, 119, 293, 306, 310 esoteric 4, 98, 294, 321, 329 explorations 5–6, 8, 12, 22–23, 30, 39–40, 44–46, 55, 58–59, 76, 80, 306, 329, 331, 340 fair(s) 9, 33, 114, 137, 286, 307, 312 Fakir’s Rock 34; see also Sultanganj Fatehpur 265, 272 Fa Xian 43, 45, 65, 82, 142 Fergusson, James 47, 51, 93, 146 Firman from Shah Alam 62 First Buddhist Council 48 fort 26, 28, 33, 41, 62, 104, 105, 112–115, 118, 305 Gadadevi 90 Gadadhar 34, 36, 123, 126, 309 Gait, Edward 71 Gajalakshmi 105 ganas 182–183 Gandhara 74, 332 Ganesha 34, 36, 84, 102–104, 106–107, 110, 119–121, 129,

141, 153, 164, 182–183, 262, 269–271, 273, 275, 299, 316, 318–319 Ganga 2, 13, 15, 23, 25–26, 34, 65, 84, 101–102, 104, 106–107, 110, 132, 137, 139, 156, 162, 210–211, 255, 257–258, 286, 307, 312, 313–314, 316 Ganges 26; see also Ganga garbha griha 9, 101, 109, 121, 138, 140–141, 148, 171–173, 178, 182, 259, 268, 273, 285 Garohat 104, 108 Garrick, HBW 46 Garuda 100, 104, 109, 116 Gau Pachar 123, 126, 142 Gauri 1, 38, 55, 84, 151, 186 Gauri Sankar 37–38, 55 Gaya 14–15, 30–32, 35–39, 45–49, 62, 81, 99–103, 105–123, 126–129, 137, 142, 156–161, 164, 166–171, 173, 183–184, 186, 188, 190, 192, 194, 198, 200, 202, 204, 206, 208, 216, 222, 236–248, 255–258, 265, 267–268, 272, 274, 285, 295, 297–299, 305–312, 325, 333–334, 337–338 Gaya Mahatmya 129, 309 Gaya Museum 14, 160, 171, 183, 236 Gayasuri 127–128, 171, 238, 240, 309 Gayesvari Temple 123 ghana 261 Ghatshila 265 Ghenjan 114 Ghorakatora 73 Ghosh, A. 78, 141 Ghosrawan 40, 45, 111, 115, 122, 132, 175–177, 230, 232, 286, 300, 305 gilding 64, 260–261, 266 Giris 62 Giriyek 41, 175–177, 230, 232 gold plaque 154, 284 Goreya 48, 116 Gosala 82 Government Museum Mathura 160, 181, 220

Index Gowar 115 granite 31, 34–35, 42, 64, 102–103, 106, 110, 112, 116, 119, 130, 139, 156, 162–163, 184, 186, 210, 220, 257–258, 275, 298–299, 301–303 Grierson, GA 62, 90 Guhyasamaja 321 A Guide to Nalanda 78, 92, 141, 143 Gunamati monastery 48 Guneri 73, 111, 115 Gupta, PL 74, 87, 154, 340 Gupta(s) 2–3, 7, 41, 44, 48, 55, 75, 78, 86, 88, 91, 100–102, 104–105, 107, 109, 139–141, 153–154, 300, 326, 332, 334–335 Gurpa caves 100–101 Gurwat 38 halo 116, 150, 163, 182–252, 265, 267 Hanuman 34, 100, 106, 268, 319 Hargauri/Hurgauri 37–38 Harihara 106 Harsa Dehejia Collection 160, 181, 228 heritage 14–15, 60, 70, 72, 77, 79, 91, 332, 334, 337–338, 340 Heruka 84, 316, 321 Hilsa 115, 121, 178–179, 224, 226, 256, 294, 305 hoards 61, 137, 257, 261, 282, 300, 320 idgahs 9, 304 Imadpur 265 Indian Archaeological Policy 90 Indian Archaeology a Review (IAAR) 14 Indian Museum 39, 59, 66–68, 70, 72–73, 77, 90, 114, 139, 143, 153, 158, 160, 168, 179, 192, 194, 210, 220, 266, 276, 331–332 Indology 43–44 Indra 113 inlay 261, 263, 266–267 Islampur 301 Itihasa Purana 98, 293, 306, 310 I Tsing 82, 93, 281, 317 Jackson, VH 73 jagati 120, 140–141

