new approaches to south asian art || the problem of proportion and style in indian art history: or...

The Problem of Proportion and Style in Indian Art History: Or Why All Buddhas in Fact DoNot Look AlikeAuthor(s): John F. MostellerSource: Art Journal, Vol. 49, No. 4, New Approaches to South Asian Art (Winter, 1990), pp.388-394Published by: College Art AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/777140 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 20:11

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].

.

College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.182 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 20:11:36 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

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

http://www.jstor.org/stable/777140?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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


The Problem of Proportion and

Style in Indian Art History: Or Why All Buddhas In Fact Do Not Look Alike

By John F. Mosteller

he issue of the relation between proportion and style in the visual arts is

significant in the context of both the creative and the analytical processes. For the artist, this is a technical or methodological problem inherent in the problem of visual representation itself: in creating an art object, the artist inevitably establishes, irre- spective of whether the work is realistic or abstract, naturalistic or stylized, a series of forms that have two-dimensional mass or three-dimensional volume and are joined in relation with one another. The artist establishes these spatial/volumetric relationships either by using a formalized system of proportion or canon, or by simply visu- alizing certain patterns or relationships. In the context of analysis, the object thus created presents the art historian with the problem of discerning the relationship between the work's proportions and style. The results of this analysis go beyond simply affirming the fact that the particular proportions used by a given artist, working at a specific time and place, constitute an attribute or element of his style. As Erwin Panofsky has observed, the analysis of proportional theory can function as a significant tool for analyzing and understanding artistic styles since analysis permits the art historian to reconstruct artistic intention by examining the artist's "creative" approach to visual representation.

Remarkably, Panofsky seems to have been unaware of the vast literature on human proportions in ancient India when he wrote his famous essay "The History of the Theory of Human Proportions as a Reflec- tion of the History of Styles." This appears to be the case in spite of his suggestion that the Byzantine canon of nine faces was de- rived from somewhere to the "East."2 The life of his essay, first published in German in 1921 and then in English in 1955, spans

the period when the study of proportion in Indian art was a major concern of a number of scholars in the field. The omission of India, of course, cut him off from a culture that, unlike the ones he examined (Egyp- tian, Greek, Byzantine/Medieval, and the Renaissance), preserved a living tradition of art upon which to draw for understanding. Thus, the details of the Indian situation distinguish it from any of the other cultures considered by Panofsky, and in this way the example of Indian art supple- ments his study.

In Indian art, the problem of the relation between proportion and style relates di- rectly to the context of both artistic activity and historical analysis. With respect to artistic activity, it defines the mechanism for the transmission of style in Indian art and provides a complex example of how systems of proportion are and are not related to specific styles. This clarification of the relation between proportion and style, which proved possible through the study of the living tradition of sculpture, would never have been fully understood simply by studying ancient texts. With respect to analysis, it offers an opportunity for understanding what has remained until now beyond understanding-the nature of artistic style and its transformation in India. Therefore, a consideration of proportion and style in Indian art expands our understanding of the problem of the relationship between proportion and style in the visual arts in general. Such an examination also suggests a new direction for the study of Indian art that will have an equally significant impact on other fields of art-historical inquiry.

he serious study of proportion in In- dian art began in the nineteenth cen-

tury when Western scholars began translat-

ing newly discovered ancient Sanskrit texts on art that contained numerous proportional prescriptions.3 Thus this study was, from its beginning, based primarily on texts. In this way it differed little from the study of proportion in Western art except that the Indian sources were more plenti- ful. For nearly a century (ca. 1850-1950) the proportional systems described by the texts-be they for the art of image making (sculpture and painting) or architecture- were analyzed and, to a lesser degree, compared with the artwork of various pe- riods. This effort resulted in the identifica- tion, editing, translation, and analysis of a large number of textual sources useful for the study of proportional systems in Indian art. It also led to the formulation of several long-lasting beliefs about the role of proportion in ancient Indian art. First, scholars came to believe-on the basis of a faulty understanding of the textual sources-that the use of canons of proportion began only in the sixth or seventh century A.D., after what was then regarded by Western critics as the "classical" phase of Indian art. Second, proceeding from this was the belief that the development and rigorous application of proportional systems contributed to the decline of In- dian art in its so-called medieval phase (after the seventh century), because all these rules stifled the creative genius of the Indian artist. Finally, and as a result of these convictions, scholars became con- vinced that the use of proportional systems was merely a technical concern of the ancient Indian artist, tangential to his real artistic achievements, which, of course, were best seen in art belonging to the earlier classical period.

