in which angels adore the empty throne on which the Saviour will come to sit for the Last Judgment.THE earliest religious art of India known to us is Buddhist. Here again both local traditions and imported influences are at work, but in this domain it is the local traditions which develop chiefly at the beginning, and outside influence only appears with Græco-Buddhist art, shortly before our era. That influence prevails at first in the north-west, on the fringe of India as it were, and then gradually makes its way all over the country.
We find the earliest Buddhist religious works, which belong to the local tradition, carved in durable materials in the second century B.C. The most noticeable thing about them is the absence of any representation of Buddha himself. Whether the cause was the difficulty of portraying such a miraculous being, or religious scruple, or ancient tradition, his place is marked by an empty seat, by his footprints, by a riderless horse, and his presence is indicated by an umbrella. How can this conception have arisen? The answer is indicated by Foucher's researches. It seems that very soon after the death of the Blessed One it became habitual to make pilgrimages to the sites of the four chief events of his life, the Four Great Miracles—the Birth and Departure from Kapilavastu, the Illumination at Buddh Gaya, the First Sermon in the gazelle park at Benares, and the Death at Kusinagara. It was, and still is, the custom for pilgrims to take small cakes of earth away with them as mementoes and relics. These cakes doubtless bore the four emblems, the vase of lotuses of the Immaculate Birth, the tree of the Illumination, the Wheel of the Law, symbolizing the First Sermon, and the stūpa (tomb and reliquary) of the final Nirvana, the Parinirvāṇa, the earthly death of Buddha (Pl. VI, B, D, E, G). Presently worshippers were depicted round these symbols (Pl. VI, D-G). Then it came to be held that the worshippers were not adoring only the symbols, but Buddha himself at the moment when the miracle was being performed, and so the real scene was represented. Since Buddha could not be shown, an empty seat, the mark of his feet, or an umbrella was sometimes inserted to indicate his presence (Pl. VI, D, F, A). In this way the Illumination and the First Sermon were represented, and from the Four Great Miracles the method was soon extended to other scenes in the last existence of the Blessed One. An empty seat with a tree (Pl. VI, D) or an empty seat with a wheel and often with gazelles (Pl. VI, F) indicates Buddha at the moment of the Illumination or of the First Sermon. One finds a still more curious scene—a birth without a child. Maya, the mother of Buddha, is shown (Pl. VI, C) standing or sitting on the lotus while two elephants, carved above her—that is, behind her in vertical perspective—ritually asperse the unseen child, in accordance with the legend. This scene was probably misunderstood, and since the absence of the child and the perspective give the impression that it is Maya that the elephants are aspersing, the Brahman goddess Lakshmi, Vishnu's wife, was afterwards represented in this way. The Departure of Buddha (Pl. VI, A), leaving his family for the wilderness, was represented by a riderless horse under an umbrella, with deities supporting its hooves, as the legend tells. When Buddha, arriving in the wilderness, is bidden farewell by his groom and his horse, we see the groom and horse prostrating themselves before the mark of his feet (Pl. VI, A).
So a whole religious art became established, some of the symbols of which are perhaps old symbols of the Near East, taken over and transformed by India and Buddhism.1 It is hardly probable that it had any influence in Buddhist countries outside India. It is, however, curious that one often finds in Byzantine art the theme of the Etimasia in which angels adore the empty throne on which the Saviour will come to sit for the Last Judgment.
But, while the Blessed One cannot be represented in his last existence, there is not the same scruple against showing him in his previous lives. This fact, combined with the Indian artist's love of depicting animals, explains why early art is so full of Jātakas, miraculous stories of how Buddha, often in the form of an animal, did deeds of charity and benevolence to all creatures (Pl. IX, A).
Græco-Buddhist sacred art is very different. It depicts Buddha himself, and so introduces entirely new treatments. As we shall see later, Græco-Buddhist art, combining Greek methods and Indian religious subjects, seems to have developed from the middle of the first century B.C. onwards in Gandhara and Kapisa, in the north-west of India and south-east of the present Afghanistan. The earliest figure of Buddha—the fact is almost certain, although it is still contested—is a Græco-Buddhist work. It wears the monastic dress treated as classical drapery (Pl. VII, A), and has the signs of perfection of the universal lord and great religious reformer and various other marks of beauty, such as the long ears and the small circle in relief (ūrṇa) between the eyebrows. Such a miraculous being could not be represented with his head shaven as the sacred books required, and he was given wavy hair tied on the top into a bun. Later on, apparently under the influence of the art of Mathura, the ritual bun and curls were adopted almost everywhere and took the place of the waved hair, the general form of which was, however, maintained, although not properly understood. Since some of the books declared that Buddha's skull was highly developed, this bun then became a protuberance of the skull, the ushṇīsha, an attribute which persisted in all the various renderings of Buddha and was sometimes, but only later and chiefly in Indo-China, surmounted by a flame.
