Published in The Journal of the Greater Indian Society, Vol. IV, 1937, pp.122-127.
In the art of North India the images of the river-goddesses Ganga and Yamuna occupy an important place. During the Middle Ages and even many centuries after the Muhammadan conquest temple gates were decorated with these images, while the Buddhists also placed them in their shrines.
During the late Middle Ages images of Ganga, designed for independent worship, are met with chiefly in the plains of the Lower Ganges. The Tantras adopted and established the worship of Ganga as a goddess by formulating its ritual. Ganga was to be recognised and represented as the ultimate goal of salvation (Parama gatih) in a country noted for accurate philosophical thought and for a knowledge of the real sources of salvation in accordance therewith.
According to Akshay Kunar Maitra, who devoted a fine article to this subject in Rupam (1921), this development evidently took place in the Tantrika region and coincided approximately with the late mediaeval art of the Gaudian Empire of Bengal. Royal grants of the Pala kingdom show that while the capital was transferred from one place to another, it was always located on the Ganges or in its vicinity. It is this age and the zone influenced by the culture of this kingdom which have given us the best examples of the Ganga image intended for special worship.
It is less well-known that Ganga images also occur in Indo-Javanese art. In this article are published two illustrations of a very beautiful Ganga image found in Paper, Kediri (East Java). It is four-armed and carries in the upper right hand extending backwards a linga on a lotus, in the upper left a fly-fan, in the lower right a rosary and in the lower left a kumbha. Back of the feet lies a crocodile with lifted tail.
Thirteen years ago Dr. Stutterheim called attention to a Javanese Ganga image in the British Museum, London, and another in the Musee Guimet, Paris. [1] Photos of these remarkable antiquities are here reproduced for the first time. [2]
When these images are compared, it becomes evident that all three originated in East Java and were made probably during the 14th century. On the pedestal of the London image a few figures are still faintly visible, which Dr. Stutterheim interpreted as 128. The image was thus made between 1358 and 1368 A.D.
The Papar image far surpasses the other two in beauty. The latter represent a thin, emaciated goddess standing on a crocodile, between two tall lotus stems. The London figure has also a crude halo.
Apparently these three are death-images, considered as appropriate resting-places for the redeemed souls on account of their relation to the Ganges, the mighty river of the dead which opens the way to celestial bliss.
According to Maitra, the worship of Ganga with clay image still prevails in Bengal, preserving a continuity which has disappeared from Orissa and other neighbouring provinces. I would also call attention to the fact that two bronze images of the goddess, with a crocodile, which also evidently represent Ganga, have been found in Nalanda [3] and elsewhere. [4]
The first mention of the name Ganga is in the rock inscription of pose has been clearly relieved by a pleasing emphasis on curves which are more pronounced and undulating in the Ceylonese example. The Sumatran parallel is slightly thick set and the face is a little heavy and flat with eyes downcast. However, if we leave out the faces, whose peculiarities are due to the difference of the racial stamp, the similarity of treatment of the rest of the body, even to minute details e.g. the clinging transparent drapery with wavy fringe and angular corners is remarkable to a degree in both examples.
In my previous papers on “The Early Art of Sri-Vijaya” [4] and “The Sources of the Art of Sri-Vijaya” [5] I have attempted to show the apparent influence of the Pallava art of South India on the Palembang Bodhisattva. Dr. R.C. Majumdar, while discussing the stylistic connections of this particular image, remarked: “In opposition to the views of Dr. Bosch and Dr. Krom that Southern India exercised no influence of any importance on the art of Sri-Vijaya, Mr. Ghosh holds that this image of Avalokiteshvara is almost an echo of the monumental Pallava reliefs of the 7th century at Mamallapuram. Here, again, the resemblance is only superficial. The figure is no doubt a remarkable one and possesses certain traits of classic Gupta art … it is premature to draw any definite conclusions about the particular school from which it originated.” [6]
Now let us see what Mr. Paranavitana thinks of the Ceylonese Bodhisattva. “The image is interesting”, he observes, “both from the artistic and the iconographic points of view, and must be classed among the best products of Simhalese plastic art … In style the sculpture shows affinities with the Pallava school of art.” [7]
In the case of the Sumatran Bodhisattva, except for the down-cast eyes, Gupta traits conspicuous by their absence. Modelling is perceptibly flat and subdued in both the sculptures from Ceylon and Sumatra in contrast to classic Gupta idiom; while the peculiar clear-cut definition of features characterising Gupta plasticity is also missing.
Such profound kinship between the Bodhisattvas from the two islands, is due probably to their having been influenced by the same common source of art, viz., the Pallava School. But it is more likely that the Sumatran sculpture was inspired by direct contact with the Ceylonese prototypes.
Notes
[1] App. Royal Institute, 1924, pp. 296, 298.
[2] For permission to publish these photos, I am indebted to the courtesy of the Netherlands-Indies Archeological Service, the British Museum and the Musee Guimet.
[3] Ann. Progress Report of the Archeological Survey of India, Central Circle, 1920-21, p. 47.
[4] Bhattasali, Iconography of Buddhist and Brahmanical Sculptures in the Dacca MUseum, pp. 199-200, 273, ill. LXVII f.
[5] J.G.I.S., Vol. I, No. I, pp. 31-38.
[6] Ibid., Vol. III, No. I, pp. 50-56.
[7] R.C. Majumdar, Origin of the Art of Sri-Vijaya, JISOA., June, 1935, p. 77.
[8] Indian Arts and Letters, Vol. XI, No. 1, p. 28.
Published in The Journal of the Greater Indian Society, Vol. IV, 1937, pp.122-127.