“Andhra-Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka” Early Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka

49

Epigraphical and literary sources along with archaeological evidence indicate a brisk intercourse between the Buddhists of Sri Lanka and their

co-religionists in the Krishna valley.1 Today, art historians unanimously accept the infl uence of Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda art on the earliest types of Buddha images known in Sri Lanka. This has even led Senerat Paranavitana to suggest that “[t]he evidence of the infl uence of Andhra art on that of early Ceylon is so overwhelming, that it may even be suggested that a branch of that school was established in Ceylon, and that the sculptures on the frontispieces of the ancient stupas are the work of that school”.2 The fi nding of hitherto unknown statues and reliefs from the excavations conducted in recent years by the Central Cultural Fund and the Archaeological Department in Tissamaharama compels us to re-examine the question.3

One has to keep in mind that the worship of images in early Buddhism in Sri Lanka would have been contrary to the Theravada philosophy of renunciation of all sensual experiences. Therefore, it would appear that the cult of the Buddha image developed in Sri Lanka under the Mahayana infl uence of the Abhayagirivasins.4 For this same reason, compared to the Amaravati, Mathura or Gandhara Buddhist schools, ancient Sri Lanka is almost deprived of narrative scenes – relief or rock-cut images depicting the life of the historical Buddha or his previous lives (jatakas). It is certain that a few portable marble reliefs depicting various Buddhist themes found in Sri Lanka were originally executed in Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda and were brought to the island by pious traders or pilgrims as offerings.5

The Great Stupas of Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda symbolise, as do many Buddhist monuments in India such as Sanchi and Bharhut, the political and economic power of the ruling dynasties.6 However, there must also have been a genuine religious stimulus from the local Buddhist population for the construction of these Buddhist monuments in the Krishna valley.7 The enormous amount of funds needed to build these massive monuments would have come from both the pious and commercial classes of Buddhists that were well established in Dharanikota. Their prosperity was based on the fl ourishing inland and international trade centres in the ports of Dharanikota and other

“Andhra-Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka”Early Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka

Osmund Bopearachchi

Epigraphic Enigmas.indd 49Epigraphic Enigmas.indd 49 2/27/2012 4:31:01 PM2/27/2012 4:31:01 PM

50 New Dimensions in Tamil Epigraphy:

entrepots on the rivers and along the coast of Andhradesa. Great quantities of foreign glassware, pottery of Western types, fi rst century AD Mediterranean amphorae fi lled with wine and olive oil and Roman gold coins representing bullion trade uncovered in the distribution centres along the Krishna river attest to the fl ourishing domestic and international trade.8

Sri Lanka was also a part of this international trade network in the Indian Ocean. Epigraphic, numismatic and archaeological discoveries in Sri Lanka and South India have added to the growing body of evidence attesting to the close cultural, social, religious and commercial ties between Sri Lanka and Andhra-Tamilnadu from the early historical period.

As I have pointed out in my earlier work,9 the most important characteristic of all the ancient ports of the western and southern Sri Lankan coast, as well as many others around the island, is their geographical location at the estuaries of rivers. The location of emporia along rivers must have facilitated transactions with the interior regions. The starting point of our investigations is the spatial distribution of ancient ports along the South Indian coasts. It is signifi cant that ancient ports like Ponnani, Muziris (Muciri), Porakad (Bacare), Kolkho (Korkai), Karikal (Camara), Podouke (Putucceri) were situated either on the banks or at the mouth of the rivers, especially of the Ponnani, the Achenkoil, the Tamraparni, the Kaveri, and the Cenci. Arikamedu on the Ariyankuppam river, Kaveripattinam at the Kaveri river, Alagankulam on the Vaigai river and Dharanikota and Vijayapuri at the Krishna river are well-known sites of this nature.10 All the three Tamil capitals were inland towns, but each had one or several marts on the coast. For Karur, the capital city of the Cera kings, situated at the Amaravati river, and for Uraiyur, the capital city of the Cola kings, the main port was Kaveripattinam, also called Kaveripumpattinam, in the Kaveri delta. For Madurai, the capital of the Pandyas, a direct river connection along the Vaigai led to Saliyur (modern Alagankulam) near Ramesvaram.11 Likewise, Dharanikota or Dhanyakataka, the capital city of the Satavahana kings, and Vijayapuri, the capital city of the Ikshvaku dynasty, were on the right bank of the Krishna river.

