Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:19:02.440Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fancy Footwork: Furniture Patterns Going to and from Gandhāra

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2021

DORIS METH SRINIVASAN
DORIS METH SRINIVASAN*
Affiliation:
Stony Brook UniversityDoris.srinivasan@stonybrook.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is the first assessment of the different sources and shapes in a selection of Gandhāran furniture. Two main types of furniture legs are discussed. These are thought to be originally wooden legs attached to chairs, stools, and beds that are depicted in Kushan sculpture from Gandhāran. The two types are defined by their decoration. The first type is the geometric, lathe-turned furniture leg, the second type of leg is carved, not lathe-turned and depicts figures. The foreign origins of both types are traced and analyzed. A list, plus illustrations of reliefs showing representative contexts for each type, is given. Several heretofore unpublished reliefs are included. In some cases the Gandhāran examples can be interpreted as well as their developments into Central Asian furniture types.

Keywords

Gandhāran furnitureExcursus on the Dhauli Elephantfurniture legs
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 31 , Issue 4 , October 2021 , pp. 647 - 691
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kalter, Johannes, The Arts and Crafts of the Swat Valley. Living Traditions in the Hindu Kush, (London, 1991), p. 108Google Scholar; Yousuf, Mahruch, Folk Motifs of Pakistan, (Islamabad, 1990)Google Scholar, on p. 55 she states that “In the northern areas comprising Hunza, Gilgit, Chitral and Swat, pine, deodar and mulberry wood were extensively used”.

2 The talk, given July 3, 2014, was entitled Fancy Footwork: Travels of two Gandhāra Furniture Legs.

3 “Gandhāran Textiles: A Local Craft with a Western Connection”, Gandhāran Art in Context, (eds.) Raymond Allchin, Bridget Allchin, Neil Kreitman, Elizabeth Errington, Regency Publications, (New Delhi, 1997), pp. 95 – 117. “Local Crafts in Early Gandhāran Art”, in Gandhāran Buddhism (eds.) Pia Brancaccio and Kurt Bherendt, University of British Columbia Press, (Vancouver and Toronto, 2006); pp. 243 – 269. “Swati Textiles: How Long Has This Been Going On?’ in Studies in Popular Pakistani Culture, (eds.) William L. Hanaway and W. Heston, (eds.) (Lahore, 1996), pp. 15 – 61, plus 26 Plates.

4 Ancient Brahmanic, Buddhist and secular texts mention the Northwestern textile tradition in ways that would indicate the use of woollen products. See “Gandhāran Textiles”, p. 98.

5 For a few examples of pre-Islamic and early Islamic wooden household furniture see “Some Findings of Archaeological, Historical and Ethnographic Interest in Chitral”, by Alberto Cacopardo, East and West LVII, (2007); pp. 377 – 389.

6 Jorinde Ebert (Parinirvāṇa, Stuttgart 1985) has bravely tried to construct a chronological development applicable to the Geometric Type. But writing before the serious efforts of Faccenna and then Callieri and Filigenzi, and using outmoded stylistic characteristics to date Gandhāran art, detracts from the conclusions she proposes.

7 The relief was last featured in The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan. Legends, Monasteries and Paradise (Bonn, 2008), Cat. No.115, p. 201. The Catalogue lists the Inv. No. as CGP -1981-1-66. It is also listed under the No. Peshawar UM 070309-338-06

8 A Catalogue of the Ancient Sculptures Preserved in the Municipal Collections of Rome. The Sculptures of the Palazzo dei Conservatori, by members of the British School at Rome, (ed.) H. Stuart Jones (Oxford, 1926) Vol. 2, pt. 1. Descriptions on pp. 175 – 179. Plates in Vol. 2, pt. 2.

9 Martina Stoye, “Der Dreifuss in Gandhārischen Szenen vom Ersten Bad des Siddhārtha Gautama – Überlegungen zu Herkunft und Bedeutung eines visuellen Zitats” Artibus Asiae, Vol. LXIV, 2; 2004 p. 170.

