Maurya and Shunga Art c12.5
Maurya and Śuṅga Art c12.5
- Language
- English
c12.5.1
In the art of the Śuṅgas, the human form which is conspicuous by its absence in the hitherto known examples of Mauryan art plays an important role; but it is accepted and treated merely as one of the many components of nature, not as the main pivot as in later Indian sculpture. Here he is completely at one with trees, creepers, animals and hundred and one other objects of nature. The method of narrating the stories is the simplest, the most direct, and the language most unaffected. Indeed, men and women of Barhut have almost a primitive and tribal simplicity. Since they are fully co-ordinated with and apprehended as part of nature itself they have no special emphasis or accent and are in no way different from animals or plants. They do not express any emotions nor are they idealised in any way. Now, these are characteritics also of the Jātaka stories themselves, and indeed of all tribal and primitive folk stories of the world. Besides this tribal and primitive character of the human figure as seen in Barhut, its comparative disregard in Mauryan court art but exuberant wealth in that of the Śuṅgas calls, I think, for an explanation. We know that Northern (i.e. Nordic of which Indo-Aryan is but a facet) art is characterised by its logical and abstract, rhythmical and disciplined designs and patterns but is conspicuous in its disregard of the human figure.
c12.5.2
It is only when the Northern people was brought into contact with the Southerners that man came to play his part and gradually became the pivot of artistic representation. But on the other hand, the Northerners brought with them into the South not only abstract patterns and designs but also an ornament flowing in rhythmic curves. The fusion of these two trends, the Northern and the Mediterranean (i.e. the Southern), can best be seen in ancient Greece and mediaeval Italy. Is it unreasonable to argue that the same phenomenon is observable in India? The social and religious ideology of Aśoka characterised by a sense of ethical purity and rational outlook as evidenced in his edicts is essentially Indo-Aryan. His preference for animal symbols and even rhythmically flowing vegetal designs appears to be Northern (i.e. Indo-Aryan) in affiliation. This also probably explains why Mauryan court art emphasises the animal figures more than the human. On the other hand the wealth of human figures in Śuṅga art is to be explained by the assumption of the existence of an art in pre-Mauryan India in which men and women must have played an important role, and which was un-Aryan in racial character and ideology. The human figure which came later on to be the main exponent of Indian art of the classical and early mediaeval periods, considered from this point of view, appears to be the gift of un-Aryan Southerners of India.
c12.5.3
It is true, evidences for such a hypothesis are not present before us in all their details as we have them in the case of Greek or Italian art, but if what modern researches, mainly by Strzygowski, have revealed to us in respect of Northern and Mediterranean arts and their intermingling in various centres of early and mediaeval Europe have any objective value and significance for early Indian art and if, further, we have to seek for an explanation of the various culture trends in early Indian art, I do not think we can reasonably escape from such a hypothesis. It is well known that the Buddha issued definite injunctions against representing himself in human form; indeed he was, according to certain texts (Cowell, ‘Jātaka,’ 479), averse to image-representations. I am inclined to believe that this was due to the general Indo-Aryan outlook that the Buddha shared. In any case, this probably explains the absence of representation of human figures in Mauryan art as well the concrete symbols—the vajrāsana, the foot-prints, the wheel, the ‘stūpa’ the sacred tree etc.—by which the Buddha is represented in Śuṅga art. The early Buddhist attitude was essentially religious, not artistic. But as time wore on, the emotional and sensuous of the pre-Aryan Southerner got the better of the religious and rational of the Aryan Northerner and eventually transformed these symbols into human form vibrant with life.