RIVISTA

DEGLI

STUDI ORIENTALI
VOLUME LXXVI FASC. 1-4 (2002)

PISA ROMA

ISTITUTI EDITORIALI E POLIGRAFICI INTERNAZIONALI

2003

RIVISTA DEGLI STUDI ORIENTALI

Trimestrale Prezzo dabbonamento per lanno 2002: Interno 150,00 (privati); 200,00 (enti, con edizione Online) Estero 350,00 (Individuals); 500,00 (Institutions, with Online Edition) (comprensivo dellintera annata della rivista e dei due supplementi) I versamenti possono essere eseguiti sul conto corrente postale n. 13137567 o tramite carta di credito (Visa, Eurocard, Mastercard, American Express, Carta Si) ISTITUTI EDITORIALI
E

POLIGRAFICI INTERNAZIONALI

PISA

ROMA

Casella postale n. 1 Succursale 8 I 56123 Pisa Uffici di Pisa: Via Giosu Carducci 60 I 56010 Ghezzano La Fontina (Pisa) Tel. +39 050878066 (r.a.) Fax +39 050878732 E-mail: iepi@iepi.it Uffici di Roma: Via Ruggero Bonghi 11/b (Colle Oppio) I 00184 Roma Tel. +39 0670452494 (r.a.) +39 0670476605 E-mail: iepi.roma@iepi.it La Casa editrice garantisce la massima riservatezza dei dati forniti dagli abbonati e la possibilit di richiederne la rettifica o la cancellazione previa comunicazione alla medesima. Le informazioni custodite dalla Casa editrice verranno utilizzate al solo scopo di inviare agli abbonati nuove proposte (L. 675/96).

Sono rigorosamente vietati la riproduzione, la traduzione, ladattamento anche parziale o per estratti, per qualsiasi uso e con qualsiasi mezzo eseguiti, compresi la copia fotostatica, il microfilm, la memorizzazione elettronica, ecc., senza la preventiva autorizzazione scritta degli Istituti Editoriali e Poligrafici Internazionali , Pisa Roma http://www.iepi.it Copyright 2003 by Universit degli Studi di Roma La Sapienza
ISSN 0392-4866

INDICE DEL VOLUME SETTANTASEIESIMO 1-4

ARTICOLI......................................................................................................................................... Pagina Y. LEV, Charity and Justice in Medieval Islam ............................................................................ Rapporto delle campagne di scavo 2002 in Uzbekistan: C. SILVI ANTONINI, F. FILIPPONI, A - Il sito di Uch Kulakh....................................................... F. NOCI, B - Kurgan Vardanzeh. Ricognizione archeologica preliminare.................................. na-Varda nz ........................................................ M. COMPARETTI, C - Note sul toponimo Varda mahes vara in Central Asia Art .............................................................. C. LO MUZIO, The Uma sistha (utpatti) e la dottrina s ivaita della vibrazione B. LO TURCO, Il terzo prakarana dello Yogava (spanda) ........................................................................................................................................ T. LORENZETTI, A Rare Meditational Sculpture from Tamil Nadu............................................. M.L. DI MATTIA, Il complesso templare di Nako nellalto Kinnaur: un esempio dello stile indo-tibetano dei secoli X-XII. Parte II ............................................................................................ in Capitals ........................................................................ P. CORRADINI, On the Qidan and Jurc NOTE E DISCUSSIONI C.M. LUCARINI, D. CAMPANILE, A proposito di una nuova traduzione e commento a Filostrato, Vite dei sofisti ............................................................................................................................. L. ROSTAGNO, Note su Domenico Gerosolimitano. Parte I......................................................... M. BERNARDINI, A Response to Dr. Orsatti ................................................................................... RECENSIONI The Phoenicians in Spain (G. Garbini) ......................................................................................... A. FINCKE, The Samuel Scroll from Qumran (A. Catastini) ....................................................... Santa Nino e la Georgia (E. Ercolino) ........................................................................................... D. THOMAS, Early Muslim Polemics against Christianity (B. Scarcia Amoretti) ........................ Saints et hros du Moyen-Orient contemporain (B. Scarcia Amoretti) ...................................... D. DAVIS, Pantheas Children (A. M. Piemontese) ....................................................................... B. MARSHAK, Legends, Tales and Fables in the Art of Sogdiana (A. Santoro) ........................ L. ALSDORF, Kleine Schriften, 2. Auflage (P. Daffin) ................................................................. E. WINDISCH, Kleine Schriften (P. Daffin) ................................................................................... J. BROCKINGTON, The Sanskrit Epics (F. Squarcini) ...................................................................... A. FORTE, F. MASINI, A Life Journey to the East (M. Miranda) ................................................ L. BUTLER, Emperor and Aristocracy in Japan (V. Ferretti) ....................................................... SCHEDE BIBLIOGRAFICHE L. RAMIREZ BELLERN, Historia secreta de los Mongoles (P. Cannata) ....................................... M.S. GORDON, The Breaking of Thousand Swords (P. Cannata) ............................................... LIBRI RICEVUTI ............................................................................................................................ SUPPLEMENTI C. BORI, Ibn Taymiyya: una vita esemplare. Analisi della fonti classiche della sua biografia F. DAGOSTINO, L. VERDERAME, Umma Messenger Texts 305 307 311 265 267 275 278 279 282 284 288 290 293 296 300 215 231 263 1 17 27 39 49 87 121 137 169

[1]

49

VARA IN CENTRAL ASIAN ART MAHES THE UMA ivaite imagery, the Uma In the Central Asian S mahes varamu rti, i.e. the iva (Mahes sculptural or painted representation of S vara) along with his wife Pa rvat (Uma ), holds a place of special interest, in that it is one of the few iconographic subjects which lend themselves to an unambiguous identification. Seven representations of the couple are so far known, six of them in painting (one at Dilberjin, two at Khotan, three at Kyzyl) and one in clay sculpture (Penjikent). But for the Dilberjin mural (fig. 1), which has been attributed to the late Kushan epoch (see further), all of them belong to a rather circumscribed time span, that is the 6th-first part of the 8th century AD. They occur in diverse religious contexts. At Kyzyl (figs. 3-5) they appear in large scenes centred on the Buddha; the Khotanese Uma mahes varas (figs. 6, 7) are depicted as isolated icons on wooden panels; as such they are likely to be linked to the Bud iva and Pa dhistic milieu. At Penjikent (fig. 2) S rvat seem to be set within a local religious background; so do they at Dilberjin (fig. 1). Although each case displays iconographic elements which are at variance with the original Indian models, a number of common traits make of our Central Asian Uma mahes varas a rather homogeneous group. Dilberjin (fig. 1). The mural was found in the Temple of the Dioscuri (room 2, west wall, to the right of the entrance to the cella)1. It was recovered in the Kabul Museum, so that it is now virtually lost (the use of the present tense in the following description is therefore purely conventional). The painted layer was only partially preserved. The upper part of the figures is miss iva was ing, in particular their heads are lost, so that we do not know whether S one- or three-faced. The couple, which represents the fulcrum of the composition, is seated on the bull (vrsa). Mahes vara (on the left) sits in sukha sana-like pose, with his right foot resting on a foot-stool; he wears a dhot , which covers his legs up to the ankles, bracelets and keyu ra. His erected penis is hidden by the dhot . He has four arms; of the upper two only details are still extant,
1 KRUGLIKOVA 1974: 44-47, fig. 30; 1976: 93-96, fig. 54; 1986: 65-66, 102-103, fig. 60; FITZSIMMONS 1996: 282-288, fig. 4; LO MUZIO 1999: 59-61, fig. 17.

50

Ciro Lo Muzio

[2]

namely the bent fingers of the right hand, higher up on the left at some distance from the figure, and the lower contour of the left arm extended aside. His lower right arm is bent, the hand with the palm facing forward, whereas with his lower left arm (of which only the wrist with a bracelet is visible at the level iva embraces the goddess. of Pa rvat s breast) S

Fig. 1. Dilberjin Temple of the Dioscuri (after Kruglikova 1986).

Pa rvat (on the right) sits in three quarter view to the right, with her legs crossed at the ankles; she wears a diaphanous dress draped on the legs and bracelets; she hugs Mahes varas shoulders with her right arm; her left hand rests on a round, convex object with a radiating motif or flower inscribed, placed upright on Mahes varas left thigh. The huge bull lies in profile towards the left with its head turned to the right; it wears a circular yoke decorated with circles and a cloth laid on its back, iva and Pa on which S rvat sit. The couple is flanked by two worshippers. The one on the right, much better preserved, is a male figure standing in front view, wearing a tunic (?) with round red-bordered neck-opening, a caftan with borders and sleeves decorated by red bands, a red belt and trousers. In his raised right hand he holds a small round object, in his left, near the chest, a no longer identifiable attribute

[3]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

51

(fruit?). He has black hair, beard and moustaches; two short ribbons are visible behind his shoulders.

Fig. 2. Penjikent, Temple II, chapel 15 (after Marshak 1996).

