The Vishnu Image from Sarisadah in the Indian Museum, Kolkata

 PRAJÑÅDHARA ESSAYS ON ASIAN ART, HISTORY, EPIGRAPHY AND CULTURE in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya Edited by Gerd J.R. Mevissen and Arundhati Banerji 2009 Kaveri Books New Delhi - 110 002 The Vi¹½u Image from Sarisadah in the 26 Indian Museum, Kolkata CLAUDINE BAUTZE-PICRON In one of his recent articles, Gouriswar Bhattacharya has drawn the attention on the development of the ‘Våsudeva-Vi¹½u images from Bengal’ and on the presence of a tiny lotus flower in the lower right hand of the god, which he suggests to identify as an ‘auspicious mark’.1 He reminded us that this development is arti- culated on four stages,2 which he identifies first of all through the position of the arms of the god: All four are lowered down in the early Gupta and post-Gupta period; only in the late post-Gupta or early Påla period, two of the arms are raised at the level of the shoulders, an attitude which is generalized till around AD 1200. A second criterion concerns the presence of different attendants at the side of the god: The weapons club and disk or the respective åyudhapuru¹as are present till the beginning of the Påla period, being then replaced by the wives; finally, the åyudhapuru¹as of the conch and lotus are introduced by the side of the wives. As a token of respect and admiration for Gouriswar Bhattacharya’s work, and of recognition for the nu- merous exchanges of views on the art history of Bihar and Bengal in the last twenty and more years, I would like to consider here a twelfth century image of Vi¹½u (Plates 26.1-3) which was discovered in 1884 by Kadir Gazee, an inhabitant of Sarisadah, a village located near Dakshit Barasat, Jayanagar Thana, in the District of the 24 Parganas before entering the rich holding of the Indian Museum in Kolkata (inv. 2592).3 Measuring 152.4 x 79.36 cm, the sculpture is perfectly preserved, despite the broken upper pointed extremi- ty. Although it has been mentioned or published by various authors, its very particularity which is to have been inspired by an image of the Gupta or post-Gupta period does not seem to have drawn the attention. * * * Nilman Chakravartti (1908: 88-89) provides the best and longest description in his catalogue of the col- lection of the Indian Museum4 which is summarized in one sentence in the 1911 edition of the catalogue by Theodor Bloch (pp. 81-82). Chakravartti identifies the female attendant with Lak¹mï while giving no name for the male figure (p. 88). Kalidas Dutt (1928-29/1930a: 12) identifies here the god as being Våsudeva accompanied by the personified Cakra, Lambodara, and the personified Gadå or Sulocanå according to the Vi¹½udharmottara of Hemådri. In his two studies concerned with a survey of the Sundarbans (1928-29/ 1930a & 1930b), this author furnishes, moreover, a detailed account of the ‘antiquities’ collected in the region where this Vi¹½u was discovered. J.N. Banerjea (1945: 79; 1956: 403-404) refers to this image where he recognizes Gadådevï and the Cakrapuru¹a. Enamul Haque (1992: 61)5, although referring to J.N. Banerjea’s writings in his Ph.D. Thesis in 1972, published in 1992, suggests to recognize here ‘Pradyumna and Balaråma, or Vi¸våk¹ena and Vatsa- da½∙a’, i.e. two male attendants, having overlooked the fact that the over-dimensional attributes gadå and cakra are carved behind the two characters. 274 Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya In his book on Vai¹½avism in Eastern India, Pranabananda Jash (1982: 59)6 quotes the identification given by J.N. Banerjea, but because of the presence of the two small åyudhapuru¹as at the side of the com- position and of the ‘ascetic-like figure’ in the pedestal (in fact, the donor/devotee), he suggests to identify this image as being ‘the Yogasthånakam÷rti of Vi¹½u’. * * * When we compare this sculpture, even briefly, to other images found in the region,7 it becomes evident that this image is not a local production but must have been imported from North Bengal, comparing for instance to images from Gazole, Malda District (Plate 26.6).8 Such images like those reproduced on Plates 26.4-5 integrate, each of them, motifs observed in the Sarisadah sculpture. Without entering here into a detailed stylistic analysis, let us underline that the image in the National Museum of Bangladesh (Plate 26.4) pre- sents the same kaustubha jewel attached to the necklace, the same composition of the pommel of the gadå, two large flowers on both extremities of the pedestal (see here at the right corner, symmetric to the devotee) which appear also on images from Rajshahi District,9 and Garu∙a in the middle of the pedestal, facing the viewer, on his own lotus-pedestal (see also Plate 26.7).10 Similarly, we notice the following common features between the Sarisadah image and the sculpture pre- served in the Asian Art Museum, Berlin (Plate 26.5): flying figures flanking the monstrous head topping the composition, similarly shaped nimbus with the row of intricate flames, and the same large rhomboid orna- ment in the middle of the necklace, same bulbous tiara adorned by a row of lotus petals at its basis (see also Plates 26.7-8), beside the same facial features, such as pointed chin, small mouth (also Plates 26.6-8). We observe that the same flying gandharvas carrying a sword are introduced in the images of Dhaka and Berlin (and Plates 26.6-8) whereas the Sarasadah image shows them accompanied by their spouses. All sculptures share the same treatment of the lower part of the pedestal, the same aureole, the same shape of the nimbus, round but slightly pointed and flanked by triangular ornaments, eventually with a flat extremity (Plates 26.6-8), the same undulating movement of the sacred chord, the same ornamentation of the girdle, etc., the overall same scheme of composition. However, a close scrutiny in the carving of details reveals that the Sarasadah image might be slightly later: A fringe of tiny pleats runs along the edges of the shawl across the chest and to the skirt; the upper part of the moulded pedestal has angles accentuated by a circular line (seen on both parts of the pedestal whereas it is only carved in the lower part of