g 5 L — 7 , u‘l“!!! I'll 'l 2 9____+_:___:_+__*_:_ NE??? 0? 2‘: LATE MEE? IE if? 1’." l K Nfifi‘”’ LLan 22E” :3 ‘f c t 2.? .m 17-. O .- 213?} v“- I ? i -52.»: 'ti 232'": :22 " 1': 2 L ABSTRACT IDENTIFICATION AND HISTORICAL PLACEMENT OF A LATE MEDIEVAL SOUTH INDIAN FEMALE DEITY SCULPTURE By Margaret Thorp Miller This paper identifies the type, date of origin, style and meaning of an Indian female stone deity sculpture from the Kresge Art Center Gallery of Michigan State University. This is achieved through an examination of the iconography and style of the figure in comparison with other Indian figure sculpture of the Medieval Period of South India. Interpretation of the icono- graphy, moreover, further substantiates the identity of the figure and yields an understanding of the position of this image within the frame- work of the Hindu religion and society. Through this research and comparative investigation of iconography, style, and meaning of the subject sculpture, I believe this figure to be a SrT Laksmi'image from South India of the Vijayanagar Period, l6-l8th century A.D. or later. IDENTIFICATION AND HISTORICAL PLACEMENT OF A LATE MEDIEVAL SOUTH INDIAN FEMALE DEITY SCULPTURE By Margaret Thorp Miller A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Art 1971 "Nhen many a year had fled, Up floated, on her lotus bed, A maiden fair, and tender-eyed, In the young flush of beauty's pride She shone with pearl and golden sheen, And seals of glory stamped her queen. On each round arm glowed many a gem, On her smooth brows a diadem. Rolling in waves beneath her crown, The glory of her hair rolled down. Pearls on her neck of price untold, The lady shone like burnished gold. Queen of the gods, she leapt to land, A lotus in her perfect hand, And fondly, of the lotus sprung, To lotus-bearing Vishnu clung Her, gods above and men below 1 As beauty's Queen and Fortune know." —--R3m5yana 1w. J. Wilkins, Hindu Mythology (London: Thacker, Spink and Co., 1913), pp. 133-34. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES .......................... iv CHAPTERS I. TYPE OF GODDESS ...................... 1 Brief Description of Subject Sculpture ......... 1 Description of Iconography of the LaksmT' Image According to T.A. Gapinatha Rao .......... l Iconometry of Subject Sculpture ............. 4 Iconography of Subject SrT'LaksmT Figure Including the Significance of the Icono- graphy as Geographical and Chronological' Factors ......................... 4 II. THE MEANING OF THE GODDESS SR1 LAKSMI'HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE HINDU RELIGION ................. l8 Concept of the Goddess LaksmT .............. l8 Iconographical Iflterpretation .............. 22 Worship of Laksmi .................... 26 III. COMPARISON OF THE STYLE OF SUBJECT SR'I' LAKSMT SCULPTURE WITH THE STYLE OF SOUTH INDIAN MEDI- EVAL SCULPTURE . . . . . . . . ; ............. 32 Comparison of Style of Chola Period Figure Sculpture With That of Vijayanagar Period Figure Sculpture .................... 32 Comparison of Style of Subject Sculpture With Examples from Vijayanagar Period ............ 38 Summary of Suggested Dating According to Museum Authorities ....................... 47 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................... 49 iii Figure 10. ll. 12. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS SrT LaksmT. Granite. H. 3l in. South India. 16- l8th century A. D. Kresge Art Center Gallery, Michigan State University, East Lansing ...... Vaisnava Trinity. Granite. H: 54 l/4 in. (SrT DevT); 5l in. (Bhu Devi), 69 l/4 in. (Visnu). South India. First half of lOth century A. D. The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland ...... ParvatTI Granite. H:46 in. South India. llth century A.D. The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland ..................... Bhu DeVT. Granite. H:32 l/l6 in. South India. l3th century A.D. National Museum, New Delhi . . . LaksmTZ Bronze. South India. 13th century A.D. Victoria and Albert Museum, London ........ Visnu with Consorts. Bronze. South India. 14th century A.D. Government Museum, Madras ...... Visnu. Bronze. H:46 l/2 in. South India. l4-l5th century A.D. Denver Art Museum, Denver ...... ParvatT. Bronze. H:26 1/2 in. Madras. l4-l5th century A.D. Victoria and Albert Museum, London. . . Sivakami. Bronze. H:27 3/4 in. South India. 14- l6th century A.D. The George P. Bickford Collec- tion, Cleveland .................. ST? DeVTL Granite. South India. lS-lBth century A.D. William Hayes Fogg Art Museum, Harvard Uni- versity, Cambridge ................ Visnu. Brass. H: l3 l/2 in. South India. l6th century A. D. The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland ..................... LaksmT. Brass. H: 25 1/2 in. Mysore. lG-l7th century A. D. Victoria and Albert Museum, London. iv Page 13 34 37 39 4l . 42 43 44 45 , 46 CHAPTER I TYPE OF GODDESS Brief Description of Subject Sculpture Figure l. SrT'LaksmT Goddess of luck, prosperity, good fortune, standing with a lotus in her hand with a parrot perched be- hind. Vijayanagar Dynasty or later, l6-l8th century A.D. Granite, H: 31 in. (head to ankle where sculpture has broken off). Provenance: unknown, South India. Kresge Art Center Gallery, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan. The following is a brief iconographical description of the Sr? LaksmT image (Figure l): chalchala type image; tribhanga pose; katakE hasta, right hand gesture, holds padma, lotus, with parrot behind; kitha- mukuta, headdress; SiraSchakra, halo; ratna-kundala, jeweled earring; kanthT hara, flat, solid necklace; skandhamfili} shoulder tassels; kéyfira, biceps ornament; kucha-bandha, breast band; katisfitra, hip band; dhgtj, waist to ankle garment. Description of Iconography of the LakgfiT Image According to T. A. Gopinatha Rao In 1966 the Kresge Art Center Gallery acquired for its permanent collection an Indian stone sculpture. The figure at the time was thought to have been a Hindu SrT LaksmT image of the llth or 12th century A.D. mcvmcmA pmmm .xpvmgm>_:: mpmpm :mmwcuwz xngFMG mecmu pg< mommgx .o.< zgzpcmu gumpum_ .mwvcH spaom .cw Fm”: .mpwcmgw ”hawxm4.wwm F wgzmwm It is my purpose to bring to bear certain evidence which indeed indicates that the figure is a SrT'LaksmT figure, but that it is of a much later date probably from the l6th to l8th century A.D. According to T. A. GOpinatha Rao in Elements 9f_Hindu Iconography, the iconography of LaksmT is described as follows: There is goddess-worship associated with the cult of Vishnu and BrahmE'as well [as with the cult of iva]. 'The goddess is here invariably looked upon as the consort of the god; and chief among Vishnu's consort is LakshmTZ When the ocean of milk was' churned for—BBTETfiing the ambrosials for the gods, many other valuable things came out from that ocean. The goddess of wealth LakshmT, who became after- wards the consort of Vishnu, came out from that ocean then. LakshmT'is conceived to be treasured by her lord on the right side of his bro d chest. She is known by several names, such as, rT, Padma' and Kamalal She is seated upon a adma and holds in each of her two hands a lotus. e is also adorned with a lotus garland. On either side is an elephant emptying water on her head from pots presented by attendant celestial maidens.... The colour of LakshmT is to be golden yellow. She would wear golden ornaments set with rubies and other precious gems; in her ears there should be jewelled nakra-kundalas. The figure of LakshmT' has to be like that of a maiden who has just at- tained age and should be of very handsome appear- ance, with pretty eye-brows, eyes like the petals of a lotus, a full neck and a well developed waist. She should wear a bodice and be adorned with various ornaments on the head. In her right hand she should carry a lotus flower and in the left hand a bilva fruit.... The figure of LakshmT should have only two hands when she is by the side of Vishnu. But when she is worship- ped in a separate temple she should have four hands..., and be seated upon_a_lotus of eight petals....She should be adorned with keyura and kankana.1 Delhi: l . . T. A. Gopinatha Rao, Elements of Hindu Icono ra h (2 vols.; Motilal Banarsidass IndologicaT—Publishers, I968), I, Part II, pp. 372-74. Iconometry of Subject Sculpture The Kresge SrT figure, like all Hindu sculpture, was carved according to rules laid down in the