buddhist bronzes of the six dynasties period

Buddhist Bronzes of the Six Dynasties PeriodAuthor(s): Hugo MünsterbergSource: Artibus Asiae, Vol. 9, No. 4 (1946), pp. 275-315Published by: Artibus Asiae PublishersStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3247917 .

Accessed: 18/06/2014 10:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Artibus Asiae Publishers is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Artibus Asiae.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.31 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:40:12 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=artibus

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3247917?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


HUGO MUNSTERBERG:

BUDDHIST BRONZES OF THE SIX DYNASTIES PERIOD

I THE EARLIEST CHINESE BUDDHA IMAGE

IN THE SIX DYNASTIES PERIOD, WE FIND AN ART VERY CLOSE TO THAT OF THE

Mediaeval epoch in our own civilization, and Dvorak's beautiful words about the nature

and the purpose of Gothic art could have been said just as well about the Buddhist

art of the Six Dynasties period. For this art, too, "sollte nicht nur kuiinstlerisch gesteigerte Wirklichkeitseindriicke und natuiirliche, lebendige Organismen beherrschende Krafte ver-

korpern, sondern auch die realen Formen mit solchen Qualitaten verbinden, welche dem

Beschauer die Substanz des Gottlichen, ihr Walten, eine transzendente GesetzmaiTigkeit vor Augen fiihrt".' It is an art which is trying to express the transcendental, spiritual

experience of the Buddhist teachings in terms of artistic forms and which modifies and

accentuates these forms in order to convey its message, irrespeCtive of the anatomical

and organic corredness of the forms employed.

Although Buddhist persecutions, wars and neglet of later generations, which took no

interest in Buddhism, have left only a few and often not first rate specimens of bronze

images, it is still possible to see that the art of the Six Dynasties period was great and

varied, showing a stylistic development closely resembling that of the Art of Mediaeval

Europe. In such a comparison, the years between 400 and 600 A.D. in China would

correspond to the years Ioo00 to 1300 A. D. in the West, and the Fourth Century would

be similar to the Eleventh Century in our own civilization, for in both cases we have

a few isolated works of art which form a sort of prelude to the great spiritual art of

the subsequent centuries. Why the artistic output suddenly grew large and varied cannot

be answered; it is one of those phenomena which are difficult, if not impossible, to account

for, since whatever rational explanation one might strive for, the sudden growth of a

great artistic style, as well as the decay of sustch a style, hecannot be explained in rational 1 Dvorak, Kunstgeschichte als Geistesgeschichte, Munchen, 1928, p. 62.

275



terms. In both cases, the preceding centuries saw the beginnings of a new spiritual art, but that the years 400 A. D. and I1oo A.D. should witness the sudden flourishing of plastic art after centuries of negled remains a mystery which cannot be explained in terms of

social or political events.

In discussing the sculptures, we shall deal with them in five different groups. First, the

isolated example of a Fourh Century image; second, the group of bronzes which date

before the time of the great Buddhist persecution during the middle of the Fifth Century

(this group I shall call Early Archaic); third, the sculptures from the second half of the

Fifth Century (referred to as Late Archaic); fourth, the works from the first four decades

of the Sixth Century (the style which I shall refer to as the Great Style); and finally, the works from the later part of the Sixth Century (which I shall call Transitional). For

the sake of completeness, I shall include a few Sui bronzes, among the works I shall

discuss in this last sedion. In contrast to Siren2, however, I do not consider the Sui style

transitional, but a mature style in its own right. The earliest dated Chinese Buddhist bronze we know of is a seated Buddha Sakyamuni in the ColleCtion of Mr. C. T. Loo in New York (Plate i). Mr. Pope who studied the

inscription tells us that the inscription, dating it September 3oth 338 A. D. and saying it

was made under the Later Chao Dynasty, seems genuine.3 Since there are records showing that the rulers of this dynasty were patrons of Buddhism, and that the art of making Buddhist images had been praftised in that kingdom by an Indian monk as early as

322A. D., there is no reason to doubt the genuineness of the image and its inscription on an historical basis. But the main criterion for determining the authenticity of a Buddhist

bronze must always be a careful examination of the objed itself, for the Chinese have

been notorious all through their history for adding false inscriptions to works of art.

Studying the sculpture itself, I do not believe that there can be any reasonable doubt

that this is the earliest Chinese Buddhist bronze we know of. Although we have no

other Fourth Century works to compare it with, the style of this statue would indicate

2 Siren, O., Chinese Marble Sculpture of the Transitional Period, Bull. of the Mus. of Far East. Ant.,

Stockholm, 1940, Nr. 12. 8 Catalogue of the 1940 Exhibition of Ancient Chinese Ritual Bronzes in

the Detroit Museum of Fine Arts, 1940, plate XLI.

276



that it must undoubtedly be looked

for among the Gandhra images ofe

Northwestern India', whence this

type may have travelled to Central

Asia and China. Andit is not difficult

to find the exad type which the

artist who made this statue must

have had in mind. There is a statue

which is almost identical in both typ

posture and iconography, although it is executed in stone.

We see the Buddha seated in Yogi

posture, the legs crossed, the feet,

not visible, the body upright, the

hands in dhyani mudrr , 9 the gesture of meditation, the eyes showing the '

' ,

abstrad look of one absorbed in _ ~ _;__

contemplation, the head with the

usnmsa, the symbol of the Buddha's

superhuman insight. Even such small

details as the edge of the garment Plate

hanging down over the legs beyond Buddha Syamuni

the hands, and the simple, cubic form dated 338A.D. Collection C. T. Loo

of the throne on which the Tathagata is seated, are almost identical. This same type of image also occurs in Mathura art6 and in Central Asia.7 : Only a few Gandhara bronzes are in existence; the only two seated Buddha images I know of are

in the Taxila Museum (photograph R. A. R. B.); and the reproduction in the Archeological Survey of

India, 90ol II, p. 29, plate XVI. 5 Foucher, A., L'Art Greco-Buddhique du Gandhara, Paris,

i918, Vol. II, Fig. 455. 6 Foucher, op. cit., Fig. 532. 7 Sir Aurel Stein, Serindia, Vol. IV,

plates, Oxford, I92 1, pl. 8.

277



But in spite of this obvious dependence upon India for its inspiration, the Chinese image shows an artistic language quite its own and indigenous to China. Whereas the Gandhara

statue shows the strange combination of Indian warmth and fullness with sophisticated late Roman elements, a strange marriage of religious feeling and decadence which is the

very nature of Gandhara art, the Chinese Buddha shows a new, charaderistically Chinese

mode of artistic expression. The round, full sensuous forms and curving lines of the

Indian Buddha are transformed into geometric, sharp and angular shapes which build up the figure with almost mathematical abstradness. Nothing of the original pagan decadence

or Indian warmth is left; instead, an austere and formal arrangement of lines and forms

prevails, which is typical for the essentially linear and caligraphic rather than plastic nature

of Chinese art. Whereas the hands formed a gently sloping curve in the Gandhara statue, the Chinese figure shows a frontal arrangement of the hands so that they face the wor-

shipper in rigid frontality and form a straight horizontal line instead of a curve. The

same change takes place in the treatment of the drapery and the hair. For in the Indian

figure the drapery of the garment falls in natural folds with ridge-like elevations, while

the Chinese figure shows the abstrad, flat geometrical pattern which, as we shall see later, is charaderistic of Chinese Buddhist sculpture of the Great Age. The same is true of

the hair, which instead of falling in wavy locks, consists of a formal arrangement of

incised lines.

The base also brings out the difference of artistic conception, for the Indian image shows

decorative forms, modelled in relief, probably derived from late Roman ornaments, while

the Chinese Buddha has a simple, cubical base with incised floral motives of Chinese

origin. The artistic merits of this geometrical style may be debated, but whatever one's

aesthetic estimate of this type of figure may be, I think one will have to admit that we

are here confronted with a truly Chinese and deeply religious artistic expression. Since the dating of Gandharan and Central Asian works is so uncertain, it is difficult

to state if this type of image was derived diredly from India or indiredly via Central

Asia. Literary accounts, as we saw above, would support either hypothesis, and it is probably safe to say that the new Buddhist art reached China both diredly from India and in-

diredly. Siren places the emphasis upon Central Asia, and suggests that the early Chinese

278



Buddhist bronzes were "based upon models imported from Khotan."8 I personally tend

to think that the role of Central Asia has been emphasized unduly, due to the good

preservation of many of the Central Asian sites and the excellent publications of the

excavations by von Le Coq, Griinwedel and Sir Aurel Stein. Recent scholars have given

up the theory that the Horyuji paintings were derived from Central Asian models, and

I feel that in connedion with Buddhist sculpture as well as wall painting, we shall some

day stress the influence of India more strongly, and no longer let the wealth of the

Central Asian material obscure the proper relationship.

Literary accounts would suggest that the sea route as well as the land route served as

a link between India and China, but even Bachhofer, who makes the most of the Southern

School, is forced to admit that the monuments themselves give little support to the thesis

that an independent Southern School of Chinese Buddhist sculpture existed. ,,Priift man

nun die beiden altesten siidchinesischen Bildwerke mit Hilfe der gleichen Methode, namlich

einer genauen Analyse der ikonographischen und stilistischen Elemente, die es ermoglicht

hatte, die Provenienz gewisser Formen in der hinterindischen Plastik aufzuklaren, so

zeigen sie nicht die geringste Spur, die auf die Herkunft aus dem nordlichen, dem west-

lichen oder siidlichen Indien, aus Ceylon oder aus Funan schlieBen liegie."e

Siren, although admitting that there is no evidence which would make us suppose that

there was a separate Southern School based on models which came from Southern India

by sea, suggests that "the influences which reached the Yang-tse valley came along the

southern transcontinental route, mainly from Khotan, where as those which dominated

the artistic centers in Shansi and Honan came by the northern route over Tun-huang from Kucha and Tumchuk."10 But he gives no proof for this theory and as interesting an hypothesis as it may be, I do not believe that the scanty material at our disposal would warrant such an hypothesis. Nevertheless, we cannot disprove this theory either, since

the two early Southern bronze images which have come down to us do not justify a

definite pronouncement. Besides this seated Buddha there is another image with a Fourth Century date, of which

8 Siren, O., Indian and Other Influences in Chinese Sculpture, p. 24. 9 Bachhofer, L., Anfange der Buddhistischen Plastik in China, Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, I934, p. 15. o1 Siren, O., op. cit., p. 24.