The problems with this earlier scholarship and its conclusions are several, primarily because Western cultural categories

388 Art Journal



were applied to the study of Indian art. The most obvious example, of course, was the imposition of the style-concept dichotomy of classic-medieval, which reflected the prejudicial assessment of Indian art by Western scholars and has since continued to influence the way the "history" of In- dian art has been analyzed and understood. Of even greater significance to the study of proportion was the continuation of the Western bias toward texts as the primary sources for such a study. The discovery of texts containing information about art led Western scholars wrongly to assume that they had discovered the artistic manuals of ancient India which set forth the practical and theoretical foundation of its art. How- ever, these texts are rarely manuals in the Western sense, since they record, in an often disjointed and fragmentary way, di- verse traditions which, by their abbrevi- ated nature, indicate that they are merely written summaries of larger, orally transmitted, "fields of knowledge."4 Because these texts are compilations, ultimately based upon oral sources, they cannot be assigned precise dates, nor can their region of origin be easily traced; as a result, attempts to demonstrate correspondences between these texts and the surviving images are seldom rewarded. The implica- tions of this are enormous, considering the early attempts to compare the texts with the surviving monuments; all these com- parisons were based upon the assertion that because such and such a text dates to a particular period, the proportional system prescribed by that text was the one adopted by the artists of that time. Indeed, the very belief that proportional canons were not employed before the sixth century was based on the assumed chronology of the textual sources, the earliest of which do not predate the beginning of the sixth century A.D. However, this failed to take into account the fact that the redactor of that text himself makes reference to earlier works.5

Finally, the focus on the textual sources combined with a model of stylistic devolu- tion prevented Western scholars from directing attention to other important sources for the study of proportion, namely, the living artistic traditions and the images themselves.6 Even early in this century there survived in various regions of the Indian subcontinent a relatively large number of traditional artists who were still building temples, carving images, and producing paintings according to the ancient traditions handed down from father to son, from master to student, over many centuries. However, scholars largely ig- nored this immense body of ethnographic data because of their own prejudice that the ways in which these artists worked, like what they produced, was only the debased survival of the later decadent tradition of

Indian art. This mistake was second only to the neglect of the images themselves as sources of information regarding the proportional systems used in their creation. The few scholars who actually tried to measure images and analyze their measurements were crippled by the methodological folly of trying to find a particular proportional system prescribed by a particular text. As a result, the images to be measured were chosen because of their assumed relationship with the text.

Against this background, I have devel- oped a different approach to the study

of proportion in Indian art, with special reference to sculpture.7 To compensate for the mistakes of the past, priority is given to the proportional data embodied by the surviving images. I have established a method of measuring images-permitting me to obtain relevant measurement data to test for proportional control-based on a combined analysis of the textual prescriptions and information gained from the observa- tion of traditional Indian sculptors.8 The initial purpose of this comparative study of texts and living craftsmen has been to come to a clear understanding of how the traditional Indian sculptor practiced and still practices his art.9 I should emphasize that this study demonstrates a remarkable continuity in the Indian sculptor's basic approach to his art, which is also con- firmed by the many surviving unfinished images which preserve telltale remnants of the same creative process outlined in the texts and still followed by living artists (figs. 4 and 5). Working with the information provided by these sources, I have been able to identify a series of systematically significant points for taking measurements from ancient images. From the analysis of these measurements, I can identify the systems of proportion used by ancient Indian sculptors up to at least the sixth century A.D. (the cutoff date of my original study) and detail the ways in which these sculptors manipulated their systems. This, in turn, has helped clarify some of the information preserved in texts.