SilpaSEStras (or art treatises) for the measurement of various parts of the body, their relative proportions, and for the posture of the figure. The Kresge sculp- ture has been carved in the most common proportion in that she is navatala, or nine heads in height. Hindu images had to follow the rules of proportion, be well executed, and pleasing so that they would invite the deity to inhabit them and would enhance the feeling of devotion of the worshiper. These rules are found in the dhyanas which are verses describing the power and personality of the gods and goddesses and in the lakshanas which indicate the form and pr0por- tions of the figures in keeping with the dhyanas.1 Most of the SilpaSEStras were written during and after Gupta rule, and although elaborated upon with the passage of time most of the fundamentals of art theory have remained unchanged to the present day. Although South Indian sculpture was considerably different in style from that of the North it adhered to the same basic codes of image, attitude and gesture.2 /_ _. Iconography of Subject Sri Laksmi Figure Including the Significance of the IconOQraphy as Geographical and Chronological Factors The attitudes and gestures of Hindu gods and goddesses, as well as the objects which they held in their hands and their various kinds 1Daya Ram Thapar, Icons in Bronze. An_Introduction tg_lndian Metal Images (New York: Asia PuBTishing House, |§6|), p. II. 2C. Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes (New Delhi: B.C. Sanyal, 1963), p. 13. of dress and ornamentation, thus made up the iconography which dis- tinguished one form of a god or goddess from another. Moreover, because the iconography, particularly the decoration, varied in design from place to place at different time periods, these factors are sometimes of help in dating as well as in identifying an image. The Kresge SrT LaksmT figure stands in the position known as sama_and takes the tribhanga attitude. In this attitude her lower limbs to the hips are turned slightly to the left and her torso and shoulder to the right while her head leans to the left. This at- titude is characteristic of many SrT'LaksmT figures, but is also widely used as a posture in all Indian sculptured images. There are, moreover, three types of icons which are worshiped in five different ways depending upon the material of which they are made and the purpose for which they are intended. The Kresge sculpture being of medium size and therefore semi-moveable is probably of the chalchala type and was most likely used when sacrifices were offered.1 As the figure has only two arms it strongly indicates that she was originally placed to the right side of Visnu, her consort. However, according to Gopinatha Rao: "Even when the Devi is not made to stand by the side of her consort, she may sometimes be given only two hands, one of which may be made to carry a parrot or a mirror and the other a blue-lily;...."2 All standing Hindu images were placed upon a platform. Although the Kresge SrT'sculpture has been broken off at the level of her ankles, 1Thapar, Icons jg_Bronze. An_Introduction tg_Indian Metal Images, p. 24. 2 Gopinatha Rao, Elements gf_Hindu Iconography, I, Part II, p. 339. it is probable that she once stood upon a lotus pedestal (padma thha) or was perhaps even part of such a pedestal. The open double-petalled lotus flower with one set of petals pointing upwards and the lower set drooping down was often used as a design for round or oval pedestals and in this case would be particularly in keeping to indicate the divine origin of the deity and to symbolize her particular attributes. The double-petalled lotus pedestal can be seen SUpporting the SrT figures from the Vaisnava Trinity Sculptures in Figures 2 and 6. The symbolic hand gestures called mugras or hastas play a very important part in indicating an action which a god is engaged in or a quality characteristic of a particular god. The Kresge SrT' sculpture holds her right hand in the katakElhasta in which the tips of the fingers curl around toward the thumb to form a circle. The palm of her hand faces front and is raised upwards near her right breast which is the usual position for this gesture. As she holds a lotus in this hand, the gesture could also be termed padma-hasta, meaning a hand holding a lotus. The fact that she holds a lotus, identifies her as being Visnu's consort, LaksmT, otherwise known as 1 There are numerous examples of SET LaksmT figures SrT or SrT'LaksmTI holding lotus buds, however, for a specific example of this we can again refer to the fore-mentioned SrT sculptures in Figures 2 and 6. According to Gopinatha Rao, an authority on Hindu iconography, the parrot which perches on the hand of the figure behind the lotus further supports the identity of the image as a SrT'LaksmT'figure.2 1Gopinatha Rao, Elements 9f_Hindu Iconography, I, Part II, p. 373. 21bid., p. 339. .vcmrm>m—u .pc< mo Enema: ucm—m>mpu mgh .o.< zczucwu suo_ mo mpm; gmcwu -mwcch s¥cmu . .=w¢\_ am”: .mowcacu .spwcwep a>m=mwa> .Azomw>v .=E¢\_ mm ”02>ao zgmv .ca Fm mnw>ao hmmv N mgzmwu ‘14 1|.“ Min, v ‘ku'll.g r ’0’. . J.q‘rh\.‘.w. ...(v .h.. ¢.,. . n. p..-v. ...nLt -14w222-. - U I r- s .l“‘ 0-. .I x .. 1 2.. a There are, however, few examples to be found of LaksmT figures ac- companied by parrots, thus indicating that the parrot is not commonly used as a LaksmT symbol. The left arm of the Kresge sculpture, although broken off at the wrist was probably held in the lola-hasta in which the arm hangs to the side with the hand drooping gently. This can be conjectured by the position of the part of the arm which remains intact. The lola-hasta is peculiar to South Indian images2 and is generally seen in female figures who have nothing to clasp in their hand. Moreover, the most typical hand positions for the SrT LaksmT image are the Beggar hasta as previously stated and the lola-hasta. Examples of this can be seen in the SrT figure from the Vaisnava Trinity sculpture in Figure 2, the SrT figure from the Vaisnava Trinity sculpture in Figure 6, and the SrT'DevT in Figure 10. In addition to the ha§3a§_there are headgear which are character- istic of South Indian sculpture and of certain goddess figures. The Kresge figure wears a coronet called a kitha-mukuta which usually occurs if in Vaisnavite images (Visnu, his consorts, and his avatars or incarna- tions).3 The kitha-mukuta on the subject sculpture consists of a conical 1Chintamoni Kar, Indian Metal Sculpture (London: Alec Tiranti Ltd., 1952), Plate 21. 2Mu1k Raj Anand, The Hindu View 9f_A§t_(London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1933), p. 196. 31bid., p. 197. shaped crown surmounted by a tap-piece on a bulbous circular cushion. It has a central motif in front, in this case a leaf shape, and is otherwise simply decorated with a few incised designs. The fact that this kitha-mukuta is more conical than cylindrical in shape and is surmounted by a swelling topped by a bud-shaped tip indicates that this comes from a period toward the end of the 14th century or later.1 It is also pertinent to note that as the rank of a person was judged in India by his headdress so too would the importance of the gods, goddesses, and monor deities by gauged by the size of their headdress.2 The size of the kitha-mukuta of the Kresge SrT'would then indicate that she was indeed a goddess of significance. Examples of kitha-mukuta of a type similar to that worn by the Kresge sculpture can be seen in the following figures: Visnu from the Vaisnava Trinity Sculpture (Figure 6) and Visnu (Figure 7), both of which have leaf motifs at the base of the headdress of a more ornate nature than that of the Kresge figure; SrT'DevT (Figure 10), which has a kitha-mukuta_ fijfi of identical shape and simplicity of design without the leaf ornament. The SiraSchakra on the back of the head of the subject sculpture is very simplified in design. This consists of four flat circular bands out of the center of which hang straight tassels. The original purpose of the SiraSchakra was that of a halo which shown from behind the head of the deity. By the late Medieval Period it had become as small as that 10. Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, pp. 25-26; Figure 11 (b, c), p. 26. 