Читать книгу Art of India - Vincent Arthur Smith - Страница 3

Lion capital of the pillar erected by King Ashoka at Sarnath (today the National Emblem of India), c. 250 B. C. E., Maurya dynasty (Ashoka). Polished Chunar sandstone, height: 215 cm. Archaeological Museum, Sarnath, Uttar Pradesh.

A short time after the death of Alexander in 323 B. C. E., the throne of Magadha or Bihar, then the premier kingdom of Northern India, was seized by Chandragupta, surnamed the Maurya, known as Sandrokottos to Greek authors. In the course of a victorious reign of twenty-four years this able prince caused his influence to be felt over all India, at least as far south as the river Narmada, and acquired from Seleukos Nikator, first his enemy and then his ally, the valuable provinces lying between the Indus and the Hindu Kush mountains which now constitute the major part of the kingdom of Afghanistan.

Chandragupta was succeeded by his son Bindusara, who, in or about 273 B. C. E., transmitted the imperial sceptre to his son, Ashoka, the third and most renowned sovereign of the Maurya dynasty. For forty-one years (273–232 B. C. E.) Ashoka ruled his immense empire with great power and might, maintaining friendly relations with his neighbours, the Tamil states of the extreme south and also with the island kingdom of Sri Lanka and the more remote Greek monarchies of Macedonia, Epirus, Western Asia, Egypt, and Cyrene.

Early in life the emperor became a religious convert and as the years rolled Ashoka’s on his zeal increased. Finally, his energies and riches were devoted almost patronage of entirely to the work of honouring and propagating the teaching of Gautama Buddhism – Buddha. With one exception he abstained from wars of conquest and was thus free to concentrate his attention upon the task to which his life was consecrated.

The imperial palace at Pataliputra, the modern Patna, the capital of Early Chandragupta Maurya is described by Greek and Roman authors as excelling the royal residences of Susa and Ekbatana in splendour. Although no vestige architecture of such a building has survived (with the possible exception of some brick foundations) there is no reason to doubt the statements of the historians. The result of much excavation seems to support the literary evidence that Indian architects before the time of Ashoka built their superstructures chiefly of timber, using sun-dried brick almost exclusively for foundations and plinths. No deficiency in dignity or grandeur was involved in the use of the more perishable material; on the contrary, the employment of timber enables wide spaces to be roofed with ease which could not be spanned with masonry, especially when, as in India, the radiating arch was not ordinarily employed for structural purposes.

Excavations of widely spread sites dating from the Maurya to the Gupta Stone periods, and even later, emphasize the fact that timber and unburnt brick buildings were the standard architectural materials of ancient India, mud being used as it still is, for ordinary, domestic work. However, Ashoka is credited by the literary sources with the use of masonry in the many building activities reported of him. It is on record that during his reign of about forty-one years he replaced the wooden walls and buildings of his capital by more substantial work and caused hundreds of fine edifices in both brick and stone to be erected throughout the empire. So astonishing was his activity as a builder that people in after ages could not believe his constructions to be the work of human agency, and felt constrained to regard them as wrought by familiar spirits forced to obey the behests of the imperial magician. Few sites can, however, be definitely ascribed to the Ashokan or even to the Mauryan period. No building with any pretensions to be considered an example of architecture can be assigned to any earlier period than this, with which the history of Indian architecture as of the other arts begins.

The Mauryan emperors must surely have built palaces, public offices, and Indian temples suitable to the dignity of a powerful empire and proportionate to the wealth of rich provinces, but of such structures not a trace seems to survive. The best explanation of this fact is the hypothesis that the early works of Indian architecture and art were mainly constructed of timber and other perishable materials, ill-fitted to withstand the ravenous tooth of time. Whatever the true explanation of this may be the fact remains that the history of Indian art begins with Ashoka. ‘But’, as Professor Percy Gardner observes, ‘there can be no doubt that Indian art had an earlier history. The art of Ashoka is a mature art: in some respects more mature than the Greek art of the time, though, of course far inferior to it, at least in our eyes.’