10 For a description of the scene with comments on both the textile and carving crafts, see Srinivasan “Local Crafts”, for Fig. 11. 5. Already I began to doubt Ebert's chronological (and thereby stylistic) analyses.

11 Henner von Hesberg “ Elemente der frühkaiserzeitlichen Aedikularachitektur”, Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archaologischen Institutes in Wien, Vol. 53.1 ( 1981), 45

12 Paspalas, Stavros A., “On Persian -Type Furniture in Macedonia: The Recognition and Transmission of Forms”, American Journal of Archaeology CIV (2000), pp. 531–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see especially pp. 532–536.

13 My date for the Begram treasure is based on the research of David Whitehouse on painted glass beakers. He places them in the late first to early second century ce (See Whitehouse, D. “Begram, the Periplus and Gandharan Art”, Journal of Roman Archaeology 2, (1989), pp. 93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This date agrees with Sanjyot Mehendale's dating of the Begram ivories and bone objects to the first century. Sanjyot Mehendale, “The Begram Ivory and Bone Carvings: Some Observations on Provenance and Chronology”, Topoi Orient–Occident. 2001, pp. 485–514. She did her PhD thesis on this subject.

14 Paspalas, “Persian -Type Furniture”,534 ff.

15 See Bernard, Paul, “Sièges et Lits en Ivoire d’Époque Hellénistique en Asie Central”, Syria XLVII (1970), pp. 327–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar; see p. 334, fn 2. Vesta S. Curtis, “Parthian and Sasanian Furniture” in The Furniture of Western Asia. Ancient and Traditional, Georgiana Herrmann (ed.) (Mainz, 1996); pp. 233–244. Curtis sees no special reason to regard the Nisa pieces as Graeco - Bactrian even though they are similar. Such furniture legs existed throughout the Parthian period, according to Curtis (see p. 235).

16 See Sculptures of Palmyra (ed.) I. K. Tanabe, (Tokyo, 1986). See Plates 393–409, pp. 427–429. Curtis, “Parthian and Sasanian Furniture”, p. 237 gives additional Parthian sites yielding reliefs of funerary couches.

17 Doris Meth Srinivasan, “From Roman Clipeata Imago to Gandhāran Image Medallion and the Embellishment of the Parinirvāṇa Legend” in Architetti, Capomastri, Artigiani, L'Organizzazione dei Cantieri e della Produzione Artistica nell'Asia Ellenistica, (ed.) Pierfrancesco Callieri, (Rome, 2006 ), pp. 247–269; also my “Māyā,Gandhāra's Grieving Mother – Part 2”, in Miscellanies about the Buddha Image, (ed.) ClaudineBautze-Picron, BAR International Series 1888,( 2008), pp. 109–124.

18 For the Mathurā Parinirvāṇa relief, see J. Ph. Vogel, “La Sculpture de Mathurā”, Ars Asiatica XV (Paris and Bruxelle,1930), Pl. LIII a. The Sanchi I example is in The Monuments of Sañchī, by John Marshall and Alfred Foucher, Vol. II. Reprinted (Delhi, 1982), See Plate 63, Back of Western Gateway, Front of Middle Lintel. A king is shown sitting on a sort of throne with lathe-turned legs.

19 Vogel, Mathurā, Pl. XX side c.

20 For a brief description of this coin see Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan: Legends, Monasteries, and Paradise, Christian Luczanits, Michael Jansen, (Mainz, 2008), p.149, Cat. No. 88; British Museum No. IOC.268.

21 Giovanni Verardi, “The Buddha – Elephant” in Silk Road Art and Archaeology 6, papers in Honour of Francine Tissot. (eds.) Elizabeth Errington, Osmund Bopearachchi (Kamakura, 1999/2000), pp. 69–74.