2 Thapar, Icons in Bronze. An_1ntroduction tg_Indiaaneta1 Images, p. 32. lO seen on the subject sculpture although from the Pallava Period on it usually was composed of a simple lotus-petal design.1 Below the SiraSchakra of the Kresge sculpture can be seen the back part of the necklace from which hangs a locket in the shape of a banyan leaf, a decoration typical of the late Chola and Vijayanagar Per- iod.2 Next to the headgear probably the most characteristic decora- tions are the ear ornaments or kundalas. The subject sculpture wears ratna-kundalas which are composed of two circular shapes with the indication of an inset gem in the center. According to Gopinatha Rao LaksmT “should wear golden ornaments set with rubies and other precious gems: in her ears there should be jewelled ratna—kundalas."3 These ratna-kundalas are very rare and occur in sculpture of the Chola period or later.4 The fact that the kundalas are quite plain is a further indication that the subject sculpture was originally accom- panied by her consort as goddesses who were individually represented "wore the dragon kundala at least in the right ear."5 Two very fine examples of ratna-kundalas are found on: SrTlDevT of the Vaisnava Trinity Sculpture (Figure 2) and Laksmfi'(Figure 5). Hara, or necklaces, were worn by all deities. The Kresge SrT wears a kanthT, a flat, solid string with a central bead tied high on 1Kar, Indian Metal Sculpture, Plate 56, p. 46. 2Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, Figure 14 (d), p. 28. 31bid., p. 29. 4Gopinatha Rao, Elements 9f_Hindu Iconography, p. 373. 5Thapar, Icons jn_Bronze. An_Introduction tg_Indian Metal Images, ll her neck.1 This is accompanied by two other flat necklaces, one which rests above the kanthi and the other which flows down between her breasts. The simplicity and length of these necklaces is character- istic of the Vijayanagar Dest.2 An example of necklaces of similar formation to those of the subject sculpture can be seen on the LaksmT image in Figure 12. Skandhamalg'or shoulder tassels, are worn by the Kresge sculpture. These consist of a central tassel flanked by strands which form a loop on top of the shoulders. The use of a tassel on the right shoulder did not begin until the late 10th and the llth cen- tury of the Chola Dynasty and it was not until the late Chola Period that two tassels appeared, one on each shoulder.3 In some examples of late Chola sculpture, the tassel was divided into several strands hanging loosely over the shoulder as in Figure 5. The most character- istic skandhamfila'of the Vijayanagar Period, with the exception of a few earlier examples, was composed of the side tassels split into two strands, one of which was made to hang loose while the other circled the shoulder as in Figure 6 and 12. It would thus appear that this particular skandhamale, although missing the loose tassel, is of the Vijayanagar Period. The biceps decoration, ggyggg, of the subject sculpture consists of a flat curvilinear ornament held on the arm by two simple bands which 1Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, p. 31. 2Ibid. 31bid., p. 30. 12 resemble armlets. It is possible that the lower band is an armlet, although its juxaposition to the kéygra_discounts this and, moreover, the armlet is usually placed closer to the elbow. This particular k§y§1a_design is similar to some of the biceps ornaments of the Chola Period. It is not, however, peculiar to ahy period, for throughout the history of India the k§y§r2_has usually taken on either a more ornate floral pattern (Chola Period) (Figure 3), or simplified itself to the other extreme in becoming a plain band resembling an armlet (Vijayanagar Period) (Figures 8 and 12).1 The subject sculpture wears no kahkana, or wrist bracelet, which is generally seen on all goddess figures.2 The upper part of the body of Indian goddess figures is often covered by a tight fitting bodice made of very fine cloth which appears to be transparent. The subject sculpture may wear such a garment as indicated by the incised curving diagonal line and two swirling lines which are carved on the abdomen area and which may be a decorative way of treating the indication of a very fine drapery. The garment of the torso of the subject sculpture is thus rendered in a way typical of Indian sculpture in general in that it subtly serves to indicate the natural lines of the body. The kucha-bandha, or breast band, worn by the subject sculpture is significant in that it serves to differentiate this goddess from 1Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, p. 31, 32; Figure 20 (2b) (3b), p. 33. 2Stella Kramrisch, Ih§_Art 9f_India (3rd ed., London: The Phaidon Press, 1965), Plate 112, p. 13TT— 13 Figure 3 . llth century A.D. . South India 46 in The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland tTI Granite. H Parva 14 others, and in that it appears for the first time in Chola sculpture.1 The simplicity of the kucha-bandha worn by the subject sculpture, how- ever, indicates that she is of the Vijayanagar Period.2 This particular kucha-bandha consists of a jeweled strip of cloth hung from slender shoulder straps which ocvers the breasts and serves to keep them in position as the name indicates. In the case of South Indian Vaisnava Trinity sculpture in which Visnu is represented with two consorts, the one on his right side, the principal one (SrT'LaksmT) is always shown with the kucha-bandha 3 (this does not occur in the sculpture of North India). "The consorts of Vishnu are SrT and BhUdevT'every- "4 where except in sculptures of north-eastern India.... Furthermore, in regard to the use of the kucha-bandha principally by SrT'Laksmfi] and lest she be confused with ParvatT due to certain similarities, it is significant that C. Sivaramamurti states, "ParvatT never wears the kucha-bandha as she is the only consort of Siva, except when she mani- fests herself as KE1T'or MahishamardinT Durga, in which forms the kucha-bandha is a nagakuchabandha, namely a snake artistically coiled into a knot over the center of the breast."5 There are numerous examples of South Indian SrT'Laksmfi'figures wearing the kucha-bandha. However, those figures whose kucha-bandha 1Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, p. 37. 2Indian Sculpture from the Collection of Mr. and Mrs. Earl Morse (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1963), Plate 3DI 3 Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, pp. 37, 38. 4C. Sivaramamurti, "Geographical and Chronological Factors in Indian Iconography," Ancient India, No. 6 (January 1950), p. 34. 5 Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, p. 38. 15 must closely resemble that of the subject sculpture are: LaksmT (Figure 5), whose kucha-bandha rather than being jeweled is decora- ted with a brocade pattern; SrT'DevT (Figure 10), whose kucha-bandha appears to be of a rather plain design; and LaksmT (Figure 12), whose kucha-bandha although designed with a central flower and leaf motif is otherwise as simple in concept as that of the Kresge S}? figure. The katisUtra, or waist band, is usually made up of a number of strips of material with a buckle in the center on either side of which hang ribbons as illustrated in Figure 3. The katisfitra of the Kresge sculpture, however, consists of two strips of material and there is no evidence of a clasp or of ribbons. The decoration formed by the piii, or short folds of the hem which hang from the waist band down to the thighs on both sides of the Kresge SrT is often found on the sculpture of the late Chola Period and later. However, in most cases the waist bands are more ornate than that of the subject sculpture and/or only one hem tip is shown (Figures 3 and 8). Below the waist band of the subject sculpture there is a flat band which hangs down to form a median square pattern. This strip also hangs in loops on either side of the waist and then falls down in stylized folds on either side of the figure. This way of draping the median and side loops is characteristic of the Chola Period (Figures 3 and 6), while the style of the long side strips with their circular- patterned incised decoration is more indicative of the Vijayanagar or Nayak Period (Figures 7 and 12).1 1Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, p. 35, Figure 24 (a), p. 36. 