279



the original has not come down to us, but which is reproduced in the catalogue of the

Tuan Fang Colledion.l1 The inscription refers to it as a Maitreya and gives its date as

390 A. D., or Third Day of the Third Month of the Third Year of the T'eng Kuo Era.

But even the crude little drawing shows quite clearly that the statue could not possibly have been of Forth Century origin, since the slender, elongated forms and the broken

halo are charadteristic of the Sixth Century, and it is more than unlikely that this one

figure should have anticipated a development which was not to take place until over a

century later. The broken halo, for example, does not occur until 50o A. D.12 Other features

of this image which make the early date unlikely are the complicated iconography and

the refinement of the forms. As I pointed out above, early dates and famous signatures were added frequently in China, and especially in the Tuan Fang catalogue there are

numerous examples of such forged inscriptions. We can therefore dismiss this statue as

obviously of later origin with an added inscription. This leaves us with the Loo bronze as the only authentic statue from this period, and

I think we can conclude by saying that this was not pure chance, but that sculpture was just as rare in Fourth Century China as it was in Eleventh Century Europe, for the

great day of Chinese Buddhist sculpture had not yet dawned.

II THE EARLY ARCHAIC BRONZES

With the turn of the century Chinese Buddhist images become more common and a large number of dated Fifth Century statues have come down to us. Since the style of the

bronzes from the first half of the Century before the great Buddhist persecution, which

ended in 452 A. D., differs somewhat from that of the images from the second half of the

Century, I have chosen to deal with the two groups separately, and shall refer to them as

early and late archaic works. No less than nine dated early archaic Buddhist bronzes have

come down to us, but four of these must be disregarded as they are of later origin with

false inscriptions. 11 T'so Ch'i chi chin lu (Catalogue of the Tuan Fang Collection), Vol. 8, pl. 3. 12 Omura, S., Shinabijutsushi, Chosohen (History of Chinese Art, Sculpture), T6ky6, I915, p. 172.

280



Although two of the bronzes are of Southern Sung origin, one from the Northern Hsia

Dynasty and the other two from the Northern Wei Empire, they are similar in style. This would suggest that the sculptural style did not vary in different parts of the country, for the fad that both Southern bronzes represent seated Buddhas and both Northern

Wei images are of standing deities strikes me as purely accidental.

The earliest of these images is the seated Buddha from the Hsia Dynasty, now in the

colledion of Mr. Yamaguchi at Kobe.13 It is dated 429 A.D. The type is not unlike the

later Chao bronze we discussed above, and it therefore serves as a link between this

earliest monument of Chinese Buddhist sculpture, and the somewhat late examples, showing that a continuity of style existed from the earliest times.

In creating this image the artist must have had passages like the following from the

Saddharmapundartka in mind: "Now at that time it was that the Lord surrounded, attended,

honoured, revered, venerated, worshipped by the four classes of hearers, after expounding the Dharmaparyaya called the Great Exposition, a text of great development, serving to instrud Bodhisattvas and proper to all Buddhas, sat cross-legged on the seat of the

law and entered upon the meditation termed the station of the exposition of Infinity, his body was motionless and his mind had reached perfed tranquillity."14 In comparing this image with the Fourth Century one, we can observe certain definite

differences, in spite of the general similarity in the conception of the statues. The icono-

graphy is now more complex and the technique more highly developed. This is best seen

in the treatment of the throne and the hands. For, whereas the Later Chao bronze had a

simple cubic box-like base, which was to symbolize the lion throne of Sakyamuni, the Fifth

Century image shows the Buddha seated on a little platform with a lotus flower at his feet

and two lions flanking him. The latter are not recognizable as such, but it is evident that

the Chinese artist, unfamiliar with the sight of these animals, tried to approximate them as

well as he could, since the texts talk about the Tathagata being seated on a lion throne

and since the Indian models usually show this iconography. The hands are now seen lying in the Buddha's lap in dhyani mudra, as it is found in Gandharan and Central Asian images. The treatment of the drapery is much the same as in the earlier image, but the lines are

18 Siren, O., op. cit., Fig. 24. 14 Kern, Sacred Books of the East, XXI, p. 6.

28i



now softer and more fluid, and the entire expression of the figure and the feeling conveyed is less austere

and archaic. Since these new features of this statue

are due to renewed contat with the West and greater technical skill in making such images, it is probable that these early Fifth Century statues were inspired by

foreign models, rather than being an outgrowth of the

indigenous Fourth Century tradition. And I think

?! B it is well to emphasize that all through this entire

epoch a constant contad between India, Central Asia

and China must have existed. It is evident as well

that not only religious but also artistic influences

came from the West.

After a few years, both style and iconography of this

type have changed again, although always remaining

part of the same tradition. This is seen clearly by study-

4 11 w ~ing the two Southern bronzes.5 The first carries an in-

scription dating it 437 A. D., or First Day, Fifth Month, Fourteenth Year of Yuan Chia, and originally comes

Plate 2 from the Tuan Fang Colledion, while the second is Buddha Sakyamuni in the Freer Gallery at Washington and is dated

dated 45I A.D. Collection Freer Gallery, Washington 45 A.D., or Twenty-eighth Year of Yuan Chia.

The figure itself has remained much the same, with the rigid, geometrical treatment of

the drapery, the Yogi posture, the rigid frontality of the body and deeply religious ex-

pression of the face. The change that took place is mainly seen in the treatment of

the throne and the addition of a nimbus. For whereas none of the figures we discussed

so far had any halo or mandorla, these figures have both. In back of the 437 A.D. Buddha

is a halo outline on a flaming mandorla which makes it appear as if the Buddha is

surrounded by flames-probaby a lingering reminiscence of an old solar symbol, as it 15 Siren, O., History of Chinese Sculpture, London I925, Vol. II, pl. i6a and i6c,

z28



is found in the paintings at Bamiyan, where the Buddha is seen as a solar divinity.16 And although the halo is quite common in Gandhara sculptures, I have not been able

to find a true mandorla in India, whereas the mandorla was known in Central Asia, for

the figure from Khotan we mentioned above had one. An identical mandorla dated

436A.D., but with a later image, is in the Yamanaka Colledtion in London.

The image in the Freer Gallery has a mandorla with plain edges but the additional feature

of three small Buddha images on its surface. One is over the head of the central figure, the others at its sides. They are probably meant to represent the Buddhas of the Past, their number here being reduced from seven to three. This interpretation of the iconography is very probable, for ,,Schon im Hznaydna Buddhismus galt Shaka nicht als der einzige Buddha. Er selbst schreibt sich 24 Vorganger zu. Von diesen werden die 16 letzten mit

Shaka in eine Gruppe zusammengefaglt, die als sieben Buddha (sapta Buddha) in Sutren

behandelt werden, die im Sten und 6ten Jahrhundert ins Chinesische iibersetzt werden.l7

The treatment of these little figures shows a close resemblance to certain little seated

figures which are found on Han reliefs,18 and it has been suggested that there exists

some relationship between the two types, but this similarity strikes me as purely incidental, since the Western origin of the seated Buddha type is beyond doubt. But it is evident

that some of the same technical devices were used in both instances.

The other feature which appears in both images and which we had not seen before, is

that the Buddha is now seated on a throne consisting of an inverted pyramid placed on

another pyramid, instead of the traditional lion throne. This iconography is frequently

employed in India and represents the Mount Meru or World Mountain.19 It is closely related to the Pyramid and the Ziggurat, which are also to be thought of as the World

Mountain. The meaning of this symbol would then be that the Buddha, seated upon the World Mountain, is above the world and is the ruler of the universe. Another change in the base is that instead of being broad and heavy, it now is higher and tends to lead

16 Hackin, J., L'Oeuvre de la Delegation Archeologique FranGais en Afghanistan, Tokyd, 1933, Vol. I,

Fig. 39. 17 Smidt, H., in Artibus Asiae, Dresden, 1925, Vol. I, p. II. 1 Fischer, O., Die

Kunst Indiens, Chinas und Japans, Berlin, 1928, p. 313. 19 Coomaraswamy, A.K., History of

Indian and Indonesian Art, New York, 1927, pi. X, Fig. 32, 34.

283



Plate 3 Maitreya. dated 443 A.D.

Private Collection, Tientsin

the eye upwards in a vertical diredion, just as

the figure itself and the mandorla stress the upward movement and show greater delicacy and

refinement. But, in spite of the differences

between these types, it is well to keep in mind

that all these figures are essentially of the same

style. Besides the three seated figures there are also

two standing images which date from this epoch. Both of them were made under the Northern

Wei Dynasty, the first being dated 443 A.D., or the Fourth Year of T'ai P'ing, the second

coming from the following year, or Fifth Year

of T'ai P'ing. The earlier image is in a private colledion at Tientsin, while the 444 A. D. statue

is in the colledion of Mr. Ito in Tokyo.20 The

443 A.D. image is of the Udayana type and is

called Maitreya Bodhisattva2t in its inscription, in spite of the general belief that this iconography was only employed for Buddhas. The only

explanation can be that the Maitreya is here

looked upon as the future Buddha. This curious

iconography, showing a Bodhisattva dressed in

a monk's garment is very interesting, for it

throws new light upon the great trinities of

Cave Eighteen and Twenty-two at Yiin Kang, where attending Bodhisattvas dressed in a monk's

garment flank the central Buddhas.22 The only 20 Siren, O., Chinese Sculpture, Vol. II, pl. I46 A. 21 Rowland, B., Buddhist Sculpture in China, Art Bulletin, 1937, Fig. 6. 22 Siren, 0., op. cit., pl. 48, 53, 54.