the pedestal on the other two images; see also Plates 26.6-7). All images share the same form of the opening of the back-slab behind the god, i.e. the slab is carved through below the armpits up to the feet, which underlines the shape of the body and deepens the space behind the central deity, and which differs from the opening in the back-slab in images from the Vikrampur area or further East where it forms a horizontal rectangle behind the upper part of the body: wider, it is there also to be seen behind the arms.11 All images also favour the presence of plain and smooth surfaces on the back-slab, emphasizing this way such motifs as the kïrtimukha, the figures flying on their clouds, and even, on the Sarisadah image in particular, the ornamentation of the back-throne. This sculpture was thus carved in North Bengal, most probably in the second half of the twelfth century. * * * As mentioned above, what makes this image peculiar is that it does not follow the iconographic pattern usually adopted in the eleventh and twelfth centuries in Bengal (or Bihar) and which is illustrated here on  C. Bautze-Picron: The Vi¹½u Image from Sarisadah in the Indian Museum, Kolkata 275 Plates 26.4-8. The god lowers down his four arms, and is not flanked by his wives Lak¹mï and Sarasvatï,12 but by the åyudhapuru¹as of the club and the disk, i.e. the Gadådevï Kaumodakï and the Cakrapuru¹a Sudar¸a½acakra. Two further small åyudhapuru¹as complete the group, positioned as usual behind the main attendants; they can be identified with the personifications of the conch and, strange as it might appear, of the disk – identification allowed through comparison with other images (Plates 26.5-8).13 The attitude of these two figures may vary: The weapon can be carried on the head (Plates 26.5-6) or, as it is the case here, on a lotus held by the left hand (and Plates 26.7-8).14 The magnified club and disk are visible behind their respective personification (Plates 26.2-3); the disk forms an elongated aureole behind Sudar¸a½acakra, with the extremities of its spokes radiating all around (Plate 26.3a) whereas the club is carved behind Kaumodakï, its elaborated pommel being seen at the level of the head, the lower extremity being partly hidden by the feet. Both attendants carry the same lotus flower; like Vi¹½u, the goddess holds a fruit, and wears the jewellery and dress traditionally presented by all god- desses, whereas Sudar¸a½acakra has the hair standing on end which forms like a nimbus.15 Vi¹½u lowers his four hands; while two are laying on the club and the disk, the other two ones present a fruit, as he does on early images from the Gupta to the early Påla period (Plates 26.10, 26.12),16 and the conch, in the right and left hands respectively, a late element being here the tiny lotus also held in the right hand. Interestingly enough is the fact that the conch does not lay on his open hand, being prevented from falling through two fingers folded on it, as it is usually the case (Plates 26.4, 26.8), but is here fully seized by the hand, with two fingers sliding into it. The gesture is most unusual after the eighth century, and even at an earlier period, it remains rarely encountered in Eastern India. It is true that this particular manner evoked the god actually blowing into it;17 this interpretation is, however, most likely to be obsolete in the Bengali context of the twelfth century. In the present case, we have to do with a late copy of an unknown image which must pre-date the eighth century. One of the nicest examples is illustrated by the Narasiºha from Shahkund in Bhagalpur District, Bihar (Plate 26.9).18 Other post-Gupta images from Bihar show the same way of holding the ¸a¼kha.19 On the contrary, whatever the period, artists from Bengal always pre- ferred to present the conch on the open palm with the fingers closing on the attribute.20 As to the tiny lotus, it is likewise observed since the eleventh century on images from North Bengal (Plates 26.4, 26.8), consti- tuting a development of the ‘auspicious mark’ as named by Gouriswar Bhattacharya.21 As mentioned above, the sculpture remains alien in the surrounding where it was recovered but relates to the contemporary production of North Bengal (Malda and Rajshahi Districts), and this lets surmise that it must have been ordered in a north Bengali atelier. But its particular way of illustrating an aspect of Vi¹½u iconography departs from the contemporary trend illustrated here on Plates 26.4-8 and makes it equally un- familiar in the region. We presume that either the artist or the donor, but most probably the donor, must have seen an early image of the Gupta or post-Gupta showing the personified attributes touched by the hands of the god. When studying the stylistic or iconographic development of a particular school, we tend perhaps too quickly to neglect this fact, which is that images continued to be worshiped all through the centuries, and that the worshippers like the artists were practically in a permanent contact with the production of bygone ages. Examples are known from other regions. The Gupta atelier of Sarnath produced a copy of early Ku- ¹å½a images present in the site,22 and the Gupta atelier of Mathura drew its inspiration from the earlier Ku¹å½a local production to create an image utmost unusual (Plate 26.13):23 The central Buddha tames the wild elephant Nålågiri, he is flanked by two smaller images of himself which are evidently copies of two 276 Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya sculptures of the ‘Kapardin type’, in particularly the standing Buddha at the proper left of the central image. As to the seated image, and although it is backed by the large scalloped nimbus surrounded by the thick foliage of the Bodhi tree of earlier times, it combines it with the bh÷mispar¸amudrå which is introduced in the Gupta period. These are only a few striking examples of images being inspired by earlier sculptures, and where we can assume that they constituted particular commissions. The inspiration can also be limited to the use of some ornamental/ symbolic motifs. We notice, for instance, that the Gupta nimbus of Mathura with the lotus flower spread and the row of pearls