Challenges in Dating Nepalese Stone Sculpture

Ulrich von Schroeder

Black and white photograph of Buddha standing with right hand raised in mudra situated in brickwork niche — Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva; Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century, commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style; stone; height 10 ft. 7 in. (324 cm); photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva

Kathmandu, Nepal 15th century,commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style

Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva; Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century, commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style; stone; height 10 ft. 7 in. (324 cm); photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Summary

Buddhists have been carving stone images in Nepal since ancient times. Art historian Ulrich von Schroeder re-evaluates this sculpture’s style in relation to the time period it was created. Art historians often date images based on style, but this may not always be accurate. This image appears to be sculpted in an early style, but may have been commissioned by two brothers in the fifteenth century based on much earlier stylistic models.

Key Terms

iconography

In the Himalayan context, iconography refers to the forms found in religious images, especially the attributes of deities: body color, number of arms and legs, hand gestures, poses, implements, and retinue. Often these attributes are specified in ritual texts (sadhanas), which artists are expected to follow faithfully.

Licchavi

Licchavi is a name for an ancient Indic people. In the time of the Buddha Shakyamuni (sixth-fifth century BCE), the Licchavis inhabited the northern bank of the Ganges river in the area around the city of Vaishali, their capital. In the mid-fifth century CE, a branch of the Licchavis formed a dynasty in the Kathmandu Valley, and ruled there until the mid-ninth century, retaining close ties with Indian kingdoms and establishing close cultural, trade, and diplomatic relationships with both Tibet and China. The Licchavi period is known as the earliest great age of Nepalese art, with many Buddhist and Hindu bronzes and stone sculptures surviving today.

Maitreya

Buddhists believe that the universe expands and contracts over endless eons or “kalpas.” Buddhas appear at pre-set times in these eons. The Buddha of our era was Shakyamuni, and the next Buddha to appear will be Maitreya, whose coming will usher in an age of peace. Images of Maitreya are very popular in Buddhist art, either as part of a trinity of Buddhas of the Three Times, or as individual sculptures and paintings often depicting Maitreya standing. Maitreya can be represented both as a bodhisattva and as a buddha.

mudra

In Hinduism and Buddhism, mudras are ritual hand gestures made by deities, Buddhas, and other sacred figures. These hand gestures are important and relatively standardized parts of deities’ iconographies. Mudras are also performed by practitioners during rituals, allowing them to take on the bodily attributes of the deities.

stupa

Stupas are monuments that initially contained cremated remains of Buddha Shakyamuni or important monks, his disciples, and subsequently other material and symbolic relics associated with the Buddha’s body, teaching, and enlightened mind. As representations of the Buddha’s presence in the world, stupas with their contents—texts, relics, tsatsas—continue to be important objects of Buddhist worship in their diverse forms of domed structures, multistoried pagodas, and portable sculptures. The original form of stupas was an earthen dome-shaped mound containing the remains in reliquary vessels or urns deposited within the innermost core. The dome would often be successively enlarged and surrounded by a path for a walk around in a clockwise direction and veneration (circumambulation)

The ancient sacred hill site of the Svayambhu Mahachaitya () at Kathmandu is filled with stone chaityas and several hundreds of stone sculptures, mostly of Buddhist deities. Very prominent among them is a tall stone carving of a standing installed west of the Svayambhu Mahachaitya that receives special attention from the numerous visitors. This Buddha, measuring 10 1/2 feet (3.2 meters) high, is the tallest known Nepalese stone image of a Buddha. Facing east, he stands inside an open shrine built with bricks, in a slightly sideways bent attitude on a single lotus pedestal characterized by large petals. The right hand, with clearly visible webbed fingers, is lowered in the gesture of charity (varada ), and the raised left hand holds the tip of the diaphanous monastic robe, rendered without pleats and covering both shoulders. The gesture of charity is known in Nepal also as mudra of prediction, which explains why this image is also known as the Buddha with the Gesture of Prediction. The edge of the lower garment is also visible. The image is set against an oval aureole and the head against an oval nimbus—both decorated with leaves (figs. 2, 3, and 4).