284



conclusion we draw from all this is that the Chinese

were not very exad about their iconography, and

used this type of representation for both Buddhas

and Bodhisattvas. It is also interesting to note

that the Saddharmapundarzka specifically refers to

the Lord Maitreya as a Bodhisattva. Wegner, who

made a special study of the iconography of the

Chinese Maitreya tells us that he appears both as

a Buddha and a Bodhisattva.23 About the origin of this type he says the following: "Die Darstel-

lungsart des Maitreya geht von Gandhara aus. Dort

war er nach den Untersuchuugen von Griinwedel

und Foucher der Bodhisattva mit dem Locken- [ wulst und dem Flischchen, der sowohl stehend wie

mit iiberkreuzten oder unterschlagenen Beinen sit-

zend dargestellt wird und dem die dharmacakra

mudra zukommt - wenn auch nicht ausschliellich - als dem Buddha der Zukunft, der das Rad der

Lehre noch einmal drehen wird. Dieses Vorbild

hat bewirkt, dafg sich dieselben Merkmale, Cha- Plate

rakterisierung als Bodhisattva, in Yiin Kang und Buddha Sakyamuni bei anderen friihen Werken aus der Wei Zeit fin- dated 444 A. D. Collection Ito, Tokyo

den."24 This Buddha of the Future who shall be the last to receive superior enlightenment, was very popular during this epoch and most of the early standing figures are

designated as Maitreya while later Sakyamuni becomes more common.

The iconography employed for this standing Maitreya type shows the Buddha standing on a lotus, his hands in the gesture of "have no fear" and "mercy", abhaya and vara mudra, the large ear of the Enlightened one who hears everything, the usnisa or superior mind

23 Wegner, M., Zur Ikonographie des Chinesischen Maitreya in Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, Berlin, 1929, Neue Folge, Vol. V, p. 167. 24 Wegner, Ibid., p. 268.

285



of the Buddha, the loops and the monk's garment arranged in loop-like, highly formalized

folds. This type is very famous and is commonly known as the Udayana type. As we

shall see later, several examples of this type are in existence, but this is the only Udayana bronze with a date from the Early Archaic period. The reason for calling this type of statue the Udayana type lies in the tradition that

all these images are copies of an image which King Udayana had made after the likeness

of the Tathagata himself. Hsuan Tsang gives us the following account of this occurance:

"In the city, within an old palace, there is a large vihara about 60 feet high; in it is a

figure of Buddha carved out of sandal wood, above which is a stone canopy. It is the

work of King U-to-yen-ha (Udayana). By its spiritual qualities it produces a divine light which from time to time shines forth. The princes of various countries have used their

power to carry off this statue, but although many men have tried, not all the number

could move it. They therefore worship copies of it, and they pretend that the likeness

is a true one, and this is the original of all such figures. "When the Tathagata first arrived at complete enlightenment, he ascended up to heaven

to preach the law for the benefit of his mother, and for three months remained absent.

This king, thinking of him with affedtion, desired to have an image of his person; there-

fore he asked Mudgalyayanaputra, by his spiritual power, to transport an artist to the

heavenly mansion to observe the excellent marks of the Buddha's body and carve a

sandalwood statue."25 I have quoted this passage at length for it not only relates the

origin of this type, but shows how much emphasis was placed upon the divine inspiration for the religious art of this epoch and how many images were thought of as copies of famous Western ones.

Stylistically this figure shows the crude, heavy forms and formal inorganic treatment of

the drapery which is charaderistic of the Fifth Century Buddhas. The feeling of massiveness

and bulk which this statue evokes is the same quality we find at Yiin Kang. The Buddhas

of Cave Seventeen and Twenty-two, especially, show a close resemblance to this image. The forms are round and full, without the attenuation and refinement which is charader-

25 Beal, S., Buddhist Records of the Western World, London, I906, Vol. I, p. 235.

286



istic of the later works. As at Bamiyan, the monumental size of the Buddha is meant

to be symbolical of his superhuman power as the Great Being.

Contrasting this Chinese Buddha with its Indian prototype of Gandhara origin, such as

the small bronze statue in the Museum at Srinagar in Kashmir,26 or the stone statue in

the Museum at Lahore,27 we observe the same changes in treatment and conception as

we had seen in the seated Buddha images. The arrangement of the drapery is more

formal and inorganic, being arranged in a symmetrical, rigid manner, instead of falling

naturally. Whereas the Gandharan images clearly showed their derivation from the decadent

and naturalistic art of the Late Roman tradition, the Chinese image shows no signs of

delicacy or decadence; quite in contrast, it is a primitive and powerful expression of

a new and still young religious epoch. In its feeling it is therefore closer to the art

of Mathura, although there can be no doubt that it derived its inspiration from Gandhara

models. The similarity is due to the fad that both India and China were at the same

stage of their cultural development, for India had experienced the chaos following the

decay of a great empire, also had seen barbarian invasions and was now, too, waking

up to a new cultural and political growth, under the impad of the foreign conqueror, who had taken up Buddhism and was a great patron of Buddhist art.

The other standing figure, dated 444 A.D., probably represents Sakyamuni Buddha. Again the Buddha is seen standing on a lotus flower, one hand raised in the abhaya mudrd,

the other one in the vara mudrd, the gestures of "have no fear" and "charity". He is

clad in a monk's gown and has the usnisa and large ears of the Enlightened one, but

there are some changes in the iconography, for a halo and flaming mandorla have been

added, and the robe only falls over one shoulder, leaving the other one bare, instead

of covering both shoulders as it is seen in Udayana images. The expression is much the

same, the forms are also full and heavy, but the eyes are closed and the lips are drawn

together in a smile. The treatment of the drapery, which falls in parallel folds, recalls

Gandhara models and resembles them more than the other statue.

Although this Buddha type with one bare shoulder is rarer than the Udayana type, it

26 Handbook of the Archaeological Numismatic Section of the Museum at Srinagar, p. 69. 27 Foucher, op. cit., Vol. II, frontispiece.

287



does occur at Yiin Kang.28 Even though I have been unable to secure a photograph of

the inscription, I do not believe that the deity is specifically designated as Maitreya, for

Siren in his text merely calls the image a Buddha. It is perfedly possible that the Chinese

of the early archaic period did not make clear iconographical distindtions and merely

thought of these images as Buddhas. Wegner would make us believe that all early standing

types must be thought of as Maitreyas. Since little or no difference exists in the iconography for the various Buddhas it could be either Sakyamuni or Maitreya; personally, I tend to

believe that it is Sakyamuni himself, for it seems only likely that he is shown in this

form, since he was represented this way in Gandhara art. Although this image is much

smaller than the Maitreya, the quality of the workmanship is far superior to that of the

larger statue.

In concluding our consideration of the bronzes of this type, let us sum up the chara6ter- istics of the Early Archaic Style as it appears in the Chinese bronzes of the first part of the Fifth Century. The type of image is obviously derived from Gandharan and

Central Asian models, but is modified in accordance with the native Chinese artistic

traditions towards a more formal and symmetrical pattern. The iconography is very

simple and follows the Indian models, but does not always adhere to the prescribed

usage. The main contribution which Chinese Buddhist art makes to the iconographical

vocabulary is the use of the flaming mandorla, which, although foreshadowed in Gandhara

art,29 does not atually occur there. In comparison with later Chinese Buddhist art, the

early archaic style is heavier, cruder and less refined. The emphasis is placed upon solidity and static bulk instead of dynamic movement. The figures show lack of subtlety but

radiate primitive strength. The forms are full and plump. The artistic as well as icon-

ographic vocabulary is still very limited, consisting of two main types-the seated Buddha

in Yogi posture, and the standing image used for both Buddhas and Bodhisattvas -without

much change in iconography. It is an art of a young culture full of simplicity and

spirituality.

28 Sir6n, op. cit., vol. II, p. 46. 29 Foucher, op. cit., Vol. I, Fig. 0oo and 632.

288



III THE LATE ARCHAIC BRONZES

The period which I have called the Late Archaic one is in many ways a continuation

of the Early Archaic, but the forms now become more natural and less abstra&. It is

a transitional age, in the same way that the second half of the Twelfth Century in the

West is transitional. Since pratically all the stone sculptures at Yiin Kang were made

during this period, undue emphasis is usually given to it, and I believe that a comparison of the bronzes from the second half of the Fifth Century with those of the first half

of the Century proves that a style of greater beauty and expressiveness must have pre- dominated during the first half of the century, only that very few monuments of this

art have come down to us.

One of the main reasons for this fad must be seen in the great Buddhist persecutions of the years 446-452 A.D. The Wei Shu gives the following account of the imperial decree ordering these persecutions: "We, receiving the succession from heaven, have under-

gone the humiliation of the present wretched fortune. We want to sweep aside the false

and establish the true, and restore the government of Fu-hsi and Shen-nung. Therefore

let us destroy the foreign gods and exterminate all traces of them, in hope of not proving inferior to the Fengs. "From this day onward, whoever presumes to worship foreign gods and make images either of clay or of bronze will be put to death with his whole household . . . Let those

in charge issue a proclamation to the generals, the armies, and the governors, that all

stupas, paintings and foreign sutras are to be beaten down and burned utterly; the sramanas

without distintion of age, are to be destroyed."30 But the monks, having been warned, fled and we are told that they succeeded in con-

cealing most of the images and sutras. And when the emperor died, five years later, the new emperor encouraged the revival of Buddhist learning and art. He issured a long decree in which he exalted Buddhism and ended with the following words: "We, receiving the illustrious succession and ruling over the empire, plan to follow our predecessor's 30 Wei Shu, p. 141-142, translated by J. Ware in T'oung Pao, Paris, 1933.