The relationship between proportion and style in the creative process of the ancient Indian artist is based on the use of systems of construction as distinct from systems of proportion.10 My analysis of images indicates that these constructive systems or devices functioned in the past-as they do in living traditional practice-as the means for the mnemonic transmission of the structure, composition, proportion, and morphology (i.e., style) of images. These constructive devices, in the context of stone sculpture, consisted of drawings of intersecting lines placed upon the surface of the block to be carved. At minimum, they had a central vertical line, which represented the axis of the figure

subdivided at certain points by horizontal lines. (For the trace of such an axis line, see the torso in fig. 4.) More complex versions included a series of vertical lines running parallel to the axis, as also oblique lines, arranged in varying patterns, in relation to the underlying linear web. These devices mnemonically encoded in their lines and points the structure and composition of the figure: they identified the significant features of the figure (hairline, neckline, breasts, navel, etc.) and the spatial disposi- tion of its various limbs. These constructive devices were never drawn haphazardly, but always in proportion, by the artist. Thus, it was necessary for the artist first to select a system of proportion for the figure and then draw out the lines and points of the constructive device according to the prescribed measurements.

n India, systems of proportion were and are defined by the vertical height of the

human figure depicted in the image calcu- lated in terms of a module. A variety of modules are mentioned in texts. Principal among these are the units called ahgula and tdla. Ahgula, which literally means "finger," is said by many texts to correspond to the width of the middle segment of the middle finger of the patron of the image. It is through such a relationship- between the measure of the living patron and the measure of the image-that the two are brought into meaningful association, whereby the patron derives a unique and lasting merit from the creation of the image. Tala, which means, among many other things, "palm of the hand," is said to correspond to "a span measured by the thumb and middle finger.""' As with the ahgula, this span from thumb to middle finger is frequently identified by the texts as belonging to the patron's hand. Such modular units, based upon the absolute measure of parts of the living body of the patron, were undoubtedly employed in certain cases in ancient India for the making of images. However, the texts that record these definitions are, in general, later and of south Indian origin.

In contrast, it has been possible to demonstrate that the module used for early north Indian sculpture was not based upon an absolute measure taken from a living body. Instead, this modular unit was calcu- lated, as it still is, in a very practical way by the sculptors themselves, by subdividing the stone surface to be used for the image into a prescribed number of equal parts.12 This subdivision was and is done along a vertical line drawn on the block's surface, which corresponds to the vertical axis of the figure to be carved; each division represents the module. Therefore, in the case of an image that is to be made using the nine- module system (the most common in ancient India),13 the axis is divided into nine

Winter 1990 389



equal parts. This simple procedure pro- duces what can be called a modular ruler. This ruler is then used by the sculptor to guide the drawing of the constructive device, permitting him to establish its lines and points with the proper measured dis- tances between them. Thus, it is proportion that controls the specific articulation of the constructive device.

Finally, this proportioned mnemonic device also controls the transmission of the actual form of the image, first as a two- dimensional design and then as a three- dimensional object. The Indian artist has always analyzed images into their constituent limbs and parts and memorized each of these as they appear in various states or postures. When the artist creates an image he selects the required parts from his memorized typology of forms and assembles these using the constructional device. For example, the human figure, divided into its principal limbs, which, in turn, are analyzed into their constituent parts, is first drawn out in relation to the constructive device (fig. 1). The location and curves of the limbs of the figure, the outline of its torso and its internal structure of breasts, stomach, and abdomen, its face and features-all these are drawn out from the artist's memory in relation to the device in the same way he originally learned to draw them from his teacher.