We can affirm with certainty that the forms of Ashokan architecture and plastic decoration were descended from wooden prototypes, and may also discern traces of the influence of lost works in metal, ivory, terracotta, and painting. The pictorial character of the ancient Indian reliefs is obvious, and the affinity of much of the decorative work with the jeweller’s art is equally plain. The sculpture on a pier of the southern gate at Sanchi was actually executed by the ivory-carvers of the neighbouring town of Vedisa (Bhilsa). We may, moreover, feel some confidence in affirming that the sudden adoption of stone as the material for both architecture and sculpture was in a large measure the result of foreign, perhaps Persian, example. The fuller consideration of the foreign influences affecting Indian art will be more conveniently deferred and made the subject of a separate chapter.

Whatever the foreign elements of ancient Indian art may have been, great weight must be allowed for the personal initiative of Ashoka, a man of marked originality of mind, capable of forming large designs and executing them with imperial thoroughness. The direction taken by Indian art was like the diffusion of Buddhism, determined in its main lines by the will of a resolute and intelligent autocrat.

Like most of the extant works of early Indian art, the Mauryan columns and caves were executed in honour of Buddhism, which became the state religion in the empire of Ashoka and is said to have been introduced during his reign into independent Sri Lanka. Although we know that both Jainism and Brahmanical Hinduism continued to attract multitudes of adherents during the Mauryan period, hardly any material remains of works dedicated to the service of those religions have survived.

The monuments which can with certainty be dated in Ashoka’s reign are not very numerous, but it is not improbable that more may be discovered, and our direct knowledge of the art strictly contemporary with him is derived from his inscriptions, the carving and sculptures on his monolithic columns, certain caves, and a few fragments of pottery excavated at Mauryan level. The inscriptions are worthy of being mentioned among the Fine Arts on account of their beautiful execution, for nearly all are models of careful and accurate stone cutting. The most faultless example is the brief record on the Rummindei Pillar, which is as perfect as on the day it was incised. The craft of the skilled mason and stone-cutter, so closely akin to fine art, reached perfection in the days of Ashoka, as appears from every detail of their work and especially from an examination of the beautifully polished surface of the monoliths and the interiors of the cave-dwellings dedicated by him and his grandson, Dasaratha Maurya (reign 232–224 B. C. E.), in the hills of Bihar.

The First Sermon, with the Wheel of the Law representing the Buddha, 150–140 B. C. E., Sunga dynasty. Stupa III, south torona, west pillar, north face. Sandstone. Sanchi, Madhya Pradesh.

Isolated pillars, or columns, usually associated with other buildings, and frequently surmounted by a human figure, animal sculpture, or symbol have been erected in India at all times by adherents of all the three leading Indian religions. The oldest are the monolithic pillars of Ashoka, who set up at least thirty of these monuments, of which many survive in a more or less perfect state. Ten of these bear his inscriptions. The Lauriya-Nandangarh monument, in Bihar, inscribed with the first six Pillar Edicts is shown. The shaft of polished sandstone, 10 metres in height, diminishes from a base diameter of 90 centimetres to a diameter of only 57 centimetres at the top proportions which render it the most graceful of all the Ashoka columns. The uninscribed pillar at Bakhira in the Muzaffarpur District, in perfect preservation, and presumably of earlier date, is more massive and consequently less elegant. The fabrication, conveyance, and erection of monoliths of such enormous size, the heaviest weighing about fifty tons, are proofs that the engineers and stone-cutters of Ashoka’s age were not inferior in skill and resource to those of any time or country.

The capitals of these pillars provide excellent evidence of the state of the art of sculpture, both in relief and in the round, during the period between the year 250 B. C. E. and the end of the reign of the great emperor in 232 B. C. E.