289



intention of exalting the Way. Today, command is given to the provinces, prefetures, and subprefed6ures that in each place where people live in groups it is permitted to ered

one stupa. No limit is set to the amount that may be expended. As for those who love

and find pleasure in the dodrine of the Way and want to become sramanas without

distindion of age, if they come from a good family, if their condud and adions are

normally sincere and free from all doubt and indecency, and if they are known in a

village, they may quit their homes for the monastic life, as a rule, fifty individuals from

a large province and forty from a small province. As for the prefedures far removed

from the capital, ten individuals, each with his particular charge, are entirely sufficient

to convert the evil to good and to spread the dorine of the Way . . ." The empire

immediately took up the example, and the stupas and monasteries which had been previously

destroyed were restored to their former condition. The statues of the Buddha, the sutras

and the sastras all succeeded in reappearing.31 We have no way of kno g owing how representative the few early bronzes which have

come down to us are and if great numbers of images had been created in the first half

of the century, but since we also have very few images from the first two decades follow-

ing the restoration of Buddhism, it is quite possible that Buddhist images were not at

all common until the reign of Hsiao Wen Ti (471-499A.D.). And I believe that scholars

like Dr. Rowland, who suggest that the great caves et Yiin Kang were made during this

reign32 are corred.

The artistic monuments from the first twenty years after the restoration of Buddhism

are few and quite inferior in quality. There are only four dated bronzes and one dated

stone sculpture from the reigns of Wen Ch'eng Ti (452- 465 A. D.) and Hsien Wen Ti

(466-470 A.D.). The latest authorities ascribe Cave Five at Yiin Kang to the latter's

reign,33 but the inscriptions in Caves ii and i8 from the eighties of the Fifth Century make it seem likely that the bulk of work was done under the reign of Hsiao Wen Ti, who was a great patron of Buddhism, although the caves were probably started in 454 A. D.

The first sculpture, a bronze dated 453 A. D., or Second Year of Hsing An, in the Freer

Gallery, shows a continuation of the style of the late phase of the Early Archaic style. 31 Ibid., p. I44-145. 32 Rowland, op. cit., Art Bulletin, 1937, p. 102. 33 Ibid., p. I62.

290



The forims are heavy and crude,

similar to those of the Maitreya of

443 A. D., only that the treatment is j1I

now looser and somewhat more

elaborate. One could talk of a dis- -

integration of the once austere

style, since the simplicity and strength ; of the Early Archaic works is no

longer seen. The flaming halo of the

bronze image is now overdone and

the statue has lost much of the im-

pressiveness of the early figures. It

is a late, imitative style without great W

beauty or expressiveness. But although the artistic elements are

much the same as before, the icono-

graphy of this statue shows new

elements which we did not find

in the earlier works. For this

bronze image represents Kuan Yin asRA

Padmapdni, a deity which may al-

ready have been represented earlier,

but if so no earlier image of this

deity has come down to us. No

similar statue in Gandhdra art is

known, and although we do have

Gandhara images of a seated Plate 5 Kuan Yin Padmapani

Bodhisattva with a lotus flower,a dated 453 A. D. Collectioih Freer Gallery, Washington D. C.

the iconography differs considerably and it is not likely that this type served as a model

Foucher, op. cit., Vol. II, Fig. 4Io, 427, 428.

9t1



for the Chinese Kuan Yin images. Foucher, in discussing the Gandhara Avalokitesvara

images comes to the following rather indefinite conclusion: "Assurement nous y trouvons

deja l'amorce des precedes qui ont plus tard servi a differencier entre eux les grands Bodhisattvas c'est a n'en pas douter le lotus rose de Padmapani que les figures portent,

epanoui ou non, a la main; et le personnage de gauche de la figure 408 tient deja le livre

qui sera l'un des attributs caraderistiques de ManjuYri: mais c'est la tout ce que nous

pouvons affirmer, et au bout du compte; nous n'avons aucune raison decisive de croire

que les noms de Manjupri et Avalokitesva n'etaient pas aussi etrangers a la pensee des

premiers sculpteurs indo-grecs qu'a celle des compilateurs du Mahavastu et du Lalita-vistara."35

Since a special chapter was dedicated to Kuan Yin in the Lotus Sutra, it is likely that

the name of this Bodhisattva was known in China from the earliest times, but if the

images of this divinity were made prior to the middle of the Fifth Century, they are

yet to be unquestionably identified.

He, or later, she, since Kuan Yin eventually became a female deity in China, is frequently

represented as the lotus-bearer or Padmapani. In later times a willow branch is often

substituted for the lotus. At other times Kuan Yin is represented with a precious jewel, as Cintamanicakra Avalokitesvara. At other times his attributes are a leaf-shaped objed or vase. At times Kuan Yin is represented as an attendant in a trinity, but most of these

early images show him as a separate divinity. The name has been translated in various

ways; Kern translates Avalokitesvara as, "the Lord who is everywhere visible as a present

help in trouble", while Eliot translates it, "the Lord who is looked at". The Lotus Sutra

describes him with the following words: "Think, o think with tranquil mood of Avalokitesvara,

that pure being, he is a protedor, a refuge, a recourse in death, disaster and calamity. He who possesses the perfecdion of all virtues, and beholds all beings with compassion and benevolence, he, an ocean of virtues, Virtue itself, he, Avalokitesvara, is worthy of

admiration. He, so compassionate for the world, shall once become a Buddha, destroying all dangers and sorrows; I humbly bow to Avalokitesvara."36

He is here represented as Padmapani, the lotus-bearing Bodhisattva; he has the bare breast, the jewels, the scarfs and the crown of the royal Indian prince. He stands on a lotus 85 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 238. 36 Kern, op. cit., p. 416-417.

292



flower with a halo and a flaming mandorla behind him. Violent, tense movement pervades the whole image, especially the scarfs, which seem to flutter in the wind. As we shall

see, the same iconography occurs again and again in representations of Kuan Yin all

through the following decades. Since we are not dealing with the stone sculptures in

such detail we shall not discuss the iconography of the stone Buddha, but we may re-

mark that this image, too, shows more detail and greater complexity than had been

known previously. The seventies of the Fifth Century show a new style which recalls earlier.Gandhara

models. Again the monuments are few and of poor quality, but on the basis of the

four dated bronzes which have come down to us, we can talk of a revitalizing of Chinese

bronze sculpture during this period, and by 478A.D., a new, more powerful and ex-

pressive style had emerged. All these bronzes are very small and it is difficult to analyze the style of this decade from them. But since the five great caves at Yiin Kang, which

were probably executed during the same period, show a style close to Gandhara models, I believe there can be little doubt that we are here confronted with a new influx of

Indian and Central Asian influences.

The only one of the four bronzes of which we have an adequate photograph is the

image of the standing Sakyamuni and Prabhitaratna, dated 473 A.D., or Thirteenth Day,

Eighth Month, Third Year of Yen Hsing, in the Freer Gallery. Both examples are of

the usual standing Buddha type, with raised hands, Gandhara drapery, lotus base, halo

and flaming mandorla. All these features are also found in the contemporary statues

and Yiin Kang.37 It is not unlikely that the Gandhara Renaissance of the seventies served

a purpose similar to the various Classic revivals during the Christian Middle Ages. For

we should never forget that the Chinese had no real sculptural tradition, but found

their prime medium of artistic expression in painting and caligraphy. Besides the renewed Gandhara influence, this image is also interesting for its iconography. For here, as in the representation of Kuan Yin we find a type which is charadteristically Chinese and was not seen in Gandhara art. Again the iconography is probably based

on the Lotus Sutra, and since the scene from which it is taken is so charateristic of

37 Siren, op. cit., Vol. II, pl. 48.

293



Mahaydna Buddhism, as the men of

that epoch experienced it, I shall quote

r :ii- s:- ;it at length: "And when the Lord

Skyamuni, the Tathagata, perceived

that his creations, none wanting, had

arrived; perceived that they were

severally seated on their thrones, and

dated 473 ocntperceived that the satellites of those

Tathogatas, were present, he, in con-

sideration of the wish expressed by

those Tathagatas, rose from his seat

and stood in the sky, as a meteor.

And all the four classes of the assembly rose from their seats, stretched out

their joined hands, and stood gazing

up to the face of the Lord. The Lord, then, with the right forefinger unlocked

the middle of the great Stipa of jewels,

which showed like a meteor and so

severed the two parts. Even as the

double doors of a great city gate

separate when the bolt is removed,

so the Lord opened the great Sttipa, Plate 6 which showed like a meteor, by un- Buddha Sakyamuni and Buddha Prabhiitaratna

dated 473 A. D. locking it in the middle with the right Collection Freer Gallery, Washington, D. C.

forefinger. The great Stipa of jewels

had no sooner been opened that the Lord Prabhutaratna, the Tathagata, was seen sitting

cross-legged on his throne, with emaciated limbs and faint body, as if absorbed in

meditation, and he pronounced those words: Excellent, excellent Lord Sakyamuni, thou

has well explained this Dharmaparyaya of the Lotus of the True Law, Lord Sakyamuni,

294



'ssvw4[ 'a?Fpt.quiv) 'unasnJl ffsoj uot3al//oD 'a 'v +8 Para

iunuIAAB_S eqppng z aluld



to the (four) classes of the assembly I myself, Lord, have come hither to hear the

Dharmaparyaya of the Lotus the True Law.

"And then the Lord Prabhutaratna, the Tathagata, ceded to the Lord Sakyamuni, the

Tathagata, the half of the seat on that very throne within the same great Stupa of jewels and said: Let the Lord Sakyamuni, the Tathagata, sit down here. Whereon the Lord

Sakyamuni, the Tathagata, sat down upon that halfseat together with the other Tathagata, so that both Tathagatas were seen as meteors in the sky, sitting on the throne in the

middle of the great Stupa of jewels."38 The image in the Freer Gallery shows the two Buddhas standing side by side, which

is very rare; usually they are seen seated upon a throne as it is described in the Lotus

Sutra. Omura reproduces the rubbing of such an image, dated in the preceding year,

472 A. D., or Fifth Day, Fifth Month, Second Year of Yen Hsing.39 The style is the same,

only that the treatment of the stand is different, for wheras it was decorated with

ornamental motifs in the Freer bronze, this stand shows two donors drawn in the traditional

Chinese manner, a feature we shall observe again later.