The translation of this two-dimensional design into a three-dimensional sculpture is then achieved through a carving process based on the removal of drawn line. Obvi- ously, as the sculptor works, the initial drawing is obliterated and the image has constantly to be redrawn (fig. 2). After each redrawing, the carving is directed to the removal of stone marked by the new

drawing. In this way the acts of drawing and carving are connected: the image is quite literally "drawn" into the third di- mension. This process of redrawing and carving, like the initial two-dimensional design of the image, is a process that is mnemonically controlled. The sculptor learned from his teacher how to shape the discrete forms of a figure (fig. 3). Thus, the artist not only knows and can re-create the two-dimensional curving outline of the thigh, he can also re-create the three- dimensional volume of that thigh- replicating the "style" of his master teacher.

s now, and as no doubt in the past, the memorization of these formal typol-

ogies is accomplished through a series of repetitive exercises: forms memorized in isolation are then memorized in combina- tion. The artist asked to carve a given image is able to call from his mind the necessary calculations for its proportions, lay out its structure and composition, and visually define all its limbs and modify the relationship of their respective parts so that they move as one body (fig. 3). This mnemonic approach, based on the systematic analysis of visual forms, was pervasive in ancient India. It was used both in image making (fig. 4) and painting (fig. 5). Figure 4 shows the unfinished image of a Jain saint, called a Tlrthahkara, carved in stone relief. On the stomach, which remains roughly cut, we can see the central linear axis of the constructional device carved into the surface. Figure 5, which shows an unfinished seated Buddha drawn on the ceiling of a cave, also has its constructional device still partially visible. This same working method, based on the systematic

_ ::: ::::.~:.::::::::::::::

analysis of forms, also governed architecture in ancient India as well (fig. 6): ground plans, elevations, and the discrete mor- phologies of the different architectural styles, all were mnemonically transmitted. It can be noted that the system for creating/ assembling complex temples mirrors the actual repetitive nature of the memorizing process, since these magnificently complex monuments were produced through the varied multiplication of a limited range of forms.

The Indian artist's mnemonic system for transmitting visual imagery unites proportion and style in such a way that the definition of artistic form is controlled by measure. For the analysis of Indian art, this link between measure and morphology- proportion and style-raises two important questions. First, how does it influence our analysis of proportion, and therefore what does it permit us to say about how Indian artists used proportion? Second, how does it influence our analysis of morphology or style?

e will examine both these questions in terms of two images of the Bud-

dha (figs. 7 and 8), both from the north Indian site of Mathura, an important com- mercial and religious center as early as the first century B.C. By that time, a community of sculptors lived and worked at Mathura, producing large numbers of vo- tive images for the Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain pilgrims. These two Buddhas are vo- tive icons and were made in the fifth century A.D.; one (fig. 7) is dated by its in- scription to A.D. 434/35, while the other (fig. 8) has been assigned to ca. A.D. 430-35 on the basis of an analysis of its "style."14

Figure 1 Sculptor drawing a goddess in relation to the constructive device, 1978, charcoal on granite. Mahabalipuram, Chingleput District, Tamilnadu.

Figure 2 Sculptor redrawing figure for carving, 1978, charcoal on granite. Mahabalipuram, Chingleput District, Tamilnadu.

390 Art Journal



Until recently, the analysis of proportion in Indian art in general, and in Indian sculpture in particular, has been limited to generalized descriptions of visually obvious differences between such images. Thus, for example, if we look at these two images, we readily observe that figure 8 appears more elongated than figure 7 and that this seems to be due, in large part, to what appear to be the longer legs of figure 8. We can also suggest a difference in shoulder width between the two images, which contributes to the overall impression of elongation. Little more can be said on the basis of a strictly visual analysis. If, however, we analyze the measurements of these images, and thereby define their proportional systems, it becomes possible to make specific statements that no longer just describe but rather explain what we see.