365

Jagdamba 35, 116 Jagdishpur 73, 85, 124, 130, 305, 310, 317 Jahangira 106, 110, 139, 156, 168, 184, 257, 304, 307, 312–313 Jalan Museum 14; see also Killa House Jalkund 287 Jamalpur 287 Jambhala 84, 319 Jamuna Dih 116 janapadas 154 Janardhana 123, 126 Jarasandha 38 Jarasandha ki Baitaki 38, 42, 324 jatamukuta 164, 182–183, 188, 208–222, 230, 232, 252 Jayaswal, KP 74, 154 Jehanabad 15, 255 Jharkhand 15, 265 Jirnodhaar 98 Junglinath 125, 133, 168 Kahalgaon 31, 34, 79, 110, 119, 132, 258, 286 Kalachakra 84, 93, 316 Kalachakrayana 84 Kali 104, 113, 117 Kamadeva 316 Kanchi 267, 279, 289 Kanhaiya 35 Kanwariya 312–313 kapala 182, 187–195, 201, 209–213, 221, 231–237; see also skull cap Kapatiya 124, 130 Karna 106, 313 Kartik 141, 205 Kartikeya 273 Kashtaharini Ghat 118, 120, 156, 165–166, 168, 186, 257, 313 kashti patthar 163, 286 Katyayani 110, 304 Kausambi 75 Kauva Dol 105, 109 Keur 115, 121, 169, 194 Kharagpur 36, 257 Kheri 104, 108, 110, 139, 305, 307 Killa House 14

366

Index

kinnaras 88, 141, 153, 164, 182–183, 185, 189, 195, 199, 219, 237, 273 kiratmukha 262 Kispa 36, 38, 116, 302, 305, 324 Kittoe, Markham 39, 266, 268, 300–301, 305 Konch 103, 108, 296, 306 Kramrisch, Stella 9, 61, 74, 82, 85–88, 93, 151–152, 255, 285–287, 289, 320 Krishna 32, 34, 36, 38, 100, 106, 109–110, 112, 143, 310–311 Krishna Dwarka 123, 126 Kubera 103, 105, 113, 141, 177, 234, 316 Kukkutpadagiri Vihara 45, 279 Kumrahar 72, 76 Kundalipur 124, 130, 132, 310 Kunde 86 Kunti 143 Kurkihar 45, 73, 158–160, 164, 169–170, 182, 190, 202, 216, 260–270, 272, 276–279, 289, 295, 302–303 Kush 100 Kushanas 76, 153 Lakhi Serai 81 Lakshmana 100, 268, 313 Lakshmi 34, 107, 112, 141, 182, 207, 232, 316 Lakshmi Narayana 34, 172, 177, 234, 246, 273 lalitasana 152, 163, 164, 166, 182–183, 270, 284 Landsat images 131 Lava 100 lilamurti 151 Lord Canning 46 Lord Curzon 6, 329 Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) 1–2, 15, 159, 180, 214, 260 lost-wax process 261 lotus 56, 88, 151, 153, 162–164, 166, 182–184, 186–190, 192–197, 200–223, 228, 230, 232, 234, 236, 252, 261