In 477 A. D. a new era, by the name of T'ai Ho, begins, and with it a new epoch in

Chinese Buddhist sculpture, for the following decade marks the high point in both the

bronze and stone sculpture of the Late Archaic Period. The style is no longer weak

and imitative, but forceful and full of deep spiritual feeling. The forms are also derived

from Gandhara models, but are freer in treatment of the bodily forms and the drapery, and show great technical ability. Typical of these bronzes, and perhaps the best, is the

seated Maitreya in the Fogg Museum, dated 484 A. D., or Eighth Year of T'ai Ho. It

shows Maitreya seated with crossed legs, one hand raised in the abhaya mudra, the other

holding some small objed, the nature of which cannot be clearly determined. The body is draped in a monk's garment, with pitchfork folds; one shoulder is left bare, the head

shows an usmnisa, the expression is full of caltn and serenity. At the feet of the throne

on which the Buddha sits are tNwo lions; on the stand are reliefs showing two daemon

kings. The style of the work is closely related to the giant seated Buddha of Cave

Twenty-two at Yiin Kang.40 In both we find the expression of primitive force and 38 Kern, op. cit., p. 236-237. 39 Omura, op. cit., Fig. 460. 40 Siren, op. cit., Vol. II, pl. 43.

296



deep religious feeling, which is charaderistic of the Archaic period at its best. If we compare this 484 A. D. bronze with the Freer one, dated 451 A. D., we can easily see the close resemblance and the differences between the two styles. The iconography is much the same, but in spite of this apparent similarity, the feeling of the whole is

different. The new style is somehow freer, more fluent, more graceful, more natural, and technically more accomplished. The medium no longer presents problems to the

artist; we now have the feeling that he expresses himself with complete freedom. If we

want to talk of a progression, we must, in terms of the development of Western art,

say that it is a progression in the sense that St. Denis is a step forward from St. Sernin.

However, our personal preferance may belong to the archaic mood, and the i ooere no doubt

will be many people who will like the Fourth Century bronzes best of all, just as there

are people who prefer Eleventh Century sculpture to the works of the mature Gothic

period. The art historian is less concerned with evaluations, but rather with the analysis and explanation of the different styles which he finds.

Finally, we come to a large image of Buddha and Prabhutaratna, dated 489 A. D., or

Fourth Day, Third Month, Thirteenth Year of T'ai Ho, in the Nezu Colle6dion.41 It is

a most interesting work, for it shows the close relationship between the stone and bronze

sculpture of this period. The right figure represents Sakyamuni seated with crossed legs; he points at Prabhutaratna, who had lived in solitude for so many years and has now

reappeared to the heavenly assembly. Both in style and iconography this figure is almost identical with the giant Buddha of Cave Twenty-two at Yiin Kang. The left figure shows the seated Prabhutaratna, who closely resembles the seated Buddha of Cave Seventeen at the same site,42 who is dated 489 A.D.

We can therefore draw three most interesting conclusions from this. First, not only the two dates found at Yiin Kang, but also the dating of the bronzes showing the same

style, would support the theory that the five great caves at Yiin Kang were executed

during the T'ai ho era, and not finished by 483 A. D., as Glaser suggests.43 Second, the

41 Yashiro, Y., A Chinese Gilt Bronze Sculpture Dated 489 A. D., Bijutsu Kenkyu, T6ky6, September, 1934, P1. I & II. 42 Siren, op. cit., pl. 43. 3 Glaser, K., Ostasiatische Plastik, Berlin, I925, Text to pi. 1-15.

297



style of the contemporary stone and bronze

images is quite similar, although the quality and quantity of the surviving stone sculpture exceeds the bronce sculpture by far. Third, the iconography is not differentiated much, so that the identical figure which at one time

is meant to represent Maitreya can at other

times represent Sakyamuni or Prabhutaratna.

6B ;! ^j^^^ _ Another interesting feature of this image is

the line drawings of two donors with lotus

stems on its stand. This type of drawing is

^H|.| X^^ B X !later also found at Tun-huang, where the

same strange combination of Buddhist divinities

rendered in a style based on Western models

[ fi and donors painted in a purely linear Chinese

manner, is quite common.44

There remain two large dated bronzes which

according to their inscriptions, come from

_rl - hthis era. One of them is dated 477A. D., or

.:; . ..... ; as it had been read earlier, 486 A.D., and is

in the Metropolitan Museum at New York.45

Although Dr. Rowland already questioned the

Plate 8 genuineness of the inscription, he adds: "The Buddha Maitreya

dated 477A.D. statue itself, without doubt, belongs to the Coll. Metropolitan Museum, N.Y. formative period of Buddhist China."46 But

other critics such as Wegner and Salmony even questioned the image itself as an authentic

Six Dynasties work. Wegner suggests that it may have been a later copy of a Gandhara

44 Siren, O., History of Early Chinese Painting, London, 1933, Vol. I, p. 30. 45 Bulletin of the

Metropolitan Museum, New York, October, I926; and Priest, Chinese Sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, 1944, p. 28, (here the date is read 477 A. D.). a6 Rowland, op. cit., p. 99, footnote.

298



work which carried the same inscription,47 and Salmony says "that it is difficult to believe

that the Metropolitan bronze is a work of the Fifth Century, in spite of the dated

inscription."48 Further investigation has shown that there can be little question that the

inscription is a modern Japanese forgery in spite of the fad that the late Professor

Paul Pelliot accepted it as authentic. We must therefore disregard the inscription and

judge the statue solely by stylistic and iconographical criteria.

Unfortunately, the dated material which we can use for a comparison is very limited.

And since the same Udayana type, with the parallel folds of the robe, the highly stylized treatment of the human body, the hands in abhaya and vara mudra, the heavy cubic

head with the usmnsa and large hanging earlobes, the eternal smile and the lotus base-

was repeated over and over again, the iconography proves very little as to the dating of the statue.

It is therefore upon the style that we have to depend, almost entirely. As we saw

above, the Maitreya of 443 A. D. is very similar to the statues at Yiin Kang in its simple but powerful nature, and there can be little doubt that it is a genuine Fifth Century work. If we compare it with the Metropolitan bronze, we notice at once that the type is the same and the spirit of the image is very similar. However, the forms in the 477 A. D.

statue are more refined and superior in execution. The 477 A. D. statue has nothing crude about it; instead it shows the highest technical mastery. A comparison of any

detail, such as the treatment of the head or the hands or the drapery or the legs, shows

this difference between the two statues. This may be explained by the fact that forty- five years lie between the dates of the two images. But although the style of the image seems that of a somewhat later period, there are nevertheless details which are very close to the early images such as the great Buddhas at Yiin Kang. Examples of such

details are the bifurcated folds, the open neck without standing collar, the irregular treatment of the folds at the opening of the neck, the treatment of the hair and the

lobes of the ear. This would suggest a date contemporaneous or somewhat later than

that of the stone sculptures at Yiin Kang. Comparing the image with other Udayana

47 Wegner, op. cit., p. 226. 48 Salmony, A., Delimiting Questions in Indian and Chinese

Sculpture, Eastern Art, I929, Part II, p. 226.

Z99



statues we find that it does not resemble any of the later works. Unfortunately, there

is no large dated T'ang figure of this type, but the small undated figure reproduced in Art News49 shows that the full, sensuous forms of the mature T'ang style have little

resemblance to the more abstra& style of the Metropolitan image. The same is true of a comparison between the early Kamakura wood statue in the Seiryo

temple at Kyoto,50 and the New York Maitreya. The Kamakura image shows the same

Udayana type, but it is more elongated and slender, has the arms in a different position, and shows a different facial expression. It is quite improbable that our image is con-

temporary with this work.

We therefore come to the Ming period whose large body of Tibetan Ming and Ch'ing bronzes offer interesting parallels to the Metropolitan image. Mr. Sickman calls all these

Tibetan images Ming; other scholars have called them Eighteenth Century. Since none

of them are dated, there can be little certainty as to the exad date of the individual

statues. But the type is well known, for numerous examples of it can be found in both

America and China. The Detroit Museum, for example, has an image which is un-

doubtably of Ming origin, although Benjamin March calls it early T'ang.51 Since I was able to study the original of the bronzes at leisure, I chose a small Tibetan

bronze in the colleCtion of Dr. Rowland as material of comparison, but I could have

sele&ed any number of other statues. A comparison of this work with the Metropolitan

Maitreya will show that although there is a great resemblance in so far as both of them

go back to the same Gandhara original, there is also a great stylistic difference. The

Tibetan image is far more elegant and decadent, the produd of a late and ecledic culture

when traditional forms are repeated over and over again without freshness or life. The

Metropolitan Museum image on the other hand is crude and strong, the produd of a

young vigorous culture. In addition to that there is a technical point which is a sure

touchstone for these Tibetan images; namely, that in all of them the garment of the

Buddha has fourteen folds while in the 477A.D. this is not the case. We may there-

fore conclude that all signs indicate that this image is a genuine Six Dynasties work,

49 Art News, December 9, 1933, p. 95. 50 Japanese Temples and Their Treasures, T6kyo,

1910, pi. 315. 51 Art in America, I930, p. I44.

300



probably of the last quarter of the

Fifth Century. The only other possible conclusion could be that this image is a modern forgery in the style of

the Fifth Century statues which con-

sidering the size and quality of the

work seems most unlikely. The

possibility of it being a Ch'ing work

in an archaistic style seems to be ruled

out by its close resemblance to the

443 A.D. image and the stone sculptures at Yiin Kang, for we can other-

wise always clearly distinguish between

ancient and archaistic works.