Buddha is not always shown, as is sometimes supposed, sitting cross-legged on the ground (Pl. X, B). This "Indian attitude", as it is called, is only a position of repose, suited to meditation, intermediate between the upright attitude, which brings fatigue, and the recumbent, which is conducive to sleep. Buddha is frequently represented standing, or, especially in the Ajanta period, sitting in the "European" fashion on a seat with his knees wide apart (Pl. III, B). This last attitude, apparently the royal position of the Asiatic king, seems to have been adopted by the Scythians and by them to have been introduced into Buddhist religious art. It is found again at Dvaravati in Siam and in Java.
The position of Buddha's hands (mudrā) has a symbolic meaning. Meditation is indicated when they rest in the lap (Pl. X, B), argument when the right hand is raised with the first and middle fingers joined, and charity when it hangs palm outwards (Pl. Ill, A). The hand held forward, open, with fingers raised and palm outwards, wards off all fear. Preaching is symbolized by the hands brought together and "turning the Wheel of the Law", and illumination by the right hand, palm inwards, touching the ground, for when the Blessed One became Buddha he took the earth to witness.
Græco-Buddhist art represents the bodhisattva as covered with jewels and wearing a moustache, like a Scythian ruler. Another type of bodhisattva which should be mentioned here is found in the art of Mathura, a specifically Indian art which developed in the north of India, parallel to Græco-Buddhist art. These bodhisattvas, which are dated by an inscription of the reign of Kanishka, are substitutes for Buddha himself, who was not yet represented after his Illumination. It has been suggested that this type is the first representation of the Blessed One, and so earlier than the Greek rendering and fundamentally Indian (Pl. VII, B). For the general aspect of these bodhisattvas is that of the typically Indian figures of the art of Mathura—round face, rounded figure, and Indian treatment of clothes. The skull is smooth with a coiled bun, a peculiarity. On the other hand, the arrangement of the drapery is very like what one finds on some Græco-Buddhist bodhisattvas; the halo, which is frequent, seems to be a foreign importation, in spite of its peculiar ornament; and the use of the name of bodhisattva shows a persistent dislike of representing Buddha after the Illumination. The school of Mathura does not therefore seem to have been the first to venture to defy the old prohibition. Probably these figures are, not a model, but a first repercussion, indirect, it is true, of Græco-Buddhist art on the native art of India. In any ease, after fifty years they give place, even in the art of Mathura, to figures copied from Græco-Buddhist types.
Almost the whole expansion of the arts of India can be traced by that of the plastic representations of Buddha. Two different types appear fairly soon. A Buddha with the right shoulder uncovered is found, carved in the round, in Southern India in the first centuries of our era, at Amaravati, and the material in which he is clad is still heavy, with broad, regular folds (Pl. VII, C). We find him again later, in Ceylon; here the material is finer and the folds, which have been preserved, are more numerous. The best example of these Buddhas is perhaps that at Dong-duong in Champa (Annam), which seems to be a Cingalese importation (Pl. VII, D). The Buddha with the bare shoulder also seems to have existed at the beginning of one of the most ancient arts of Indo-China, that of Dvaravati in Siam.
The figure of Buddha with both shoulders covered was still more popular, and seems to have gradually influenced the previous type, and sometimes to have taken its place. This is the Buddha which we usually find in Græco-Buddhist art. We see it penetrating into the art of Northern India in the second Mathura period, about the fiftieth year of Kanishka, and reaching Southern India in the age of Amaravati (second to fourth century), where it generally appears in the reliefs. This Buddha becomes hieratic and stylized in the north, while keeping its harmony. It is an upright figure, with the clothing held up by the lowered forearms and falling in regular lines on each side of the body so as to frame it. The folds are now rendered by curved lines in very slight relief, indicating a fine, transparent material clinging to the body (Gupta period, PI. VII, E); this drapery is also found in late Græco-Buddhist art, and as far away as China, at T'ien Lung Shan. Presently the folds disappear altogether, and Buddha at first sight looks as if he were naked, for his robes are a transparent muslin, and might be wet, so closely do they follow the modelling of the figure. From the fifth and sixth centuries onwards, Buddha is always represented thus in India, whether he is standing, sitting in European fashion, or sitting cross-legged (Ajanta, Bengal, etc.; Pl. III, A and B), until Buddhism disappears from the country.