Mackenzie, Collin 52, 88–89 Madhucchistavidhana 261 Madhusudan 32, 107 Madras Museum 74 Magadha 45, 49, 99, 132, 154, 264, 272, 286, 289 Maghara 173, 228 Mahabharata 42, 106, 114, 138, 286, 313 Mahabodi Temple/Complex 33, 36, 38, 45, 47, 61–64, 103, 123, 128–129, 142–143, 159, 170, 183, 200, 276, 296, 299–301, 308, 333–337 Mahadeopur 48 Mahant 14, 32, 34, 47, 60–64, 68–69, 72, 89–90, 123, 129, 157, 164, 173, 248, 301–302, 313 Mahant’s Collection 14, 61–65, 68–69, 123, 164 Maharaja of Hathwa 72 mahavihara 14, 130, 132–133, 272, 279, 281, 316, 334, 336–337 Mahayana 4, 83–84, 91, 93, 280, 315, 322 Mahesvari 114 Mahisasuramardini 40, 115, 128, 171, 309, 318 Mahramau 161–163 Major Mead 47 Makhdum Kund 42 maladharas 153, 183, 213, 221, 226 mandapa 79, 101–105, 111, 118–119, 136, 138, 141, 171–172, 236, 238, 240, 246, 268, 296–297, 300, 319 Mandar Hills 31–32, 107, 110, 139; Akasaganga 107; Papaharini 31 Mangala Gauri 123, 127–128, 172, 246 Maniyar Math 45, 79, 102, 299, 303 Manjushri 319 Manjuvajra 321 mantras 83, 315, 323 Mantrayana 315 Map of Hindoostan 24–25, 27 mapping 7–8, 23–24, 27–29, 45, 97–98, 122, 136, 308 Marara 157, 166, 177, 190

Index Marici 84, 131 Markham, Clement 27 Marshall, John 6, 293, 329–332, 340 Martin, Montegomery 30, 53 Matangesvara Temple 114 math 31, 45, 79, 89, 102, 299, 303 matha 4, 34, 61–64, 114, 137, 294, 309, 323, 327 Mathura 73–75, 86, 91 Mauryan 2, 7, 70, 72–73, 75, 76, 88, 116, 154, 332 Mayadevi 68, 115 Mayamatam 13–14, 98, 133–136, 299 Memoirs of a Map of Hindoostan 24–27 meteorite 73 Metropolitan Museum of Art (MET) 157, 159, 175, 180, 212, 214, 260, 269, 271 miniature temples 100–101, 124, 130–131, 159, 166, 174, 182–183, 196, 204, 275–276 mithuna 153–154 Mitra, RL 14, 47, 62–63, 81, 89–90, 142, 288, 290, 306 monasteries 13, 55, 82–83, 90, 92, 124, 132, 137, 141–142, 147, 266, 281, 289, 309, 314–316, 319, 323, 337; see also viharas Monastic Complex 40, 55, 77–78, 120, 125, 130–132, 168, 257, 286, 306, 311, 316–319, 333–336 Monghir 26; see also Munger Motichandra 154 Mount Kailasa 156, 162, 210, 220 Mrichchhakatika 151 Mubarakpur 39, 41, 116 mudras 83–84, 147–148, 150, 152–153, 165, 315 mukhalinga 112–113, 178 Mukherji, PC 66 multi-religious architectural complexes 12, 98, 122–123, 136 Mundesvari 103–104, 108, 121, 138, 156, 162, 173, 222, 285 mundi 182–183, 192 Munger 15, 81, 104–105, 108, 110, 111, 114, 117–121, 137, 156–157, 162, 165–166, 168, 255–257, 274, 287, 307, 312–313