This leaves us with the other large dated bronze which was supposedly made in 496 A.D.52 But here there

can be little doubt as to the later origin of the image. Mr. Sickman, who studied

the inscription when he was at Peking, assures me that it is definitely a very crude forgery. Aso the style and details

of the iconography, such as the lotus

base, are definitely of a type not used

before the Ming period. The closest

analogy which I could find for this

image is the lacquered wood Maitreya from Eighteenth Century Tibet, which

Dr. Salmony reproduces in his article 52 Rowland, op. cit., Fig. I I & 12.

Plate 9

Buddha Sakyamuni Tibetan I8th century

Coll. B. Rowland, Cambridge, Mass.

301



on the Udayana type.53 The same crude, meaningless repetition of folds, the same

empty expression, the same signs of decadence and degeneration are seen in both works.

There can be little doubt therefore that this statue, in spite of its Fifth Century date,

is a later Tibetan image with a false inscription.

IV THE BRONZES OF THE GREAT AGE

When I talk of the Great Age of Chinese Buddhist Art, I mean the first four decades

of the Sixth Century, during which the epoch that I have called the Mediaeval one of

Chinase art finds its culmination. The Indian and Central Asian influences have now been

absorbed completely, the new technique has been mastered, and the genius of the Chinese

people has created an abstrad, spiritual type of formal expression which compares favorably with any other great age of religious art, whether it is the Medixval West, Archaic Greece

or the "Gothic" sculpture of Hadda.

Form and content are now completely integrated and form an organic and harmonious

unity. But, like all such periods of greatest beauty and perfedion, it could not last, and

soon after the collapse of the Great Northern Wei empire this greatest expression of the

glory of the Wei state disintegrated, too. New formal elements were introduced into Chinese

Buddhist art, the old style decayed, and a new style, which I call Transitional, emerged.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine the exad dates of this great style, for here, as

during other great artistic epochs, the period of greatest harmony and expressiveness is not

arrived at suddenly, but develops gradually, and it is impossible to say just when this brief

moment of perfed integration had been reached. We could choose 49 A.D. as the be-

ginning of this age, for the earliest dated image at Lung-men,54 which carries that date, al-

ready shows the new style. One could put the date even further back by saying that some

of the late sculptures at Yun kang already show a style very similar to the Sixth Century one.55 On the other hand, some of the bronzes from the first decade of the Six Century

53 Eastern Art, 1929, Fig. 3. 54 Chavannes, E., Mission archeologique dans la Chine septentrionale,

Paris, 909 - 15, Vol. VI, pl. CCXLIV, No. 376. 55 Siren, op. cit., p1. 40, 41.

302



still show a quite archaic style, closely resembling Gandhara models, and also the political

change does not come before the end of the century, for the T'ai Ho era ends in 499 A. D.

I chose the last date as the beginning of the Great Age, for it lies between the date

when the new style emerges in bronze sculpture, and when it is first seen in stone

sculpture. It also seems convenient to try to preserve a certain relationship between

the political era and the artistic style, whenever that seems justified. As I said above, bronze sculpture did not develop nearly as rapidly as stone sculpture,

for, while the caves at Lung-men abound with dated images from the first decade of

the Sixth Century which are executed in the Great Style, the bronze sculptures of the

same year show no or little stylistic change. This would tend to show that the art of

stone sculpture had now become the most important medium of artistic expression, in

which the changes in the artist's vocabulary were first attempted and achieved.

A Kuan Yin of 508 A. D.,56 or Tenth Day, Fourth Month, Fifth Year of Cheng Shih, shows

a style not nearly as developed as that seen at Yun Kang, but nevertheless much closer

to that of the Great Age than any of the contemporary bronzes representing other

divinities. The image represents Kuan Yin standing on a lotus, the hands showing the

abhaya and vara mudra often associated with Maitreya. But although the divinity has

neither the bottle nor the lotus, we are confronted with a representation of the Bodhisattva

of Mercy, because the inscription designates the image as a representation of this deity. The emergence of the new style is clearly seen in the elongation of the figure, the

greater refinement of the detail and especially the sawtoothed edges of the garment. Another feature which is charaderistic for the early Six Century Kuan Yin images, is the

long scarf which hangs over both shoulders, is tied in a knot at the waist, and then

bulges in two loop-like curves. Behind the head of the deity is a halo and a flaming mandorla which shows the same elongation and tension that we found charaderistic of

the new style. On the back of the image is a flat relief, showing the meeting of Buddha Sakyamuni and Buddha Prabhutaratna, in company of Bodhisattvas. Above and below this scene, the space is filled with floral motifs. The style of representation employed in this relief

56 Catalogue of Asiatische Kunstausstellung, Koln, 1926, pi. 55. The date is here given as 50gA.D.

303



also shows elements of the new style, and shows already similarity to the great representation of this group in the Louvre. Just how typical or isolated this bronze is for its

date is difficult to say, but I do not believe it unlikely that there were other early

images of this type. The Kuan Yin of 956-I7 A.D., or Hsi P'ing Era, in the Stoclet Colledion,57 shows the

fully developed Sixth Century style at its best. He is now seen as Padmapani, with the

lotus bud in one hand and the bottle of heavenly nedtar in the other. He stands on

a lotus which rests on a four legged stand. His expression is full of deep spirituality, tension and religious intensity, and pervades the entire image; the head is covered with

a crown that has a jewel in its center, from which two decorative scarfs flow to both

sides. Around his neck is a necklace with a precious pearl. A long scarf, ending in a

heavy loop, falls over both his shoulders. He wears a beautiful garment which has saw-

toothed edges at both sides. Behind him is a large, flaming mandorla, which curves over

to the front, over his head, and ends in a point at the top. The figure as a whole, and every detail, is a perfed expression of this intensely spiritual and abstrad religious art which saw its Great Age during this epoch. A stylistic development similar to that we observed in the representation of Kuan Yin, can also be found in the Sikyamuni images. Here, too, the first one in the new style is dated at the end of the first decade of the Sixth Century, and the Great Style has

evolved fully by the end of the second decade of the Great Age. This would sub-

stantiate our hypothesis that the stylistic development of bronze sculpture lagged a decade

or two behind the development of stone sculpture. The first Buddha image in the new style is dated 5loA. D.,58 or the Third Year of

Yung P'ing, and shows the Lord Sakyamuni, seated between two attendants. He has

one hand raised in abhaya mudra, while the other one shows the gesture of Charity, the vara mudrt. The garment is draped about him in loop-like curves, creating a fine

rhythmic pattern. The throne on which he sits consists of a pyramid, the upper part of which is covered with drapery that is arranged in a series of superimposed lobes.

Behind the Buddha rises a mandorla with a flame pattern. Mr. Tajima, in his comment 57 Siren, op. cit., p. 147 B. 58 Shimbi Taikwan, Vol. 12, pl. 3.

304



upon this image, says that he believes this mandorla to be a later addition, but it resembles

other contemporary mandorlas greatly, and I therefore see no reason for such a supposition. At both sides of the seated Tathagata are standing Bodhisattvas, the identity of which

is not certain. According to Siren, "We frequently find Maiijusri and Samanthabadra

or Maitreya and Avalokitesvara as attendants of Sakyamuni".59 On the other hand, Wegner, after careful study of the iconography of Maitreya, comes to the conclusion that Maitreya is never represented as an attendant of a central figure.60 And since all the trinities in

which Maijusri and Samanthabadra appear are from a later epoch, it seems to follow

that the iconography of these early trinities remains uncertain, and that both attending Bodhisattvas were usually represented in the identical way, without giving either of them

charaderistics of his own. In this case, the iconography employed for the Bodhisattvas

would suggest that both of them are meant to be representations of Kuan Yin.

The deity is shown as a youthful prince, clad in a richly decorated garment, with a

long, loop-like scarf, precious jewels and a crown. The drapery of the garment ends

in saw-toothed edges in the manner we noted in the Kuan Yin image discussed above.

Although the photograph does not show the attributes very clearly, it looks as if the

Bodhisattva's left hand is empty, while his right holds a precious pearl or cintamani.

This indicates that the Bodhisattva represented must be looked upon as Cintamanicakra

Avalokitesvara. Over the head of the Bodhisattva is a very ornate open halo, with a

small figure of his spiritual father Amitabha. The legend reports that Kuan Yin was born

in a ray of light coming from the right eye of Amitabha, Kuan Yin being the dhyani Bodhisattva of the Buddha of Infinite light.61 A further proof of the fadt that both

Bodhisattvas were intended as Kuan Yins must be seen in the great Suiko bronze trinity of 623 A.D., which bears close stylistic resemblance to this image, and also shows Sakyamuni attended by two jewel-holding Kuan Yins.

Besides these single seated Buddha images from the second decade of the century, there

are several dated images of Sikyamuni and Prabhutaratna. The finest one, dated 518 A. D.,62

is in the Louvre and shows the mature style of the Great Age, for, instead of being

59 Siren, op. cit., tent., p. CXXXIV. 60 Wegner, op. cit., p. i68. 61 Siren, op. cit.,

p. CXXXIX. 62 Ashton, pl. XL.

305



rigid and static, the forms are now filled

with dynamic movement, tense energy

date ..; A and elastic rhythm. The bodies are

elongated to a far greater degree than

before, the forms are filled with tenseness

and religious intensity. Every detail seems

to vibrate this inner tension and ecstatic

to engulf the Tathagatas, pointing up-

Han"cs-bta~ work: II wards and leading the worshipper's mind

heavenwards, where the Enlightened Ones

are showing themselves to the assembly of the Bodhisattvas and monks. Every contour is sharp and precise, creating a

Collwn,. Iiiwkclearly articulated linear pattern. Instead

of being seated in Yogi posture and facing the worshipper frontally, these Buddhas

let one leg hang down, while the other one lies flatly upon the lion throne with

Plate io the sole of the foot bent outwards. Buddha Sakyamuni and Buddha Prabhuitaratna The pleated folds of the garment are

dated i8 A.D.of the garment are Collection Louvre, Paris reduced to a linear arrangement, without

any true three dimensional quality. The folds, with their sharp pointed edges, resemble

outspread wings of a bird.