As in India, the most important ancient capitals of Sri Lanka were inland, but each had one port on the coast. Manthai, the most active port in ancient Sri Lanka, was located close to the Aruvi Ari river (Malvatu Oya or Kadamna Nadi) which linked the port to the inland capital of Anuradhapura. Likewise, the location of the ancient capital of Polonnaruwa on the banks of the Mahavali river, which fl ows to the sea at Gokanna, is no coincidence. Similarly, Tissamaharama, Sri Lanka’s ancient city in the south, blossomed due to its location on the left bank of the Kirindi Oya which connected the town to the ancient port of Kirinda.


51

There is no reason to believe that during the fi rst three centuries of our era, Roman traders had direct connections with Sri Lanka. This was probably due to the time gap between the two monsoon winds used for sailing which put Sri Lanka out of reach.12 Lionel Casson13 has convincingly shown that, at the time of the Periplus (circa fi rst century CE) the starting point for ships leaving Egypt for India were the ports of Myos Hormos and Berenice. It is now believed that the goods to be exported were brought via the Nile to Coptos and from there transported across the desert by camel or donkey to the corresponding ports. The proper time to leave Egypt for India was July. Making use of the south-west monsoon winds, the ships sailed through the Gulf of Aden and reached the ports of the west coast of India in September or in October. The return journey had to be scheduled for the month of November so as to take advantage of the north-east monsoon winds. Merchants hardly had a month to sell their goods and load their ships with new merchandise. Sailors may not have continued their voyage up to Sri Lanka for risk of missing the north-east winds which assured their return journey. It was certainly more profi table for the merchants to buy Sri Lankan products from the Indian markets than to spend a year on the island waiting for the next north-east monsoon. South Indian traders probably played an intermediary role between the Roman and Sri Lankan traders. Pliny’s specifi c reference to the ships of Taprobane carrying 3000 amphorae14 in contrast with the Roman vessels capable of carrying over 10,000 amphorae shows that the navigation through the straits of Mannar was undertaken not by Romans but by Sri Lankans.

It was during this period, when they acted as intermediaries between Romans and Sri Lankans that the South Indian traders came from Amaravati to Sri Lanka in search of merchandise. These traders, when visiting religious monuments in Anuradhapura and Tissamaharama, would have brought votive plaques as offerings to Buddhist establishments on the island. This is the reason why some steles depicting scenes from the Buddha’s life have been found in the Amaravati style among the religious monuments of Sri Lanka.

The most important Buddhist sect at Amaravati during the Satavahana rule of Andhradesa seems to have been Caitikas, a subsect of the Mahasangika school of Buddhism, which stressed the supernatural character of the Buddha and Bodhisattvas. The Great Stupa of Amaravati is the earliest monument at the site with a dated inscription. This inscription tells us that the monument was dedicated to the Mahavana-seliyas whose western branch, known as the Apara-mahavina-seliyas, an offshoot of the Mahasangika, split from the orthodox Theravadins after the second Buddhist council at Vaisali.15 The inscription of Vasishtihputra Pulumavi refers to a settlement of Caitikas which was also an offshoot of the Mahasangika and who gave special prominence to the worship of the caitiya or stupa.16

Osmund Bopearachchi



The Bahusrutiya at Nagarjunakonda were offshoots of the Mahasangika whose literature showed a strong affi liation to that of the Sarvastivadin.17 The Bahusrutiya fi rst included stupa worship and subsequently image worship into their practices. One of the groups for which we have clear evidence at Nagarjunakonda is the Theravadin from Sri Lanka who have been referred to as the Theravadin of Mahavihara.18 Another Buddhist sect from Sri Lanka lived at the Chuladhammagirvihara in Nagarjunakonda.19 It by reason of these religious and commercial contacts between Andhra and Sri Lanka that so many sculptures were imported from the Krishna Valley during the fi rst fi ve centuries of our era.