367

muni 32, 313 Murli Hillock 139; see also Bais Karan rock museum display 6, 12, 22, 51, 60–61, 64, 66, 68–69, 72–81, 332, 339 Museum fur Indische Kunst, Berlin 67, 81, 157, 160, 166, 168, 181, 210, 212, 218 Museum of Asian Art, San Francisco 156, 162, 180, 216 naga 102, 153, 226, 277, 320, 323 nagara 135, 138, 142, 275 Nagarjuni 38, 45, 100–101, 304; Gopi Cave 100, 304; Vapi Cave 100 nagasthana 38, 116 nagi 102, 153 Nalanda 6–7, 12–15, 30, 33, 39–46, 55–56, 61, 65, 68–69, 72, 76–78, 82–85, 90, 92–93, 102, 105, 108, 111, 115, 118, 120, 122, 124, 130–132, 137, 141, 157–159, 164, 167, 174–175, 177, 182, 188, 190, 196, 200, 204, 206, 212, 220, 222, 234, 255–257, 260–269, 272, 276, 278, 281, 286–287, 295, 300–301, 305–306, 310–311, 315–316, 318–319, 326, 331–338; Site 9 Nalanda 158, 174, 190; Temple 2 Nalanda 20, 124, 141, 296, 301; Temple 3 Nalanda 124, 128, 171, 295; Temple 12, Nalanda 40, 317; Temple 13, Nalanda 317; Temple 14, Nalanda 131, 317 Nalanda Museum 6, 61, 76–79, 157–158, 174, 177, 188, 234, 316, 326 Nalanda University 82, 131, 295 Nandapur 104, 108 Nandi 102, 113, 118–119, 138, 141, 153, 162, 185, 187, 189, 191, 193, 195, 197, 199, 201, 203, 205, 207, 209, 211, 213, 215, 217, 219, 221–222, 273 Nandua 158, 167, 169, 188 Narasimha 35, 107, 123, 126, 275 Narasinga 34

368

Index

Narawat 38, 116, 121 Narayana 112, 142, 172, 177, 234, 246, 309 Nardah Collection 14; see also Nawadah Museum National Museum, New Delhi 14, 77, 158–160, 174, 179, 181, 190, 200, 216, 270, 332 National Museum for Oriental Arts Rome 157, 181, 218 Navagraha 104, 113, 125–126, 318 Nawadah 14–15, 39, 157–158, 160, 166, 171, 177–178, 190, 234, 236, 255–256 Nawadah Museum 157, 166, 171, 177–178, 190, 234, 236 neem 309 Negapatnam 73–74, 332 Nepal 74, 153, 284, 287, 308, 314, 336–337 Ner 116 Nilotpal 164, 182, 187, 193, 195, 197, 201, 283 Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW) 48, 113 octo-alloy 260; see also ashta dhatu Oddantpuri 13, 316; see also Uddandapura Oldham, CEAW 71 Ongari 35, 38–39, 116, 120 Orientalism 59 Outstanding Universal Value 334–336, 340–341 Pachar 106, 123, 126, 142, 156, 169, 186 Padmapani 41, 142 Pala Buddhism 315, 327 Palas 7, 49, 88, 119, 143, 154, 265, 289 Pali 35, 102, 108, 305, 324 Panasia Gallery of Far Eastern Antiquities 157, 179, 210 pancha koshas 86 panchalinga 182–183, 189 Panchanan river 37 Pancha Pandava 34, 123, 129 pancharatha 182, 214, 216, 263 panchayatana 111, 140