22 Trautmann, Thomas R., Elephants and Kings. An Environmental History, (Chicago and London, 2015), p. 291CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 For Verardi's discussion see “The Buddha - Elephant”, also see Doris Meth Srinivasan, Many Heads, Arms and Eyes. Origin, Meaning and Form of Multiplicity in Indian Art, (Leiden, 1997), pp. 292–294.

24 Domenico Faccenna, Sculptures from the Sacred Area of Butkara I, (Swāt, W. Pakistan) Volume II, Part 2, (Rome, 1962), p. 73; Pl CCLXXXVIII a Inv. No. 3591; see also Pl. DXXXVII b in Butkara I, Vol. II, Part 3 and pp. 158 – 159.

25 Faccenna, Butkara I, the same subject also featuring geometric legs is depicted in Pl.CCCXCIX, lower panel.

26 See Pls. DXXIII a & b, DXXXIV b, DXXVI a & b, DXXVII a & b; DXXVIII a & b; DXXIX a & b, DXXX a & b, DXXXI a & b, DXXXII a & b, DXXXVI b; DXXXVIII a & b; DXXXIX a & b; DXL; DXLI b; DXLIV a. Curiously all these carvings show the same subject, namely the Buddha surrounded by two or more adorants. The geometric turned leg can be seen, for example on a divine tutelary couple, see for example W. Zwalf, Gandhāran Sculpture, Vol. II, No. 96. (full ref. in fn. 27, below).

27 Harald Ingholt, Gandhāran Art in Pakistan (New York, 1957); W. Zwalf, A Catalogue of the Gandhāra Sculpture in the British Museum, Vols. I and II, (London, 1996); Isao Kurita, Gandhāran Art Vols. I and II, First Edition, (Tokyo, 1988); Michael Jansen, Christian Luczanits curators, Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan. Legends Monasteries and Paradise, (Mainz, 2008). Exhibition Catalogue; René Russek, Buddha zwischen Ost und West. Skulpturen aus Gandhāra/Pakistan (Zürich, 1987); Suwarcha Paul, Gandhāra Sculptures in Chandigarh Museum, Chandigarh, no date; N. P. Joshi and R. C. Sharma, Catalogue of Gandhāra Sculptures in the State Museum, Lucknow, (Lucknow, 1969); Gandhāra 2, Kyoto University Scientific Mission to Gandhāra, (Kyoto, 1988) for Ranighat; Benjamin Rowland Jr. Gandhāra Sculpture from Pakistan Museums, Asia Society, Inc. (New York, 1960); Domenico Faccenna, Sculptures from the Sacred Area of Butkara I, (Swāt, W. Pakistan) Volume II, Part 2, (Rome, 1962); Vol. II.3, 1964; Domenico Faccenna et al., Pānṛ I (Swāt, Pakistan), Vol. I (Rome, 1993); Domenico Faccenna et al., Saidu Sharif I ( Swāt, Pakistan),Vol. 2, (Rome, 1995); Alfred Foucher, L'Art Gréco-Bouddhique du Gandhāra. Étude sur l'iconographie bouddhique de l'Inde d'après des textes inédits, (Paris, 1905 – 51); Saifur Rahman Dar, “The Sikri Sculptures: prolegomena on an exceptional, but unstudied collection of Gandhāran art in the Lahore Museum”, Silk Road Art and Archaeology 6. Papers in Honour of Francine Tissot, (eds) E. Errington O. Bopearachchi (Kamakura 1999/2000), pp. 19 – 43.

28 Juhyung Rhi, “Positioning Gandhāran Buddhas in Chronology : significant coordinates and anomalies” in Problems of Chronology in Gandhāran Art, (eds.) Wannaporn Rienjang and Peter Stewart, Archaeopress Archaeology, 2018, pp. 35 – 51. My discussion is in The Eight-Armed Devi from Guligram, Swāt ( c. 8th century ce). A Study in three parts dedicated to the memory of Harald Hauptmann. By Doris M. Srinivasan, Luca M. Olivieri and with a note by Giuseppe Salemi, in Gandharan Studies Vol. 12.