Beneath the main group four much smaller figures are to be seen, three of ivas foot-stool, the fourth one farther on the left. All of them to the right of S them wear a belted tunic; the second and the fourth from the left have a headgear. The first (male?) figure on the left has his right hand raised with forefinger pointing toward the couple. The same gesture is performed by the last figure on the right, whereas the second one points his right forefinger at his own breast. ivas only extant attribute is a circular convex-shaped As we have seen, S object resting on his left thigh, on which Pa rvat puts her hand. It may recall a cakra, one among Visnus most distinctive emblems, which is found, however, in some early images of S iva as well2. In this case, however, the size as well as
2 cO on a Huviska coin (Gbl 1984: 44, type 7) and a Gandharan Sivaite figure in the Cf. OHI (TADDEI 1985; HRTEL 1989: fig. 2). In this case, however, the attribute MNAOR, identified as Harihara

52

Ciro Lo Muzio

[4]

the convex shape make the attribute closer to a shield, which is less easily ex iva image. A similar object decorated with a large rosette with plainable in a S pointed petals, that we may tentatively interpret as a shield, appears between the legs of one of the two Sivaite figures painted in the room 16a at Dilberjin (Kruglikova 1974: fig. 7). The size of the attribute and the absence of a handle should however discourage us to think of a mirror, one of the traditional emblems of Pa rvat (Verardi 1982: 285, fn. 15), especially if we compare it to the mirror held by the martial goddess portrayed in the room 12 (Kruglikova 1974: fig. 41a; 1977: fig. 11; Grenet 1987: pl. XXIV, fig. 2). On the contrary, the shield on which the same deity rests her left hand seems very close to the emblem we have been so far trying to identify. ivas upper arms, raised aside, we can risk On account of the position of S the hypothesis that, as in other Central Asian Uma mahes varas (cf. Kyzyl: figs. 35; Khotan: fig. 6, 7), the god might have held the sun and moon symbols. As to the two main worshippers, the caftan decorated with red bands and the short beard are to be seen in the male personage portrayed on a well-known elenko 1966; Chuvin [ed.]: 2002: painted vase from Merv (5th-6th century) (Kos fig. 223); for the caftan we have a rather close parallel in two donors in a Penjikent mural3, whereas the same beard is worn by several figures depicted in the Afrasiab paintings (7th century) (Azarpay 1981: pls. 21, 22) and by some worshippers in a Bamiyan mural4. The Dilberjin worshipper holds an unidentifiable object in his left hand and a very small circular attribute in his right. What remains of the figure standing to the left of the divine couple (only traces of the left part of the silhouette and of the dress) does not allow to ascertain its sex. On iconographic grounds, the date proposed by Kruglikova (1986: 75, 108), i.e. the 3rd century AD circa, appears too early. This issue will be dealt upon in detail further on. iva and Pa Penjikent (fig. 2). A clay sculptural group depicting S rvat has been unearthed in a chapel (room 15) situated to the south of the porch giving access to the outer court of the temple II5. The upper part of both figures (half bust and head) is lost, therefore the number of the gods arms and faces is not
recalls a solar disk rather than a wheel (central plain disk and marginal rays). A closer comparison for the Dilberjin round emblem is provided by the cakra held by a syncretistic deity depicted on a Swat relief (GNOLI 1963: fig. 4; AGRAWALA & TADDEI: 1966). 3 Cf. painting in a chapel of the temple II (end of the 5th century): AZARPAY 1981: figs. 23, 24; Oxus 1993: 67). 4 Cf. painting in the cave of the 38 m Buddha, 7th century: KLIMBURG-SALTER 1989: pl. IV, fig. 4 D.2 E, D.3 W. 5 KODA 1993: 93-95; MARSHAK 1996: 435-438, fig. 7-8. SKODA 1992; MARS AK, RASPOPOVA, S

[5]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

53

iva sits on his va ascertainable. S hana in sukha sana, he wears dhot , which conceals his u rdhvalin ga, the sacred thread (upav ta) and, oddly enough, boots. In his right hand, resting on the thigh, he holds what seems to be a fruit (ma tulun ga?); with his left arm he embraces Pa rvat s back, in the hand he holds a tri ivas left thigh; she wears a dent. The goddess sits in three quarter view on S short upper garment fastened with a belt and a skirt. Her left arm is wrapped in a shawl, of which she holds a hem in her hand; her right arm is lost. Hair tufts koda 1992: painted black are reported to be still visible on her left shoulder (S 319). The bull is portrayed as lying in profile to the left, with the head turned upwards. Potsherds found in the clay mass date the sculpture in the early 8th century. iva, An iconographic detail is to be remarked, namely the boots worn by S cO, are not to be found in Indian as well as in Central which, except for OHI Asian representations of the god. Along with Mode (1992: 329), we note the unusual position of the bulls head, and in particular the long curve of its neck i suramardin than S which reminds us rather the buffalo slain by Durga Mahisa vas va hana in any other Uma mahes vara, be it Indian or Central Asian. Kyzyl. Devil Cave (passage B, annexe C) (fig. 3). The painting was detached from the left wall6. In this case the Brahmanical couple appears in the foreground of a pariva ra scene, to the right of the Buddha. Both deities are haloed and sit in the European fashion in three quarter view towards the left, with iva wears a tiger skin (black with white circles crossed ankles, in ajalimudra . S and a white border), a long scarf covering his shoulders and winding round his arms, leggings, two bands crossing on the breast clasped by a circular plaque, necklace, bracelets. He has three faces (the lateral ones are smaller); the front face has third eye, jata with central round ornament, earrings; left face with moustaches, and a small animal (calf?) head above the forehead; right face scarcely discernible. The god has four arms (only three of them are visible); he raises his back right hand holding a black circular attribute with white dots that may lead us to think of a fruit, although it is most probably to be interpreted as a solar disk. He sits on a long-horned bull lying in profile to the left, with right front leg stretched and left one bent. Pa rvat wears a tight garment decorated by groups of three dots and, on the sleeves, by circle rows, scarf, crown and bracelets; she has an elaborated ivas va hair-do. The goddess does not appear to sit directly on S hana, but no

6 GRNWEDEL 1912: 136, fig. 297; 1920: II, 50, fig. 47; GAULIER, JERA-BEZAR, MAILLARD 1976: II, 39, 50, fig. 106.

54

Ciro Lo Muzio

[6]

other kind of seat is recognizable7. iva does not embrace Pa This is the only case in our repertory in which S rvat , the couple being portrayed in one of the most standardized worshipping attitudes to be found in the painting of Kyzyl. This mural is dated around the 600 AD (Gaulier, Jera-Bezard, Maillard, 1976: II, p. 39). Kyzyl. Ma ya Cave (3rd Foundation, cave 224; Grnwedels cave 5) (fig. 4)8. The Uma mahes vara appears within a pariva ra scene, which includes the theme

Fig. 3. Kyzyl, Devil Cave (after Grnwedel 1912).

7 We cannot be sure that the cuirassed black-skinned figure to be seen behind the couple may represent Ka rttikeya (GRNWEDEL 1912: 136). Just above the group another divine pair is to be seen (GRNWEDEL 1912: fig. 296): on the right, a male figure wearing caftan and large trousers, holding a sunflower in his right hand, on the left, a female figure milking a child (Pa ncika and Ha rit ? cf. Gaulier, JERA-BEZARD, MAILLARD 1976: II, 39, 51, fig. 112). 8 GRNWEDEL 1912: 176, fig. 410.

[7]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

55

tavika; the painting was part of the iconographic proof the Conversion of A iva and gramme of the right wall (with respect to the stu pa-pillar) of the cella. S iva sits Pa rvat are represented in the foreground, to the right of the Buddha. S on the left in the European fashion with crossed ankles, wearing a tunic which leaves his right shoulder uncovered. The god is blue-skinned, three-faced (central face with jata , three eyes; right face female [?]; left face hidden) and six armed; he embraces Pa rvat s shoulders with his left arm, holding her chin in his right hand; the other extant (left) hands hold an astral symbol and a circular attribute (shield?). The god sits on the bull, of which only the fore part is visible (head in front view, bent legs, circular yoke). Pa rvat wears a long-sleeved garment; she is haloed. No other details are discernible.

Fig. 4. Kyzyl, Ma ya Cave, 3rd Foundation (after Grnwedel 1912).

56

Ciro Lo Muzio

[8]

tavika takes a To the left of the Buddha, in the foreground, the yaksa A dark-skinned child by the hand; both of them are standing with their legs halfplunged in a pond9. For this painting a date no later than 650 AD had been proposed (Gaulier, Jera-Bezard, Maillard 1976: II, p. 39). However, 14C analysis carried out on some murals detached from the same cella, now in the Museum fr Indische Kunst in Berlin, have yielded a time-span comprised between 261-403 AD (painting with the Bodhisattva Maitreya in the lunette above the door, cf. Yaldiz et alii, s.d.: 210, no. 306) and 416-525 AD (painting with the parinirva na, from the pradaksina wall, cf. ibid.: 213, no. 309), i.e. between the mid-3rd and the mid-6th century. On iconographic grounds (see further our discussion of the Indian evidence), we are inclined to believe that our painting belongs to the latest part of this period10.

Fig. 5. Kyzyl, Gorge Cave (after Srinde 1995).

9 This is an unexplained detail which is not witnessed in the Gandharan reliefs depicting this legend as well as in literary sources, cf. SANTORO 1988: 229. 10 The application of scientific methods (14C, thermoluminescence, etc.) is bringing about a dramatic change in the traditional chronological layout of Xinjiang paintings, especially as far as its initial phase is concerned, cf. Howard 1991; Yaldiz et alii, s.d.: 191-192. I take the occasion to thank dr. F. Filipponi who was so kind as to provide me with useful information about this issue.

[9]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

57

Fig. 6. Dandan Oiliq (Khotan), painted wooden panel (after Williams 1973).