Parashwanath 35, 106, 112, 304 Parbati Hill 39–40, 304, 306 Parpitamahesvara 123, 126 Parvati 84, 92, 100, 103–107, 110, 112, 121, 126, 141, 143, 148, 151–154, 156, 161–162, 169, 177, 182, 188, 202–203, 210, 214, 218–220, 222, 224, 230, 234, 269, 272–274, 283–285, 319–320, 326–327 Pasupatinath 123 Pataliputra 26, 70, 72–73, 76, 91, 154 Patharghata 79, 107, 110, 140, 168, 194, 257–258, 265, 286, 316 Patna 6, 12, 14–15, 26, 30–32, 37, 39–41, 53–55, 61, 65–77, 87–88, 90–92, 94, 99, 103, 106, 115–116, 138, 142, 154, 156–162, 165–170, 174, 179, 181, 186, 188, 190, 196, 202, 218, 250, 252, 254–255, 257, 260, 263, 267, 269–270, 274, 276–277, 284–286, 288, 294, 326, 331–332, 340 Patna Museum 6, 14, 39, 61, 66–77, 87–88, 90–92, 94, 102, 156, 158–162, 165, 174, 179, 181, 186–187, 190, 196, 202, 218, 250, 252, 254, 257, 260, 263, 267, 269–270, 274, 276–277, 284, 286, 288, 326, 331–332, 340 Patna Museum Catalogue 67, 75, 91–92, 94, 284, 288, 340 Patna University 73, 143 Patthar Ghatti 120; see also Nalanda, Temple 2 Nalanda Pattharkatti 285 Pawapuri 132 Peshawar Museum 74 Phalgu 61, 123, 129, 142–143, 305, 307, 309, 324 Phalguesvara 126 Philadelphia 158, 180, 214, 283 phyllite 157, 160, 210, 218, 250, 286–287 pindadaan 128, 309 pipal 41, 129, 159, 172, 200, 246, 268, 303, 309 Pipra 160, 171, 236

Index pitha/pith 101, 128, 140, 172, 270, 313, 315, 320–322 Porusnath 34 Porusram 34 prabhamandala 151, 202, 261–262, 265, 269, 327 pradakshina path 101 Prajnaparamita 84 Preth Bhawani 38 Pretsila 123, 126 Prit Sila 38 Provincial Coin Cabinet 71 Public Works Department 47 Punawan 117 punch-marked coins 71 Puranas 4, 15, 44, 49, 86, 119, 139, 151, 282, 293, 306, 310 quarry 164, 257, 287, 306 Rada 34, 36, 79, 101; see also Radha Radha 38, 106 Rajaona 104, 108, 122, 138–139, 156, 162, 168, 210, 220, 274, 283–286 Rajgir 30, 33–34, 36–42, 45–46, 48, 65–66, 68, 71, 73, 76–77, 79, 100–102, 108–109, 118, 121, 132, 157, 166, 175–177, 222, 230, 232, 257, 286, 299, 303–304, 324, 332, 340 Rajmahal Hills 258 Rama 34, 38, 100–101, 107, 126, 141, 143 Ramayana 100–101, 118, 258 Ramgayabedi 126 Ram Gaya Hill 123 Ramsila 123, 126, 298 rasa 148, 150, 282 Ratnagiri 73 Ray, Niharranjan 262–263, 287–289, 354 Rennell, James 7, 14, 23–28, 51–53 renovation 35, 111, 120, 122, 126, 128, 132, 134–136, 143, 295–297, 299–300 rock-cut shrines 12, 98–100, 106, 109–110, 163 Rohtas 13, 15, 26, 101, 103–104, 108, 119, 156, 173, 222, 255–256

369

Rohtasan Hill 119 rosary 164, 166, 187 Roy, Sarat Chandra 71 Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 72 Rudra 1, 106, 314, 346 Rukmini 123–124, 130, 295, 310–311, 326 Rukministhan 124, 130, 310–311, 317 sacred geography 13, 28, 307–309; sacred landscape 8–9, 12–13, 16, 23, 50, 97–98, 101, 111, 126, 292, 294–295, 303 Sahibganj 324 Said, Edward 29 sakti 31, 83 samadhis 9, 64, 224 Samvara 321 Sanchi 7 sandstone 1, 55, 64, 74, 119, 140, 156–158, 161–162, 184, 186, 188, 192, 210, 220, 246, 258, 301, 324 sangrahama 82 Sankalia, HD 61, 82–85, 93, 327 Sankatharini Devi 268 Saraswati 84, 107, 141, 316 Sattaparni cave 48 Sati 119, 172, 246, 305, 313 Sati pillar 119, 305 Sattvavajri 321 saumya 1, 151 schist 156–158, 186, 188, 194, 210, 218, 257 sculptor’s studio 41 sculptural sheds 79 Second Diffusion 321 Senas 2, 88, 154, 275 Shahabad 30, 33, 37, 54, 188, 258 shakta 147, 314–315, 320 shakti 1, 128, 172, 302, 313–315, 321 Shashti 104 Shastri, A. Banerji 73 Shastri, Hirananda 77 Sheikhpura 15 shikhara 101, 108, 119–120, 138, 140–142, 311 Shilpa 14, 98 Shilpa Shastras 5, 98, 329