Recently, three sculptures were uncovered in Tissamaharama by the Central Cultural Fund: One, a Buddha statue imported directly from Amaravati; two, a head executed by the artists of the same school established in the southern coast of the island; and three, a guardstone stylistically analogous to the Nagarjunakonda school. These three sculptures will be focal point of this article.

1. In December 2001, in Tissamaharama not far from the Sandagiri Vehera, a Buddha statue (Panel 1) and two small Bodhisattva images were found accidentally on private land known as Badu Watta. The Central Cultural Fund and the Archaeological Department jointly rescued the statues and restored them. Sri Lankan archaeologists have correctly observed that the sculptures were removed in the past from the original shrine and were hidden for an unknown reason in the present fi nd spot. The Viharage (Image House) situated close to the fi nd spot, excavated by the Central Cultural Fund may be

Panel 1. Buddha statue uncovered in December 2001, in Tissamaharama.


53

the building which housed the statues in the past (Panel 2). From a stylistic, chronological and technical point of view, the Buddha statue is different from the two Bodhisattva images. The latter belong to the Mahayana sculptural style which began to fl ourish in Sri Lanka from the eighth century onwards. Apart from the right hand, the rest of the Buddha statue is intact and is in good condition. it is 210 cm tall, the maximum width is 53 cm, and the face is 23 cm (Panel 1).

2. During the excavations carried out by the Central Cultural Fund, a head and a body belonging to two different Buddha statues were unearthed from a Bodhighara situated approximately 50 m. from the Sandagiri Dagaba. Although the head and the body were found together, it is diffi cult to believe that the two parts belonged to the same statue. Proportionally they are different. The total height of the body is 113 cm with a maximum width of 24 cm (Panel 3). The height of the head is 22 cm with a maximum width of 15 cm (Panel 4).

3. A unique guardstone, stylistically analogous to the Nagarjunakonda school, may indicate the origin of this type of art form in Sri Lanka. This sculpture was discovered accidentally at Akurugoda in Tissamaharama when bulldozing a land for road construction. The total height of the statue, including the bottom part which is set below the ground, is 128 cm. The section normally meant to be seen aboveground is 96 cm. The maximum width is 57 cm (Panel 5). 20

Panel 2. Viharage (Image House) situated close to the fi nd spot of the Buddha statue (Tissamaharama).

Osmund Bopearachchi



Panel 3. Body of the Buddha statue unearthed from the Bodhighara

situated close to the Sandagiri Dagaba. (Tissamaharama).

Panel 4. Head of the Buddha statue unearthed from the Bodhighara situated close to the Sandagiri Dagaba. (Tissamaharama).

Panel 5. Guardstone, stylistically analogous to the Nagarjunakonda school discovered

accidentally at Akurugoda (Tissamaharama).


55

It is interesting that these sculptures were found in Tissamaharama, the ancient capital of Ruhuna, but not in Rajarata where the political power of many Sri Lankan kings was concentrated. Recent archaeological excavations conducted by Sri Lankan, French and German archaeologists have shown that Ruhuna had played an important economic role in the country. Coins Inscribed in early Prakrit or Tamil Brahmi; seals bearing the names of ganka, coin hoards and moulds at Akurugoda; and iron smelting and steel making furnaces at Ridiyagama have revealed its important economic and trade activities.21

In my opinion, like the panels depicting scenes from the life of Sakyamuni and several architectural elements from Andhradesa, the fi rst images of the Buddha were also the imports from the same region. A few such stone Buddha images imported from Andhra Pradesh are known. The fi rst discovery was on the 23rd of March, 1946, at Maha-Illuppallama in the Anuradhapura district. When building a model farm, the bulldozer used for levelling the land hit the statue which lay buried for centuries. Senerat Paranavitana, who was then the Archaeological Commissioner decided to leave the statue at the site at the request of the villagers.22 A modern shrine was built to house the statue. As U. von Schroeder23 has underlined: “Tasteless restorations with cement and application of modern paint, together with the most unfortunate installation inside a modern structure, have virtually destroyed this important image”.