58

Ciro Lo Muzio

[10]

Kyzyl, Gorge Cave, right side wall (fig. 5)11. Here once again is the Uma mahes vara depicted in a preaching scene, in the foreground, on the right; interest iva and Pa tavika. S ingly enough also in this case we find the yaksa A rvat sit on the bull in the European fashion with crossed ankles; both of them are haloed. iva is black-skinned and wears a tiger-skin tied on the left shoulder, a scarf, S leggings, a long garland, large circular earrings, a necklace and bracelets; he is ithyphallic (with penis concealed by the dress) and three-faced: central face dark, slightly bent towards the goddess; side faces fair skinned; above them animal heads. He has six arms; here also is he portrayed in the chin-touching attitude; the upper hands probably hold sun and moon (only his right is visible), the middle right hand rests on the thigh, the middle left is no longer visible. Pa rvat holds no attribute, her head is slightly bent upwards in three quarter view. The bull lies in profile toward the left, with fore legs bent, head in three quarter view to the right. tavika stands in a pond taking a In the foreground, on the left, the yaksa A 12 child by the hand . Above the yaksa, a blue-skinned, six-armed divine figure holding sun, moon and s an kha, i.e. a deity sharing several traits of Visnu. This painting has been dated in the 7th century (Srinde 1995: 309; but see the remarks made above on the Ma ya Cave painting). iva holds the solar and lunar It is to be observed that in all three instances S symbols. In the Gorge Cave only (fig. 5) are both deities clearly seated on the iva is ithyphallic; in this cave and in the Ma bull and S ya Cave (fig. 4) the god is six-armed, he hugs Pa rvat s shoulders putting a hand under her chin; both deities look at each other. Another detail common to both representations are ivas large circular earrings. In two cases (Gorge and Ma S ya Caves) the scene tavika, who is represented includes the theme of the conversion of the yaksa A iva on the left of the Buddha. In the Devil Cave, S and Pa rvat sit side by side in ajalimudra in a pariva ra scene. iva Dandan Oiliq (Khotan) (fig. 6). Wooden painted panel; 8th century13. S sits in front view, with crossed legs; he wears a tight, long-sleeved, white garment, tiger-skin concealing his u rdhvalin ga, upav ta, necklace, keyu ra, bracelets. He has three faces: central head in three quarter view to the left, with diadem, black jata ; right face with diadem; left face terrific, with third eye, frowned eye brows, wide open mouth. Four arms: in his back right and left hands he holds
11 Berlin, Museum fr Indische Kunst, inv. MIK III 8725. GRNWEDEL 1920: taf. xxvi, fig. 4, II, 65-67; YALDIZ 1987: Taf. XI. The painting is illustrated also in Srinde 1995: 309, but it is not included in the descriptive item (no.238), which gives account of other sections of the mural. 12 On this detail, see fn. 11. 13 Lahore, Central Museum, inv. D.X.8. STEIN 1907: II, pl. LXII, obv.; WILLIAMS 1973: 142, fig. 52.

[11]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

59

sun and moon, front right arm embracing Pa rvat s shoulders, front left hand holding vajra and resting on the thigh; halo and mandorla. The goddess, de ivas picted in smaller scale, is black-haired and wears a diadem; she kneels on S right thigh, staring at the gods face and leaning toward him a bowl she holds in her right hand. iva very close A number of iconographic details make the Dandan Oiliq S to another isolated image of the god from the same site (Williams 1973: fig. 51; Whitfield 1984: pl. 70). In fact in both cases we find tiger skin, astral symbols, vajra, ithyphallism, three faces (one of which is terrific) and a diadem with a circular ornament.

Fig. 7. Khadalik (Khotan), painted wooden panel (after Williams 1973).

60

Ciro Lo Muzio

[12]

ivas right thigh, looking at him Pa rvat s pose is unusual, as she kneels on S and leaning a cup in his direction. Khadalik (Khotan) (fig. 7). Wooden painted panel, 8th century14. Only the left part of the panel is preserved and the painting on it is in bad condition. We can discern Parvatis head turned towards the right, with a head ornament in ivas lower right the form of a rosette, her right arm bent before her breast, S arm embracing the goddess and holding an unclear attribute, his upper right iva is blue-skinned. It is not clear whether Pa arm holding the sun disk. S rvat is ivas right thigh, however the iconographic scheme must sitting or kneeling on S have been very similar to the one on the Dandan Oiliq panel described above. To sum up, with the only exception of the Devil Cave mural at Kyzyl (fig. iva and Pa 3), in all Central Asian representations S rvat are portrayed as sitting on the bull embracing each other. This is a relevant clue to the understanding of their iconographic source and chronology. The epoch of the spread of the Uma mahes varamu rti can be fixed between the 6th and the 8th century, i.e. within a relatively short period, which is in agreement with the typological uniformity of almost all the representations we have listed, the main difference being the absence of the bull in the Khotanese paintings. It goes without saying that the chronology proposed for the Dilberjin mural (3rd century A.D.) sounds like a false note15. As a matter of fact, doubts have been cast about the whole chronological frame of the site. In a previous article (Lo Muzio 1999), we have tried to show that one of the pivotal arguments of Kruglikovas chronology i.e. a Graeco-Bactrian date (approximately the first quarter of the 2nd century BC)16 for the painting with the Dioscuri found in the same temple (period I) is to be rejected; on iconographic grounds an attribution of the mural to the 2nd or even the 3rd century AD appears more reasonable. As to the Uma mahes vara, Kruglikova (1986: 75) relates it with the reign of the Kushan king Vasudeva I, that is the 3rd century AD (but earlier she thought of Vima Kadphises, 1st century AD: Eadem 1974: 46)17. However she fails to substantiate her attribution of the painting to the Kushan epoch, as no persuadNew Delhi, National Museum, inv. Kha. i. 51. WILLIAMS 1973: fig. 51. Scepticism about such an early date was expressed by Fussman (1978: 428, on numismatic grounds) and Bernard (BERNARD - FRANCFORT 1979: 126 fn. 7, with regard to the painting with the Dioscuri). 16 KRUGLIKOVA 1974: 26-27; 1986: 7 ff. 17 In both cases the hypothesis is based on the supposed Sivaite faith of the two Kushan sovereigns. Such a considerable (and unexplained) shift in the opinion of the Russian scholar patently betrays the weakness of stratigraphic data.
15 14

[13]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

61

ing Indian or Gandharan parallel can be brought forward. Verardi (1982: 285 fn. 15) rightly stressed the point that the Dilberjin couple derives from a quite specific iconographic type, widespread in post-Kushan India. On the other hand a long list of inconsistencies affecting Kruglikovas accounts of the Dilberjin excavations has been more recently highlighted by Fitzsimmons (1996) on the grounds of a thorough revision of stratigraphic and structural data; on ac iva and count of the affinity with the Tapa Skandar marble group depicting S th th Pa rvat (fig. 17), he assigns the Dilberjin Uma mahes vara to the 7 -8 century (ibid.: 287). But we shall turn back on this issue further on.

Fig. 8. Surkh Kotal, fragment of frieze (F1) (after Schlumberger-Le Berre-Fussman 1983).

There are two further pieces of evidence that have been brought forward iva and Pa in witness of an early spread of the cult of S rvat in Kushan Bactria, namely a fragment of the sculptural decoration of the Surkh Kotal shrine and a stone sculpture from Airtam (Old Termez). We did not think it right to include them in our list of ascertained iconographic evidence (for the reasons that will be given below), nonetheless we cannot fail to discuss them. iva with the bull Nandi is shown on three fragAccording to Fussman, S ments of frieze (F1, F2, F10) found in the cella of the main temple (A) of Surkh

62

Ciro Lo Muzio

[14]

Fig. 9. Surkh Kotal, fragment of frieze (F2) (after Schlumberger-Le Berre-Fussman 1983).

Kotal (figs. 8-10)18. In one case (F2) the god is accompanied by Pa rvat (fig. 9). The presence of Sivaite images in a religious building of declared Kushan dynastic patronage would represent a crucial piece of evidence iva within the royal religious on the place assigned to the worship of S cO19), ideology (an issue since long debated with regard to the numismatic OHI as well as within the context of this particular temple. Nevertheless, the very small scale and the approximate treatment of the figures, as well as their general attire (naked with mantle or anklets) and bad state of preservation (all of them are headless), do not make them very different from the Erotes depicted on other fragments of frieze unearthed in the same building (Schlumberger, Le Berre, Fussman 1983: pl. 55.155-159). If we add that on each of the fragments at issue two bulls are to be seen, it is difficult to follow Fussman when he maintains that: les personnages (...) des blocs F1, F2 et F10 sont clairement identifiables pour qui a iva appuy sur le taureau dj mani des monnaies kouchanes: il sagit de S bosse Nandin (F1, F10) et accompagn de Pa rvat (F2). As a matter of fact, when Siva is accompanied by his va hana, only one bull is visible. This holds true since the earliest representations of the god up to our days, including his countless depictions in the Kushan coinage20. The
18

SCHLUMBERGER, LE BERRE, FUSSMAN 1983: 110, 112, 149, pl. 55. 152-154, 160; FUSSMAN 1989:

198. TANABE 1991-92; LO MUZIO 1995-96; CRIBB 1997; ZEYMAL 1997. The exceptional representation of two bulls lying symmetrically at the feet of Mahes vara on a well-known wooden painted panel from Dandan Oiliq, Khotan (7th century AD circa) (WILLIAMS 1973: fig. 51; WHITFIELD 1984: pl. 70) is likely to be related to the later iconographic type of the kingly or divine figure seated on zoomorphic throne, be it supported by lions, rams, horses or camels; a widespread
20 19

[15]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

63

identification proposed by Fussman should therefore be taken with caution.

Fig. 10. Surkh Kotal, fragment of frieze (F10) (after Schlumberger-Le Berre-Fussman 1983).

With no less caution should we consider another supposed clue to a Sivaite presence in the Surkh Kotal shrine, namely the trident-shaped marks engraved on some steps of the monumental stairway leading to the temple, in which Fussman does not hesitate to see Sivaite tris u las (fig. 11)21. A clue which is not easy to manage from a chronological viewpoint, as the author admits. On stratigraphic grounds the marks are chronologically unrelated to the temple A (and therefore to the Sivaite fragments discussed above), on the other hand they are hardly to be linked with the later fire-temples B and D. Therefore we should place the tridents either somewhere between the two main phases or after the temple B had ceased to exist. In both cases, to explain the frequentation of the shrine by Sivaite pilgrims, who were free to engrave tris u las on the steps

pattern in Sasanian and Central Asian art. On the contrary, the motif of two addorsed bulls (zebus) is found in a purely ornamental context in capitals from Bactrian sites of the Kushan period, namely Sham Qala (not far from Surkh Kotal) and Kara Tepe, see STAVISKIJ 1973: figs. 9, 10. 21 Trident marks appear also on some stone blocs reemployed in the pit at the bottom of the stairway (SCHLUMBERGER - LE BERRE - FUSSMAN 1985: 73-74, pl. 122).