370

Index

Shishunaga 49 Shiva 1, 4, 34–35, 37, 41–42, 56, 86, 92, 100, 102–107, 110–115, 117–123, 125–129, 131, 133, 138–139, 141, 143, 148–154, 156–157, 159, 161–167, 170–175, 182–183, 185, 212, 216, 269–270, 272–274, 280, 283–285, 287–288, 307, 309, 312–314, 318–321, 323, 326, 333 shraadh 32, 122–123, 126, 128–129, 142, 308–309, 325, 333, 338 Shri Bullum 41 shringara 150 Siddhesvaranatha Temple 105, 109 Simaria 111, 117, 121 Singhavahini 40 single-celled shrines 12, 101 Sinha, Sachidanand 70 Sita 34, 38, 100–101, 105, 107–108, 123, 126, 128, 141, 173, 228, 268, 313, 333 Sitakund 105, 108 Sitala 123, 127–128, 173, 228 Sitamadhi Cave 100–101 Sita Kund 107 Skanda 153, 164, 182–183, 208–209, 213, 215, 217, 235, 269–270 skull cap 164, 182, 232; see also kapala slate 160, 188, 258, 270, 286–287, 321 Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings 329 Soh Serai 40–41 Son Bhandar cave 48, 100–101, 109 Sotheby’s 157, 180, 212 Sparshavajra 321 Spooner, DB 72 Sravasti 75 Sringirikh 119 State Museum Lucknow 157, 159–160, 180–181, 212, 220 Stephenson, Hugh Lansdowne 71 strotas 83 stucco 74–75, 78–79, 102, 124, 128, 299, 303, 317, 319, 336 stupa 9, 40–41, 43–45, 48, 55, 64–65, 85, 89–90, 93, 100–101, 114, 117–118, 123, 129, 132,

142, 183, 230, 237, 267–268, 275, 288, 295, 301, 303–306, 311, 313, 319, 324, 333, 335–337, 342 Stupa of Buddha’s hair and nail 85 Sujata Stupa 123, 129 sukhasana 152 Sultanganj 34, 36, 48, 110, 156, 163, 168, 184, 255, 257–258, 286, 304, 306, 312–313 Sungas 2, 154 Sun temple 113, 115–116, 120, 140, 296 Suraj 196, 206, 311 Suraj Kund 114, 118, 171, 238, 297 Suraj Mandir 159, 174, 204, 206, 286 Suraj pokhar/pokhra 33, 113, 116, 124, 130–131, 196, 311–312, 317 Surajpur 132, 159, 170, 208, 274 Surjangiri 159, 170, 194, 198, 200, 204, 206, 208 survey 5–8, 14, 21, 23–30, 33, 38, 44–49, 323–325, 336, 339–340 Surya 35–36, 68, 84, 103, 105–106, 111–113, 120, 123–124, 126, 128, 141–143, 159, 163 sushira 261 Swarup, Bishnu 71 tank 9, 31, 40, 98, 100, 102, 104–107, 111–118, 123–124, 126, 128, 130–132, 140, 171, 173–174, 177, 183, 238, 268, 275, 294, 305, 307, 309, 311–312, 318 Tantra 83–84, 151, 319, 321–322, 326 Tantrayana 84, 93 Tantric 4, 15, 78, 83–85, 88, 255, 266, 289, 314–316, 319–321, 323, 326–327 Tantricism 4, 15, 83, 88, 320, 326 Tapoban 119, 121 Tara 33, 36, 68, 84, 100, 102, 115–116, 123, 128, 143, 268, 316, 319 Taranath 82–83, 261 Tata, Ratan 72 Tathagatas 315 Taxila 74–75