The Gandhira models have now been lost sight of; instead, we are confronted with

an indigenous Chinese artistic expression, in which linear patterns and tense movement

supplant the full, rich, sensual beauty of the Indian models. The linear rhythm of the

Han works is combined with the tense energy and dynamic strength of the great Chinese

animal style, and the result is this art, which is the greatest sculptural style China has

known. It is in works like this bronze and the images in Cave Twenty-one at Lung-

306



men that we see the Great Style at its

best.

Although both S akyamuni and Kuan Yin

were important and popular divinities

during the Great Age, there can be no

doubt that Maitreya was the most beloved a

and most frequently represented god of

this Buddhist pantheon during this period. O o A comparison of the number of represent- . ations of the different deities among dated

bronzes of this epoch shows that out

of a total of twenty-nine bronzes, no

less than fourteen represent Maitreya, six SCkyamuni, two Sckyamuni in the

company of Prabhutaratna, six Kuan Yin, p and one, in all probability, Yukushi, the

god of medicine. The proportion is al-

most exadly the same for stone sculptures, for of the sixty-one dated sculptures ',

Chavannes lists at Lung-man,6 no less

than thirty are images of Maitreya, while

eighteen are representations of Sikyamuni Plate i

and thirteen of Kuan Yin. And it may Maitreya Altar Group dated y 24, A. D.

be added that the Maitreya statues are Collection Metropolitan Museum, New York

not only the most numerous, but also the most impressive and artistically the best.

The most impressive and elaborate of these Maitreya representations are the two altar

groups in the Metropolitan Museum, formerly in the Rockefeller Colle6lion.6" Only one

of them is dated, but since they are very close in style and were found at the same

63 Chavannes, op. cit., Vol. I, text pp. 544- 545. 64 Priest, Chinese Sculpture in the

Metropolitan Museum, New York, 1944, Pp. 28-29.

307



site, it is probable that both of them were made at about the same time, which would

be 524 A. D., or Fifth Year of Cheng Kuang. Although they have suffered somewhat from

having been buried for many centuries, they are nevertheless in good condition and unique in being the only complete Six Dynasties altar groups in existence - for the only other

Chinese Buddhist altar group executed in bronze is the Sui one in the Boston Museum.

In the center of the group is Maitreya, the Buddha of the Future, standing on an in-

verted lotus flower, the symbol of his purity. His hands are raised in the familar gestures of "Have No Fear" and "Charity", the abhaya and vara mudra. His ears are large, for

the Buddha hears everything; his head shows the usnzsa, the superhuman mind, symbolizing that the Tathagata has universal insight and understanding. His body is slender and elegant, his face expressive of calm and serenity of the Enlightened One. The folds of the garments are treated in an abstrad, stylized manner, in accordance with the spiritual nature of the

image. The lower hems of the robe are pointed, like the stretched wings of birds.

Behind his head is a transparent halo, consisting of a series of petals growing from the

center of the halo and interrupted by openings, which create the effed of a highly stylized

sun, symbolizing the Buddha as the solar ruler. Beyond this is an outer circle, which

shows beautifully designed decorative motifs probably derived from floral forms. Both

rings of the halo are surrounded by a flaming mandorla which resembles lattice work.

The openings of the mandorla suggest flames, and all strive upward, thereby adding to

the spiritual effed of the image. Along the borders of the mandorla are soaring apsaras

playing musical instruments, and also lotus flowers. The long scarfs of the angels fly

upward, as if the wind was blowing them, which further enhances the upward-striving motion of the entire group. At the feet of the Buddha are two seated Bodhisattvas and an incense burner supported

by an earth goddess. The Bodhisattvas are seated in the posture of meditation, one leg

hanging down vertically, the other one lying horizontally upon it. One hand holds the

lying leg, while the other hand is held against the chin in the gesture of meditation.

The Bodhisattva is dressed in the royal garb of the Indian prince and has a holo behind

his head.

In order to interpret the iconography of this deity, we must turn to Lung-men, where

308



the seated Maitreya occurs in the company of two meditating Bodhisattvas of this type.

Wegner, who made a careful study of this group, comes to the conclusion that this

figure must be looked upon as the Lord Sakyamuni, who is here seated in contemplation before his final enlightenment. This would mean that the Buddha Sakyamuni is here

represented as an attendant of Maitreya, which seems strange, but Wegner gives the

following explanation: ,,Bedenken mag dagegen der Umstand erregen, dab1 Sakyamuni in diesem Falle als sekundaire Begleitfigur dem Maitreya beigegeben wire. Zur Aufkli-

rung kann vorgebracht werden, dat in der buddhistischen Hierarchie der gegenwartig inmitten der Gotter des Tusita Himmels weilende Maitreya Bodhisattva mehr gegolten haben wird, als der weltgeborene Sikyamuni vor seiner Erleuchtung."65 It seems to

me that the same interpretation can be applied to this group, although we here have

Maitreya Buddha rather than the Bodhisattva Maitreya. In connedtion with a discussion

of the seated Bodhisattva type, we shall return to the arguments in favour of interpreting this type as Prince Siddhirta in Meditation, but let us for the present continue our

discussion of the 524 A.D. altar.

At the sides of the central Buddha there are two further Bodhisattvas standing on lotus

flowers, whose stems grow out of the base. They are represented as royal princes, with

crossed scarfs and royal jewels. Behind them are two large pointed halos, decorated with

lotus flowers. The iconography of these two Bodhisattvas is not quite certain, since

they bear no special attributes. It is quite possible that they were merely thought of

as attending Bodhisattvas, but not as specific types of Bodhisattvas. In support of such

a supposition, which seems very likely to me, I should like to quote Wegner once again, as follows: ,,Maitreya zusammen mit zwei Bodhisattvas steht in verschiedenen Inschriften.

Wenni hier die beiden Bodhisattvas unbenannt bleiben . . . ist das well sie keine Namen

haben. An anderer Stelle werden Kuan Yin und Yau-schi (Bhaisajyaguru) genannt."66 Another interpretation would, of course, be that both attendants must be thought of

as representations of Kuan Yin, which is quite a plausible theory, for, as we saw, Sakyamuni Bodhisattva is also duplicated here.

Below these Bodhisattvas are four more figures holding alms bowls, two of them on

665 Wegner, op. cit., p. 218. 66 Wegner, op. cit., p. I68.

309



either side. They stand on palmettes which spring from the platform of the base. They are four heavenly kings who, according to the legend, Pa-hsian reports,67 "will once more

come and respeftfully salute Maitreya as Buddha" when he has arrived at supreme wisdom.

The begging bowls they hold in their hands are the four parts into which the alms bowl

of Sakyamuni has divided itself at this time.

Besides these figures which are attached to the platform on which the group stands, there are four more figures which are said to originally have been part of the shrine.

They are two guardians and two lions. The latter are the symbols of royal power, and

were probably originally seated at the sidzs of the incense burner. They have manes

and long tails, and their bodies are graceful and slender, quite in accordance with the

style of the rest of the shrine. The tension and vivacity of these animals stand in striking contrast to the static solidarity of the earlier representations of this animal as we found

it in Archaic bronzes close to the Gandhara models.

The guardians may originally have been attached to the sides of the stand, since holes

suggesting that additional figures were fastened there can be seen. In true Chinese manner, the guardians are represented as fierce looking men, full of power and movement, threat-

ening to scare away anyone, ghost or man, who desires to menace the tranquillity and

holy blissfulness of this sacred shrine.

In summing up our comments about this altar group, we can say that we have here

all the essential elements of the sculptural style of the Great Age combined in one

magnificent creation. For the three most popular deities, Maitreya, Sakyamuni and Kuan

Yin are found here, surrounded by the heavenly kings, guardians and apsaras playing

heavenly music, while incense is being burned and even the lions raise their paws in

reverence. But not only the main iconographical elements of the Great Style are re-

presented; also, the chara6teristic stylistic features can be observed, showing what this

abstrad, spiritual style was like at its best.

The other altar group68 is very similar in style and iconography; we shall therefore not

have to go into quite as much detail in analysing it. Although the group is less elaborate, it is just as impressive, since it is better preserved, and the detail can be studied better 67 Beal, op. cit., p. LXXVIII. e6 Siren, op. cit., pl. i56

31o



in this altar. Again; the blessing Maitreya stands in the center; he is attended by two

Bodhisattvas; behind him is a mandorla with flying apsaras, who are playing musical

instruments. At the top of the mandorla is a small stupa with Sakyamuni and Prabhtutaratna.

At the feet of the Buddha is an incense burner supported by an earth goddess. The

burner is decorated with a lotus bud and lotus leaves. Instead of the four heavenly

kings holding alms bowls, we have two bare-headed monks who worship the Buddha.

And finally, there is a feature which we did not find in the other shrine: the lotus

flowers on which the Bodhisattvas stand are supported by fierced looking little demons or Yaksis, a feature also found in contemporary steles.9 The style is the same highly formalized, tense style we saw in the other altar group. Another Buddhist shrine of this type, which originally was in all probability very similar, but which has now lost all its attendants, is the Maitreya altar of 529A.D., or Second

Day, Seventh Month, Second Year of Yung An, in the colledion of Mr. Berenson at

Settignano.70 Although the quality of the workmanship is not quite as good as in the

Metropolitan bronzes, the excellent preservation compensates for that.

Again, the standing Buddha Maitreya is seen in the familar posture, with his hands in

abhaya and vara mudra; and behind him, as in the other representations, the flaming mandorla is found. But there are now ten apsaras, for, besides the music playing ones

at the sides of the mandorla, there are now two more at the top, where the stupa was

seen before. The apsaras at the top are seen singing, while the other eight are playing various musical instruments such as the lute, the psaltery, the flute, the syrinx, the

German flute, the cymbal, the drum and the horn.