16 The LaksmT image in Figure 5 resembles the Kresge SrT in the style of certain parts of her waist to ankle garments. The waist band of the LaksmT in Figure 5 is patterned as is the loop which hangs down from it, and in this way these articles of dress are more ornate than those of the subject sculpture. Also the median 100p in Figure 5 does not form quite such a square pattern as that of the Kresge §}21 However, the design of the side loops and the conception of the patterned cloth which hangs to the side of the legs is very similar especially in the way the folds swing outward at the base away from the legs. Moreover, the stylization of the folds through the use of in- cised lines (four lines as opposed to two on the ghgtj of the subject sculpture), and the use of incised lines to give the effect of a pattern on the side draping material, offer a similarity to the subject sculp- ture. There are many examples from later periods in which incised lines indicate the pattern of drapery, although in the later sculptures there is often no side cloth at all and there is much variation in the style of the median loop. The folds of the ghgtj_worn by the LaksmT'sculpture in Figure 12 are rendered by two incised lines although no pattern is indicated. The side cloth hangs in three curled strips and the median loop has been omitted. The folds of the dpgti_worn by the SjvakEmi sculpture in Figure 9 are delineated by three rows of incised dots. A very ornate material pattern is also indicated between the folds through the use of dots. Although there is no drapery to the side of the legs, a 100p of cloth forms a square shape between the thighs. 17 The ghptjftype garment of the subject sculpture drapes from her waist down to her ankles. The 93231: which is the orthodox mode of dress in India even today, consists of a piece of material folded over at the waist and secured in front and back by the katisfitra. Double incised lines indicate in schematic fashion the rhythm of folds in the ghgtj_of the Kresge SrT. The strips of cloth hanging to either side of her body likewise fall in folds which are indicated by double in- cised lines and the fabric is given texture by a pattern of incised circles. The use of incised lines to indicate the garment folds be- came a common device of the late Chola Period1 and was used thereafter (Figure 5). In the later periods, however, the side cloth often was very small or was omitted altogether and the median loop took on a variety of shapes and styles (Figures 8 and 9).2 The ghgti of the ParvatT sculpture (Figure 8) is arranged in folds which are indicated by the use of a single incised line. The median loop forms a semi- circle and there is the briefest suggestion of drapery between the legs. In summary the iconography of the subject sculpture indicates that she is indeed a SrT'LaksmT'figure from the South of India and was most likely placed in a niche beside her consort, Visnu. Furthermore, the style of her iconography would suggests that she was created during the Vijayanagar Period or possibly later. 1Thapar, Icons jp_Bronze. An_1ntroduction tg_1ndian Metal Images, Plate LXIII. Sivaramamurti, South Asian Bronzes, p. 36-37. 2Kar, Indian Metal Sculpture, Plate 21. A§t_gf_lndia and South- east Asia, Plate 66, p. 49. CHAPTER II THE MEANING OF THE GODDESS SRI’LAKSnT HISTORICALLY WITHIN THE HINDU RELIGION Concept of the Goddess LaksmT- Hinduism reached its final form as the result of the impact upon it of the Dravidian South. "Here, on the basis of indigenous cults fertilized by Aryan influences, theistic schools had arisen, character- ized by intense ecstatic piety."1 This devotional Hinduism, which was spread by many wandering preachers and hymn-singers in the Medieval Period, had a great effect on Hinduism. From before the Christian era educated Hindus looked Upon either Visnu or Siva as the highest god and considered other gods to be secondary expressions of God. Thus the two sects of Vaisnavites and Saivites were formed. For the most part, the two sects recognized that each of their gods was a different aspect of the other, and so each tolerated the other. To the Vaisnavite, Visnu is the high god, the unconquerable pre- server of the universe, "...the source of the universe and of all things."3 1A. L. Basham, The Wonder That Was India (New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1954), p. 298. 18 19 According to one myth Visnu rises from a lotus bloom;2 in another he sleeps in the cosmic waters on the snake of a thousand heads. While he is sleeping a lotus arises from his navel, and in the lotus lies the creative force of the world. After the world is created Visnu awakens to rule in the highest heaven. Visnu's consort or female counterpart is LaksmTI Although all Hindu gods have complementary goddesses, "LaksmT is an important goddess in her own right."3 LaksmT, meaning fortune, is the goddess of luck, prosperity, abundance, and good fortune as well as the Sakti or energy of Visnu. She is also called SrT, meaning beauty, and KamalE or Pade, meaning lotus-lady.4 Both SrT and LaksmT are conceptualized as fortune in the Vedas. Beauty and fortune in the TaittirTya samhitE'are the wives of Aditya, the solar-principle. Beauty is described in the Satapatha BrEhmana as being born from PrajEpati, the lord of progeny.5 The first time that LaksmT'is mentioned by her two most import- ant names, SE? and Laksmfi, is in the Khilas or "Supplements" which is an apocryphal hymn appended to the Rig Veda.6. Here are found descrip- tions of all the meanings which were to characterize her in Medieval 1Basham, The Wonder That Was India, p. 300. 2Donald A. MacKenzie, Indian Myth and Legend (London: The Gresham Publishing Co., Ltd., n.d.), p. 122. 3Basham, The Wonder That Was India, p. 300. 4Alain Daniélou, Hindu Polytheism (New York: Bollingen Founda- tion, 1964), p. 259. 51bid., p. 261. 6Heinrich Zimmer, Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization, ed. by Joseph Campbell (New York: Harper and—Brothers,19627. p. 91. 20 times. In this hymn she is addressed in the following manner: '"Thou art the mother of created beings"....'1 Moreover, she is called EEEEES earth, and as such is linked with the Mother Earth goddess, a very old concept which spread over a wide area of Asia. It is said she "...presides over the fertility and moisture of the soil and over the jewels and precious metals in the womb of the earth...."2 As such '...she is called, “The One Possessing Dung" (karTsinT)..'..'3 and her two sons, Mud and Moisture represent the two ingredients of rich earth.4 As goddess of good fortune and beauty it is said in the Khilas that she is honey-like (midhavT), and capable of giving '"...gold, cows, horses, and slaves.“5 'She wears "garlands of silver and gold."' She can grant good health, wealth, children and fame. 'She is "made of gold" (hiranyamayT),..., imperishable, beautiful, and valuable as gold.’7 She is also called Jewel (HirE).8 Laksmfi'is probably most frequently associated with the lotus symbol. In the Khilas she is called: lotus-born (padmasambhava), standing on a lotus (padmesthitE), lotus-colored (padmavarna), lotus- 1Zimmer, Myths and Symbols jp_Indian Art and Civilization, p. 91. ZZimmer, Ihg_Art_9j Indian Asia, I, p. 158. 3Zimmer, Myths and Symbols jp_Indian Art and Civilization, p. 91. 4Ibid. 01 D. Ibi I 1 7Ibid., pp. 91-92. 01 D. 8Danié1ou, Hindu Polytheism, p. 262. 21 thighed (padma-Effi), lotus-eyed (padeksT), abounding in lotuses (padminT puskarninT), decked with lotus garlands (padmamElinT).1 Laksmfi'is said to have arisen from the ocean of milk, hold— ing a lotus in her hand, when it was churned by the gods and anti- gods, for ambrosia. This story comes from the Ramayana and several of the Pur'a'nas.2 It is told in the Visnu Purana as follows: ...Then, seated on a lotus, Beauty's bright goddeas, peerless Sri, rose Out of the waves;.... LaksmT mythology associates her with the lotus symbol both independently and through her existance as the consort or Sakti of Visnu. LaksmT is referred to in the Khilas as '...harivallabhE and visnupatnT, "The Beloved Spouse of Vishnu.“4 As Visnu is the cosmic sea, the substance from which all things arise, and all things return again, it is fitting that LaksmT, as the lotus goddess, be his con- sort.5 "Rising from the depths of water and GXpanding its petals on the surface, the lotus ... is the most beautiful evidence offered to the eye of the self- engendering fertility of the bottom."6 As previously pointed out, Indian mythology tells us that at the beginning of time Visnu sleeps in the universal waters supported by the 1Zimmer, Myths and Symbols jp_Indian Art and Civilization, p. 91. 