Index

371

Udaygiri 73 Uddandapura 132, 315; see also Oddantpuri Uma 1–2, 5, 8–10, 12–15, 37–38, 42, 63–64, 67, 81–82, 87–88, 98, 100–131, 133, 137–141, 143, 146–156, 159, 161–168, 173–174, 177, 182–263, 265, 267–281, 283, 285–287, 289, 294, 297, 299–300, 302, 312, 314, 316, 318–319, 320–321, 323, 327–328 Umasahitamurti 151 Umga 305, 307 UNESCO 334–337, 340–341 Upanishad 86 Upapuranas 4 Upardih 160, 171, 236 Uren 111, 117, 121–122 Utrain 119 Utsavamurti 13, 150, 280 uttar-vahini 257

vahana 153, 162–164, 166, 182–183, 185, 211, 213, 215, 217, 219, 221, 223, 227, 229, 231–233, 235, 237, 261, 269–271, 273, 284 Vaibhara 118, 121, 303 Vajrapani 115, 272 Vajrasana 47, 115, 123, 297, 335 Vajrasattva 321 Vajravarahi 321 Vajrayana 4, 84, 280–281, 315–316, 319, 321–322, 327 Vajrayogini 321 Vaishali 72, 76 varadamudra 213 Varaha 102 Vardhaman Mahavir 130, 154 Varendra Research Museum 67 Varuna 113, 141 vastu purusa mandala 87 Vastu Shastra 87, 329 Vasudeva 34, 36, 38, 84 Vasundhara 84 Vateshvara 107, 110, 258, 316 Venuvan 118 Vidyadhara 141, 182–183, 323 Vienna School of Art 85 viharas 4, 40, 90, 280–281, 303, 316, 333, 336 Vikramsila 115, 125, 132, 139, 143–144, 168, 255, 272, 281, 286, 289, 315–316, 318–319, 321, 354, 359–360 Vishnu 4, 36, 68, 84, 90, 100, 102–104, 106–107, 109–113, 116, 119–123, 126, 128–129, 140, 142–143, 153, 156, 158, 161, 163–164, 169, 171, 182, 185, 195, 205, 262, 273, 275, 296, 305, 307, 312, 316, 318–319, 326, 333 Vishnupad 32, 35–36, 123, 126–128, 141, 171, 238, 240, 297–298, 302, 308–309, 325, 333 Vishnupur 157, 169, 186 votive stupa 41, 64, 89–90, 93, 100–101, 230, 268, 295, 311, 335

Vageshwari 104, 123–124, 128, 301–303, 307, 316

Waddel, LA 72 Wesen 86

Telhara 39–40, 42, 45, 55, 106, 132; see also Tilhara Teliya Baba 124, 317–318 terracotta 55, 73–75, 78, 101–102, 132–133, 140, 147–148, 153–154, 259, 284–286, 288, 311, 319, 332, 340 Tetrawan 40–42 Thai 317 three-dimensionality 166 Tibet/Tibetan 25, 78, 82–83, 143, 261, 287, 314–316, 318, 321–323, 326–327, 336–337 Tilautta 38 tirtha 34, 129, 139 Tirthankara 34, 129 Treasure Trove Act 71 tree shrine 41, 114, 123, 143, 159, 170–172, 200, 238, 246, 268, 299–300, 317 Trilokavijaya 79, 84, 316–317 triratha 182, 212, 214, 262 trishula 164, 182–183, 270

372

Index

workshops 137, 147, 260, 266, 281 World Heritage List 334, 338 Xuan Zang 43, 47–48, 65, 100, 105, 286, 296

Yaksha 103, 323 Yakshi 72, 86 Yama 103, 113 Yamantaka 84 yoga 83, 320 Yoginitantra 314–315, 320