29 Ellen M. Raven, Gupta Gold Coins with a Garuḍa – Banner Vol. I, (Groningen, 1994), pp. 31 – 33; Vol. II Plates XXXI – XXXVI. Cribb's identification of the goddess as Ardoxsho on a Samudragupta coin in the British Museum (see Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 112; cat. No. 59) cannot be endorsed. For Śrī-Lakṣmī's relation to the royal Guptas please also see my “Lakṣmī's Choice”, in South Asian Archaeology and Art 2012. Vol II edited by Vincent Lefèvre, Aurore Didier and Benjamin Mutin, (Turnout, 2016), see pp. 697–714. Mention should be made of the book by Sanjeev Kumar, Treasures of the Gupta Empire, The Shivlee Trust, (2017). It contains a large quantity of gold coins reproduced beautifully. Unfortunately, to judge by the summary given on the iconography of Śrī-Lakṣmī on Gupta coins, pp. 45–50, the analysis does not cover my latest (pre-2017), findings which demonstrate a more accelerated development in the iconography of Lakṣmī as seen on Gupta coins than Kumar allows. Specifically the analysis for the steps by which Śrī-Lakṣmī attained her image on the throne on some Gupta gold coins of Samudragupta and his Candragupta I (Candragupta II in Raven's Gupta Gold Coins), cannot be supported. The fact, for example, that Kumar also reproduces a possible fake sculpture (p. 46 from the Corfu Museum) and cites the reverse of some Kuṣāṇa coins inscribed ‘Oesho’ as ‘Shiva’ suggests there can be areas of weakness in this volume.

30 Raven, Gupta Gold Coins, Vol. I, p. 39. In those coins where Śrī-Lakṣmī sits on the lotus, she also holds a lotus and abandons the cornucopia, another attribute she gained in the North. See my “Śri-Lakṣmī in Early Art: Incorporating the Northwestern Evidence”, South Asian Studies. Vol. 26. 1, (March 2010), pp. 77–95.

31 Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 112; cat. No.58.

32 Cribb, Joe and Singh, Karan, “Two Curious ‘Kidarite’ Coin Types from 5th Century Kashmir”, Journal of the Oriental Numismatic Society 23, (2017)Google Scholar.

33 “Lakṣmī on the Lion” in Temple Architecture and Imagery of South and Southeast Asia, (eds.) Parul Pandya Dhar and Gerd J. R. Mevissen (New Delhi, 2016), pp. 246-261.

34 Gritli von Mitterwallner, Münzen der spaten Kuṣāṇas, des Hunnen Kirada/Kidara und der frühen Guptas. Teil 1(Munich, 1983).

35 Chhaya Bhattacharya, Studies in the wooden objects of the Berlin Central Asian Collection a PhD Dissertation from Free University of Berlin (1975). Chhaya Bhattacharya, Art of Central Asia (with Special Reference to wooden objects from the Northern Silk Route), (Delhi, 1977). This is a revised form of the author's thesis.

36 See Vignato, Giuseppe, “Monastic Fingerprints – Tracing Ritual Practice in the Rock Monastery of Qizil through Archaeological Evidence”, Indo-Asiatische Zeitschrift 20/21, (2016–17); pp. 22–38Google Scholar. Thanks to Gerd J. R. Mevissen for bringing this article to my attention.

37 See Vignato, “Monastic Fingerprints”, fn. 10, p. 28 for usages of palanquins in Gandhāra and Khotan.

38 Stoye, “ Der Dreifuss in Gandhārischen Szenen”, 169. See her Figures 1, 2, 4, 5.

39 See further details in Stanislaw J. Czuma, with assitance of Rekha Morris, Kushan Sculpture: Images from Early India, Cleveland Museum of Art, (1985), pp. 121-122.

40 For a complete description and analysis of this relief, please see my “Local Crafts in Early Gandhāran Art”, pp. 260-261.

41 See image in Kurita, Gandhāran Art, Vol I, p. 242, Photo 482 and Ebert, Parinirvāṇa, Tafel 10, No. 17 (where the provenance is given as the Calcutta Museum).