appears on a Vi¹½u image from Bihar.24 Most stone images showing Vi¹½u’s four hands being lowered down are observed in Bihar (Plate 26.10).25 The type was, however, not altogether ignored in Bengal in the Gupta and post-Gupta periods, but since the region catched up with the development of the god’s iconography at a later period, the main phase where this type had been favoured in Bihar was already over. Small and rectangular slabs where the god is represented in an often very rough manner have been found in various regions of North and West Bengal; they show him with the four hands lowered down and with the enlarged cakra and gadå.26 Small carvings of a higher quality than those slabs and illustrating the same iconography were also collected from various places of Bengal.27 Within this context, we should draw the attention to terracotta images of this type which have surfaced around Mahasthan (Bogra District) in the recent years and which betray a high aesthetic quality. The first image to be mentioned here belongs to the Bangladesh National Museum (Plate 26.11): Both personified attributes are turned towards each other, practically profiled on either side of the god who leans his hands on them. The second terracotta, now in a private collection, is slightly later and has been re- stored; it includes the magnified weapons in place of their personification (Plate 26.12). Both testify to the existence of this iconography in North Bengal; such images were probably at the origin of the rough small carvings evoked above and which appear to have been produced as pious tokens, and such images might also have been at the origin of a sculpture like the Sarisadah image. * * * The sculpture is well balanced with Vi¹½u positioned on the vertical axis of symmetry; his body is profiled in the darkness created by the opening of the back-slab. The emptiness of the back reminds that the image is only a reflection arisen out of the void. Further, it isolates the god and enhances his importance: Alone, he stands in the centre, source of the universe which emanates out of his body. The four distinctive animals and mythical beings flanking him on either side and attached to the throne backing the deity symbolize, let us remember, the four elements which become entangled in the process of creation through the fifth element, i.e. the ether or quintessence. The sanctity of this phenomenon is here underlined by the presence of a plain zone which separates the throne and its animals from the aureole running along the edge of the image. Through this zone, the artist has chosen to introduce even more distance between the god and the human world.28 Similarly, the traditional ornamentation and garments adorn the powerful body of the god, letting large bare parts counterbalancing the intricate and adorned back-slab. The prominence of the god over his attendants is also stressed by the depth of the carving as seen on Plate 26.3a. The attendants depicted, as always, in decreasing sizes, are intrinsic part of the divine personality: They personify, as we know, the attributes which are held by the four divine hands, and are thus the direct conti- nuation of the god’s body as well as they symbolize the divine power which is exercised through them. The presence of those personifications forces the attention exclusively on the god, whereas the representation of  C. Bautze-Picron: The Vi¹½u Image from Sarisadah in the Indian Museum, Kolkata 277 the two wives Lak¹mï and Sarasvatï puts together deities of various origins within the Vai¹½ava realm. This focusing of the perception fully coincides with the composition: When drawing two lines from the top of the lotus surmounting the kirï¶a-muku¶a to the elbows of the two external åyudhapuru¹as, one gets a triangular space within which the five deities are completely included, which can never be the case in the usual repre- sentation of the god with two hands raised at the level of the shoulders. Even Garu∙a is included within this composition, fulfilling his function to carry the god (Plates 26.1, 26.4, 26.7); facing us, he appears in the di- rect prolongation of the god above him with whom he shares the frontal position, a position which is, in the range of positions presented by deities, the most impressive, the most adequate for representing the highest divine nature: The deity is offering him/herself to the look of his/her devotees. He is taller than when, as it is the case in most images of the period in North Bengal (Plates 26.5-6, 26.8),29 he appears as a small character usually introduced in the right part of the pedestal, from where he is looking toward the centre of the composition, slightly turned toward Vi¹½u; in this situation, he is symmetric to the human devotees with whom he shares the gesture of venerating the god, i.e. he is depicted as if partly emerging out of the human world which is integrated in the lower level of the image.30 The Sarisadah image is thus not a mere copy or adaptation of a Gupta model: The artist innovated in resorting to an iconographic model which was out-of-date and in integrating it with harmony into the stylistic composition of his time. He also managed in creating an elegant image, carved with attention and elaborated on a very complex and subtle structure which reflects the Indian perception of creation of the universe and relationship between the devotee and the deity. Notes 1. Bhattacharya 2007: 103; see further Bautze-Picron 1985: 467 (where I suggest to identify the round mark, wrongly labelled by me ‘rosette’, as emblem of the cakravartin), and pp. 470-472. One can distinguish three treat- ments of the motif: 1) the ‘auspicious sign’ (Bhattacharya) or ‘cakravartin’ emblem (i.e. the cakra) (myself); 2) the tiny lotus flower substituted to it (Bautze-Picron 1985: 471& note 185) still understood by Bhattacharya as being the auspicious sign; and 3) the lotus flower of a size equal to the size of the other attributes (Bhattacharya 2007: 103; Bautze-Picron 1985: 471& note 187). Considering the epigraphic and literary material available, the deity should be named Våsudeva or even Nåråya½a at a later period (Bautze-Picron 1986). For sake of easiness, I shall retain here the common denomination Vi¹½u all through this paper. 