The analysis of measurements enables us to go beyond merely stating, as a matter of belief, that these images are based on proportional systems to identifying what proportional systems these images employ. As their associated diagrams reveal,15 these two like images from roughly the same time and same site use different systems: the Buddha dated to A.D. 434/35

(fig. 7) uses a nine-module system while the other (fig. 8) uses a ten-module system. These different systems are comple- mented by the artists' different approaches for applying them to the figure. In figure 7 the system has been applied from the hairline to the feet with the result that the hair exceeds the nine-module system. This hair, however, is proportioned according to the same module used for the figure. In contrast, in figure 8 the ten-module system has been applied to the figure from the top of the hair to the feet. It is noteworthy that these approaches to establishing the sys- temic height for the figure are attested by texts. However, until my analysis revealed their use, scholars could only wonder whether this distinction was simply a con- fusion within the texts or represented different regional traditions.

Beyond their use of different systems, the major difference in the appearance of these two images is, of course, the elongated proportions of the one in comparison with the other. An analysis of their respective proportional systems indicates how the real difference in leg length is related to a difference in the vertical subdivision of the entire figure. It is useful to begin by noting that both images share a common convention for the length of the torso: the images maintain a length of two modules from their necklines to their navels, with their genitals systemically defined by a

Figure 3 Unfinished dancing figure, 1978, charcoal on granite. Mahabalipuram, Chingleput District, Tamilnadu.

Figure 4 Unfinished Jain saint (Tarthahkara), early 9th century A.D., stone, ca. 31/2 feet high. Ellora, Jain Cave No. 32 (J 10), Aurangabad District, Maharashtra.

point located one module below the navel. This convention for a torso length of three modules (from neckline to genitals) is a

Figure 5 Unfinished painting of the Buddha, ca. 6th century A.D., ca. 21/2 feet high. Kanheri, Cave No. 34, Bombay District, Maharashtra.

Winter 1990 391



constant feature in all proportional systems used in India at least until the sixth century A.D.; it is also clearly suggested by the textual prescriptions. However, what is not suggested by the texts is the degree of freedom the ancient artists had in changing the proportional relationships between the figure above and below the torso. These Buddhas document only two out of a number of possible optional ratio sequences identified by my work: the one sequence using fractions (fig. 7) and the other, whole numbers (fig. 8). Significantly, in both cases, the length of the face is equal to the proportioning module and thus calibrated with the overall height of the figure. What varies are the length of the neck and the height of the hair, and whether or not the latter is included within the overall system or simply added. Within each system these manipulations had a significant effect since they permitted the ancient artist to increase the length of his figure's legs. By excluding the hair from the nine-module system in figure 7, the artist has made the legs of his Buddha four and one-half modules long, while by using the ten-module system in figure 8, the other artist has in- creased the length of his figure's legs to five modules.

From this proportional analysis, we gain an understanding of how a fixed system of transmission was subject to a structured

but flexible system of application, or artistic interpretation. The artist could draw out the constructive device according to a whole range of optional proportioning systems, within which he could make further manipulations to alter the internal proportions of the figure. Thus, these two images of the first half of the fifth century at Mathura reveal a common interest in elongated proportions as a hallmark of their style; at the same time, they achieve this elongation to different degrees and through different manipulations. Indeed, this experimentation with varying systems and patterns of internal proportion is evidence of these artists' desire to produce more elongated figures. This experimentation focused upon elongation is a dominant feature of fifth-century sculpture not only at Mathura but also at other sites in the Gangetic Plain. However, all this experimentation was carried out using the same constructive system.16 My work demonstrates that images in the same style use different proportional systems and that the same proportional system could be used for images in completely different styles. Significantly, therefore, there is no necessary connection between a specific canon of proportion and a specific style in Indian art. Instead, the Indian artist's approach proves to have been flexible as he worked within an established framework.

roportional analysis of ancient Indian images reveals an interesting situation:

while there is no necessary relationship between a specific canon of proportion and a specific style, there is a necessary relationship between the proportioned constructive device-the mnemonic approach of the artist-and the form or style of a sculpture. This relationship between proportion and style, via the common link of the constructive device, provides a new way to approach the analysis of form or style in Indian figural art. To understand how this works we can refer to the two Buddha images discussed above (figs. 7 and 8).