64

Ciro Lo Muzio

[16]

Fig. 11. Surkh Kotal, stairway leading to the temple (after Schlumberger-Le Berre-Fussman 1983).

of the monumental stairway, is no easy task, as there are no proofs of a Sivaite interlude during the existence of the Bactrian temple or of a later consecration of the shrine to the cult of Maha deva. According to Fussman les nombreux plerins qui gravrent les tris u la sur les marches du grand escalier de Surkh Kotal avaient trouv au sommet de la colline de quoi penser quil sagissait dun sanctuaire s ivate: soit un bloc sculpt iva ou interprte comme analogue aux blocs de frise; soit une statue de S tant de Siva; soit une pierre considre comme un lin ga (ibid.: 152). However, to begin with the very assumption that Siva had nombreux plerins in Kushan Bactria, all these hypotheses pertain more to the realm of conjectures. We think it safer not to rule out that the Surkh Kotal tridents might have been stone-cutter tamghas22. In this case we would better compare them to the tridentshaped marks born by some stone blocs of the defensive wall of the late Sasanian Darband, in Daghestan

22 As can be inferred from the photograph (fig. 11), no bloc bears more than one trident, a regularity which seems more suitable to construction workers than to worshippers.

[17]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

65

(most probably built during the reign of Khusraw I Anus irwan, 531-579 AD), where no Sivaite implication can be surmised (fig. 12)23.

Fig. 12. Darband (Daghestan), Trident-shaped marks on stone-blocs (after Gadz iev-Kudrjavcev 2001).

The Airtam stone sculpture is composed of a bloc serving as a pedestal to a relief representing a standing couple, of which only the lower part is preserved (fig. 13). A six-lined inscription in Bactrian script engraved on the base dates the sculpture to the 4th year of Huviskas reign (2nd century AD)24. The stratigraphic context is not very clear and the bloc was not found in its original location; at any rate a relationship with the Buddhist ruins found in that sector cannot be excluded. The two personages stand side by side; the female figure, on the right, wears a long himation-like dress and heavy anklets bearing a rosette each, the right leg is crossed in front of the left; the male one keeps no traces of clothes. Bernard (1981: 327-328) deems it plausible to identify them iva and Pa as S rvat . As a matter of fact, the general impression one gets from this sculpture is that its iconographic source might have been Indian or possibly Gandharan, as the dress of the female figure seems to convey. What remains of the relief, however, does not preserve so specific traits iva and Pa as to allow us to think of S rvat rather than any other tutelary couple or even a generic mithuna, the auspicious couple that often flanks the entrance to Buddhist caityas25. In conclusion, neither Surkh Kotal nor Airtam seem to provide unquestionable proofs on the spread of the cult iva and Pa and iconography of S rvat in Kushan Bactria.
23

For the rich repertory of tamghas in the Darband fortification, see GADZ IEV-KUDRJAVCEV

2001.
24 BERNARD 1981; see also ABDULLAEV et alii (eds.) 1991: I, no. 193 (with the text of the inscription) and RTVELADZE et alii (eds.) 1991: no.23. The inscription refers to works carried out in a temple, to the building of large gates (?) for the gods and of dams. No god is mentioned, however. 25 With regard to Bernards interpretation, scepticism has been expressed by Fussman (1987: 359) and Rtveladze (in CHUVIN [ed.] 1999: 100). The latter does not discard the hypothesis that the relief

66

Ciro Lo Muzio

[18]

An overview of the development of the Uma mahes vara in Indian art will help us trace the original models of its Central Asian representations as well as place the Dilberjin painting in a credible chronological frame. Our analysis of the Indian repertory will lay particular stress on the iconographic schemes, in other words on the position and the attitude of the two deities, as they are, in our opinion, pivotal elements for singling out the source of inspiration of our Central Asian images.

Fig. 13. Airtam, stone relief (after Rtveladze et alii 1995).

No Gandharan specimen of this subject was known until the recent publimay represent a seated king (Huviska) flanked by a standing woman. However, the representation of a barefoot and trousersless Kushan sovereign does not seem very sound.

[19]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

67

Fig. 14. Kashmir or Northern Pakistan, linga-shaped dyptich (after Rowan 1985).

iva and Pa cation, by J. Sherrier (1991), of three reliefs depicting S rvat , all of iva and them belonging to the authors collection. In one case (ibid.: pl. 48.1a) S Pa rvat figure in a quartet along with Ka rttikeya and the six-headed goddess Sasth (cf. Agrawala 1995: fig. 1); in another relief (ibid.: pl. 48.2a) they are ac companied by Ka rttikeya only, represented between them in smaller scale and riding a peacock; in the third relief (ibid.: pl. 48.4a-b) we find again their son portrayed between them in much smaller scale, and two worshippers, male and female, depicted on Sivas and Pa rvat s side respectively. A point worth being

68

Ciro Lo Muzio

[20]

stressed is that all three examples show the couple as standing, and none of ivas va them includes S hana, the bull. The same applies to the Huviska coin iva)26. cO (Uma showing the couple OMMO/OHI /S iva-Pa At Mathura the S rvat couple is a relatively common subject, yet their representations show a rather strict adherence to an iconographic pattern which has very little in common with our Central Asian specimens, and which goes on being witnessed in India until the Gupta epoch (Kreisel 1986: 154-160, figs. 102-108). The Mathuran depictions of the pair show the two deities as iva has one head, two arms and u standing in frontal view, side by side. S rdhvalin ga; he hugs Pa rvat s shoulders with his left arm. The bull appears behind them, standing or lying. Moreover, in most cases we deal with rather small terracotta reliefs, whereas stone specimens of larger size, but following the iconographic type described above, appear only in the Gupta epoch (ibid.: 156 ff., figs. 105, 106a-d). In the same way (but without contact) is the couple represented on a terracotta relief from Kaushambi (second half of the 4th century A.D.) (Banerji 1913-14: 292, pl. LXXb; Banerjea 1956: 467, pl. XXXVIII, fig. 2; Kreisel 1986: fig. A24). A few later examples from the North-West of the iva and Pa Subcontinent can be mentioned. S rvat are represented as standing th side by side on a 6 century relief from Baramula, in Kashmir, where we find ivas attributes (Kumar 1975: pl. XI), as well as on a sun and moon among S lin ga-shaped dyptich (fig. 15) from Northern Pakistan (Taddei 1964-65) or Kashmir (Goetz 1965; Rowan 1985: 279-80, pls. 39A, 39B), dated to the 7th-8th (Taddei) or to the 10th century (Goetz). In this case the couple is portrayed as iva puts his arm on the goddess right shoulstanding before the bull; S der. The two deities are shown as sitting, but separated, on a few terracottas of the Kushan epoch from Bhita (U.P.) and Amreli (Gujarat) (Joshi 1989: 49). On iva and Pa a 4th century terracotta relief from Rang Mahal (fig. 14)27, S rvat are seated, but neither in this case is there any contact between them. Sivas va hana resembles more a lion than a bull. The solar and lunar symbols, here held by a small long-haired figure emerging above the gods head28, provide an interest-

26 ROSENFIELD 1967: 94, c.166; CRIBB 1997: 35, pl. G8. Against the equation OMMO=Uma , see GBL 1984: 43, who reads the goddess name as NANA[NONO]; such interpretation seems to be supported by another coin of the same monarch in which OMMO is replaced by NANA, depicted in a very similar attire and position, but holding different attributes (CRIBB 1997: 35, pl.G9). OMMO and NANA, however, are separately mentioned among the gods listed in the lines 9 and 10 of the Rabatak inscription (SIMS-WILLIAMS CRIBB 1995-96: 79, 108). Strangely enough, the Rabatak pantheon does not include cO, whereas in an interlinear addition Mahasena and Vis OHI akha are mentioned. 27 R.C. AGRAWALA 1956: fig. 1; V.S. AGRAWALA 1960: pl. XXIV.14; KREISEL 1986: pl. A16. 28 Maxwell (1983: 41-44) identifies the personage holding the astral emblems as a raudra figure symbolizing the control over Time, i.e. over birth, life, death and rebirth, the first appearence of which is

[21]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

69

Fig. 15. Terracotta relief from Rang Mahal (after Kumar 1975).
iva in a proto-vis recorded in an earlier relief (ca. 50 AD) from Musanagar (U.P.) depicting S varu pa form (ibid.: fig. 1; KREISEL 1986: Abb. A15).

70

Ciro Lo Muzio

[22]

ing link with the Central Asian Sivaite pairs29. Moreover, the presence of a male and a female figure kneeling on both sides of the couple is worth being stressed.

Fig. 16. Aihole, stone relief (after C. Sivaramamurti, India, Ceylon, Nepal, Tibet, Torino 1988, p. 62).

iva and Pa It seems that the iconographic type showing S rvat sitting and embracing each other as they are depicted in Central Asia is the one which is properly referred to as Uma mahes varamu rti. According to the Visnudhar iva and Uma mottarapura na: S should be seated on a seat, embracing each iva other. S should have the jata makuta on his head with the crescent moon stuck on it; he should have two arms, in the right one of which there should be a n lo tpala flower and the left one should be placed in embrace on the left shoulder of Uma . Uma dev should have a handsome bust and hip; she should iva and have her right hand thrown in embrace on the right shoulder of S should keep in her left hand a mirror (Rao 1968: II, pt. 1, 132-133). A similar
29 Apart from the evidence provided by the reliefs from Musanagar and Rang Mahal as well as some later sculptures from Kashmir, sun and moon cannot be listed among the most typical emblems of iva. Moreover in Central Asian art these attributes are not specific to S iva, being found in the hands of S many divine figures and hinting to a broad popularity of astral cults. On this subject, which surely needs further investigation, see BUSSAGLI 1949 and 1962; KLIMKEIT 1983.