2Ni1kins, Hindu Mythology, p. 130. 3Zimmer, Myths and Symbols jp_Indian Art and Civilization, p. 92. 4Ibid., p. 133. 5Zimmer, Ihg_Agt_pf_Indian Asia, I, p. 165. 6Ibid. 22 snake, Ananta, who symbolizes this water. When a new world cycle begins a golden lotus bud bursts forth from the navel of Visnu. This lotus represents the creative forces within his body. "This radiant lotus of the world is the goddess Pade} the Sakti or divine energy of slumbering Visnu. She is the awakening of his substance, in dream, as the miracle of life."1 In this aspect she is also sometimes called multiplicity, while Visnu is said to have the power-of-cohesion. She is thus the active force of their dual existance; he is the inactive force. The idea of the consort being a female counterpart or one of the dual aspects of the divine is a very important one in Hinduism. In the Visnu creation myth LaksmT as the female principle is regarded as "...the most potent force in creation, being representative of the Energy, Power or Virtue which manifests itself throughout the universe in qualities both benign and malignant....“2 Further descriptions of her as the sakti of Visnu found in the Visnu PurEna are as follows: Visnu is all pervading, she is omnipresent; Visnu is meaning, she is speech;she is understanding, she is intellect; Visnu is righteousness, she is devotion; she is earth, Visnu is the support of the earth.3 Iconographical Interpretation How then does the Indian image maker personify the goddess LaksmT so as to convey her many meanings to the devotee? Because of her 1Zimmer, 33551391: Indian Asia, I, p. 165. 2E. B. Havell, The Art Heritage pf_India (Bombay: D.B. Tarapore- vala Sons and Co. Private Ltd., 1964), p. 159. 3Mackenzie, Indian Myths and Legend, p. 149. 23 association with the lotus she is almost without exception portrayed with a lotus. She is usually represented as a woman in her prime, seated on or standing upon a lotus, and holding a lotus in her hand. She is most often shown with two arms seated or standing beside Visnu holding a lotus in her hand. Her other most characteristic pose is shown with her holding a water jar (symbolizing abundance), from which grow five lotus blossoms, two of which support two attending elephants. These elephants with their raised trunks sprinkle the contents of the water jar over the goddess of fertility, GajE'LaksmT'(LaksmT of the Elephants). A review of the symbolic meaning of the lotus then is necessary for an understanding of why the image maker almost invariably depicted her in association with this flower. We have seen how the myths con- cerning her and Visnu have involved much reference to the lotus and how LaksmT is sometimes called Lotus or her name at least includes the word lotus in it. The lotus is equated with the universe and the cosmic waters.1 (The Hindu conceive of the waters as being female). It is also life rising from the waters and thus represents the unfolding of all crea- tion or the womb of the universe. It therefore has the faculty of bestowing life, fertility, and abundance of all kinds -- specifically wealth. "From this root the sap is sent forth into all directions, it rises through the central stem, Spreads through the side-shoots, flows out ‘Zimmer, Myths and Symbols in. Indian Art and Civilization, p. 90. 24 through the nodes, penetrates into the plant's branches, leaves, flowers and fruits, and wher- ever it appears it engenders life, the life that animates animals and man, demons and gods, that makes the fields fertile and the cattle thrive, pours riches and wealth over the earth.... The lotus, moreover, is associated with the idea of purity and there- fore with the color white and with pure gold. Although the lotus rises from the mud, it is clean, white and pure. The forms and shapes that the images of the Hindu gods and god- desses take find their character in the parts of the lotus plant. The meaning of this is found in the notion that the human body is the microcosmic counterpart of the cosmic lotus plant.2 Thus it is that LaksmT"s body and limbs are portrayed as being round and cylindrical like the lotus stalk, her fingers are like the lotus rhizone shoots, and her eyes are the shape of the lotus petal. To understand the type of beauty most commonly aimed for by the Indian artist in creating a LaksmT figure, one must take into account the dual aspect of the divine. It is thus that the Indian artist sought to design a divine type which would combine and trans— cend the physical beauty of both male and female principles. Thus we see in all images the use of broad shoulders and impressive body combined with rounded parts and smooth skin. When the female ideal is depicted sexual characteristics are added to this basic form. These characteristics, moreover, are usually most prominent on a fertility image such as that of LaksmT.3 1F[red] D. K. Bosch, The Golden Germ (The Hague: Mouton and Co., 1960). p. 64. 2Ibid., p. 223. 3Haven, The Art Heritage 9:_India, pp. 160—61. 25 We have seen how LaksmT is associated with the purity of gold and with gold as symbolizing wealth and abundance. It is for these reasons that the Indian artist image maker presents her as bedecked with gold and jewels. As goddess of fertility she sometimes holds in her one hand a fruit, such as the fore-mentioned bjlyg_fruit, which symbolizes "...the fertility of crops and trees"1 and conno- tates "....offspring as well, the fruit of the womb."2 Furthermore, to symbolize her beauty (SrT) she is occasionally shown with a parrot. Apparently parrots were sometimes given as offering gifts to the gods and goddesses and were considered to be sacred. They were also com- monly kept as pets by upper class ladies4 so that it may simply be that she is accompanied by a parrot as an ornament. However, it is interesting to quote from the great South Indian novel in verse written toward the end of the 2nd century A.D. by Prince Ilang6 Adigal.5 The following could well describe the subject LaksmT figure: "To hear your voice, soft as the ancient harp called yfil and sweeter than nectar, the green parrot keeps silent. Woman of noble gait, he perches, drank with pleasure, on the flower of your hand." 1Zimner. 135129: Indian Asia, I, p. 165. 2Ibid. 3B. V. Shetti, Asstt. Curator, Prince of Wales Museum of Western India to Margaret T. Miller (May 5, 1967). 4Basham, The Wonder That Was India, p. 196. 5Prince IlangO Adigal, Shilappadikaram, trans. and introd. by Alain Daniélou (New York: New Directions Publishing Co., 1965), p. VIII. 6Ibid., p. 8. 26 Worship of LaksmT- Medieval Hinduism of South India is characterized by popular devotional movements whose main focus was the devotion to and worship of a personal God. .EEQEEI is the Indian word for the devotion and adoration with which the gods and goddesses were worshiped. This cult of phaktj_systemized itself into various schools. The Srivaisnavas school of the South consisted of the devotees of Visnu with the goddess SrT acting as mediator.1 The various goddesses and saktis also were conceived of as being part of the Mother Goddess and as such became the focus of the devotional movements along with Visnu and Siva. The Mother Goddess was worshipped according to certain esoteric religious rituals as defined in the Tantras. The devotional religion of the Goddess was a powerful force in Medieval South India and remains so to this day.2 Bhakti is a very intense and fervent affection and devotion for a personal deity. It may come as a result of knowledge but this is not necessary. The personal god is the object of worship. However, worship is not bpakti_although this outward act may encompass bhgktj, It is a belief in a personal god, not in a system of beliefs. Pure works can lead to bhgkti, but the result of works is transient and phakti promises immortality. Just as the Indian artist does not sign his work, but rather is content that his identity be merged with his own creations, so can the realization of self come through surrender 1William Theodore De Bary, ed., Sources pf Indian Tradition (New York: Columbia University Press, 1958), pp. 329, 344, 349, 351. 2Phillip Rawson, Erotic Art pf_the_East (New York: C. P. Putnams Sons, 1968), p. 169. 