In India, among the very large numbers of iconic images produced, many have survived that replicate the forms of various divinities, be they Buddhist, Hindu, or Jain. Understanding the Indian artist's creative process allows us to appreciate how he was able to produce and reproduce so faithfully these image types from region to region over centuries. However, this method of creation and the imagery it gen- erated present considerable problems to art historians attempting to comprehend the transformation of artistic styles in the In- dian subcontinent. For example, these two images from the same site and time are both considered masterpieces of what In- dian art historians have long called Gupta style. (Gupta is the name of a north Indian dynasty that rose to power in the late fourth century A.D. and established an empire which grew to include much of north, central, western, and eastern India.) That this period has been regarded as classic by historians indicates the level of appreciation it has achieved in the eyes of scholars. How- ever, we must now ask, what is Gupta style, or what are the significant criteria that define how these images are similar?

This process of identifying Indian stylistic criteria has been based exclusively upon visual, that is, descriptive, analysis. The study of ancient Indian art possesses few reliable historical sources to provide the original cultural context of these images, such as letters of commissions, bio- graphical data for the artists, and the like. In light of this paucity of sources, the method of descriptive analysis has assumed a prominent role in our attempt to organize the monuments. However, this method has concerned itself only with the surface visible to the human eye. Thus, the principal criteria for defining Gupta style in the case of these images include: (1) the stringlike folds of the garment and its "wet" look as it clings to and reveals the body underneath; (2) the articulation of certain features of the face and coiffure,

Figure 6 Kandariya Mahadeva Temple, detail of shrine wall, mid- llth century A.D., sandstone. Khajuraho, Chhatarpur District, Madhya Pradesh.

most notably the eyes with their downcast gaze, the enlarged lower lip, and the curve of the hairline; and (3) the way the Buddha holds one end of his robe in his left hand,

392 Art Journal



where it survives. Secondary criteria include such things as "finish" and proportions, the latter almost always discussed only in a general way.17

While these criteria describe what Bud- dha images made at Mathura in the fifth century look like, they do not address the very real differences between these images, nor do they adequately explain their sculptural form. With regard to their differences, I have already explained how their "elongated proportions" are the result of quite specific and different proportional solutions. Similarly, we can readily see the way in which the "wet" drapery technique reveals the body, although this description does not elucidate the nature of the considerable differences in the articulation of the body itself. These differences, which center upon the specific articulation of the forms that compose the body, can be illus- trated by several examples. First, compare the massive breast and shoulders of the image in figure 7 and the thinner more pinched shoulders of figure 8, and the de- lineation of a stomach in figure 8 and the absence of such definition in figure 7. Sec- ond, compare the downcast eyes in the images of figures 7 and 8-the arch of the eyebrows, the ratio of upper eyelid to the eye proper, and the shape of the open part of the eye-which have been rendered in very different ways. Furthermore, these differences, visible in photographs, are even more significant when considered in their three-dimensional reality. The different shapes of each of these forms-the breasts, shoulders, eyes, etc.-record not only the individual variations within a sin- gle style but also the real formal criteria of the style itself. Thus, the "wet" look is of less significance to the real definition of Gupta style than are the actual parameters for the definition of the forms of the torso, arms, and legs. Downcast eyes may also describe a common feature of fifth-century images, but they fail to account for the diversity in achieving the effect, as well as the formal rules governing each of these different approaches for representing them.