[23]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

71

Fig. 17. Tapa Skandar, stone sculpture (after Kuwayama 1976).

description of the group, with the addition of some relevant details, is found in iva should have four arms, in the Ru pamandana (loc. cit.), according to which S

72

Ciro Lo Muzio

[24]

one of his right hands he should hold a tris u la, in the other a ma tulun ga fruit; one of the left arms should embrace Uma , whereas the other left hand should ivas bull, Ganes hold a snake; the group should include S a, Kuma ra and the latter description is emaciated figure of the rsi Bhrin gi. But for a few details, the relief from Aihole (fig. 16), to-day in the Prince of perfectly matched by a Wales Museum (Mumbai); therefore in the 6th century this iconographic scheme was an accomplished fact. It is not just as simple to fix its beginning. The Visnudharmottara, which is the result of a stratification that may have some centuries (probably up to the 9th c.) on a core dating from the lasted for th 5 century30, provides no precise chronological clue, but for an approximate terminus post quem, i.e. the 5th century. At any rate, there is no artistic evidence of the Uma mahes vara type showing the two deities seated and embracing each other earlier than the 5th century, a remarkable spread of that specific iconographic being already witnessed in the 6th century. Beside a relief from Chanda, in Maharashtra (Kramrisch 1981: fig. 49) and a relief from Uttar Pradesh (ibid.: fig. 50), that Joshi (1989: 50) considers as the earliest evidence, a Kashmiri relief of the Fatah collection (fig. 18), that we will examine in more detail later on, shows that in the 6th century the Uma mahes varamu rti was known also in the North-West of the Subcontinent.

Fig. 18. Kashmir, stone relief (after Barrett 1957).

30

On this subject, see COLLINS 1988: 38-39, and fn. 26.

[25]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

73

iva As to the variant depicting the deities as looking at each other, while S touches her wifes chin, the proposal to date its appearance in Indian iconogra ra artistic milieu (Joshi phy as late as the 8th century, specifically in the Pratiha 1989: 51), has to be rejected, the chin-touching attitude being already witnessed at the latest in the 6th century at Kyzyl (figs. 4, 5). We should expect it to have been known in India some time before, probably in the 5th century. ivas va If we take into account the position in which S hana is represented (and we find it in most Indian Uma mahes varamu rti, often along with Pa rvat s lion), further distinctions can be pointed out. The bull can be shown as stand iva (as in the Aihole relief, fig. 16) or, in much smaller ing or lying behind S scale, lying at the feet of the god, a manner which was to become almost canon iva and Pa ical in the following centuries. The vrsa rudhamu rti, i.e. S rvat sitting directly on the bulls back, is the source to which our specimens from Dilberjin, Penjikent and Kyzyl (in the Gorge and Ma ya Cave [fig. 5], whereas in the Devil iva only sits on his va Cave [fig. 3] S hana) are to be related. As to the date of its introduction, nothing more precise can be said than what we have remarked above with regard to the Uma mahes varamu rti in general31. As to its homeland, the vrsa rudhamu rti is thought to have been particularly popular in Western Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan (Joshi 1989: 54), however most relevant is for our subject the evidence provided by the region between the Hindu Kush and Kashmir. Two sculptures deserve particular attention: the marble group from Tapa Skandar (fig. 17) in Afghanistan32, and a small Kashmiri relief of the Fatah collection (fig. 18)33. In both representations the couple sits directly on a lying iva is in sukha bull, S sana and leans one of his arms on Pa rvat s right shoulder; the goddess wears a long folded robe and holds a lotus in her right hand34. Moreover, both sculptures show a similar rendering of the lower edge of the
31 The so far unique piece of evidence provided by the Pearse seal, labelled as Gandharo-Sasanian (3rd century?), on which the deity is shown seated on his va hana and holding some of the attribucO (BANERJEA 1956: 468-469, pl. XXXIV, fig. 1; KREISEL 1986: 94, fig. 83), has led tes usually held by OHI Kreisel (loc. cit.) to surmise a Gandharan origin for this iconography. However, we have to remember iva on a Gandharan relief found in Mesopotamia, INVERNIZZI 1968-69: fig. that, either alone (cf. the S 102; TADDEI 1971; a relief from Akhun Dheri: HRTEL 1989: fig. 3) or along with Pa rvat (reliefs of the iva is never depicted as seated on vrsa in Kushan coinage or in GandhaSherrier collection, cf. above), S ran sculpture. In this regard, a rather odd relief belonging to a Japanese collection is worth mentioning: on the left, Pharro and Ardokhs o are seated on a lying bull, on the right two female musicians are standing or moving towards the couple (TANABE 1986: 37, II-6). Unless the photograph has been misprinted, the traditional position of the two deities is inverted (cf., e.g., FOUCHER 1905-51: figs. 382-384). Are we to iva-Pa suspect that the motif of S rvat sitting on vrsa was already known in the North-West and that a contaminatio between the two divine couples hadtaken place, or should we rather consider with suspicion this relief that perhaps displays too many unusual features? 32 For a detailed description of this sculpture, see KUWAYAMA 1976: 381-383, figs. 14-17. 33 BARRETT 1957: 59, fig. 12; PAUL 1986: 129, fig. 60. 34 BARRETT (loc. cit.) surmises she could have held a mirror in her left hand.

74

Ciro Lo Muzio

[26]

dress hanging from the border of the basement. In the Tapa Skandar group, that we should perhaps consider a Soma skandamu rti, as it shows the child iva is ithyphallic and fourSkanda at his mothers feet clinging to her skirt, S armed, his only extant attribute is the trident (the shaft is missing) that the god holds from the prongs35. In the Fatah relief the god is three-headed (as in most of his representations from the same area), six-armed and preserves all of his emblems: sun and moon36, trident (only part of the shaft is preserved), lotus flower, rosary and club; the two deities look at each other and both of them wear large ear-rings. As to chronology, for the Fatah relief the 6th century (Paul 1986: 129) seems a much more plausible date than the 7th-8th century, proposed by Barrett (1957: 59). The Tapa Skandar group is a remarkable specimen of the marble sculpture that flourished during the reign of the Turki Shahi, i.e. the 7th8th century (Kuwayama 1976); however, given the rather close iconographic affinity with the Fatah relief, we would suggest for it a date nearer to the earlier term of the time span proposed by Kuwayama, i.e. the 7th century. What we have been discussing so far can be summarized as follows. In iva and Pa Central Asia S rvat are depicted as sitting on the bull (except for Khotan, figs. 6, 7) and embracing each other (except for Kyzyl, Devil Cave, fig. iva touches 3). In two instances at Kyzyl (figs. 4, 5) they look at each other and S Pa rvat s chin. In Indian art none of the above said attitudes is attested until the end of the Gupta epoch. Before then, when the two deities are shown as seated (Bhita, Amreli, Rang Mahal, see above), there is no contact between them. The chin-touching attitude must have been introduced not later than the 5th century; there are no representations of the couple sitting directly on the bull (vrsa rudhamu rti) before the same epoch. This iconographic type is witnessed in the North-West of the Indian subcontinent from the 6th c. onwards (Kashmir, Tapa Skandar). All this having being said, Kruglikovas proposal to date the Dilberjin painting to the 3rd century can be safely rejected. However, rather than in the 7th-8th century (Fitzsimmons 1996: 288), we deem it cautious to date the mural somewhere between the 6th and the 7th c., at any rate not earlier than the 6th. Having so far focused on the iconographic peculiarity of Central Asian Uma mahes varas and on their plausible sources in Indian art, we should find out the very reasons and the religious implications of the spread of this Indian icon in Western and Eastern Turkestan.
35 The pedestal of the sculpture bears a bra hm inscription in which the gods Brahma , Visnu and Mahes vara are mentioned, see GUPTA - SIRCAR 1973. 36 ivas proper uppermost right is more likely to be interpreted as a moon The attribute held in S emblem, rather than a kapa la, as Barrett proposed (1957: 59).

[27]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

75

iva and Pa In their motherland, S rvat boast an iconographic repertory that, for variety, richness and diffusion, is unparalleled by other Indian divine couples. It ranges from the themes more specifically linked to marriage Kalya nasundaramu rti and Vaiva hikamu rti to those which can be considered as family pictures, i.e. Uma sahitamurti, Uma mahes varamu rti and Soma skandamu rti. Just as all major Indian icons, the image of the Sivaite couple lends itself to be interpreted at different levels. From a highly speculative standpoint, it is a representation of the union between purusa and pra krti, essence and sub essence (Kramrisch 1981: 58). The two gods are the first self-revelation of the absolute, the male being the personification of the passive aspect which we know as Eternity, the female of the activating energy (s akti), the dynamism of time. Though apparently opposite they are in essence one (Zimmer 197422: 139). iva and Pa S rvat are no less suitable to embody common peoples aspiration to wealth and fecundity within family life. In the Brahmanical pantheon they are the main depositories of the values connected to marriage. Their union is the celestial and auspicious archetype of conjugal love. maheCommenting on a 10th century relief from Bengal, in which an Uma ivas side, the s vara is flanked by a whole family the father with a son on S mother with two daughters on Pa rvat s Zimmer wrote: Thus the human couple are shown to participate in the mystical union of the divine; they, too, are of one flesh (19742: 138, fig. 3). A similar picture is already found in the much earlier relief from Rang Mahal (fig. 14). As pointed out by R.C. Agrawala (1956: 63), the attire and the ornaments of the couple are similar to those shown by the two deities, as to claim a sort of assimilation between the human and the divine couple, the archetype of the ideal marriage, in which She [Pa rvat ] has her living counterpart in every woman as the God in every man (Zimmer 19742: ibid.: 140). How can we make sense out of the diffusion of their icon in Central Asia? In Xinjiang the Uma mahes vara always occurs in a Buddhistic context, in which Brahmanical deities are not certainly an anomalous presence. At Penjikent and at Dilberjin, however, the appearance of the Sivaite couple, as well as of single iva (or divine figures with Sivaite traits) might stimulate representations of S controversial interpretations. Yet we feel that, beyond the diversity of the religious milieux in which the couple is represented, a univocal explanation can be ventured. Our first step will be once again the Dilberjin temple. As a matter of fact, the destination of this building, no less than its chronology, has soon appeared a puzzling question, one of the main reason being that the subjects of the paintings unearthed in it (the Dioscuri and the Uma mahes vara) seem to testify to a drastic change in the cult. This is an issue