27 to and faith in the Universal Self. Bhaktj_does not depend on effort but on faith in the grace of god and the belief that his power will determine the good of the Universe.1 The path of phakti_was Open to all classes. Although it ap- pealed to the masses their intense religious feelings as expressed in bhgktj_exerted an influence upon all of Indian society and art. Ori- ginally the three paths to salvation demarcated three different religious points of view and three levels of mind, occupation, and class level. For the Brahmin and intellectual the path of knowledge lay open; for the business man, the politician, the artist and the labourer lay the path of works; the path of phakti_was for all men who were filled with love for and faith in God.2 The divine image was the medium through which one could trans- fer his love and devotion to his god. The images and their worship became the most potent factor for the majority of Indians to express 933531, and it was for this reason that the rise of phaktj_in the South manifested itself in the creation of so many images. Moreover, this further explains why the image had to follow the canonical ortho- dox concept of the god and why it must possess beauty and life. For in the process of worship the devotee becomes one with the deity who has been invited to reside temporarily in the image. In one of the Vaisnava texts it is said that the divinity will draw near willingly l . . . Jitendra Nath Banerjea, The Development pj_H1ndu Icono ra h (2nd ed., rev. and enl.; Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1936), pp. 71-73. Havell, The Art Heritage gf_India, pp. 165-71. 2Havell, The_A[t_Heritage gf_India, pp. 165-69. De Bary, Sources gf_Indian Tradition, pp. , 6. 28 if the image is beautiful. For the devotee the image must sustain the presence of the god so that his inner vision can behold the god. The attitude of the artist is likewise that of an initiated devotee. Whether one produces an inner vision for oneself or for an image for others phakti is necessary.1 From the llth century A.D. to the present day, part of a particular festival, Divali, has been dedicated to LaksmT'ppgang, the worship of LaksmT as the goddess of wealth.2 This festival, which means festival of the feast of lights, takes place during three days in November.3 It is primarily dedicated to Visnu and his deeds. In the evening of the second day the worship of the goddess of wealth takes place. This worship may not have much connection with Visnu other than the fact that LaksmT happens to be his consort. The rite is primarily performed by wealthy people such as merchants and traders.4 Many lamps are lighted during this festival and we see in the DTpala- ksmT figures (in which LaksmT holds an oil lamp in her two hands) the physical representation of the Divali LaksmT.5 Because of the size and iconography of the subject SrT LangT figure it is my primary conjecture that she was placed in a temple 1G. S. Ghurye, Gods and Men (Bombay: P0pular Book Depot, 1962), pp. 166-67. 2Jean Antoine Dubois, Description of the Character, Manners, gpg_ Customs gf_the PeOple pf_India: and’pf_ThETr Institutions, Religious and Civil (3rd ed.; Madras: Higginbotham and Co., 1879), p. 283. 3Ghurye, Gods and Men, pp. 166-67. 4Sivaramamurti, South Indian Bronzes, Plate 96 (b). 5Kar, Indian Metal Sculpture, Plate 22. 29 compound primarily dedicated to Visnu and as such was both worshiped in a subsidiary relationship to him and independently as the goddess LaksmT by those devotees who chose her as their personal deity. A general description of a South Indian Visnu temple complex indicating LaksmT's placement in it follows. The temple compound and main structures are oriented to the East with entrances on the East side. The temple compound is surrounded by a rectangular wall having a gopura in the east and south and sometimes in the west and north. Within the compound are temples, shrines, courts, holy ponds, halls, and in some cases, chariots for the carrying of shrine images in processions. A small stone lotus altar stands by the main en- trance upon which are placed offerings. Behind this is a wooden mast which indicates the main sanctuary. In Visnu temples a Garuda or Hanuman is placed behind the mast. The cella faces east, is square in shape, and contains an image of Visnu in human form. Behind the main temple are two more temples dedicated to the children of the god and opposite the southern portal is a temple in which his consort LaksmTappears.1 The outer walls of these temples were covered with an amplitude of images (the temples appear more like huge sculptures) and as such provided for the religious tone of the times as found in phakti. It is probable that the subject sculpture was placed in a niche beside Visnu on the walls either of the Visnu or the LaksmT temple. 1Zimmer, The Art gf_Indian Asia, I, p. 288. Stella Kramrisch, The Hindu Temple—T2HVOTS.; Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1946), II, p. 299. 30 Because the subject sculpture is from the late Medieval Period of South India it is possible that she could also have been placed in a small chapel in a village or she could have been part of an indi- vidual household chapel. Once the Muslim rulers extended their influence to the South, many smaller Hindu images like that of the subject sculpture were made for this purpose in order to meet the religious needs of the people.1 Regarding the question as to whether or not Laksmfi'would have played a prominent enough role in the religion of the time to have been placed in a temple dedicated solely to her, there seems to exist a difference of opinion among certain authorities. According to G. S. Ghurye, LaksmT and PadevatT (another characteristic name for LaksmT) are treated as separate entities as apart from their male counterpart, Visnu.2 As such they are entitled to have temples of their own and Ghurye cites two examples to substantiate this: the temple of PadevatT'at Tiruchannoor near the Vaisnava center of Tirupati; the temples of GajE'LaksmT at Mahabalipura and at Doddagad- daralli near Hasan in Mysore built around 1113 A.D.3 0n the other hand, Basham states that although she was "...never the object of a special cult, her icons are numerous, and she was much worshiped as a subsidiary deity."4 According to Rambach images of 1Banerjea, The Development pf Hindu Iconography, pp. 244-45. 2 Ghurye, Gods and Men, p. 246. 3Ilpid. 4Basham, The Wonder That Was India, p. 316. 31 _. l Laksmi were placed over the doors and windows of sanctuaries. Daniélou states, "She had no temples but is worshiped in every home on all important occasions. The day dedicated to her wor- ship is observed all over India" (Divali is probably this day).2 1Pierre Rambach, Vitold De Golish, Ih§_Golden Agg_of Indian Art_(New York: The Studio Publications, Inc., l955), p. 393 2Daniému, Hindu Polytheism, p. 262. CHAPTER III COMPARISON OF THE STYLE OF SUBJECT S’RT LAKSMT SCULPTURE WITH THE STYLE OF SOUTH INDIAN MEDIEVAL SCULPTURE Comparison of the Style of Chola Period Figure Sculpture with That of Vijayanagar Period Figure Sculpture Stone figure sculpture of late Medieval South India with the exception of images from the late Chola Period, is often of rather poor quality. On the other hand, some of the metal sculptures of this period attain a high degree of excellence. It would seem that skill of workmanship and quality of design passed from the hands of the stone sculptors to those of the metal workers.1 This may have been due to the fact that the spread of the bhgktj_cults in the South brought about an increasing demand for smaller sculptures for use in processions and in homes. Metal, of course, would have provided the most desirable medium for this use. In turn, this may have furnished the sculptors with an inspiration which served to infuse life into these images. The lack of quality in the stone figure sculpture is sometimes blamed upon a too rigid following of the canons of iconography and iconometry, but were this true of stone sculpture it would probably 1Sherman Lee, A_Histor 9f_Far Eastern Art (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1964), p. 259. 