42 First published in Russek, Buddha. Skulpturen aus Gandhāra/Pakistan, Photo No. 5, described on page 16. Russek correctly considers the fragment part of some furniture; he suggests it is the armrest of a royal throne, which might be the case.

43 See Chandreyi Basu, Displaying Many Faces, Art and Gandhāran Identity. Selections from the David R. Nalin Collection; Nalini International Publications, (2004), p.103, No.108.

44 See Butkara I, Part 3, p.162 for description of Plate DLVII.

45 See Nehru, Lolita, Origins of the Gandhāran Style. A Study of Contributory Influences, (Oxford, 1989)Google Scholar, Fig. 150.

46 Ebert, Parinirvāṇa, pp. 107, 109, 113 and Fig. 37 in Tafel 20. However, I do not agree with her subsequent interpretation that these represent the breasts of Poseidon.

47 N. P. Joshi and R. C. Sharma, Catalogue of Gandhāra Sculptures in the State Museum, Lucknow, (Lucknow, 1969), p. 81, No. 53 for Acc. No. G 270. He writes: “The pedestal is a lion throne supported by two highly stylish lions one at each end. Their vigour has been shown through large dotted manes”.

48 See Russek, Buddha. Skulpturen aus Gandhāra/Pakistan; p. 74, Fig. 82. This pedestal is also described by Anna-Maria Quagliotti in Ancient Buddhist Art from Gandhāra (catalogue of the Panasia Gallery, Zürich), n.d. No. 21. Her description is based on her entry for the same piece in De l'Indus a l'Oxus. Archeologie de l'Asie Centrale. Osmund Bopearachchi, Christian Landes et Christine Sachs. (eds.) (Lattes, 2003)), pp. 235 -236. All books consider the protuberances to refer to the lion's mane. Thus these interpretations postulate three segments of a lion, namely upper jaw, mane, paws.

49 Sérinde, Terre de Bouddha, (Grand Palais, 1996), p. 135.

50 Ebert, Parinirvāṇa, p. 104, fn. 603 cites the Pañcatantra. See The Saundaryalaharī or Flood of Beauty, edited and translated by W. Norman Brown, Harvard Oriental Series 43, (Cambridge, 1958), p.72. The Dhvanyāloka of Ānandavardhana, with Locana of Abhinavagupta. Translated by Daniel H. H. Ingalls, Jeffrey Mousaieff Masson and M.V. Patwardhan, Harvard Oriental Series 49, (Cambridge and London, 1990), p. 335. On the same page, 335 it is mentioned that the simile is a frequent one.

51 Antonio Invernizzi, ‘Sculture di Metallo da Nisa. Cultura greca e cultura iranica in Partia. Acta Iranica 35, Troisième Série. Textes et Mémoires. Vol. XXI, (1999). Tav. 11, e and f. Invernizzi also cites the Aï Khanoum winged female with lion claws in his Fig. 31 in this publication (p. 80). He suggests that the Aï Khanoum metal image may be older than the Nisa ones. I wish to thank Fabrizio Sinisi for translating the relevant textual passages (parts of pp. 71 – 85, Sections 6 and 7).

52 Jansen and Luczanits curators, Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 272; Cat. No.194. I have not actually inspected this example or the others I am citing and therefore do not know whether any of the pieces also show “nipples” on the breasts. However, Ebert, in Parinirvāṇa pp. 107-108, cites Haḍḍa examples which contain throne legs with ‘globes’. Each of these globes has the raised dots in the middle. See J. Barthoux, Les Fouilles de Haḍḍa, Tome IV, (Paris, 1833), Pt. 1. See page 130 – 131 for Figs. 110 d and c; also Fig. 145, p. 166.

53 John M. Rosenfield, The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967), Fig. 101. This schist sculpture may omit the lion's jaw on top.