Black and white photograph of head and shoulders of Buddha featuring tightly coiled hairstyle, elongated earlobes, and gentle smile — Fig. 2 Detail of Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva; Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century, commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style; stone; height 10 ft. 7 in. (324 cm); photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Black and white photograph of torso and head of Buddha holding implement in right hand at shoulder level — Fig. 3 Detail of Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva; Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century, commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style; stone; height 10 ft. 7 in. (324 cm); photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Fig. 4 Detail of Standing Buddha Shakyamuni Donated by Lundeva; Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century, commissioned in a 9th–10th-century style; stone; height 10 ft. 7 in. (324 cm); photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Intriguing Iconography

This buddha, here considered to represent the historical , has also been differently identified as —the future Buddha.However, there are no particular iconographic characteristics present that would endorse such an identification. Among Nepalese scholars in particular, this buddha is also often identified as Devavatara Bodhisattva, relevant to the descent of the Buddha from the Heaven of the Thirty-Three Gods (Trayastrimsha) at Sankashya .

Uncertain Dating of the Svayambhu Buddha

Like the Nepalese stone carving of Mayadevi giving birth to Siddhartha , this buddha has also caused much disagreement regarding the date of the sculpture’s creation, which is variously dated between the fifth and the fifteenth century. At a first glance, because it imitates an early style, the viewer is tempted to attribute the sculpture to the period (ca. 300–879). Closer inspection, however, raises doubts regarding such an early date. According to a personal written communication by Swoyambhu Tuladhar, this buddha and the smaller one at the south facade of the Shantipura cave shrine were commissioned by two of his ancestors (fig. 5), namely by Lundeva and Dhandeva, sons of Patindra Malla (about whom nothing is known), whose name appears on a painting on cloth made in Nepala Samvat 559 (1438). This account is corroborated by the fact that even in recent times, according to Swoyambhu Tuladhar, when the Vajracharya priests go around during their daily prayer ritual (puja) ringing their handbells, they include in their praise the names of Lundeva and Dhandeva.

Black and white photograph of sculpture depicting haloed Buddha wearing sheer tunic standing before full-body nimbus — Fig. 5.
Shakyamuni Donated by Dhandeva; Shantipura, Svayambhu, Kathmandu, Nepal; 15th century; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Broader Context

These two buddhas were modeled after an older standing stone buddha such as the one at Rajarajeshvari Ghat of Pashupatinatha (fig. 6), Kathmandu, Nepal, dating from about the tenth century, or a slightly earlier buddha such as that of the Bhinche Baha in (fig. 7), Nepal, made in the eighth to ninth centuries. Although the monumental Svayambhu buddha was rendered in a style common in the late Licchavi period, its surface lacks the abrasions one would expect on an image that was for more than a thousand years subjected to weather and ritual wear. However, the present state of preservation is compatible with a fifteenth-century image. For a Licchavi period image the nimbus would proportionally also be much too large. There is thus a discrepancy between the date of manufacture and the style in which the sculpture was created. An attribution “carved in the fifteenth century in a ninth- to tenth-century style” would likely be the best compromise. My personal conclusion with regard to the age of this buddha, formed during numerous visits since 1965, always ruled out the possibility of its having been made during the Licchavi period.

Black and white photograph of sculpture depicting Buddha standing in contrapposto; legs below knees are lost — Fig. 6
Buddha Shakyamuni; Rajarajeshvari Ghat, Pashupatinatha, Kathmandu, Nepal; ca. 10th century; photograph by Jürgen Schick, 1980s

Black and white photograph of relief sculpture depicting Buddha wearing sheer tunic standing in contrapposto — Fig. 7
Buddha Shakyamuni; Bhinche Baha, Patan, Nepal; 8th–9th century; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 2011

Dating of Nepalese Stone Sculptures

In the best case, the dating of ancient sculptures may be achieved through comparisons with dated sculptures. However, this is not possible in the case of Nepalese standing buddha images carved in stone, because the earliest dated examples date from the seventeenth century. Nevertheless, the importance of dated sculptures should not be overestimated for several reasons. The date, if correctly deciphered, just records when a particular image has been manufactured. Contrary to general acceptance, a dated inscription thus does not stipulate that images in a similar style were necessarily made around the same time. It is also not a given that all images manufactured in a particular period have to be similar in style. In retrospect it is unknown what image the artist was using for inspiration—a contemporary model or perhaps, on request of the patron, a particular older image. The margin of errors in attribution of dates of manufacture is therefore considerable.