32 33 have also been true of metal sculpture. It is perhaps more likely due to the encroachment and ultimate control over the Deccan by the Muslims. With the fall of the Vijayanagar Kingdom in 1565, the last strong cultural Hindu empire of the South was ended. Thus, the feeling of security and confidence which existed among the Hindus during the earlier dynasties was lost along with the stimu- lus of state patronage, and these feelings were reflected in a lack of vitality in the arts. Analysis and comparison of the style of figure sculpture of the Chola Period (9th century A.D. to early 14th century A.D.) and of figure sculpture of the Vijayanagar Period (14th century A.D. to 17th century A.D.) reveals certain characteristics which permit dating of Indian figure sculpture. The overall composition of the Chola sculpture is unified by the symmetry of the figure, a sense of balance, and the flowing contours of its outlines. The images are filled with DEERE -— the breath of life -- and appear to be about to move or dance. There is a fluid flexion of the body and limbs; there is unity in the rhythm of these forms. The Vijayanagar sculptures are more static in pose and composi- tion. The body is stiff and unmoving. There is no sway and little feeling of rhythm in the body and limbs. The body appears to be limp and lifeless. These general compositional differences can be most readily illustrated by a direct comparison of the late Chola Bhu DevT in Figure 4 with the Vijayanagar Laksmfi'in Figure 10. The composition Figure 4 Bhu DevTI Granite. H: 32 1/16 in. South India. 13th century A.D. National Museum, New Delhi 35 of the Bhu DevT is unified by the continuity of rhythm of the pose to which the other formal elements relate in harmonious accord. The gentle sway of the body and rounded Swelling of the forms give a quality of life, breath and even movement to the figure which seems to defy the characteristics of the material from which she is carved. Although the LaksmT figure likewise stands in the tribhanga pose there is a stiffness in her stance and a lack of harmonious relationship between parts which does not allow for visual continuity. Thus, one is very much aware that she is a lifeless image carved in immovable stone. A comparative examination of the figural elements of the Bhu DeVT sculpture (Figure 4) with the Laksmfi sculpture (Figure 10) further reveals certain characteristics which relate to the overall composi- tional qualities of Chola and Vijayanagar sculpture. The body and limbs of the Chola sculpture are supple, rounded, and organic with each part blending easily into the next. The figure is thus unified by the repetition of these rounded areas, the inter-relationships of these areas, and the balanced organization of the parts into a whole. In the Vijayanagar LaksmT sculpture the elements of the body are rounded and curved in Shape, but the organic transitional areas between forms seen in the Chola sculpture is lacking. Moreover, the LaksmT figure illustrates the change in the relative proportions of limbs, head and torso which is characteristic of the Vijayanagar Period. The shoulders have become broader and more square, the arms are far too large and heavy for the body. In addition, the arms of the Laksmfi'figure appear 36 to be added to the body without any sense of organic unity. The torso is stiff and summarily treated, lacking the swelling of breath and the soft curving flesh which one sensed in the abdominal area of the Bhu DevT. Whereas in the sculpture of the Chola Period (Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5), the breasts seemed to swell out and hang down slightly from their weight, in the Vijayanagar Period (Figures 8, 9, 10, and 12), the bosom is smaller, stiff, and defies gravity. The faces of the Chola sculptures are carved in the round (Figures 2 and 4). Each feature grows out of the overall ovoid shape of the head and is softly modelled. The eye and eyelid are shaped like petals. The eyelid is sometimes half closed, which lends a soft- ening and sensuous effect to the fact. The eyebrow blends into the forehead. The nose is graceful in Shape and flows into the gently curving cheek. The mouth turns Upward slightly in the corners. The shape of the head is like an egg, the jaw is sometimes broad but its' graceful curves blend with the oval form of the face. The expression conveys both a sense of serenity and of vitality. The features of the faces of the Vijayanagar sculptures tend to be carved on the surface in a linear, stylized fashion (Figures 8, 9, 11, and 12). Rather than growing out of the ovoid shape of the head, they appear to be applied to the head. The eyes seem to stare or bug out. The lids are part of a double line which outlines the eyes and accentuates the Open-eyed look. The eyebrows are highly arched. The nose is very characteristic of the period and is pointed and beak-like. The mouth is usually V-shaped; the Upper lip, like the eyelid, is out- lined with an incised line which gives it a harsh appearance. The head cov204 .Ezmmsz pcmnp< ucm mwcopuw> . .o.< xcsucmu sump .mwccH swzom .chocm AWmeMA m mczmwm 38 shape is triangular. The expression is often ridiculous; the figure appears to be in a constant state of Shocked surprise. The drapery or dhgti_of Chola sculpture reveals and accen- tuates the sway and flow and rounded forms of the body beneath (Fig- ures 2, 3, 4, and 5). The drapery of the later Vijayanagar Period tends to confine and imprison the body within the sculptural material (Figures 10, 11, and 12). Rather than flowing in gentle curves with modelled folds, the drapery is as static as the form beneath it and the folds are given surface treatment through an incised, stylized pattern of lines. The ornaments, like the drapery, on the Chola sculpture are treated in detail and are softly modelled and in high relief (Figures 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6). The ornamentation on the Vijayanagar sculpture tends to be more simple in design and execution (Figures 8, 10, 11, and 12). The relief is usually lower than that of earlier sculpture and, in fact, much of the decoration is conceived through the use of flat plains and incised linear surface patterns. Comparison of Style of Subject Sculpture With Examples from Vijayanagar Period' A comparison of the subject sculpture with other figure sculptures of the Vijayanagar Period demonstrates a definite stylistic similarity. The stiff stance and general lack of grace of the pose of the Kresge LaksmT as well as the proportions of the limbs, body, and head are very similar to that of other sculptures from the Vijayanagar Per- iod (Figures 10, 11, and 12). In each instance, the huge arms which hang from enormous square shoulders seem to weigh down the figures 39 mmgumz .Ezmmzz y:m2:sm>ou .. .o.< aczpcmo cpep .meucm spzom .m~:ogm .mucomcoo saw: acmm> m assmmm 40 giving them a heavy, awkward appearnace. The small taut torsos of the images in Figures 10 and 11 twist in a tense fashion to fit the tribhanga pose having none of the fluidity and ease of the Chola figures. The faces of the images stare out aerptly at us with those peculiar features of bugging eyes, beak nose, and turned up mouth distinctive of the period. The treatment of the facial features of the ParvatT (Figure 8) and SivakEmi (Figure 9), sculptures is also similar to that of the Kresge Sr? in that the eyelids, eyebrows and mouths are executed in low relief circumscribed with incised line. The body and limb proportions of these figures, however, are more harmonious and their poses less taut which is probably due to their earlier origins and the lingering Chola influence upon their conception. The style and execution of dress and ornamentation of the Kresge SF? is similar to that of other figures of the Vijayanagar Period in that these features are treated in a surface manner with little awareness of the underlying form. The drapery is depicted in a stiff, linear, stylized fashion and the ornaments are applied in flat, low relief (Figures 9, 11, and 12). Prgna, the life breath, the energy and force of vitality which attracted the goddess to reside in her image and the devotee to draw near in adoration and which was so essential to the Medieval Hindi philOSOphy of bpakti is lacking in the subject sculpture as it is in many other stone sculptures of the period (Figures 10, 11, and 12). This force in earlier sculpture was conveyed through the use of grace- ful ease of pose, flowing contours, merging and swelling volumes of 41 U 1 TO 9, l .I Figure 7 Bronze. H: 46 1/2 in. South India. 14-15th century A.D. Visnu. " Denver Art Museum, Denver 42 Figure 8 ParvatT. Bronze. H: 26 1/2 in. Madras. 