Paranavitana24 correctly assumed that this Buddha image, in the round, about 1. 78 m. in height and carved out of South Indian white marble, had been fashioned in Andhradesa and brought to the island by traders or pilgrims. Unfortunately, the raised right hand is broken and recent restoration assigned the wrong mudra. The missing right hand may have been upheld in abhaya mudra. The missing left hand holds the hem of the sanghati, near the chest. The sanghati with prominent folds is draped over the left shoulder. The urna, a circular protuberance on the forehead which is a mahapurusalaksana,25 is given a prominent place.26 The usnisa,27 another mark of a “Great Being”, covered with snail-shell curls is also a remarkable feature of this statue. All these characteristics remind us of the Buddha statues found in Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda. Contrary to U. von Schroeder,28 who dated the sculpture around AD 350–450, I personally think that it should be dated to the second or third century AD.

Another limestone image of a standing Buddha, heavily eroded in the front due to centuries of exposure to the sun and rain, was found in Kinniya in the Trincomalee district.29 Fortunately, the carving on the back is in an excellent state of preservation. This is an image in the round (this is correct), with the right shoulder bare and the drapery shown in regular schematic folds

Osmund Bopearachchi



in relief. The limestone as well as the draping of the robe is consistent with the style of the Nagarjunakonda school.

Coming back to the Buddha statue found recently in Tissamaharama (Panel 1), we have a sculpture that has all the characteristics of the late Amaravati tradition. The white marble used for the execution of this statue is not found in Sri Lanka, but is available in Amaravati-Nagajunakoda.30 It is fashioned in the round (this is correct). Of the two hands, the left is holding the uplifted hem of the robe and the right, unfortunately damaged, is most probably held in abhaya mudra like the earliest standing Buddha statues found on the island; these statues we will examine later. The drapery treatment of the robe shown as declining parallel shallow grooves is closely linked stylistically to the Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda schools. A life-sized standing Buddha image in the round (this is correct) discovered at the Mahastupa at Amaravati is a good example to show the stylistic and iconographic characteristics of this school.31 The statue most closely resembling the one from Tissamaharama was found in the Sihala Vihara at Nagarjunakonda.32 The treatment of the drapery and the slender modelling are similar in all these statues.

The head found in the Bodhighara at Sandgiri Dagaba complex deserves special attention (Panel 4). Excavations conducted in 1955 at Kuccaveli in the Trincomalee district yielded some limestone fragments of a Buddha torso and two heads, once again of the late Andhra School.33 The prominent circular urna on the forehead is a feature rarely encountered among images made by Sri Lankan artists. This type of limestone is not attested in Sri Lanka, and no doubt these sculptures were also imported to Sri Lanka from Andhra Pradesh. The Buddha heads, one from the Bodhighara at Sandgiriyi Vihara and two from Kucceveli, remind us of the Buddha head now in the Paris Musée Guimet found at Vijiaderpuram dated to the second century CE.34 Some art historians insisted upon the Roman infl uence because of the realistic and expressive features of this sculpture. Imperial Roman coins found in the vicinity of the fi nd spot of the head point to the presence of Roman trade in the area. I have underlined earlier that not only Roman coins, but also pottery (Arezzo), intaglios and particularly amphorae from the Mediterranean world are indicative of the dynamics of the Roman trade in the area. Two more statues from the Krishna valley now exhibited in the Madras Government Museum are also excellent examples to show the features of the Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda schools of art.