2. Bhattacharya 2007: 99-101; Bautze-Picron 1985: 441-76 also distinguished four ‘epochs’ (A. Gupta and post- Gupta epochs; B. Post-Gupta and Pâla epochs; C. Påla epoch, period 1; D. Påla-Sena epoch, periods 2-4 with a distinction between the northern and south-eastern types). 3. Chakravartti 1908: 88-89 (with a long description) and after him Bloch 1911: 81 who refers to the image only as being “an excellent work of the chisel carved out of a very hard basalt stone” (also quoted by Dutt 1928-29: 12) while quoting the origin after Chakravartti’s caption. The measurements are given, however, only in Bloch’s catalogue. Dutt reproduces also a pillar of nearly 2,54 m (10 feet) which was discovered in the vicinity; he suggests that it might have belonged to the temple where the image under study was worshipped (ibid. and fig. 15); however, it does not seem to be contemporary to the sculpture. The image is reproduced on his fig. 14. 4. Nilman Chakravartti was apparently the author of the catalogue which was published in 1911 under the name of Theodor Bloch. In his catalogue, only known to me through a proof copy, which was printed at the Pioneer Press in Allahabad in 1908, the descriptions are longer but no measurement is given. 278 Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya 5. And see p. 355 under no. 622 for a further reference (all references are evidently after Dutt 1928-29: 3). 6. However, although his description mentions the four arms of the god, in the caption to his pl. II.b, he refers to the god as being ‘dvibhuja’ (p. 281). Apparently he drew his identification from Banerjea 1956: 403. 7. For such images, see Dutt’s articles. 8. Other similar images from the region are mentioned by Bautze-Picron 1998: 97, note 87. 9. Preserved in the Varendra Research Museum inv. 81 (discovered at Bihanali) (Rahman 1998: 54-55, no. 117, with further references, pl. 71); inv. 342 (from Deopara, Godagari) (Rahman 1998: 64, no. 144; Huntington archive no. 13098). See also another image in the same museum, inv. 651 (unrecorded provenance) (Rahman 1998: 71-72, no. 169, pl. 87) where the two flowers are still organically attached to the stalk which runs on the pedestal and bears the other lotus flowers. 10. This image presents two iconographic peculiarities: First, the two female attendants carry the same attribute, i.e. the padma, and second eight tiny male images are seated in two rows of four behind the goddesses, holding a sceptre or a club (?) in the left hand while presenting the gesture of protection with the right one. Could they be the Dikpålas? For the attendants, see below note 12. 11. See for instance Haque 1992: pls. 26, 28. 12. Lak¹mï, also named Indirå, can be paired with Vasumatï (Bh÷devï); see Bühnemann 2001: 246 (also Haque 1992: 62); as ˜rï, she is paired to Pu¹¶i, another name for Sarasvatï (see Bhattacharya 2007: 104-106). Haque suggests recognizing Vasumatï in images where the goddess does not show the vï½å but the padma, such as on Plate 26.4 here. 13. Banerjea 1956: 403 recognizes here the Padmapuru¹a. 14. Compare the image in Begley 1973: 60, figs. 39 & 40. 15. Numerous other Gupta and post-Gupta images showing the personifications are published by Asher 1970 (see Bautze-Picron 1985: 442-444, 446 for the references). 16. I shall not discuss here anymore the identity of this attribute; see Bautze-Picron 1985: 452-465. Banerjea 1956: 403 identifies the attribute as being a lotus bud; however, the presence of the tiny lotus held by the same hand prevents us from agreeing to this identification. J.N. Banerjea published earlier the chapter X of his book, in- cluding his remarks on this image in a series of three papers entitled “Hindu Iconography” which were published in the Journal of the Indian Society of Oriental Art, vols. XIII, XIV and XVI (1956: vii); his remarks on the image under survey appear in the first paper (vol. XIII, 1945: 79; as quoted by Haque 1992: 61). 17. Concerning the meaning of the conch in the mediaeval period in North India, consult Taddei 1993 who also makes observations concerning the way of holding the conch. 18. Asher 1980: 30-31, pl. 32, “late fifth or early sixth century”. 19. Asher 1980: pls. 9, 26. And from Bengal: Rahman 1998: 105, no. 273 (with further references), pl. 112. Varia- tions are noticed in the way of showing the conch in Bihar during the Gupta and post-Gupta periods, see Asher 1980: pl. 65 where the standing conch is sustained by the fingers of the god. The traditional manner of presenting the conch is however the most wide-spread: Asher 1980: pls. 101, 107, 123, 150, and 155, and from a later period: 132, 133, 158, 159, 189, and 196-197. From Eastern India and also from the pre-Påla period, see Begley 1973: figs. 32-35; from the ninth to tenth century: ibid.: figs. 37-38 (both images from Bihar). 20. Asher 1980: pls. 37, 104, 234, 237, and 242-244. 21. For further examples and a discussion of this controversial element, see Bautze-Picron 1985: 470-472, pls. XIc- XIIc, XIIIb, Xb (other images are mentioned in note 185); Bautze-Picron 2002: figs. 1-4.  C. Bautze-Picron: The Vi¹½u Image from Sarisadah in the Indian Museum, Kolkata 279 22. Williams 1982: pl. 26 which should be compared to pl. 6 (see J. Williams’ remarks on p. 34). 23. See also Huntington archive no. 11363; American Institute of Indian Studies no. 1577. 24. Begley 1973: fig. 37. 25. See images quoted in note 16. 26. Akmam 2006: 188-189, 191, pls. 13.12-13, 13.15 (Mahasthangarh); Rahman 1998: 78-79, no. 189, pl. 94 (Raj- shahi Dt.); ibid.: 77, no. 185, pl. 93 (from Khari, 24 Parganas Dt.; see also: Annual Report of the Varendra Research Society for 1929-30: 4, fig. 1). A further example is reproduced on the website of Michael Bjorkqvist (“Asian Master Piece”), Copenhagen, item 449679 (www.trocadero.com/AMP/). 27. Rahman 1998: 71, no. 162 (with further references), pl. 84; ibid.: 71, no. 168 (with further references) pl. 86; ibid.: 95-96, no. 245 (with further references), pl. 104; ibid.: 104, no. 271 (with further references), pl. 111, where the åyudhapuru¹as are depicted; ibid.: 105, no. 274 (with further references), pl. 112. 