14-15th century A.D. Victoria and Albert Museum, London 43 Figure 9 Sivakfimi. Bronze. H: 27 3/4 in. South India. 14-16th century A.D. The George P. Bickford Collection, Cleveland mmuwsasmu .xawmcw>w:: ucm>smz .Esmmzz pc< moon mme: Emwpr: .o.< 223ch 52-2 6.6.: 530m .32me .rng rim o_ aesmwa 45 Figure 11 Visnu. Brass. H: 13 1/2 in. South India. 16th century A.D. The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland 46 Figure 12 Laksmfil Brass. H: 25 1/2 in. Mysore. 16-17th century A.D. ' Victoria and Albert Museum, London 47 limbs, torso, hips and breasts. In the Kresge SrT one senses a tenseness of stance and a discontinuity of form which effects a lack of visual unity and vitality. The life breath which pressed out in the swelling abdomen and was GXpressed in a general sense of fluid- ity of form of earlier sculptures does not appear to be present in the Kresge SrTI In the earlier figures, moreover, the drapery and ornamentation served to reveal and accentuate the rhythm and vitality of the sculptural forms. These features of the Kresge SrT are applied in a surface manner to the rather uninteresting and static forms they cover. Although not totally lacking in grace of form the Kresge SrT' LaksmT is far removed from the ideals of beauty and vitality of the images of earlier figures and would thus appear to be of the Vijay- anagar Period or later. Summary of Suggested Dating According to Museum Authorities Communication with certain authorities in the field of Asian art reinforces the position that the subject SrT'LaksmT figure is of South Indian late Medieval origin. Correspondence with B. V. Shetti, Assistant Curator of the Prince of Wales Museum of Western India in Bombay indicated that the figure was an 18th century A.D. South Indian image of Sr? DevT (DevT meaning goddess).1 Mr. A. K. Bhattacharyya, Director of the Indian Museum of Calcutta, stated that the figure was 1B. V. Shetti, Assistant Curator, Prince of Wales Museum of Western India to Margaret T. Miller. 48 from South India of the 17th century A.D. and that she was probably SrT DevT.1 Mr. V. P. Dwivedi, Assistant Curator of Oriental Art, The Cleveland Museum of Art in Cleveland stated that her icono- graphy and style indicated that she was a SrT LaksmT figure of the 17th century A.D. from either Madras or Tangore. 1A. K. Bhattacharyya for Shri S. P. Basu, Curator, Indian Mus- eum, Calcutta, India to Margaret T. Miller (October 26, 1967). 2V. P. Dwivedi, Assistant Curator of Oriental Art, The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland, Ohio (April 20, 1967). BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Anand, Mulk Raj. The Hindu View of Art. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1933. Ancient Sculpture from India. intro. Sherman E. Lee. Cleveland: Cleveland Museum of’Art, 1964. Adigal, Prince IlangO. Shilappadikaram. trans. and intro. Alain Danielou. New York: New Directions Publishing Co., 1965. Agrawala, Vasudeva S. Indian Art. Varanasi: Prithivi Prakashan, 1965. Archaeological Remains Monuments and Museums. Part I. New Delhi: Director General of Arachaeology Tn India, 1964. Art of India and Southeast Asia. Champaign: University of Illinois, 1964. Banerjea, Jitendra Nath. The Development of Hindu Iconography. (2nd ed. [rev. & enl.) Calcuttali University of Calcutta, 1956. Bashanm, A. L. The Wonder That Was India. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1954. Ghattasali, Nalini Kanta. Iconography of Buddhist and Brahmanical Sculptures in the Dacca Museum. Dacca: Rai‘S. N. Bhadraw Bahadur, 1929. Bosch, F. D. K. The Golden Germ. The Hague: Mouton & Co., 1960. Cirlot, J. E. A Dictionary of Symbols. New York: PhilOSOphical Library, Inc., 1962. Coomaraswamy, Ananda K. The Arts and Crafts of India and Ceylon. New York: Farrar, Strass, 1964. T T Daniélou, Alain. Hindu Polytheism. New York: Bollingen Foundation, 1954. De Bary, William Theodore, ed. Sources of Indian Tradition. Compiled by William Theodore De Baryland others).New York: Columbia University Press, 1958. 49 50 Dowson, John. A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Religion, Geography,gHistory, and Literature. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. ,j 950. Dubois, Jean Antoine. Description of the Characterl_Manners, and Customs of the People of India: TAnd of Their Institutions, Religious and Civil. 3rd ed., Madras: Higginbotham and‘Co., 1879. Goetz, Hermann. Art of the World. 2nd ed., India: Bombay: 0. B. Taraporevala Sons and Co. Private Ltd., 1959. . The Art of India: Five Thousand Years of Indian Art, New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1964. T Gopinatha Rao, T. A. Element of Hindu Iconography. Vol. l--Part I & II, 2nd ed. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Indological Pub- 1ishers, 1968. . "Talamanar Iconometry" Memoirs of the Archaeo- ‘lOgjcal Survey of India. No. 3. Calcutta: SUperintEEHEnt Government Printing, 1920. Ghurye, G. S. Gods and Men. Bombay: POpular Book Depot, 1962. Havell, E. B. The Art Heritage of India. Bombay: 0. B. Taraporevala Sons and Co. Private LtdZ, 1964. Indian chlpture from the Collection of Mr. and Mrs. Earl Morse. Fogg Art Museum, Cambridgezlfiérvard University, 1963.1 Kar, Chintamoni. Indian Metal Sculpture. London: Alec Tiranti Ltd., 1952. Kramrisch, Stella. The Art of India. 3rd ed. London: The Phaidon Press, 1965. . The Hindu Temple. Vol. I, II. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1946. Lee, Sherman. A History of Far Eastern Art. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1964. Mackenzie, Donald A. Indian Myth and Legend. London: The Gresham Pub- lishing Co., Ltd., In.d.]. Master Bronzes of India. Chicago: Hillison and Etten Co., 1965. Mookerjee, Ajit. The Arts of India from Prehistoric to Modern Times. Rev. & enl. Calcutta: Osford and IBH Publishing Co.,11966. 51 Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. A History of South India from Prehistoric Times to the Fall of Vijayanagar. LondOn: Oxford UniverSity Press, 1966. . The Colas. Madras: University of Madras, 1955. Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli, and Moore, Charles A.,ed. A Source Book in Indian Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957. Rambach, Pierre. De Golish Vitold. The Golden Age of Indian Art. New York: The Studio Publications, Inc., 1955. ll Rawson, Phillip. Erotic Art of the East. New York: G. P. Putnams Sons, 1968. Rowland, Benjamin. Art in East and West. Beacon Press, 1964. . The Art and Architecture of India. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1953. Saraswati, S. K. A Survey of Indian Sculpture. Calcutta: Firma K. L. Mukhopadhyay, 1957. Sivaramamurti, C. Indian Sculpture. New Delhi: Allied Publishers, 1961. . South Indian Bronzes. New Delhi: B. C. Sanyal, 1963. Smith, Vincent Arthur. A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon. Bombay: 0. B. Tataporevala Sons and Co. Prevate Ltd. {n.dL]. Thapar, Daya Ram. Icons in Bronze. An Introduction to Indian Metal Images. New York: Asia Publishing House, 1961. The Art of Greater India 3000 B.C. - 1800 A.D. An Exhibition of Indian Art Presented Under the Patronage of the Embassy of India, Functioning for the Government of India. LOSTAngelés County: Los Angeles County MUseum,Tl950. Yutang, Lin ed. The Wisdom of China and India. New York: The Modern Library, 1942. Wilkins, W. J. Hindu Mythology. London: Thacker, Spink and Co., 1913. Zimmer, Heinrich. Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization. ed. Joseph Campbell. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1962. . The Art of Indian Asia. Vol. I, II. New York: Pantheon BoOks, 1960. 52 Periodicals Deshpande, M. N. "The Rock-Cut Caves of Pitalkhora in the Deccan," Ancient India. No. 15 (1959), pp. 66-93. Sivaramamurti, C. "Geographical and Chronological Factors in Indian Iconography," Ancient India. No. 6 (January 1950), pp. 21-63. Correspondence Bhattacharyya, A. K. for Shri S. P. Basu. Curator, Indian Museum. Calcutta, India to Margaret T. Miller, October 26, 1967. (Typewritten). Shetti, B. V., Assistant Curator, Prince of Wales Museum of Western India to Margaret T. Miller, May 5, 1967. (Typewritten). Interview V. P. Dwivedi, Assistant Curator of Oriental Art. The Cleveland Museum of Art. Cleveland, Ohio, April 20, 1967. Sculpture Vaisnava Trinity Sculpture. Chola Period. Cleveland Museum of Art (No. 63.104-.106).