Apart from the well-pronounced urna, the treatment of the hair in fi ne curls and the long and large ears of the Buddha head from the Sandgiriyi Vihara complex are characteristics of the Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda style. However, this head is carved in local stone. It cannot be excluded that


57

this sculpture was executed by artists from Andhra living on the island or by Sri Lanka sculptors using an imported statue from the Krishna Valley as a prototype. The tradition of carving standing Buddha statues imitating the Amaravati-Nagrajunakonda style continued for centuries in Sri Lanka. Statues of standing Buddha executed in local stones (e.g. dolomite, crystalline limestone and granite) maintained most of the original features of the images from Andhradesa, such as the diaphanous sanghati in regular schematic folds in relief leaving the right shoulder bare, and the right hand held forward in the abhaya mudra, with the left holding the uplifted hem of the robe. The signifi cant difference between the Buddha statues carved in Sri Lanka and those from the Krishna valley is the absence of an urna. One of the statues closest in style to the Andhra tradition sculpted in local dolomite marble was unearthed in 1987 during the excavations of the Image-house of the Yatala Dagaba at Tissamaharama (Panel 7).35 In addition, the somewhat mutilated Buddha statues – badly restored by cement and plaster – discovered during the excavations of an Image-house south-east of Ruvanvalimahasaya (Anuradhapura) and now housed in a modern shrine constructed in the Ruvanvalimahasaya complex are also fi ne examples of the continuity of the style of the Andhra schools (Panel 8).36

Panel 7. Buddha statue in dolomite marble unearthed from the image-house of the Yatala Dagaba (Yatala Museum, Tissamaharama).

Panel 8. Buddha statues discovered from the image-house south-east of the Ruvanvalimahasaya (Anuradhapura).

Osmund Bopearachchi



The highly decorated slabs of stone with anthropomorphic fi gures placed at the ends of the balustrades fl anking the fl ight of steps at the entrances of buildings are known locally in Sinhalese as doratupala-rupa.37 As Godakumbure himself admits, it is very diffi cult to date the fi rst guardstones of Sri Lanka. The most common and fully developed Naga Raja guardstone depicts a centrally placed royal fi gure under an arch, with a halo of a multi-hooded anthropomorphic cobra-king who carries a full-pot (purnaghata or punkalasa) in one hand and a fl owering branch symbolising fertility in the other.38 Evidently there was a trend to increase the number of Naga hoods from the original fi ve39 to seven40 and then from seven to nine41 and even to thirteen (Panel 9).42 At the feet of the Naga Raja are fi gures of one or two dwarfs (gana). On the outer-side of the guardstone is a pilaster topped by a fi gure of an animal. Some guardstones have a makaratorana above the arch. The best known example of the fully developed guardstone can be found at Ratnaprasada in Anuradhapura (Panel 10).43 The addorsed makara heads are at the apex of the torana. At each end of the base of the arch there is a makara standing on its paws with a raised forepart of the composite body. Out of its mouth it spews a lion, ganas and a human mituna couple.

According to Godakumbura, the transition from the Bahirava to Naga Raja can be found in the guardstone which bear the sculptures of the Naga

Panel 9. Naga Raja with thirteen cobra hoods (Archaeological Museum, Anuradhapura).

Panel 10. Guardstone at the entrance of the Ratnaprasada (Anuradhapura).


59

and Bahirava side by side.44 As evidence for this hypothesis, he takes the guardstone found in Ruhnu Maha Vihara (Lahugala, Ampara District) in the south-east. A series of sculptures depicting a Nidhi attributed to the late Anuradhapura period (sixth and seventh centuries)45 are attested from the Ruhnu Maha Vihara, and in one sculpture Nidhi is incorporated in the Naga Raja guardstone.46 This sculpture, fi rst published by D.T. Devendra, depicts the Naga Raja fl anked by an attending Nidhi.47 Artists of ancient Ruhuna who had always taken liberty in art seem to have created new types of guardstones that have no parallel in Anuradhapura, the offi cial capital of the Sinhalese kings.