The capital of each pillar, like the shaft, was monolithic, comprising three principal members, namely, a Persepolitan bell, abacus, and crowning sculpture in the round. The junction between the shaft and the abacus was marked by a necking, the edge of the abacus was decorated with bas-relief designs, and the crowning sculpture was occasionally a sacred symbol, such as a wheel, or more commonly a symbolical animal, or group of animals. The surviving capitals vary widely in detail. The abacus might be either rectangular or circular so as to suit the form of the sculpture above. The edge of the abacus of the beautiful Lauriya-Nandangarh pillar is decorated by a row of flying sacred geese in quite low relief. The abaci of the pillars at Allahabad and Sankisa and the bull pillar at Rampurva exhibit elegant designs composed of the lotus and palmette or honeysuckle. Whatever the device selected, it is invariably well-executed, and chiselled with that extraordinary precision and accuracy which characterize the workmanship of the Maurya age, and have never been surpassed in Athens or elsewhere.

Arch-shaped façade of Lomas Rishi cave, mid-3rd century B. C. E., Maurya dynasty (Ashoka). Rock-cut architecture. Barabar Hills, Bihar.

The topmost sculpture in the round was most often one or other of four animals namely, the elephant, the horse, the bull, and the lion. All these animals, except the horse, are actually found on the round on extant capitals, and it is recorded that a horse once crowned the pillar at Rummindei, the Lumbini garden. On the sides of the abacus of the Sarnath capital all the four creatures are carved in bas-relief.

The elephant of the Sankisa capital is well modelled, but unhappily has been badly mutilated. The two pillars at Rampurva bear respectively the bull and lion.

The magnificent Sarnath capital discovered in 1905, unquestionably the best extant specimen of Ashokan sculpture, was executed late in the reign between 242 and 232 B. C. E. The column was erected to mark the spot where Gautama Buddha first ‘turned the wheel of law’, or in plain English, publicly preached his doctrine. The symbolism of the figures, whether in the round or in relief, refers to the commemoration of that event. The four lions standing back to back on the abacus once supported a stone wheel, 83 centimetres in diameter, of which only fragments remain.

Ashokan pillar with single lion capital. Such pillars were erected by King Ashoka and Buddhist teachings were engraved on them, 3rd century B. C. E., Maurya dynasty (Ashoka). Polished Chunar sandstone, height: 12 m. Vaishali, Bihar.

It would be difficult to find in any country an example of ancient animal sculpture superior or even equal to this beautiful work of art, which successfully combines realistic modelling with idealistic dignity, and is finished in every detail with perfect accuracy. The bas-reliefs on the abacus are as good in their way as the noble lions in the round. The design, while obviously reminiscent of Assyrian and Persian prototypes, is modified by Indian sentiment, the bas-reliefs being purely Indian. The conjecture of Sir John Marshall (1876–1958), former Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), that the composition may be the work of an Asiatic Greek is not supported by the style of the relief figures. The ability of an Asiatic Greek to represent Indian animals so well may be doubted.

The only rival to the artistic supremacy of the Sarnath capital is the replica which once crowned the detached pillar at Sanchi engraved with a copy of the Sarnath edict denouncing schism. The Sanchi capital is decidedly inferior to that at Sarnath, but it is possible that both works may proceed from the hands of a single artist. A century or so later, when an inferior sculptor attempted to model similar lions on the pillars of the southern gateway at Sanchi, he failed utterly, and his failure supports the theory that the Sarnath capital must have been wrought by a foreigner. Certainly no later sculpture in India attained such high excellence.

The perfection of the Sanchi and Sarnath lions on the edict-pillars must have been the result of much progressive effort. The uninscribed pillar at Bakhira seems to be one of the earlier experiments of Ashoka’s artists. The clumsy proportions of the shaft contrast unfavourably with the graceful design of the Lauriya-Nandangarh column, which bears a copy of the Pillar Edicts, and may be dated in 242 or 241 B. C. E., while the seated lion on the summit is by no means equal to the animals on the edict-pillars of Sarnath and Sanchi erected between 242 and 232 B. C. E. I am disposed to think that the Bakhira column was set up soon after 257 B. C. E., the date of the earliest Rock Edicts. It must also be noted that at Rampurva there are two pillars only one of which is inscribed. In the Sahasram inscription it is clearly stated that edicts are to be inscribed on rocks, or on pillars wherever a stone pillar is standing, which suggests that some of these pillars may considerably antedate Ashoka’s reign, although their technique is obviously one with the inscriptions and caves, and they are clearly ‘Mauryan’.