28. Concerning this approach of the art object, see Bautze-Picron 2000, and more particularly in relation to the sculp- ture from Bengal, Bautze-Picron (in press). 29. Bautze-Picron 1985: 466, 469, pls. VIII-XIV.a. However, we notice in the twelfth century in this region an in- fluence from Southeast Bengal where the divine bird is traditionally facing the viewer, half kneeling below Vi¹½u (ibid.: 473, pls. XIV.b-XV.c, XVI.b). 30. Bautze-Picron 2000: 203-204. Bibliography Akmam, Afroz (2006) Mahasthan, Dhaka: Bangladesh National Museum. Annual Report of the Varendra Research Society for 1929-30, Rajshahi: July, 1930. Asher, Frederick M. (1980) The Art of Eastern India, 300-800. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Banerjea, Jitendra Nath (1956) The Development of Hindu Iconography. Calcutta: University of Calcutta. Bautze-Picron, Claudine (1985) L’image de l’Ådim÷rti Våsudeva au Bihar et au Bengale, du 5e au 12e siècle. Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale (Napoli) 45: 437-81. —— (1986) Names of Vi¹½u in the inscriptions from Bihar and Bengal: 9th to 13th centuries. Deyadharma. Studies in memory of Dr. D.C. Sircar, ed. Gouriswar Bhattacharya. Delhi, Sri Satguru Publications: 65-81. —— (1998) The Art of Eastern India in the collection of the Museum für Indische Kunst Berlin, Stone & Terracotta Sculptures. Inscriptions read by Gouriswar Bhattacharya. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag (Monographien zur Indischen Archäologie, Kunst und Philologie 12). —— (2000) De la scène narrative à l’icône. Simplification de l’image dans les bas-reliefs hindous d’Ellora. La norme et son application dans le monde indien. Journées de travail organisées par l’Université de Paris-III et le CNRS, ESA 7019, Paris, 28 & 29 janvier 1999, éds. M.-L. Barazer-Billoret & J. Fezas. Paris, Publications de l’E.F.E.O.: 203-219. —— (2002) Flying from Heaven to Earth: Vishnu on Garuda. Aziatische Kunst (Rijksmuseum Amsterdam) 32/2 (Juni): 2-12. —— (in press) The Sculpture of Bengal, a stylistic History from the 2nd c. BC till the 12th c. AD. Fine Arts and Crafts, ed. Lala Rukh Selim. Dhaka: The Asiatic Society of Bangladesh (Cultural Survey of Bangladesh). Begley, W.E. (1973) Vi¹½u’s Flaming Wheel: The Iconography of the Sudar¸ana-Cakra. New York: New York Uni- versity Press. 280 Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya Bhattacharya, Gouriswar (2007) Våsudeva-Vi¹½u Images from Bengal: Development and Innovation: Is Lotus an Essential Attribute. Kalhår (White Water-Lily). Studies in Art, Iconography, Architecture and Archaeology of India and Bangladesh (Professor Enamul Haque Felicitation Volume), eds. Gouriswar Bhattacharya, Gerd J R Mevissen, Mallar Mitra, Sutapa Sinha. New Delhi, Kaveri Books: 99-108. Bloch, Theodor (1911) Supplementary Catalogue of the Archaeological Collection of the Indian Museum. Calcutta: Printed at The Baptist Mission Press. Bühnemann, Gudrun (2001) The Iconography of Hindu Tantric Deities, Volume II: The Pantheons of the Prapañca- såra and the ˜åradåtilaka. Groningen: Egbert Forsten. Chakravartti, Nilmani (1908) The Supplementary Archaeological Catalogue of the Indian Museum. Allahabad: Printed at the Pioneer Press. Dutt, Kalidas (1928-29/1930a) I. The Antiquities of Khari. Appendices to Annual Report for 1928-29. Rajshahi: Varendra Research Society: 1-13. Also published in the Varendra Research Society’s Monographs 3 (April, 1930). Rajshahi: Varendra Research Society: 1-13. —— (1930b) The Antiquities of North-West Sundarban. Varendra Research Society’s Monographs 4 (July 1930). Rajshahi: Varendra Research Society: 3-17. Haque, Enamul (1992) Bengal Sculptures. Hindu Iconography upto c. 1250 A.D. Dhaka: Bangladesh National Museum. Jash, Pranabandanda (1982) History and Evolution of Vai¹½avism in Eastern India. Calcutta: Roy and Chowdhury. Rahman, Muklesur (1998) Sculpture in the Varendra Research Museum. A descriptive Catalogue. Rajshahi: Varendra Research Museum, University of Rajshahi. Sotheby’s (1993) Indian and Southeast Asian Art. Sale 6506. Wednesday, December 1, 1993. New York: Sotheby’s. Taddei, Maurizio (1993) Reflections on ¸a¼kha in Vai¹½ava Iconography. South Asian Archaeology 1991. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference of the Association of South Asian Archaeologists in Western Europe held in Berlin 1-5 July 1991, eds. Adalbert J. Gail & Gerd J.R. Mevissen, with the assistance of Britta Zehmke. Stutt- gart, Franz Steiner Verlag: 647-658. Williams, Joanna Gottfried (1982) The Art of Gupta India. Empire and Province. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Websites (all visited last time on 9th April 2007) www.collectbritain.co.uk: British Library, Collect Britain, Putting history in place: over 90.000 images and sounds from the UK and beyond. http://dsal.uchicago.edu/images/aiis/: Digital South Asia Library, American Institute of Indian Studies, Center for Art and Archaeology, Photo Archive. http://huntingtonarchive.osu.edu/: The John C. and Susan L. Huntington Archive of Buddhist and Related Art, a photo- graphic research and teaching archive. Columbus: The Ohio State University. www.trocadero.com/AMP/: Michael Bjorkqvist (“Asian Master Piece”), Copenhagen. Plate 26.1: Vi¹½u, Sarisadah, 24 Parganas District. Indian Museum, Kolkata, inv. 2592. Photo © Joachim K. Bautze. Plate 26.2: Detail of Plate Plate 26.3: Detail of Plate 26.1, Plate 26.3a: Detail of Plate 26.1, Cakra- 26.1, Gadådevï Kaumodakï. Cakrapuru¹a Sudar¸a½acakra. puru¹a Sudar¸a½acakra seen from the side. Plate 26.4: Vi¹½u, North Bengal. Bangladesh National Museum. Photo © Joachim K. Bautze. Plate 26.5: Vi¹½u, North Bengal. Asian Art Museum, Berlin, inv.no. MIK I 310. Photo © Asian Art Museum. Plate 26.6: Vi¹½u, Gazole, Malda District. State Archaeological Museum, West Bengal, Kolkata. Photo © Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi. Plate 26.7: Vi¹½u, North Bengal. National Museum, New Delhi, inv. 63.928. Photo © National Museum, New Delhi. Plate 26.8: Vi¹½u, North Bengal. After Sotheby’s 1993: lot 109. Plate 26.9: Narasiºha, Shahkund, Bhagalpur District. After Asher 1980: pl. 32. Plate 26.10: Vi¹½u photographed by Joseph Beglar at Damdana, Hazaribagh District (now