It is in this context that I wish to examine a certain number of guardstones that have drawn little attention from art historians. Before the discovery of the exceptional guardstone from Akurugoda (Panel 5), another guardstone (Panel 6), of lesser quality stone and in a worn out condition, but depicting the same iconography in similar dimensions has been kept in the site museum of Yatala, Tissamaharama. It drew the attention of very few scholars. C.E. Godakumbura describes it as an example which typifi es a departure from the traditional guardstones of the northern sites: “The central fi gure has the stance, the dress and the ornaments of the Naga Raja guardstone, but the living sprig, the ‘pot of plenty’ and dwarfs are absent”.48 U. von Schroeder describes with hesitation the central fi gure as Naga Raja.49

Contrary to the opinions of Godakumbura and von Schroeder, I think that the central fi gure could be a Bodhisattva or a Cakravartin wearing princely ornaments. If he is a Bodhisattva, it is impossible to identify which one. The garments and jewelled ornaments point to both Maitreya and Avalokitesvara. The rippling muscles of the body are realistic. The head dress and the ornaments are worked out in exquisite detail. Bodhisattva images of Maitreya and Avalokitesvara are well attested in ancient Ruhuna; the one at Yatala Caitya in Tissamaharama is remarkable in this respect.

Panel 6. Guardstone, stylistically analogous to the Nagarjunakonda school exhibited in the Yatala Museum (Tissamaharama).

Osmund Bopearachchi



However, compared to Bodhisattva images attested in Ruhuna, which are rigid, stiff, frontal images with no suggestion of movement, the central fi gure mentioned above is executed with much fl exibility and fl uidity.50 The diaphanous drapery adds to his sensitive pose. The rhythmic fl ow of the drapery, the serene expression of the face and the graceful attitude of the body are similar to the Bodhisattva Siddhartha from Amaravati.

The panel depicting Mahabhiniskamana or the Great Departure of Prince Siddhartha from Amaravati now in the British Museum51 is a good example to highlight the parallels with the Bodhisattva image on the Tissamaharama guardstone. Bodhisattva Siddhartha is shown here standing in the tribhanga pose, dressed in princely garments and taking leave of his groom, with his horse Kantaka and Channa kneeling at his feet. The presence of three ganas at his feet should also be noted.

The central fi gure of the two Tissamaharama guardstones (Panels 5 & 6) shown in tribhanga is surrounded by three pairs of attendants. The pair at the bottom, one standing three-quarters to the left and the other standing frontally are similar to the ones on Amaravati sculptures with pot-bellied ganas wearing a simple dhoti knotted in front.52 The middle pair with elaborate hairdo and rich jewellery appears behind the lower positioned ganas. Only their busts can be seen. However this middle pair has no characteristics of ganas. They may be attendants of the Bodhisattva. The fi gure under the right elbow of the central fi gure is a princess as revealed by her clothes and, particularly, by the tall head-dress. Her earrings are similar to makarakundala. The middle fi gure to the left of the central fi gure is a prince or a king. He wears a headgear close in style to the ones usually worn by kings and nobles in Amaravati sculptures.53 His masculinity is emphasised by the sword worn at his right fl ank. The pair at the top are shown emerging from a curtain which passes behind the head of the central fi gure. They are shown holding the curtain.54

The possibility of considering this fi gure as depiction of Cakravartin (Universal monarch) should not be discarded. 55 Such fi gures on steles at one of the frontispieces (ayakas) of Abhayagiri Dagaba in Anuradhapura drew the attention of art historians.56 Paranavitana57 observed in one of these steles, to the left of the head, the wheel and the gem, two of the seven treasures indicating his royal status. Taking the thunderbolt held in his upraised right hand and the elephant head jutting out from the border on the right side, von Schroeder58 is inclined to consider this fi gure as Dhatastra or Indra. However, the presence of the wheel or cakra, the elephant and most probably a horse are closely associated with the fi gure of Cakravartin. Such images are well attested in the Amaravati school. One relief depicts the moment when the


61

Cakravartin raises his right hand to produce a shower of coins.59 In the lower register of the same panel, the Cakravartin is shown seated, and behind the king a female holds an umbrella. The presence of the cakra along with the elephant and horse is indicative of the attributes of a Cakravartin. Apart from the three umbrellas, the guardstones from Tissamaharama do not depict any of the seven treasures of a Cakravartin.