54 Russek, Buddha. Skulpturen aus Gandhāra/Pakistan, page 64, No. 65. Probably a debased example can also be seen in Teaching Bodhisattva, No. 74. Base with Bodhisattva Padmapāni is seen in Cat. No. 82 which is very well preserved.

55 Jansen and Luczanits curators, Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 167; Fig. 3

56 Foucher, L'Art Gréco-Bouddhique du Gandhāra; Fig. 181, top.

57 Ibid. Fig. 237, top. This example probably shows debased Figurative legs.

58 Curtis, “Parthia and Sasanian Furniture”, pp. 239 – 240.

59 The quote is from W. J. F. Jenner, Memories of Loyang: Yang Hsüan-chih and the lost capital (493-534), (Oxford, 1981). The translation has been lightly reworked and ameliorated by Ching Chao-jung and transmitted to me on 1/22/2018. She translates as follows: “The king's wife is held high [by a palaquin /sedan chair ] when she goes out and when she enters [indoors, she] sits on a golden [-bench], [and] the bench [-throne] is in the form of (a?) six-tusked white elephant and four lions”.

60 Herbert Härtel and Marianne Yaldiz, Along the Ancient Silk Routes. Central Asian Art from the West Berlin State Museums. Exhibition Catalogue. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, (New York, 1982). See p. 121, Catalogue No. 56.

61 Shoshin Kuwayama, Across the Hindukush of the First Millenium. A Collection of Papers, Institute for Research in the Humanities, (Kyoto, 2002), p. 109.

62 Härtel and Yaldiz, Along the Ancient Silk Routes. See p. 122, entry No. 57 which shows the profile only. See also Bhattacharya, Art of Central Asia (with Special Reference to wooden objects from the Northern Silk Route), Figs. 179 a (the front) and b (the profile).

63 Ibid, p. 122.

64 Härtel and Yaldiz, Along the Ancient Silk Routes. See pp. 130 – 132.

65 Bhattacharya, Art of Central Asia, p. 97 and Fig. 180.

66 Stein, M. Aurel, Ancient Khotan, Vol. I. Text. (Reissued 1975)Google Scholar, by Hacker Art Books, p. 336.

67 Rosenfield, John, The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, (Los Angeles, 1967), pp. 183 – 186Google Scholar.

68 Auboyer, Jeannine, Le Trȏne et son Symbolisme dans l'Inde ancienne, (Paris, 1949), pp. 108 – 109Google Scholar.

69 Rosenfield, Dynastic Arts p.184 which see for other Buddhist texts metaphorically referring the Buddha as ‘a lion’.

70 Jansen and Luczanits curators, Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 271, Cat. No. 192.

71 Rosenfield, Dynastic Arts, Fig. 1.

72 For a full discussion on Gaja Lakṣmī, please see my “ Śri–Lakṣmī in Early Art : Incorporating the North-western Evidence”, South Asian Studies Vol. 26.1, (2010), pp. 77 – 95.

73 Thomas R. Trautmann, Elephants and Kings. An Environmental History, (Chicago, 2015), p. 128.

74 Ibid. pp. 196 – 202.

75 Mayamata, translated by Bruno Dagens, (English version), (New Delhi, 1985).

76 Ibid. p. 304. Anyone familiar with the Household Rules governing society (i.e. contained in the gṛhya –sūtras) will be familiar with the variations in timing and aspects of the upanayana, the sacred thread, tonsure performance, godāna rite, to name just a few, that are based on the class of the sacrifier. That is why the distinctions contained in the Mayamata ring true to me.

77 Ibid.,

78 I wish to thank Professor Dr O. von Hinüber for bringing this passage to my attention and providing a translation of the passage quoted.

79 Jansen and Luczanits curators, Gandhāra. The Buddhist Heritage of Pakistan, p. 180, Fig. 1.

80 For a complete description of this relief, please see my “Māyā: Gandhāra's Grieving Mother – Part 2”, p. 109.

81 See “Gandhāran Textiles”, especially pp. 96 – 97.