Jharkand). After www.collectbritain.co.uk (© The British Library Board). Plate 26.11: Vi¹½u, black slipped terracotta. Rajakpur, Bogra District. Bangladesh National Museum, inv. E-94.2385. After Akmam 2006: 187. Plate 26.13: Images of the Buddha. Mathura. State Museum, Lucknow. Photo © American Institute of Indian Studies. Plate 26.12: Vi¹½u, black slipped terracotta. Region of Mahasthan, Bogra District. Private collection. Photo © Joachim K. Bautze. Contents VOLUME I Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi Editorial Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii Bibliography of Gouriswar Bhattacharya’s Publications (1971-2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xv List of Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxvii List of Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlii List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xlv Section I: Gandhåra 1. Ya¸odharå’s Dreams ANNA MARIA QUAGLIOTTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. The Water Tank from Gandhara MONIKA ZIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. The Pious Donation of Wells in Gandhara HARRY FALK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4. Two Stamps with the Bodhigarbhålaºkåralak¹a Dhåra½ï from Afghanistan and Some Further Remarks on the Classification of Objects with the ye dharmå Formula INGO STRAUCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Section II: Northern India, Central India, Nepal 5. S÷rya Worship in Vraja in Ancient Times with Special Reference to a Rare Ku¹å½a Lintel of a S÷rya Temple VINAY KUMAR GUPTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 6. The Formation of Temple Ritual in the Gupta Period: p÷jå and pañcamahåyajña MICHAEL WILLIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 7. Mapping Masrur’s Iconography MICHAEL W. MEISTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 8. The Kashmir Connection of the Vaiku½¶ha Image of Khajuraho DEVANGANA DESAI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 9. Va¶uke¸vara – A Våma-Bhairava Sculpture in the Lucknow Museum R. NAGASWAMY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 viii Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya 10. The Identification of a Sculpture of M¡tyuºjaya/Am¡te¸a and Am¡talak¹mï in the ‘Royal Bath’ in Patan (Nepal) GUDRUN BÜHNEMANN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 11. Almora Copper Plate of Abhaya Candra, ˜aka 1296 (AD 1374) MAHESHWAR P. JOSHI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 12. Omkareshvar Mandhata and Transplantation of Temples AMAR NATH KHANNA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 13. Recasting the Architectural Landscape: The Late 12th– Early 13th-Century Ghurid Annexations of Northern India ALKA PATEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 14. Umrao Jan Ada: Her carte-de-visite JOACHIM K. BAUTZE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Section III: Western India 15. Coins of the City-State of Måhi¹matï DEVENDRA HANDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 16. Buddhism in Rajasthan – Its Evolution and Devolution NAYAN ANANDA CHAKRABORTY & SANGEETA CHAKRABORTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 17. Some Early tora½a Representations from the Maharashtra Caves PARUL PANDYA DHAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 18. To What God Shall We Render Homage in the Temple at Modhera? K. MANKODI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 Section IV: Southern India 19. Råk¹asas and puru¹am¡gas in the South-Western Corner of the Airåvate¸vara Temple at Darasuram CORINNA WESSELS-MEVISSEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 20. A Rare ˜aiva Icon at Lepåk¹i PIERRE-SYLVAIN FILLIOZAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 21. Two Kålåmukha Temples in Haveri District (Jakka½åcårigu∙i in Karnå¶aka) VASUNDHARA FILLIOZAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 22. Girijå-kalyå½a Friezes in the Temple Art of the Gow∙as of Yelaha¼ka ANILA VERGHESE & ANNA L. DALLAPICCOLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 23. Genealogical History of the Nåyakas of Vël÷r, South India, and their Patronage to Art and Architecture (c. AD 1500-1604) U.S. MOORTI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242 Plates (Sections I-IV)  Contents ix VOLUME II Section V: Eastern India and Bangladesh 24. Mahåmåy÷rï and Jå¼gulï as Attendants of Prajñåpåramitå. Investigation of an unusual iconographic feature based on Bihari A¹¶asåhasrikå Prajñåpåramitå manuscripts from the 11th century EVA ALLINGER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 25. Illustrating the Perfection of Wisdom: The use of the Vessantara Jåtaka in a manuscript of the A¹¶asåhasrikå Prajñåpåramitå S÷tra JINAH KIM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261 26. The Vi¹½u Image from Sarisadah in the Indian Museum, Kolkata CLAUDINE BAUTZE-PICRON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273 27. Further Observations on Some Unusual Aspects of a Recently Acquired Påla Masterpiece in the Los Angeles County Museum of Art STEPHEN MARKEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 28. Some S÷rya Images of the Påla-Sena Period in the National Museum of Pakistan, Karachi IBRAHIM SHAH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288 29. A Note on Some Interesting Sculptures in the Koch Bihar Palace Museum BIMAL BANDYOPADHYAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294 30. Jaina Cult in Ancient Bengal – The Tutelary Couple of Deopara ISABELL JOHNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 31. Dedicatory Inscriptions of the Time of Mahendrapåla: A Fresh Appraisal RAJAT SANYAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 32. Re-Reading Two Copper Plate Inscriptions of Gopåla II, Year 4 RYOSUKE FURUI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319 33. Re-Visioning the State Apparatus in Samata¶a (Mid-7th to mid-11th Century AD) SHAHNAJ HUSNE JAHAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331 34. Economy of Samata¶a in the Early Medieval Period: A Brief Overview SUCHANDRA GHOSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352 35. A Note on an