asianart.com | articles

Back to Comments page

GUITA BAHI BUDDHA
Tommy Yang Guo

Dear Ulrich,

I agree with you, the standing Buddha image at Guita Bahi was most likely made during the time of the consecration, i.e., late 13th century. The proposed 6th century Gupta dating is not possible. Here are some observations I would like to add to your argument.

1. A deciding feature for the dating of this bronze is the prominent single pearl-like jewel set on the center top of the tall Ushnisha of the Buddha. To my knowledge, no dated Gupta or post-Gupta period Buddha image bears this distinctive pearl on top of the Ushnisha. The shape of early depictions of the form seems more generic, similar to a small, round, dome-shape single curl, as can be seen in an early 9th century Borobudur Buddha head (TG Figure 1). This feature can also be observed in two stone Buddha examples from Bihar during the second half of the 9th century (TG Figure 2); the shape is rather similar to contemporary Anuradhapura Buddha’s flamed pearl, perhaps reflecting exchanges between Bihar and Andra/Sri Lanka. From the 10th century onwards, this feature slowly gained more popularity among stone and bronzes Buddha images (TG Figure 3). By the 12th century the feature became very popular in both Bihar and Bengal, both in stone and bronze productions. In Bengal this feature became more elaborate, depicting a single round or oval jewel inset against background, or even coming out from a lotus flower. We will see this feature spread from Bengal to Nepal and to Tibet, and ultimately to China. In South India and Sri Lanka from the late 8th to 9th century onwards, this feature also developed and became more popular and more elaborate; it resembles a flaming pearl with radiating, undulating beams, a style that spread to Sukhothai art in 13th century (TG Figure 4).

Here on the Guita Bahi Buddha, we can see the shape of the jewel on top of a very tall ushnisha is a continuation of the development of the late Northern Indian tradition in Bengal of the 12th century (see TG Figure 5). This single, large oval shape of jewel on top of Buddha's ushnisha can also be found in many 12th to 13th century early Tibetan and 13th to 14th century Buddha images in China through Nepalese craftsmanship (TG Figure 6, TG Figure 8). By the Yuan period, This feature has become the new standard for Chinese Buddha images. (TG Figure 7) The Chinese depiction of the flaming jewel appeared during 8th century and gained more popularity around the 10th century during the Five Dynasty period, perhaps originally inspired by Maha-Vaipulya-Buddhavamtamsaka Sutra. The position of the radiating pearl was not placed on top of the Ushnisha, but placed in the front, often half shown (TG Figure 9), as can be seen from late Tang Buddha images by 10th century and some Yunnan Dali Buddha images of 12th century (TG Figure 10).


TG Figure 1
Borobudur Buddha Head
800 AD

TG Figure 2
Two Buddhas, Kurkihar and Bodh Gaya
Second half of 9th century


TG Figure 3
Buddha, Gaya
Around 1000 AD
Patna Museum


TG Figure 4
Buddha, late Anuradhapura Period
late 8th to 9th century
Metropolitan Museum, New York

TG Figure 5
Buddha with tall Ushnisha surmounted by
oval shape pearl
Rajshahi District, Bangladesh, 12th century
Rajshahi Archaeological Museum

TG Figure 6.1
Buddha Vajrasana
Tibet,
13th century
British Musuem

TG Figure 6.2
Buddha with a lotus-pearl
surmounted on tall Ushnisha.
11-13th c. or 12th-13th c., Tibet
Metropolitan Museum

TG Figure 7
Buddha
Yuan Dynasty, 14th century
China
Private Collection

TG Figure 8
Buddha made by Nepalese craftsmen
Yuan Dynasty, Late 13th -early 14th century
China
Palace Museum

TG Figure 9
Buddha Head
Tang Dynasty, 9th century

TG Figure 10
Buddha
Dali Kingdom
12th century
Poly Auction Hong Kong
For similar reasons, I doubt that the Kimbell Museum gilt Nepalese standing Buddha should be dated to the 7th century by style, as proposed by most art historians (article fig. 15) ; the same can be said of the life-size stone standing Buddha discovered in 1987 now at the International Meditation center (article fig. 17), and the famous large bronze standing Buddha at Gum Vihara, Vajrayogini temple (article fig. 18). We can see a protruding jewel on top of the ushnisha of all three Buddhas. Note that the halo part of the Shankhamula Buddha’s Mandorla depicts a light beam coming above the Ushnisha pearl, a feature also seen on the Mandorla of the stone Buddha returned to Nepal by the Met. In my opinion the standing Buddha currently at the National Museum returned by the Met cannot be dated earlier than 12th century because of the large, circular shape of the pearl on top of the ushnisha and the flat, pattern like depiction of the mandorla (article fig. 19).

(click on the thumbnails of article figs. for full screen image with captions)

article fig. 15

article fig. 17

article fig. 18

article fig. 19
2. Another Observation is the small waist contrasting the long and plump thighs of the Guita Bahi Buddha. Note the high and wide pelvis is rather feminine. This trend of feminization of Buddha and Bodhisattva images can be seen in many early Malla period Bodhisattva stone and bronze images from 13th century onwards. Compared to the two standing copper Buddhas in Ian's article from Potala Lima Lhakhang dated to 10-11th century (article figs. 22, 23), where the already thick thighs still shows sign of muscle and power, the feminization of the body and the pose of the Guita Buddha during early Malla period is more prominent and more stylized.

article fig. 22

article fig. 23
3. Other than the unusual tall Ushnisha and the large surmounted pearl, a distinctive 12th century Bengal Buddha feature (Figure 4), the Guita Bahi Buddha’s face has a very long forehead, a heart shape face, a small mouth and a pointed chin with a youthful sweetness. This is quite a departure from the archaistic Licchavi style Buddhas we previously discussed, and may betray more of the contemporary aesthetics of the 13th century, with a strong influence from Bengal, than the archaic style that the artisans may have aimed to duplicate from the original.

Tommy Yang Guo
11/03/2020



Back to Comments page

asianart.com | articles