76

Ciro Lo Muzio

[28]

we have dealt upon at length elsewhere (Lo Muzio 1999), nonetheless we think it useful to summarize our opinion. The painting with the Dioscuri (Periods I and II) is in itself no evidence that the temple was consecrated to the Greek Twins. The mural was executed on the Western wall of the portico, on both sides of the door giving access to the sanctum; hence the two gods were rather a sort of assistants of a major deity, the image of which is no longer extant but was probably housed in the cella. An overview of the Graeco-Roman iconographic repertory of the Dioscuri led us to risk the hypothesis that the Dilberjin temple might be considered as the easternmost evidence of a theological and iconographic pattern which enjoyed large popularity both in the Western and in the Eastern part of the Roman Empire: the Dioscuri assisting a goddess. A pattern that probably found in the Balkh oasis fertile soil in similar beliefs (i.e., the cult of the Divine Twins associated to a goddess) that were deeply rooted in the Indo-Iranian religious domain. In other words, despite their disguising Classical attire, the Dilberjin Dioscuri are more likely to be interpreted as Bactrian Twins assisting a local (Iranian) goddess, and that their main role was the protection of marriage and, probably, children. iva and Pa In the execution of a mural depicting S rvat (fig. 1), in Period IV, many scholars, beside Kruglikova, have seen the unambiguous evidence that the temple had become a Sivaite shrine. Bernard (1987: 61), for instance, iva as the main god worshipped sees no reasons why we should not consider S in the temple, perhaps since the third or even the second period37. In this case iva (or a lin we should suppose that an image of the god S ga) was placed in the cella. In fact, just like the mural with the Dioscuri, the Uma mahes vara was painted on the western wall of a vestibule (room 2), not in the cella; so it was not the main object of worship. In this regard we have suggested an alternative hypothesis, namely that in a later epoch and under the action of a different cultural influence, possibly originating in North-Western India, the replacement iva and Pa of the Dioscuri with S rvat meant no drastic change, as there is an almost perfect overlapping between the Greek Twins and the Indian couple as far as their functional domain is concerned. If the presence of the Dioscuri was justified by their being au service dune desse, the same might have been true for the Uma mahes vara (Lo Muzio 1999: 61): the Dilberjin temple may not have changed its destination throughout its existence. However conjectural, our suggestion seems at least not to be contradicted by the Penjikent Uma mahes vara (fig. 2). The clay sculpture was found in the room 15, which is one of the two chapels (rooms 14 and 15) that flanked a central porch (13) giving access to the main courtyard of the temple II. The point
37

Cf. also in BERNARD - FRANCFORT 1979: 128.

[29]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

77

has been stressed that the earlier door linking the chapel with the courtyard was walled in the beginning of the 8th century, probably when the Sivaite sculpture was placed in its niche. Since then the small shrine could be entered only koda 1993: 93-95). Be that as it may, we from the street (Mars ak, Raspopova, S have to remark that the chapel was set within the precinct of the sacred area and, what makes the thing all the more interesting, in a symmetrical position with the six-columned chapel 14 in which a clay sculpture of the goddess Nana sitting on a lion has been found. Another clay sculpture depicting the same deity mounting her animal vehicle was found in the porch (13), to the left of the door leading to the courtyard. We are led to suspect that, although mutually isolated, the two chapels (14 and 15) might have been ideally interrelated and that a sort of affinity was understood among them, a relationship between the cult addressed to the main goddess of Sogdia and the worship of the Brahmanical couple, justifying their topographical proximity38. If this were a valid suggestion, it could add weight to the hypothesis we have advanced for the Dilberjin Uma mahes vara. An aspect which is worth being stressed is that the Penjikent Uma ma iva, has almost nothing in common hes vara, and in particular the image of S with the other Sivaite images yielded by the same site, namely the well-known and much debated Wes parkar39 and the blue god40 (which in their turn are clearly inspired to different iconographic types). It seems, in other words, that these divine figures (or, in some cases, their image) reached the Sogdian town each following a path of its own and that they were worshipped by different social groups, each of them in its own way linked with India. Of all the Sivaite images discovered so far at Penjikent the Uma mahes vara seems the purest, which is the reason why, according to Mars ak (1996: 435-436), it could not be fully integrated in the Sogdian pantheon, as the isolation of its chapel shows. Its iconography appears iva being the only concession as the least contaminated, the boots worn by S made to the Central Asian taste. Even the lin ga concealed by the dhot needs not be explained on account of the reluctance of Sogdian artists to represent nudity (Grenet 1994: 46), being on the contrary a common ivas penis in the Uma manner of representing S mahes varamu rti, both in India (from Rang Mahal onwards) and in Central Asia. We must add that this is the first case in Sogdia that a Hindu image has been found
38 A similar hypothesis has been advanced by Mode (1992: 330) on account of the old relationship iva) and NANA sometimes represented as a couple on the Kushan coinage (cf. above cO (S between OHI see above, fn. 18). 39 HUMBACH 1975; TANABE 1991-92; MARSHAK, in AZARPAY 1981: 30; MARSHAK 1995-96: 305. 40 In the rooms VII/14 (BANERJEE 1969: fig. 2; CHUVIN [ed.] 2002: fig. 170) and VI/8 (BELENICKIJ 1973: 23).

78

Ciro Lo Muzio

[30]

in a shrine; a shrine that was expressly dedicated to its worship and that was situated within one of the two main sanctuaries of the town. iva and Pa Who were the worshippers of S rvat at Penjikent? There are different possible interpretations, all of them, however, more or less conjectural. We feel rather sceptical with regard to the perspective suggested by Mode iva and Pa (1992: 330), namely that S rvat are nothing but a disguised form of the local deities Wes parkar and Nana. From what we have remarked above, the latter does not seem a sound hypothesis, so much so that, as we have already underlined, a shrine containing a canonic sculpture of Nana was situated at a distance of a few metres from the chapel containing the Uma mahes vara. In spite of the relationship we have supposed might have existed between the two chapels, the gods that they housed were likely perceived as quite distinct and probably venerated by different people. That is why we consider more attractive the hypothesis that the sculpture at issue bears witness to the presence of iva worshippers in the Sogdian town (S koda 1992: 327; Marshak 1995-96: S 305), although it leaves us in the uncertainty of what exactly should we mean iva worshippers. In other words, do we have to think of Indian immiwith S grants or of Indianized Sogdians? The contacts between Sogdians and Indians seem to have been intense on the tracks of the international trade routes leading to China. There is clear evidence of their commercial and cultural intercourse in the Tarim basin, in the Southern oasis of which the establishement of Indian immigrants (most probably from the North-Western region of the Subcontinent) dates at least from the 2nd-3rd century AD41. To my knowledge, however, no unquestionable evidence has so far been provided for the presence of an Indian community in the Sogdian motherland and, in our specific case, at Penjikent, although it cannot be excluded. On the contrary, we have extensive epigraphical material in the Upper Indus valley attesting to an active frequentation of this region by Sogdian merchants. Out of the 650 Sogdian graffitis yielded by the whole area investigated so far, about 550 have been found in the site of the Shatial Bridge, on the Southern bank of the Indus. Some inscriptions date from the 3rd-4th century, but the majority of them belongs to the 5th-6th century. Such a remarkable concentration has raised different hypothesis42. The view that Shatial might have been the terminal rather than a halting point of one of the main trade routes leading the Sogdian merchants towards India seems to us preferable. In other words, we cannot be sure that the Shatial inscriptions attestent de limportance de la prsence sogdienne en Inde ds le IIIe sicle (de la Vaissire 2002: 87), at any rate not much beyond that bridge on the Indus river.
41 42

VOROBEVA-DESJATOVSKAJA 1984; CANNATA 2000: 44 ff.; DE LA VAISSIRE 2002: 82-83. See SIMS-WILLIAMS 1996; FUSSMAN - KNIG 1997: 62-106; DE LA VAISSIRE 2002: 85-89.