Important Coin Collection of the Bengal Sul¶åns in the Bode-Museum, Berlin SUTAPA SINHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359 36. Incarnation Revived: Three Temple Sculptures from Mallabh÷ma SHARMILA SAHA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 367 37. A Note on the Mañjuvara Mañju¸rï Image at the Khiching Museum, Orissa RAJASRI MUKHOPADHYAY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 38. New Light on the Ådi-Bhañjas of Khijji¼gako¶¶a and Other Minor Ruling Families of Their Times in Orissa (An Epigraphical Perspective) SNIGHDA TRIPATHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381 x Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya Section VI: Pan-Indian Issues 39. Dikpålas and Grahas at Paharpur in Context of Contemporaneous Pan-Indian Temple Imagery GERD J.R. MEVISSEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 393 40. Icons of tripåda Deities in Indian Art ARUNDHATI BANERJI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407 41. Revisiting the “V¡¹a/Nandi” Issue PRATAPADITYA PAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413 42. A Five-headed Wooden Elephant: A Case Study N.P. JOSHI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418 43. Jala Mandirs, Tïrtha-Pa¶as and Cosmic Islands: Creating, Replicating and Representing Landscape in Jaina Art and Architecture JULIA A.B. HEGEWALD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 422 44. Hegel and the Trim÷rti ADALBERT J. GAIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 438 45. Can Guided Tours Make Sense of World Heritage? N. JAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 441 Section VII: Southeast Asia, Central Asia, Tibet 46. A Recently Discovered S÷rya Image from Thailand PETER SKILLING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455 47. S÷rya’s Någas, Candra’s Square Seat and the Mounted Bull with Two Guardians – Iconographical notes on two Khmer illustrated stela inscriptions ARLO GRIFFITHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466 48. Indo-Tibetan Influences in Banners from Dunhuang CHHAYA BHATTACHARYA-HAESNER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479 49. “Indra’s Visit” TIANSHU ZHU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491 50. Wall Paintings in the Arhat Chapel of the Monastery at Zhwa lu, Tibet: Notes on Iconography and Style HELMUT F. NEUMANN & HEIDI A. NEUMANN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510 51. Iconographical Suppositions in Connection with a Thangka Series Made in the Qianlong Period BÉLA KELÉNYI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 515 Plates (Sections V-VII) List of Contributors Mag. Eva ALLINGER, Member of the National Research Network, “The cultural History of the Western Himalaya from the 8th Century”, Institute of Art History, University of Vienna. Mailing address: A 1090 Wien, Kolingasse 13/1/12, Austria, <eva.allinger@univie.ac.at>, <eva.allinger@chello.at> Dr. Bimal BANDYOPADHYAY, Superintending Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of India, Kolkata Circle, C.G.O. Complex (4th Floor), Block-DF, Sector-1, Salt Lake City, Kolkata 700 064, India, <asical@vsnl.net> Dr. Arundhati BANERJI, Superintending Archaeologist (Publications), Archaeological Survey of India, Janpath, New Delhi - 110 011, India, <abanerji150@yahoo.com>, <arundhatibanerji.150@gmail.com> Priv.-Doz. Dr. habil. Joachim K. BAUTZE, Gastprofessor für Kunstgeschichte Südasiens, Freie Universität Berlin, Kunsthistorisches Institut, Abteilung Südasien, Koenigin-Luise-Str. 34a, D-14195 Berlin, Germany, <JoachimKB@web.de> Prof. Dr. Claudine BAUTZE-PICRON, Chargée de recherche, C.N.R.S., Paris; Chargée de cours, Université Libre de Bruxelles. Mailing address: Kantstr. 78, D-10627 Berlin, Germany, <cbpicron@gmx.de> Dr. Chhaya BHATTACHARYA-HAESNER, Independent Researcher, Keithstrasse 15, D-10787 Berlin, Germany, <chhaya-berlin@gmx.de> Prof. Dr. Gudrun BÜHNEMANN, University of Wisconsin, Department of Languages & Cultures of Asia, 1240 Van Hise Hall, 1220 Linden Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA, <gbuhnema@facstaff.wisc.edu> Mr. Nayan Ananda CHAKRABORTY & Dr. Sangeeta CHAKRABORTY, Dholavira Excavation (Report Writing) Section, Archaeological Survey of India, Purana Qila, New Delhi 110 001, India, <n_chakravartiasi@yahoo.com> Prof. Dr. A.L. DALLAPICCOLA, Honorary Professor, University of Edinburgh, 4, Sydney Terrace, Edinburgh, EH7 6SL, Scotland, U.K., <Annadallapiccola@aol.com> Dr. Devangana DESAI, Former Vice-President, The Asiatic Society of Mumbai. Mailing address: Shanti 1/30, 19 Pedder Road, Mumbai 400 026, India, <djdesai@bom3.vsnl.net.in>, <djdesai2001@yahoo. com> Dr. Parul Pandya DHAR, Assistant Professor (History of Art), National Museum Institute, National Museum, Janpath, New Delhi 110 011, India, <parulpandyadhar@hotmail.com> Prof. Dr. Harry FALK, Freie Universität Berlin, Institut für die Sprachen und Kulturen Südasiens, Königin-Luise-Str. 27, D-14195 Berlin, Germany, <falk@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Dr. Pierre-Sylvain FILLIOZAT, Membre de l’Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 13, Rue Rambuteau, 75004 Paris, France, <filliozat@dataone.in>, <pierre-sylvain@filliozat.net>, <filliozat@noos.fr> Dr. Vasundhara FILLIOZAT, Independent Researcher, 125, Vivekananda Road Cross, Yadavagiri, Mysore 570 020, Karnataka, India, <filliozat@dataone.in>, <vasundhara@filliozat.net> xlvi Prajñådhara – Essays in Honour of Gouriswar Bhattacharya Dr. Ryosuke FURUI, Associate Professor, Institute of Oriental Culture, University of Tokyo, Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan, <rfurui@hotmail.com>, <furui@ioc.u-tokyo.ac.jp> Prof. i.R. Dr. Adalbert J. GAIL, Freie Universität Berlin, Kunsthistorisches Institut, Abteilung Südasien. Mailing address: Hagenstr. 