T o approach this kind of detailed mor- phological analysis, to move from a

description to an explanation of form, re- quires Indian art historians to do what the ancient Indian artists themselves did: to measure the forms of their images. The artist's style inhered in the shape of his forms, and the articulation of those shapes, transmitted mnemonically, was controlled by measure. As we have seen, this control was at two levels: first, the artist assembled the formal structure of the image by using the proportioned constructive device, and second, he drew and carved his lines and forms by visually measuring them out in relation to the linear device. In this careful

3\4

1 - 1\2

-3

I

1\2

0

4 1\2

Figure 7 Standing Buddha paired with a diagram of its proportional system, A.D. 434/35, mottled red sandstone, 43/4 feet high. From Govindanagar, Mathura District, Uttar Pradesh. Government Museum, Mathura.

2\3

1\3

-2 -D-

f: Q

3

5

Figure 8 Standing Buddha paired with a diagram of its proportional system, ca. A.D. 430-35, mottled red sandstone, 43/4 feet high. From Mathura, Mathura District, Uttar Pradesh. Indian Museum, Calcutta.

Winter 1990 393



re-creation of forms a style lived, surviving as long as it was transmitted, within a hereditary group of artists who chose it as their dominant mode of expression in relation to the society they served. As we have also seen, in the cases of both proportion and the articulation of form, variation was part of the Indian artist's re-creative process. Furthermore, this variation was both intended and accidental. However, within any given artistic tradition or style, the range of intentional and accidental variation was limited by the shared training and standards of the members of the group. Variation was frequently tied to patronage, that is, the amount the patron paid the artists to produce an image or temple, or the patron's special requirements with regard to iconography and decoration.

Given this situation, it remains for In- dian art historians in the following decades finally to define the styles of the subconti-

Notes

I take pleasure in acknowledging the support of my research by the Department of South Asia Regional Studies at the University of Pennsylvania.

1 Erwin Panofsky, "The History of the Theory of Human Proportions as a Reflection of the History of Styles," in Meaning in the Visual Arts (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1955), 55-107.

2 Ibid., 76. 3 For an expanded discussion of the history of the

study of proportion in Indian art, see John F Mosteller, "The Study of Indian Iconometry in Historical Perspective," Journal of the American Oriental Society 108, no. 1 (January-March 1988): 99-110; Pramod Chandra, "The Study of Indian Temple Architecture," in Studies in Indian

Temple Architecture, ed. Pramod Chandra (New Delhi: American Institute of Indian Studies, 1975), 1-39; and Partha Mitter, Much Maligned Monsters: History of European Reactions to In- dian Art (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977).

4 I am indebted to Dr. B. N. Goswamy who, many years ago, demonstrated the value of this phrase in our understanding of the structure of knowledge in ancient India and how this structure relates to both the textual and the oral traditions. As an example of the iconometric prescriptions found in Indian texts, note the translation of verses 4-8 of chapter 58 from the Brihatsarmhitd, a text that dates to the sixth century A.D.:

4. The face (of a statue) is twelve of its own digits long and broad. Nagnajit, however, notes a length of fourteen digits, which is the measure for Dravidas (barbarians).

5. The nose, forehead, chin, and neck are four digits (i.e., modules) long; like- wise the ears; the jaws two digits long and broad. The chin is two digits broad.

6. The forehead is eight digits in breadth. Two digits further off are the tem-

ples, being of four digits. The ears are two

digits broad.

nent by analyzing the range of formal variation in Indian art. This massive undertak- ing will be made possible by the relation between proportion and style, and it will be accomplished through not only the visual or descriptive analysis, but also the development of a quantitative analysis based on measurement data. The acquisition of this measurement data will be made relatively easy in the coming years with the development of digital scanning technologies which, even now, permit scholars to obtain very precise surface data of two- and three- dimensional objects. The result of the use of such scanning systems is the conversion of the art object into a quantified database that can be displayed in every detail and in three dimensions on the computer screen. This conversion of the art object into a database must be understood as a method of analysis to supplement, not to replace, the discerning power of the mind's eye. It

7. The upper margin of the ear should be made in the same straight line with the brows, and at four and one half digits dis- tant (from the latter). The ear-hole and the eminence near it lies in the same line with the extreme eye corer.