Behind the soaring apsaras are long, trailing scarfs with a lotus bud and a fly whisk

amid the flying draperies. Since Wegner, in his discussion of this altar, gives a very

interesting interpretation of this part of the iconography, I shall quote him here. He

says: ,,Ein kleines Motiv verdient noch besonderer Hervorhebung. Zwischen den zuriick-

flatternden Bandern der Engel befindet sich ein Gebilde zusammengesetzt aus einer Lotus-

knospe und einem Wedel, letzterer fehlt nur bei den Engeln der Spitze. Beides sind

69 Ibid., pl. 138. 70 Wegner, M., Eine chinesische Maitreya-Gruppe vom Jahre 529, Ostasiatische Zeitschrift, I929, p. I -4, pl. I -3.

31I



haufig vorkommende buddhistische Symbole. Wie die Lotusblume im triiben Sumpf ge- boren iiber das Wasser sich erhebt, so steht nach einem Ausspruch Buddhas, der Voll-

endete da in der Welt erwachsen, die Welt uiberwindend, von der Welt unbefleckt.

Der Wedel deutet auf die allgemeine Wesensliebe des Buddhismus, da er den heiligen Personen und Menschen dient die Insekten zu verscheuchen, anstatt sie zu toten."71

He also adds that this fly whisk is called bai-fu in Chinese and is frequently seen in

T'ang art. It is charaderised as being white and manufadured out of hair. This inter-

pretation seems to me of extraordinary interest, and reveals again how even the smallest

iconographical detail is full of meaning, and every objed of the world of appearances assumes a deeper symbolical significance. The central Buddha stands on a large, inverted lotus flower, which in turn is placed on a beautifully worked, two storied stand, which has a railing around the first story. As we pointed out previously, none of the other figures of this altar have come down

to us, but since the holes in which they were fastened can be seen, there can be little

doubt that this shrine must have originally comprised a much larger group of figures. Another Maitreya figure of this type, dated 520 A. D., but without halo and mandorla, is in the Detroit Museum (formerly in the colledion of Professor Sarre, Berlin).72 The

two images are praftically identical, both in style and iconography, but this statue is

perhaps even better in workmanship; the wing-like edges of the garment spread out

even more beautifully, and the expression of the deity is even more spiritual.

Finally there is the most beautiful and best preserved of all these bronze Maitreya statues

of the Great Age, the 536 A.D., or Third Day, Third Month, Third Year of T'ien P'ing,

image in the University Museum at Philadelphia,73 which formerly belonged to the Tuan

Fang Colledion. It shows all the same features, both stylistically and iconographically, which we discussed above, but it excells all the other figures in the delicacy and ex-

quisiteness of its worksmanship and in the beauty of its deeply spiritual and highly ex-

pressive forms. I do not believe it is going too for to call this bronze the finest of all

preserved Chinese Buddhist images.

Interesting iconographically is a Maitreya dated 519 A.D.74 or Tenth Day, Sixth Month, 71 Wegner,op.cit.,p.2. 72 Glaser,op.cit.,pl. 29-31. 78 Sir6n,op.cit.,pl.5 8. 74 Omura,op.cit.,Fig. 538.

312



Second Year of Shen Kuei. Maitreya is here represented as a Buddha in a monk's garment with an usnmsa and halo. But quite in contrast to his usual iconography he is here given th6 water bottle and the alms bowl as his attributes. Since the water bottle is usually associated with Bodhisattvas it is quite surprising to see it here given to a deity which

is obviously meant to be a Buddha. But as we pointed out previously, the Chinese artists

often did not stridly adhere to the traditional iconography, and employed forms and

attributes which were really not proper to the deity represented. The alms bowl is also a strange attribute for Maitreya Buddha, but an old legend which

Fa-hsian recounts in the description of his travels already associates Maitreya with the

alms bowl. We read: "When Fa-hsian was residing in this country, he heard a religious brother from India, seated on a high throne, reciting a sacred book and saying: the

Patra (alms bowl) of Buddha originally was preserved in Vaisali, but now it is in the

borders of Gandhara. After an uncertain period of years, it will go to the country of

the Western Yu-chi. After another period it will to the country of Khotan. After a

similar period it will be transported to Kouche. In about the same period it will come

back to the land of Han; after the same period it will return to the land of the lions; after

the same period it will return to Mid-India; after which it will be taken up into the

Tusita heaven. Then Maitreya Bodhisattva will exclaim with a sigh, 'the alms dish of

Sakyamuni Buddha has come.' Then all the Devas will pay religious worship to it with

flowers and incense for seven days. After this it will return to Jambuidvipa, and a sea-

dragon, taking it, will carry it within his palace, awaiting till Maitreya is about to arrive

at complete wisdom, at which time the bowl, again dividing itself into four as it was at

first, will re-ascend the Pinna mountain. After Maitreya has arrived at supreme wisdom, the four heavenly kings will come once more and respedfully salute him as Buddha, after

the same manner as they have done to former Buddhas."75

This passage shows why Maitreya is here seen with an alms bowl in his hand. Outside

of this iconographical interest, there is little remarkable about this image, for it is of

poor quality and has little aesthetic appeal. Another small standing figure of this type is dated 536A.D.,76 or Second Year of Ta

75 Beal, op. cit., p. LXXVIII. 76 Ibid., Fig. 434.

313



T'ung. It, too, represents a standing Buddha, clad in a monk's garment, but instead

of a bowl, he now holds a golden fruit or a ball. It is likely that we are here confronted

with the Yakushi, the Buddha of Medicine, for, as Siren points out,77 this Buddha has

no other attributes or mudrds than ordinary Buddhas, but often carries the "golden fruit".

This fruit is said to have healing qualities and is therefore frequently given to Yakushi

as his attribute, just as the God of medicine is represented with a medicine jar in Japanese

representations of this divinity such as at Horyiiji. Dr. Scherman refers to the fruit as

the haritaki fruit and quotes a didionary as defining it as a sour fruit, said to cure the

deseases of "Phlegm, bile and blood". It also seems to be associated with the Myrobalane fruit which the God Indra gave to Buddha Sakyamuni to cure his ailments.78

Besides these standing images, another type of Maitreya image seems to have been popular

during these years. This type shows Maitreya in a sitting position, both in his manifestation

as a Buddha and as a Bodhisattva. A small bronze of 519 A.D.,79 or Twenty-first Day,

Eighth Month, First Year of Cheng Kuang shows him in this latter form. He lets his right

leg hand down vertically, while his left leg is pressed against his right knee horizontally. The right hand rests on the right knee, while his left is raised in abhaya mudrd. The jewels and the crown indicate quite clearly that this figure is meant to be a Bodhisattva, and since

the inscription describes the deity as a Maitreya, we are here confronted with a Maitreya Bodhisattva. Another figure in the same posture is dated 527 A.D.,80 or Twenty-first Day, Fourth Month, Third Year of Hsiao Ch'ang, and is very similar to the other Maitreya image,

only that the deity now wears the monks's robes and has no crown; it must therefore re-

present Maitreya as Buddha. The halo is solid instead of being broken, but otherwise the

iconography and style are identical.

Besides this type of seated Maitreya, there is another kind which shows the deity seated in

European fashion, with both legs placed side by side, as we found at Yiin Kang. The very

poor photograph makes it difficult to discern details,81 but it seems that the legs are not

parallel to each other, as was the case in the cave sculptures. The image is dated 525 A. D., or Sixth Year of P'u T'ung of the Liang Dynasty. This image, and the other Southern

7 Siren, op. cit., p. CXXXVII. 78 Scherman, L., Buddha im Furstenschmuck, Miinchen, 1932, p. 5 and footnote I. "7 Omura, op. cit., Fig. 539. 80 Omura, op. cit., Fig. 545. 81 Ibid., Fig. 433.

314



bronzes we studied, would indicate that no Southern school of Chinese Buddhist sculpture existed which either stylistically or iconographically differed from the Northern school.

The figure shows the same style as the Northern images, and the position of the hands, bne of which rests on the knee, while the other is raised in abhaya mudrd, is in no way different from that found in the North.

A third type of seated image, probably representing the meditating Sakyamuni as Prince

Siddharta before his enlightenment, seated unter the Bodhitree, is seen in the Metropolitan Museum. Although Sikyamuni is here lacking the jewels and the crown associated with the

royal prince, and has an usnmsa instead, the other representations of this scene82 would indicate

that this could only be the meditating Sakyamuni Bodhisattva. The posture of this figure is

the same as we observed in the two meditating Bodhisattvas in the altar group of 524 A. D.

in the Metropolitan Museum. One leg hangs down vertically, the other one rests upon it

horizontally, while one hand rests against the chin and the other one holds the leg.

Although the representations of this scene at Yiin Kang usually include the horse Kanthaka83

and the bundle of grass on which the Buddha was seated during his great meditation,' which

this does not, it must nevertheless be looked upon as the same figure, for the Bodhitree is

too closely associated with this scene to make any other interpretation possible. In concluding, I should like to quote Wegner's interpretation of this scene: "Die Bodhi-

sattvas sitzen auf deutlich erkennbaren Biindeln aus Gras oder Schilf unter einer iiberhan-

genden Baumkrone. Durch dies Motiv wird der Deutung der Weg gewiesen: es kann sich

nur um den Baum der Erleuchtung handeln, unter dem Sikyamuni vor seiner Erleuchtung, wahrend er also noch Bodhisattva war, sich niedergelassen hatte um iiber die Eriosung vom

Leiden nachzudenken."

To be continued

82 Siren, op. cit., p 72 B, and Stele at Philadelphia. 88 Ibid., pl. 29. 8 Ibid., pl. 52. 85 Wegner, op. cit., p. 217.

315



buddhist bronzes of the six dynasties period

Documents