35a, D-14193 Berlin, Germany, <adalbert.gail@googlemail.com> Dr. Suchandra GHOSH, Reader, Department of Ancient Indian History & Culture, University of Calcutta; 1/3, Gopal Chandra Bose Lane, Kolkata 700 050, India, <suchandra64@gmail.com> Prof. Dr. Arlo GRIFFITHS, Chair of Sanskrit, Kern Institute, Leiden University; Directeur d’études, Southeast Asian History, Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient (Jakarta); Jl. Ampera III no. 26, Kemang, Jakarta Selatan 12550, Indo- nesia, <arlo.griffiths@let.leidenuniv.nl> Mr. Vinay Kumar GUPTA, M.A., National Museum Institute, New Delhi. Mailing address: H. No. 50, Indrapuri, Dhauli Piyau, Mathura U.P. 281 001, India, <vinay511@yahoo.co.in> Dr. Devendra HANDA, # 1401, Pushpac Complex, Sector 49 B, Chandigarh 160 047, India, <devendrahanda@rediffmail.com> Dr. Julia A.B. HEGEWALD, Art History and Visual Studies, Mansfield Cooper Building, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, Great Britain, <Julia.Hegewald@manchester.ac.uk> Dr. Shahnaj Husne JAHAN, Assistant Professor, University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh, House 56, Road 4/A Dhanmondi R/A (Satmosjid Road), Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh, <adri_12002@yahoo.com> Dr. Nicholas JAMES, Director, PNL James Management & Interpretation of Historical Resources, 59, Mawson Road, Cambridge, England, <nj218@cam.ac.uk> Mrs. Isabell JOHNE, M.A., Independent Researcher, Gondekerstr. 16, D-12437 Berlin, Germany, <isabell.johne@t-online.de> Prof. Dr. Maheshwar P. Joshi, Professor & Head, Department of History (Retd.), Kumaun University, Nainital. Mailing address: ˜rï Mallikå Kuñja, Malla Joshi Khola, Almora, Uttarakhand, India, <mp_joshi20@rediffmail.com>, <mp_joshi56@yahoo.com> Dr. N.P. JOSHI, Hon. Acharya, Jñåna-Pravåha, Centre for Cultural Studies & Research, South of Samne Ghat, Varanasi - 221 005, India, <jpvns@satyam.net.in> Mr. Béla KELÉNYI, Curator of the Tibetan-Nepalese Collection, Ferenc Hopp Museum of Eastern Asiatic Arts, H-1115, Budapest, Thallóczy L. u. 26, Hungary, <kelenyi.bela@gmail.com> Mr. Amar Nath KHANNA, Senior Technical Officer (Retired), Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts. Mailing address: G-26, Sarita Vihar, New Delhi -110 076, India, <khannaan@rediffmail.com> Dr. Jinah KIM, Assistant Professor of South Asian Art, Dept. History of Art, B#351801, Vanderbilt University, Nash- ville, TN 37235-1801, USA, <prajna03@gmail.com> Dr. Kirit MANKODI, Project for Indian Cultural Studies, Franco-Indian Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd., 20, Dr. E. Moses Road, Mumbai 400 011, India, <klmankodi@francoindian.com>, <klmankodi@rediffmail.com> Dr. Stephen MARKEL, The Harry and Yvonne Lenart Curator and Department Head of South and Southeast Asian Art, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 5905 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90036-4504, USA, <smarkel@lacma.org> Prof. Dr. Michael W. MEISTER, W. Norman Brown Professor of South Asian Studies, University of Pennsylvania, Jaffe History of Art Building, 3405 Woodland Walk, Philadelphia PA 19104-6208, USA, <mwmeister@yahoo.com>  List of Contributors xlvii Dipl.-Ing. Gerd J.R. MEVISSEN, M.A., Independent Researcher, Erasmusstr. 17, D-10553 Berlin, Germany, <gerdmevissen@hotmail.com> Dr. U.S. MOORTI, Joint Director, Center for Art & Archaeology, American Institute of Indian Studies, Plot No. 22, Sector-32, Institutional Area, Gurgaon - 122 001 (Haryana State), India, <caa.research@aiis.org.in> Mrs. Rajasri MUKHOPADHYAY, M.A., Research Fellow, The Asiatic Society, Kolkata, and Guest Lecturer, Department of Islamic History and Culture, University of Calcutta. Mailing address: 29, Parasar Road, Kolkata - 700 029, India, < rajasri70@yahoo.com> Dr. R. NAGASWAMY, Tamil Arts Academy, 11, 22nd Cross Street, Besantnagar, Chennai, 600090, India, <nagaswamy@msn.com> Dr. Helmut F. NEUMANN & Mrs. Heidi A. NEUMANN, Independent Researchers, Spitzackerstrasse 24, CH-4103 Bott- mingen, Switzerland, <helmut.neumann@switzerland.org>, <hneumann@intergga.ch> Dr. Pratapaditya PAL, General Editor, Marg Publications, Mumbai. Mailing address: 10582 Cheviot Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90064, USA, <chitpal@earthlink.net> Dr. Alka PATEL, Department of Art History, 85 Humanities Instructional Building, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-2785, USA, <alkap@uci.edu> Prof. Dr. Anna Maria QUAGLIOTTI, Associate professor for Indian and Southeast Asian Art History and Archaeology, Univeristà di Napoli “L’Orientale”. Mailing address: Via Panama, 124, 00198 Roma, Italy, <quagliottiam@libero.it> Ms. Sharmila SAHA, M.Sc., Cataloguer, State Archaeological Museum, Government of West Bengal, Kolkata. Mailing address: Basak House (Top Floor), 3, Princep Street, Kolkata 700 072, India, <arch4life@rediffmail.com> Mr. Rajat SANYAL, M.Sc., Guest Lecturer, Department of Archaeology, University of Calcutta, Alipur Campus, 1, Refomatory Street (7th Floor), Kolkata 700 027, India, <sanyal10@rediffmail.com> Dr. Ibrahim SHAH, Associate Professor & Chairman, Department of Cultural Heritage and Tourism Management, Hazara University, Garden Campus, Mansehra, NWFP, Pakistan, <ibrahimshah01@gmail.com> Dr. Sutapa SINHA, Reader, Department of Islamic History and Culture, University of Calcutta, Alipur Campus, Kolkata 700 027, India, <sutapasinha@hotmail.com> Dr. Peter SKILLING, Maître de conférences, Ecole française d’Extrême-Orient, EFEO - Sirindhorn Anthropology Centre, 20, Boromarachachonani Road, Taling Chan, Banglok 10170, Thailand, <vararuci@mac.com> Dr. Ingo STRAUCH, Research Associate, Institut für die Sprachen und Kulturen Südasiens, Freie Universität Berlin, Königin-Luise-Str. 34 A, D-14195 Berlin, Germany, <ingo.strauch@fu-berlin.de> Dr. Snigdha TRIPATHY, Plot No. 1480, Gauda Munda Chhak, Bhubaneswar, Orissa. Dr. Anila VERGHESE, Principal, Sophia College for Women, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mumbai 400 026, India, <anilaverghese@yahoo.com> Dr. Corinna WESSELS-MEVISSEN, Independent Researcher, Quitzowstr. 126, D-10559 Berlin, Germany, <tcmevissen@surfeu.de> Dr. Michael WILLIS, Department of Asia, The British Museum, London WC1B 3DG, Great Britain, <Mwillis@thebritishmuseum.ac.uk> Dr. Tianshu ZHU, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, FSH, University of Macau, Taipa, Macau, China, <tszhu@umac.mo> Prof. Dr. Monika ZIN, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Institut für Indologie und Tibetologie, Department für Asienstudien, Ludwigstr. 31, D-80539 München, Germany, <m.zin@t-online.de>