In the earliest period of Javanese art (eighth to tenth century) Buddha is clad in this same almost invisible material, but one of his shoulders is bare; often he is inclined to plumpness, with rounded lines (Chandi Mendut, Borobudur, etc.), recalling the Buddhist sculpture of the most ancient caves at Ellora. Another type of Buddhist sculpture in Java is more vigorous (at Chandi Sari, etc) and seems to be related to the art of Bengal. In the early art which develops in Siam, probably from the sixth century (the art of Dvaravati), Buddha is represented seated in the European way or, more often, standing, in his Gupta form, clad in transparent material which frames his body, and his face has a special character which may be racial. It is a Buddha related to that of Dvaravati, but with the Indian hips, that we find, though not often, in the pre-Angkor art of Cambodia from the end of the sixth century to the ninth. In the next period of Khmer art the representation of Buddha seems to have been abandoned, and it is, I think, not till about the beginning of the twelfth century (Phimai, etc.) that he reappears, often dressed in jewellery and almost Khmer in form, then shorn of his ornaments and showing some slight influence of Dvaravati, and finally transformed by the art of the Bayon, which gives transfiguration to the countenance, into the type with the closed eyes and the mystic smile. This expression of the Buddhas, afterwards extended to the bodhisattvas, seems to be in part explained by a particularly strong influence from outside, which is very marked in Buddhas derived from the prototype which Commaille discovered on the Bayon. In Siam, under Thai influence, a new aspect of Buddha appears, in which the brow-ridges are marked by two convex lines and the mouth is narrow with upturned corners. There are many different schools of this art, in which the standing Buddha continues, down to our own time, to be framed in his clothing, which is less and less well understood by the artists who copy the type until it is sometimes no more than a flat sheet of metal (Pl. VII, F).
To the north the figure of Buddha serves to mark the route by which art spread to China by way of the oases of Central Asia, following the ancient silk road which turned the plateaux of Tibet. In addition to this land route there was the sea route to China by the islands and Indo-China. In China, as early as the Wei period, we find a completely transformed, hieratic type of Buddha. The thick concentric folds, arranged almost in steps, of these sculptures are also found in Champa (Annam) and even in one example in Indonesia, but one cannot say whether this type of drapery came direct from India or through China. Later, the light, separate folds, carved in relief, indicating thin material, which are characteristic of late Græco-Buddhist art and Gupta art are found in exactly the same form in China, at T'ien Lung Shan. This second wave of influence seems to have brought figures of the Ajanta style to Yun Kang, where they are sometimes found, to T'ien Lung Shan, where they are frequent, and even to Horyuji in Japan, where the paintings show striking likenesses of style and detail to those of Ajanta. The concentric folds and the little stiff folds, which have become mechanical, persist in Central Asia, Tibet, and Japan. In Central Asia we find the influence of India or of China predominating, according to the geographical position; in the latter case the face of Buddha is rounder and the folds of the drapery are harder. Later, in Tibet, Buddhist figures present the same Chinese character striving and mingling with the fragile, less lethargic, but equally rigid Indian type introduced from Bengal through Nepal.
When it became possible to represent Buddha, the rendering of the scenes in which he appears was naturally affected greatly. Their composition was almost entirely changed by Græco-Buddhist art. In the scene of the birth, Maya stands, with tilted hips, with one hand above her head, holding a branch of a tree in the Lumbini garden (Pl. X, A)— the attitude of certain figures at Bharhut and Sanchi (Pl. XVI, A)—while the child, who is now represented, springs miraculously from her side towards the gods who stand ready to take him. In the Departure the horse bears his rider. The thrones of the Illumination and the First Sermon are no longer empty. Græco-Buddhist art even shows the death of Buddha, as, lying on his right side, he enters Parinirvāṇa. In addition to the old scenes, thus transformed, new scenes are shown. The Blessed One is often accompanied by a curious person, Vajrapani, the Thunder-bearer. Since there is no longer any difficulty about representing scenes in the last life of Buddha, and Græco-Buddhist art has not the same love of naturalism and animal figures as that of Bharhut and Sanchi, Jātakas are less frequent.