To enable an overview about the stylistic spectrum within a particular period of time, the reader might consult groups of dated images of the same all manufactured in the same centuries (figs. 8, 9, and 10). Such groupings illustrate the differences in style among dated images produced during a particular century and demonstrate that any attempt to pinpoint a style to a particular period of time is bound to fail. Especially in short articles discussing a few deliberately chosen examples that fit the agenda, the conclusions look at first reasonably well documented.

Black and white photograph of relief sculpture depicting Buddha flanked by two kneeling attendants — Fig. 8
Standing Buddha Shakyamuni; Bangemudha Tole, Kathmandu, Nepal; 5th–6th century; stone; height 86 cm; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Black and white photograph of relief sculpture depicting elegantly carved Buddha against rough-hewn background; feet are missing — Fig. 9
Standing Buddha Shakyamuni; Northern Asoka Stupa, Patan, Nepal (stolen in late 1982); ca. 9th century; stone; height 76 cm; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

Black and white photograph of relief sculpture depicting Buddha and attendant situated before tiered architectonic sculpture — Fig. 10
Standing Buddha Shakyamuni; Naka Bahi, Patan, Nepal (stolen in mid-1970s); ca. 10th century; stone; height 60 cm; photograph by Ulrich von Schroeder, 1976

However, when considering a wider selection of sculptures, it becomes clear that conclusions based on just a few sculptures are in a wider context often erroneous. Only in a strictly supervised and centralized environment such as the imperial workshops in China, all images created during a particular period of time are almost identical in style. From this it follows that images produced in different workshops according to individual agreements between artists and patrons have a much larger spectrum regarding styles. One of the main purposes of history of art is to illustrate the evolution of styles. The merits of any particular sculpture become visible only in comparison with as many similar images as possible. If it would be predictable—it would not be art!

Footnotes

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:873, 878, 896, 897, pl. 280B, fig. VII–7. For other works on this sculpture, see Madanjeet Singh, Himalayan Art: Wall-Painting and Sculpture in Ladakh, Lahaul and Spiti, the Siwalik Ranges, Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan, Reprint, Unesco Art Books (London: Macmillan, 1968); Lain S. Bangdel, Inventory of Stone Sculptures of the Kathmandu Valley (Kathmandu: Royal Nepal Academy, 1995); Lain Singh Bangdel and Mukunda Raj Aryal, A Report on the Study of Iconography of Kathmandu Valley and Their Preservation and Protection (Kathmandu: Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture, Department of Archeology, 1996); Dina Bangdel, “Manifesting the Mandala: A Study of the Core Iconographic Program of Newar Buddhist Monasteries in Nepal” (PhD diss., Ohio State University, 1999) and Dina Bangdel, “Visual Histories of Svayambhu Mahacaitya,” in Light of the Valley: Renewing the Sacred Art and Traditions of Svayambhu, ed. Tsering Palmo Gellek and Padma Dorje Maitland (Cazadero, CA: Dharma Publishing, 2011), 272–85; Hema Raj Shakya, Svayambhū Mahācaitya: The Self-Arisen Great Caitya of Nepal (Kathmandu: Swayambhu Vikash Mandal, 2004); Michael Hutt, Nepal: A Guide to the Art and Architecture of the Kathmandu Valley (New Delhi: Adroit Publishers, 2010); Milan Ratna Shakya, Ancient Stone Images of Buddha & Bodhisattva in Nepal (Kathmandu: Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies, 2011).

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:896.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:878, 896–97, pl. 280A.

According to Sukra Sagar Shrestha, the painting was stolen and its present whereabouts is unknown. No photograph exists.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:SD card, pl. 280B.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:873, 878, 896–97, pls. 279B–D.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:888–89, pls. 276E–F.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:900–901, pls. 282B–C.

Ulric von Schroeder, Nepalese Stone Sculptures, 2 vols. (Weesen: Visual Dharma Publications, 2019), 2:1492–1504, 13 plates of dated images.