Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Maurya and Shunga Art c10: VII. Character of Maurya Art

Maurya and Śuṅga Art c10

Language
English

VII. Character of Maurya Art

c10.2

With all its urban, conscious and civilised quality, its advanced power of visualisation and full comprehension of the third dimension, Maurya court art constitutes but an episode in the history of Indian art. Kramrisch rightly states the position when she says that “in the organism of Indian art Mauryan sculpture has only marginal importance.” 55 It was indeed a hot house plant reared up by the will, care and patronage of a court heavily under the influence of the contemporary international culture and ideology of the Asiatic West and Mediterranean East. In course of time the glass walls fell to pieces and the plant withered. Maurya court art failed to make any notable permanent contribution to the growth of Indian art except that it directly helped the fixation of the latter in permanent material.

c10.3

A most important exponent of Maurya court ideology in sculpture is the crowning lion figure which, we have seen, was conditioned by a plastic vision and artistic convention already fixed and determined within a foreign art tradition. They raise the presumption that they for the first time introduced into the realm of Indian art a highly advanced power of visualisation and a fuller comprehension of the problem of the third dimension. But here a counter-hypothesis, I have already pointed out, presents itself. It is permissible to assume that these two qualities of monumental art were not unknown to Indian artists who used to work in wood and clay and shape images in fully rounded form. The evidences of the ‘Arthaśāstra’, the ‘Manusamhitā’, the ‘Aṣṭādhyāyī’ and certain early Buddhist texts are clear on this point. Moreover, the assumption seems to find strong support not only from the spirit and appearance but also from the general conception, treatment and execution of the Dhauli elephant and the Rampurva bull which undoubtedly belong to a different art tradition. I have tried also to point out that the Patna Yakshas, the Didarganj Yakshiṇī, and the Lohanipur Jaina images to an extent belong to the line of evolution of this tradition, though it must be admitted that the Maurya elephant and the bull belong qualitatively to a higher aesthetic level. This court art does not seem to have taken cognisance of another tradition of art, a more primitive, perhaps folk tradition of presumably some ethnic significance, that was hardly conscious of the third dimension and fully rounded form. This latter tradition came to be fixed in permanent material for the first time in Barhut where already the conflict between round volume and flat surface makes its appearance and gradually shows itself not only in the Baroda and Parkham Yakshas and in the so-called Manasādevī of Parkham still in worship, but also in the Patna Yakshas, the Lohanipur images, and some of the huge primitives of the early Mathura school.

c10.4

⁵⁵ 55

c10.5

No less important exponent of Maurya court art is the independent column standing free in space. The idea and impetus persisted even after the Mauryas, but the form underwent considerable change. It was never adopted as part of any larger architectural entity in which case pillars and pilasters invariably show and evolve other forms directly from wooden prototypes. Already in the first century B. C. the Garuḍa column from Besnagar raised at the direction and patronage of a colonial Greek converted to Bhāgavata Vaishnavism,⁶⁶ shows form and features that are different from those of Asokan columns. The lowest third of the shaft is octagonal terminated by eight half-lotus designs; the middle third is sextagonal which is terminated by an octagonal band, each side of the band being decorated by a stylised full and round lotus design; the upper third is round and is superimposed by a bell-shaped capital that in its shape, form and appearance is related not so much with the Asokan capitals as with the typical Persepolitan ones with a ring of pointed lotus petals at the upper end of the base. The crowning adornment is not that of an animal but consists of a high cube supporting a stylised cluster of palmyra branches which again recall similar motifs in West-Asiatic art. The fact that this column was raised by a colonial Greek probably explains this emphasis on Achaemenian and West-Asiatic motifs, but the fact remains that post-Maurya art and architecture discarded the type and form of columns made current by the Maurya monarchs. This is further supported by the shape and form of pilasters met with at Barhut and derivable from wooden prototyes. True, there are certain pilasters with pronounced Persepolitan forms, but it is clear that they were the handiwork of masons from the North-west who left their marks in the Kharoshṭhī script.

c10.6

In the realm of architecture also Maurya court art failed to make any impress. The Mauryan palaces and the Pillared Hall brought into existence directly by the impetus and inspiration of Achaemenian architectural form and ideal do not seem to have captured the imagination of Indian builders and architects, and there is no evidence in later Indian art to show that such plans and designs were ever adopted. On the other hand the few rock-hewn ‘chaitya’-cells patronised by the Maurya monarchs show that they were exactly translated from wooden prototypes. The evidence of civil and religious architecture furnished by the early Indian reliefs of Barhut, Sanchi, Amaravati and other places also point to that conclusion. Here also the Indian style, form and tradition made itself felt.⁶⁷

c10.7

It is true, early Indian art knows of certain motifs, patterns and designs made current and popular by Maurya court art—this without any reference to the question of art-style—and that quite a large portion of this repertory of motifs and designs belongs to the art of Asiatic West which was for a time dominated by Achaemenian and later by colonial Greek imperialism; but it would be an error to imagine that "the whole group of motifs of western Asiatic aspect was introduced by Aśoka's Persian craftsmen en-bloc". There can hardly be any doubt that quite a few of such motifs were made current even before the Mauryas, while those that are definitely Hellenistic during and after the Maurya period.

c10.8

The imperialism of the Maurya monarchs, especially of Aśoka, was a synthesis of Indian, Achaemenian and Hellenistic ideals. It was the expression of an individualistic taste and ideology, not of a collective social will. Aśoka's personal religion, his conception of Dhamma and his policy of Dhammavijaya also reflect the individual ideology and preference of a resolute but intelligent and benevolent autocrat who dominated the Maurya court and administration. Maurya court art also was no exception to this basic and fundamental factor. Nanda-Maurya, particularly Maurya imperialism and Asokan policy of Dhammavijaya drew India out of her primitive local and tribal outlook. Asokan policy in the realm of religion raised Buddhism to the status of an international religion right from the position of a tribal and regional cult. So in the realm of art as well. Individual taste and preference of Maurya monarchs like Chandragupta, Bindusāra and Aśoka for ideas and objects from Medo-Achaemenian and Hellenistic Orient furnished the impetus and inspiration, and Indian art not only came to be fixed in permanent material but it was raised from the position of handicraft and primitive art to the dignity and status of monumental art. One of the important functions of this art was to impress and overawe the populace with the power and majesty of the mighty rulers. To this function have to be traced the compactness of the animal figures of solid stone with no projecting arms and legs, the most durable design for and at once the most dignified though most conventional appearance of them, and the most imposing stateliness of the columns themselves and of the figures that crown them. Maurya court art is thus individualistic in its essential character and ideology. The main lines of this art, just as the main lines of Aśoka's policy of Dhammavijaya, were chiefly determined by individual will, taste and preference. Both lacked deeper roots in the collective social will, taste and preference, and were therefore destined to have isolated and short lives coeval and co-existent with and within the four limits of the powerful Maurya court. This explains why Maurya court art with all its dignified bearing, monumental appearance and civilised quality forms but a short and isolated chapter of the history of Indian art. Like the columns and the animal figures themselves Maurya court art stands aloof and apart.

Linked texts (8)