The art of Amaravati, in southern India (second to fourth century of our era), presents a very singular phenomenon—two manners of representing the divine side by side. The works in which Buddha is not represented happen, in general, to be earlier than those in which he appears, but at one time the two methods coexist. The old scruples and habits seem to have struggled to hold their ground. On the same relief one finds, side by side, one scene in which Buddha is shown and another in which his seat is empty; after several scenes in which he is represented, there is one on the same slab in which his presence is merely suggested; or two separate reliefs show exactly the same group of figures, belonging to the same scene, crowding in the one round the Blessed One and in the other round his vacant throne. The old dislike of representing the earthly death of Buddha persists; in spite of Græco-Buddhist influence, even in scenes where Buddha is shown, his death is symbolized by the stūpa.
Yet the strong character of the school of Amaravati stamps this branch of its art, and many details peculiar to it are added to what it derived from the two older traditions.
Buddhist religious art was developed at Ajanta, where, as Foucher has shown, scenes are arranged according to the place of their original occurrence, and not In order of time. But, apart from the great bodhisattvas, the spirit of the art of Ajanta, even in religious scenes, is not that of Buddhist beliefs but that of the Sanskrit literature and theatre of the day.
When Buddhism was about to disappear from India, it was in the north-east, about Bengal, that its sacred art lasted longest and developed. In figures set against stelae and curious ornamented Buddhas we can follow the transformation of the subjects and the multiplication of deities under the influence of the Great Vehicle and Tantrism. It is this north-eastern art which, through Nepal, reaches Tibet.
Other sects had their religious art, beside the Buddhists. The Jains were chiefly content to turn out tīrthakaras of one same conventional type, and it would make this treatise too long if I were to discuss them. There is a third and very different art, that of the Brahmans.
Vedic sacrifice, as we have seen, does not require images of the gods. The efficacity of its ceremonies lies in the correct recitation of the texts and the ritual performance of the sacrifice in a place which is consecrated afresh each time. It needs no architecture or divine figure.
The earliest statues of a Brahmanic tendency which we know seem to be of minor deities, Yakshas and Yakshiṇīs, the oldest examples of which seem to date from the second century B.C. The great gods of Hinduism do not appear until much later. We do not know whether there were earlier images which have not survived, or the worship of them was later than is generally supposed, or there was a religious objection to representing the gods, as among the Buddhists.
The linga (phallus), treated naturalistically both in India and in Indo-China, appears with the art of Mathura, and the figure accompanying it is related In style to the bodhisattvas of the same art and the images of Siva on the reverse of Scythian coins. Only with the coming of Gupta art (probably fourth to fifth century) do we find the great Hindu deities represented frequently—Vishnu and his avatars, Siva, and the rest. These figures have the gentleness and harmony of contemporary Buddhist art. Indian sculpture and painting, as we shall see, had developed, and at every stage of that development gods of different religions were portrayed in such a similar manner that they have been confused when not distinguished by very definite attributes. Thus the Brahmanic figures have the Buddhist softness which affects the whole early period of Indian art, and not until the second period of the classical age, about the seventh and eighth centuries, does the special character of the Hindu religions seem to assert itself in art, with the disappearance of Buddhism. Art has all its old harmony, but a new grandeur takes the place of the Ajanta gracefulness. Tall, hieratic figures stand isolated against detached backgrounds. Thus the avatars of Vishnu are represented, and Siva in his different forms, dancing the tāṇḍava (Pl. XV), emerging from the linga, and so on.
Towards the end of the classical period and in the succeeding periods, the tendency towards grandeur and violence becomes a love of movement and frenzy, and sometimes even sadism and delight in the horrible. This happens especially in the Dravidian art of Southern India and in Tibet, where Buddhism is influenced by Hindu Tantrism. This development can be followed in one particular scene— that in which Vishnu, enraged at the impious man who declares that the god cannot be everywhere, comes in the form of a lion out of the pillar which the blasphemer was striking and rends him. At Ellora, about the seventh century, in the Cave of the Avatars, Vishnu, in whom force and balance are united, attacks the blasphemer, whose recoil is striking in the elasticity of its movement. In later versions we see Vishnu seizing his victim and rending him so that his bowels gush out.
There is another and opposite tendency, chiefly in the north, which produces the most indecent erotic scenes and figures of a refined charm which sometimes falls into preciosity. So religious art runs in two directions, to occasionally insipid gracefulness and to frenzied violence, after the harmony of the classical age.