8. Vasishtha puts the space between the extreme eye corers and eyes at four digits. The under lip measures one digit, and the

upper lip one half. H. Kern, "The Brhat-Sarmhita: or, Complete Sys- tem of Natural Astrology, of Varahamihira," Jour- nal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, n.s., 6, pt. 2 (1873): 323-24.

5 I am here thinking, in particular, of the Brihat- satihitd, the compilation of which has been relia-

bly assigned to the early sixth century A.D. The redactor, one Varfhamihira, notes in several

places that he is recording what he "remembers" from the works of earlier authorities. See ibid., 321,323,324.

6 Chandra, "The Study of Indian Temple Architec- ture," 1-39.

7 See John F Mosteller, The Measure of Form: A New Approach for the Study of Indian Sculpture (New Delhi: Abhinav Publications, 1990); idem, "A New Approach for the Study of Indian Art," Journal of the American Oriental Society 107, no. 1 (January-March 1987): 55-69.

8 I conducted field observations with a community of traditional sculptors in Mahabalipuram in 1978 and again in 1982. In addition to watching and

questioning several sculptors making images, I also conducted extensive interviews with Shri

Ganapati Sthapati, who is a famous traditional architect and sculptor, as well as the superinten- dent of the Tamilnadu Training Institute for Archi- tecture and Sculpture in Mahabalipuram.

9 Throughout this article I shall refer to the Indian

sculptor by the personal pronouns "he" or "his," given the fact that we possess no evidence, either historical or from living practice, that gives us any

provides the best possible data-far supe- rior to what can be seen or remembered at any given moment-which must then be analyzed with our eyes and minds. Thus, with an enormous body of visual material, which can be properly sorted out only through an analysis that necessarily begins with proportion and moves to style, Indian art presents us with not just another example of how a study of proportion reveals the artistic intention of a culture or period, but with a wonderful opportunity for develop- ing a quantitative approach for the study of other visual traditions as well.

John F Mosteller is scholar-in-residence in the Department of South Asia Regional Studies at the University of Pennsylvania. Among his recent publications is "The Future of Indian Art History," Journal of the American Oriental Society 109, no. 4 (October-December 1989).

reason to believe that women could be sculptors. Indeed, Shri Ganapati Sthapati indicated to me in an interview in 1978 that women are specifically excluded from learning the tradition of sculpture (also of architecture, painting, etc.) because the

reality of their lives is that they must marry outside the family, into families that practice the same

occupation as their own. Thus, teaching the women of the family the trade secrets of a family's livelihood is forbidden.

10 The distinction between a system of construction and a system of proportion is made by Panofsky. See Panofsky, "The History of the Theory of Hu- man Proportions," 56-57.

11 Sir Monier Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 6th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974), 444-45.

12 Interestingly, this method of calculating the module is specifically mentioned in the Brihatsamhhitd in the earliest iconometric passage known to us. See Kern, "The Brhat-Samhita," verse 4 and p. 323n.

13 Mosteller, The Measure of Form, 53-74. 14 Joanna Williams, The Art of Gupta India: Empire

and Province (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), 69-70.

15 The diagrams paired with the images in figs. 7 and 8 have been drawn to the size of each image as

reproduced in the photograph. This represents a close approximation, which is not perfect given the modest distortion of the photographs themselves.

16 For other examples, see John F. Mosteller, "The Practice of Early Indian Iconometry: The Evi- dence of Images and Texts," in Shastric Tradition in the Indian Arts, ed. A. L. Dallapiccola in col- laboration with S. Zingel-Ave Lallemant

(Heidelberg: South Asia Institute, 1989), 123-30. 17 The one exception to this is the more thoughtful

and systematic discussion of proportion given by Joanna Williams in The Art of Gupta India.

394 Art Journal



new approaches to south asian art || the problem of proportion and style in indian art history: or...

Documents