[31]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

79

Nevertheless, it would be uncautious to think that India was out of Sogdian traders reach. Nothing prevents us from surmising that they could have travelled along the route that, passing through the western Hindu Kush, led to the North West of the Subcontinent via Bamiyan and Kapis i, that is along the th itinerary which from the mid-6 century replaced the Karakorum route (Kuwayama 1987: 717-722, and forthcoming). The case of the Buddhist monk Kang Seng hui, who was born in China, in the beginning of the 3rd century AD, from a Kang (Sogdian) family which had lived for generations in India (Tianzhu)43, shows that the establishment of Sogdians in India might have started as early as the first centuries AD, and there is some evidence, however slim, that they pushed on as far as Sri Lanka, or even farther east along the maritime trade routes (Grenet 1996). However, it is reasonable to think that their range of action must have mainly concentrated in the North-Western regions of India44. Accustomed to the coexistence of a mixed population, devoted to Buddhism for centuries and, since the 6th-7th century (if not earlier), theatre of a significant spread of the Hindu faith, with which Buddhism apparently came to terms, this area was probably the side of India most familiar to Sogdian traders. There, we may guess, they did their business and even settled, as long as they found it profitable, and got married. Mixed marriages are probably one of the keys for explaining how Sogdia became acquainted with a Hindu devotional cult which, as we have seen, gained popularity from Kashmir to the Hindu Kush in the 6th-8th centuries and which, for its symbolic realm, must have been particularly dear to women45. iva Whatever the dynamics of their spread outside India, it seems that S and Pa rvat perfectly fitted for a Buddhist frame, preserving their own significance, as the evidence from the Tarim basin shows. On account of its iconographic peculiarities, in particular the cup held by the goddess as well as her unusual position, the Khotanese couples (figs. 6, 7) seem to betray a specific re mahes vara occurs twice (in ligious bias46. At Kyzyl, on the other hand, the Uma the Ma ya Cave and in the Gorge Cave) in association with the Conversion of tavika, the children-devourer yaksa. In the literary version of this episode A
The source is the Gao seng zhuan, a Chinese collection of biographies (first half of the 6th cenVAISSIRE 2002: 77-80; see also GRENET 1996: 65-66. On the Sud (also Suda, Sudgi), supposed descendants of Sogdian (or Central Asian) traders settled in the Panjab, see BAGCHI 1955: 146, and GRENET 1996: 65, fn. 4. 45 We remind, in this regard, that the Skandapura na (Avantikhanda, 9.48) refers to small golden of fortune and wealth (JOSHI 1989: 49). Uma mahes vara images to be worn by ladies, as bearers 46 J. Williams (1973: 144-145) links these icons to Tantric (either Buddhist or Hindu) ritual practices including madhu (liquor) and maithuna (sexual union), whereas Kumar (1975: 117), who is inclined to a Vajrayanic interpretation of the Khotanese representations of Mahes vara, thinks of a proto-yab-yum iconography. tury):
DE LA 44
43

80

Ciro Lo Muzio

[32]

there is no mention of the Sivaite couple47, nor do we find it in the Gandharan reliefs depicting this episode of Buddhas life. In the Kyzyl paintings the Uma mahes vara is to be seen in the place which, in the Gandharan reliefs show tavi, ing the same subject, is sometimes reserved to the king and the queen of A that is to the right of the Buddha (Foucher 1905-51: figs. 252, 253). On the op tavika is shown as he offers the kings son to the Buddha. The posite side, A royal couple of A tavi, who thanks to the intervention of the Buddha gets back its child, is here replaced and sublimated by the divine couple embodying the protection of family and progeny. The clue provided by the Xinjiang murals leads us to suggests that the Uma mahes vara should be probably interpreted as one of the main forms taken by the worship of the tutelary couple in Buddhist Central Asia. The cult addressed to Pa cika and Ha rit as well as to Pharro and Ardokhso was deeply rooted in North-Western India, as witnessed in Gandharan art48, but we also must keep in mind that the pattern of the divine couple extended well beyond Gandhara and the Buddhist domain, that it was part of a heritage common to Central Asia since the Kushan epoch as late as the early medieval period (Bussagli 1984), as we can infer from the relevance of divine couples in the later painting of Sogdia. We can affirm that, as Bussagli suspected with regard to the iva and Pa Dilberjin painting (loc. cit.), S rvat adjusted themselves in that pattern. In the Tapa Skandar Uma mahes vara, Skanda is not accompanied by his va hana, the peacock, and holds none of his usual emblems (a cock or a spear). ivas son is here simply shown as a naked child, with bracelets and anklets, S clinging to Pa rvat s dress. In other words he appears just as anyone of the children that usually gather around the Gandharan Ha rit 49. It was in the NorthWest of the Indian Subcontinent, in a land bound to be on the fringes of ortho iva and Pa doxy, that S rvat crossed the border of Brahmanism. CIRO LO MUZIO

REFERENCES ABDULLAEV, K. et alii (eds.) (1991) Kultura i iskusstvo drevnego Uzbekistana (Katalog vystavki), 2 vols., Moskva
47 tavika is found An extensive account of the literary references concerning the Conversion of A in SANTORO 1988: 226 ff. See also FOUCHER 1905-51: 507-512. 48 FOUCHER 1905-51: I, 142-155. 49 The iconographic and religious affinity link between this sculpture and the pattern of the tutelary couple was already suggested by TADDEI (1973: 212), while KUWAYAMA (1976: 395) stressed the compositive similarities with the representations of Pa cika and Ha rit .

[33]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

81

AGRAWALA, R.C. (1956) Two Interesting Saiva Terracottas in the Bikaner Museum. Artibus Asiae, XIX, 61-65 AGRAWALA, V.S. (1960) The Religious Significance of the Gupta Terracottas from Rang Mahal. Lalit Kala , 8, 63-71 in Gandharan Reliefs - A Review. East AGRAWALA, R.C. (1995) Skanda-Sasth and West, XLV, 1-4, 329-332 AGRAWALA, R.C. - TADDEI, M. (1966) An Interesting Relief from the Swat Valley. East and West, XVI, 1-2, 82-88 AZARPAY, G. (1981) Sogdian Painting, Berkeley - Los Angeles - London BAGCHI, P. Ch. (1955) India and Central Asia, Calcutta BANERJEA, J.N. (1956) The Development of Hindu Iconography, Calcutta BANERJEE, P. (1969) A Siva Icon from Piandjikent. Artibus Asiae, XXXI, 1, 73-80 m. ASIAR 1913-14, BANERJI, R.D. (1913-14) Some Sculptures from Kosa 262-264 hi Period. Oriental Art, N.S., III, BARRETT, D. (1957) Sculptures of the Sha 54-59 BELENICKIJ, A.M. (1973) Monumentalnoe iskusstvo Pendikenta, Moskva BERNARD, P. (1981) Un nouveau document sur les cultes hindouistes dAsie Centrale. Studia Iranica, 10, 2, 325-339 BERNARD, P. (1987) Review of Kruglikova 1986. Abstracta Iranica, 1987, 60-62 BERNARD, P. - H.P. FRANCFORT (1979) Nouvelles dcouvertes dans la Bactriane afghane. Annali dellIstituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli, N.S. XXIX, 1, 119-148 BUSSAGLI, M. (1949) Due statuette di Maitreya. Nota sul simbolismo lunare nel Buddhismo. Annali Lateranensi, XIII, 355-390 BUSSAGLI, M. (1962) Note sulla divinit recante i simboli del Sole e della Luna scoperta a Pjandz ikent nel 1954. Rivista degli studi orientali, XXXVII, 1-2, 91-103 BUSSAGLI, M. (1984) Variabilit di valori nel sistema delle coppie in epoca kusa na in Asia Centrale. In: L. Lanciotti (ed.), Incontro di religioni in Asia tra il III e il X secolo d.C., Firenze, 115-146 CANNATA, P. (2000) Sulle relazioni tra India e Asia interna nelle testimonianze cinesi (Rivista degli studi orientali, LXXIII, Suppl. 1), Roma CHUVIN, P. (2002) (ed.) Le arti in Asia Centrale, Milano (1st ed. Paris 1999) iva at Elephanta, New COLLINS, Ch. D. (1988) The Iconography and Ritual of S York CRIBB, J. (1997) Shiva Images on Kushan and Kushano-Sasanian Coins. In: K.Tanabe, J.Cribb, H.Wang (eds.), Studies in Silk Road Coins and Culture.

82

Ciro Lo Muzio

[34]

Papers in Honour of Professor Ikuo Hirayama on his 65th Birthday, Cambridge: 11-66 FITZSIMMONS, T. (1996) Chronological Problems at the Temple of the Dioscuri, Dilberdz in Tepe (North Afghanistan). East and West, XLVI, 3-4, 271-298 ra, 3 vols., ParisFOUCHER, A. (1905-51) Lart grco-bouddhique du Gandha Hanoi FUSSMAN, G. (1978) Chroniques des tudes kouchanes (1975-1977). Journal Asiatiques, 419-436 FUSSMAN, G. (1987) Chroniques des tudes Kouchanes (1978-1987). Journal Asiatique, CCLXXV, 3-4, 333-400 t devakula: A New Approach to Its Understanding. FUSSMAN, G. (1989) The Ma In: D.M. Srinivasan (ed.) Mathura . The Cultural Heritage, New Delhi, 193-199 FUSSMAN, G. - D., KNIG (1997) Die Felsbildstation Shatial (Materialen zur Archologie der Nordgebiete Pakistans, 2), Mainz IEV, M.S. - A.A. KUDRJAVCEV (2001) Steinmetzzeichen des 6. Jahrhunderts GADZ n. Chr. in Darband. Archologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan, 33, 357-390 GAULIER, S., R. JERA-BEZARD, M. MAILLARD (1976) Buddhism in Afghanistan and Central Asia (Iconography of Religions, XIII, 14), 2 pts., Leiden GNOLI, Gh. (1963) The Tyche and the Dioscuri in Ancient Sculptures from the Valley of Swat. East and West, XIV, 1-2, 29-37 a nreiches, GBL, R. (1984) System und Chronologie der Mnzprgung des Kus Wien GOETZ, H. (1965) A Kashmiri Lingam of the 10th Century. Artibus Asiae, XXVII, 3, 275-279 in. In: F. Grenet (sous la direction de) GRENET, F. (1987) LAthna de Dilberdz Cultes et monuments religieux dans lAsie Centrale prislamique, Paris, 41-45 GRENET, F. (1994) The second of three encounters between Zoroastrianism and Hinduism: plastic influences in Bactria and Sogdia, 2nd-8th c. AD. In: G. Lazard, D.R. SarDesai (eds.) James Darmesteter Memorial Lectures (Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bombay, 69), Bombay, 41-57 GRENET, F. (1996) Les marchands sogdiens dans les mers du Sud lpoque prislamique. In: Inde-Asie Centrale. Routes du commerce et des ides (Cahiers dAsie Centrale, 1-2), Tachkent Aix-en-Provence, 65-84 GRNWEDEL, A. (1912) Altbuddhistische Kultsttten in Chinesisch Turkistan, Berlin GRNWEDEL, A. (1920) Alt-Kutscha, Berlin -mahes vara image inscription from SkanGUPTA, P.L. - D.C. SIRCAR (1973) Uma

[35]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

83

dar (Afghanistan). Journal of Ancient Indian History, VI, Parts 1-2 (197273), 1-4 iva Relief from Gandha HRTEL, H. (1989) A S ra. In: K. Frifelt, P. Srensen (eds.), South Asian Archaeology 1985, Copenhagen London, 392396 HOWARD, A.F. (1991) In Support of a New Chronology for the Kizil Mural Paintings. Archives of Asian Art, XLIV, 68-83 iva und der Spiritus Vivens im ostiranischen HUMBACH, H. (1975) Vayu, S Synkretismus. Acta Iranica. Monumentum H.S. Nyberg, I, Leiden, 397409 INVERNIZZI, A. (1968-69) A relief in the Style of the Gandhara School from Choche. Mesopotamia, III-IV, Torino, 145-158 JOSHI, N.P. (1989) Brahmanical Sculptures in the State Museum, Lucknow. Part II, I (Siva and Visnu), Lucknow KLIMBURG-SALTER, D. (1989) The Kingdom of Ba miya n. Buddhist Art and Culture of the Hindu Kush, Naples - Rome KLIMKEIT, H.J. (1983) The Sun and Moon as Gods in Central Asian Texts. South Asian Religious Art Studies Bulletin, 2, Reading, 11-23 KOS ELENKO G.A. (1966) Unikalnaja vaza iz Merva. Vestnik Drevnej Istorii, 1, 92-105 KRAMRISCH, S. (1981) The Manifestations of Siva, Philadelphia iva-Bildwerke der Mathura KREISEL, G. (1986) Die S -Kunst. Ein Beitrage zur frhhinduistischen Ikonographie (Monographien zur Indien Archologie, Kunst und Philologie, 5), Stuttgart KRUGLIKOVA, I.T. (1974) Dilberdz in I. Raskopki 1970-1972 gg., Moskva KRUGLIKOVA, I.T. (1976) (ed.) Drevnjaja Baktrija. Materialy sovetsko-afganskoj ekspedicii 1969-1973 gg., I, Moskva KRUGLIKOVA, I. (1977) Les fouilles de la Mission Archologique sovito-afghane sur le site grco-kushan de Dilberdjin en Bactriane (Afghanistan). Comptes Rendus de lAcadmie des Inscriptions & Belles-Lettres, 407-427 KRUGLIKOVA, I.T. (1986) Chram Dioskurov, Moskva na-Yoga Mahes amu rti, and Some Reflections on the KUMAR, K. (1975) A Dhya Iconography of the Mahes amu rti-Images. Artibus Asiae, XXXVII, 1/2, 105-120 a KUWAYAMA, Sh. (1976) The Turki S his and Relevant Brahmanical Sculptures in Afghanistan. East and West, XXVI, 3-4, 375-407 KUWAYAMA, Sh. (1987) Literary Evidence for Dating the Colossi in Ba miya n. In: G. Gnoli, L. Lanciotti (eds.), Orientalia Iosephi Tucci Memoriaes Dicata, 2, pp. 703-727 KUWAYAMA, Sh. (forthcoming) Two Itineraries Concerning the Decline of

84

Ciro Lo Muzio

[36]

Gandha ra: Chinese Evidence. The Buddhism of Gandha ra: An Interdisciplinary Approach, Toronto cO: a Sovereign God. Silk Road Art and ArchaeolLO MUZIO, C. (1995-96) OHI ogy, IV, 161-174 LO MUZIO, C. (1999) The Dioscuri at Dilberjin (Northern Afghanistan): Reviewing their Chronology and Significance. Studia Iranica, 28/1, pp. 41-71 MARSHAK. B.I. (1995-96) On the Iconography of the Ossuaries from BiyaNaiman. Silk Road Art and Archaeology, IV, 299-321 MARSHAK, B. A. (1996) New Discoveries in Pendjikent and a Problem of Comparative Study of Sasanian and Sogdian Art. In: La Persia e lAsia Centrale da Alessandro al X secolo (Atti dei Convegni Lincei 127), Roma, 425-438 KODA (1993) Novye issledovanija sogdijMARS AK, B.I. - V.I. RASPOPOVA - V.G. S skoj kultury v Pendz ikente. Archeologic eskie Vesti, II, 91-102 ditya/Rudra Oppositions in Vis MAXWELL, T.S. (1983) Sun/Moon and A varupa. South Asian Religious Art Studies Bulletin, 2, 41-55 MODE, M. (1992) Zum sogdischen Maha deva. Archologische Mitteilungen aus Iran, n.s., XXV, 329-331 Oxus (1993) Oxus. Tesori dellAsia Centrale, Roma PAUL, P.G. (1986) Early Sculpture of Kashmir, Doctoral Thesis, University of Leiden RAO, T.A. GOPINATHA (1968) Elements of Hindu Iconography, New York (1st ed. Madras 1914) ROSENFIELD, J.M. (1967) The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, Berkeley-Los Angeles ROWAN, D.P. (1985) Reconsideration of an Unusual Ivory Diptych. Artibus Asiae, XLVI, 4, 251-304 RTVELADZE, E.V. ET ALII (EDS.) (1991) Drevnosti juz nogo Uzbekistana (Antiquities of Southern Uzbekistan), Soka SANTORO, A. (1988) Note di iconografia gandharica, III. A proposito della con tavika. Annali dellIstituto Universitario Orientale, n.s., versione di A XLVIII, 219-242 SCHLUMBERGER, D., LE BERRE, M. & FUSSMAN, G. (1983) Surkh Kotal en Bactriane, I. Les temples: architecture, sculpture, inscriptions (MDAFA, XXIV), 2 vols., Paris Srinde (1996) Srinde, Terre de Bouddha, Paris iva in Gandha SHERRIER, J. (1993) S ra. In: A. Gail, G.J.R. Mevissen (eds.), South Asian Archaeology 1991, Stuttgart, 617-624 SIMS-WILLIAMS, N. (1996) The Sogdian Merchants in China and India.

[37]

The Uma mahes vara in Central Asian Art

85

In: A. Cadonna, L. Lanciotti (eds.), Cina e Iran. Da Alessandro Magno alla dinastia Tang, Firenze, pp. 45-67 SIMS-WILLIAMS, N. - J. CRIBB (1995-96) A New Bactrian Inscription of Kanishka the Great. Silk Road Art and Archaeology, 4, 75-142 iva-Heiligtum in Pendz ikent. Archologische MitSKODA, V.G. (1992) Ein S teilungen aus Iran, n.s., XXV, 319-327 STAVISKIJ, B.Ja. (1973) The Capitals of Ancient Bactria. East and West, 23, 265-277 STEIN, M.A. (1907) Ancient Khotan. Detailed Report of Archaeological Explorations in Chinese Turkestan, 2 vols. Oxford hi Period. TADDEI, M. (1964-65) A Linga-shaped Portable Sanctuary of the Sha East and West, XV, 24-25 iva Image from Ku hah, Mesopotamia. Annali delTADDEI, M. (1971) On the S lIstituto Universitario Orientale, 31, 548-52 r, Ghazni. In: N. TADDEI, M. (1973) The Mahisamardini image from Tapa Sarda Hammond (ed.), South Asian Archaeology, London, 203-213 aiva Image from Gandha ra. In: J. SchotsTADDEI, M. (1985) A New Early S mans, M. Taddei (eds.), South Asian Archaeology 1983, Naples, II, 615-628 rti or Harihara? East and West, 46, 3-4, TADDEI, M. (1996) Bhiksatanamu 453-456 TANABE, K. (ed.) (1986) Gandharan Ladies & Toilet-Trays from Japanese Collection (Tokyo, The Ancient Orient Museum, March 15th - May 6th), Tokyo cO: Another Kushan Wind God. Silk Road Art and TANABE, K. (1991-92) OHI Archaeology, 2, 51-71 DE LA VAISSIRE, . (2002) Histoire des Marchands Sogdiens (Bibliothque de lInstitut des Hautes tudes Chinoises, XXXII), Paris VERARDI, G. (1982) Osservazioni sulle sculture in argilla e su alcuni ambienti dei complessi templari I e II di Pendz ikent. Annali dellIstituto Universitario Orientale, 42, 247-304 nom Turkestane v VOROBEVA-DESJATOVSKAJA, M. I. (1984) Indijcy v Vostoc drevnosti (nekotorye sociologic eskie aspekty). In: B.A. Litvinskij (ed.), Vostoc nyj Turkestan i Srednjaja Azija. Istorija. Kultura. Svjazi, Moskva: 61-96 WHITFIELD, R. (1984) The Art of Central Asia. The Stein Collection in the British Museum, III, Tokyo WILLIAMS, J. (1973) The Iconography of Khotanese Painting. East and West, XXIII, 109-154 YALDIZ, M. (1987) Archologie und Kunstgeschichte Chinesisch-Zentralasien (Xinjiang), Leiden

86

Ciro Lo Muzio

[38]

YALDIZ, M. et alii (s.d.) Magische Gtterwelten. Werke aus dem Museum fr Indische Kunst, Berlin, Berlin ZEYMAL, E.V. (1997), Visha-Shiva in the Kushan Pantheon. In: R. Allchin et alii (eds.), Gandharan Art in Context. East-West Exchanges at the Crossroads of Asia, New Delhi, 245-266 ZIMMER, H. (1974) Myths and Symbols in Indian Art and Civilization, ed. by J. Campbell, Princeton (1st ed. 1946)