Two small chatras appear at either side of the head of the main fi gure. A larger chatra is depicted above the head. Godakumbura,60 when describing the three umbrellas over the head of the main fi gure, assumes that they “probably symbolise royalty”. The standing Cakravartin with hands in anjali mudra from Amaravati now in the British Museum,61 wearing nearly a diaphanous drapery, like the central fi gure of the Tissamaharama guardstone, is also protected by an umbrella held by an attendant.

I would also like to draw the attention to the slab depicting a Yaksa or Kubera of the late Amaravati period (CE 250–300) excavated in 1926 at Goli (Guntur district, Andhra Pradesh) now housed in the Madras Government Museum.62 In spite of the static and motionless attitude of the central fi gure, the presence of the chatra and the two pot-bellied dwarfs reminds us of the guardstone from Tissamaharama.

The guardstones from Tissamaharama (Panels 5 & 6) are also characterised by a makaratorana, with a makara head placed at each end of the base of the arch composed of lotus petals and garlands. The makara is composed of the jaw of a crocodile, the trunk of an elephant, tusks of a wild-boar, paws of a lion and feathers of a peacock. The capital of the column, on either side of the central motif, with a circular fl uted cushion reminds us of the ones from Amaravati and Nagarjunakonda. A humped bull sits on the pilaster.

A dolomite marble Bodhisattva wearing an unusual head gear, standing in tribhanga under a chatra in the form of a lotus leaf, holding in the right hand a living sprig ending as a lotus blossom, with two ganas at his feet, now erected at the shrine close to the Sandagiri Caitya is very similar to the two Bodhisattva images under discussion (Panel 11).63 This image has no affi liation to the Naga Raja images that developed later.64

Among the characteristics of the guardstones, which were sculpted before the classical Naga Raja stones, the absence of both attendants and the purnaghata motif is conspicuous. A series of guardstones which depict royal or princely images holding a fl owering twig, but deprived of gana images are well attested in ancient Ruhuna. Two such fi gures made of dolomite marble from Maligawila Puranavihara (Monaragala District), now erected in front of the colossal Buddha statue of Maligawila deserve our attention (Panel 12). Both fi gures stand in tribhanga, holding a living sprig in one hand and a

Osmund Bopearachchi



padma (lotus) in the other and are depicted within an architectural element resembling the facade of a shrine or an image house.65

Two guardstones, with a fi gure depicted frontally, standing in tribhanga, wearing a princely dress and very elaborate head gear, and holding a fl owering twig, are found in the Gal Ande Puranarajamaviharaya, Dehighalanda, Ambalatota. 66 Another guardstone, in a very bad state of preservation is now kept in the Yatala museum.67 Similarly, two more guardstones with the same depiction are now being erected in front of the Tissamaharama Dagaba.68 The recent excavations at the Buddhist sanctuary of Mahagawewa Saliya Pabbatha Vapikaramaya at Padikemgala (Mahagalwewa Colony,

Hambantota District) has brought to light many guardstones. It was also in this monastic complex that the hitherto unpublished six guardstones and one of the most beautiful Bodhighara depicting scenes from the life of the historical Buddha – to which I have made mention at the beginning of this study – were discovered. Out of six, three guardstones are carved with a princely image holding a fl owering twig in one hand and a fl ower in the other.

The singular character of all the guardstones found in ancient Ruhuna made U. von Schroeder raise the question of whether the fi gure depicted on them is Padmapani or Maitreya.69 I am rather inclined to consider the main fi gure of the Tissamaharama guardstones and many others found in ancient

Panel 11. Guardstone depicting a Bodhisattva erected at the shrine close to the Sandagiri Vehera (Tissamaharama).

Panel 12. Guardstone from Maligawila Puranavihara now placed in front of the colossal Buddha statue of Maligawila.


63

Ruhuna as Avalokitesvara. It is true that the image of the Tathagata Amitabha in the jatamakuta, the attribute par excellence of Avalokitesvara is absent in these sculptures. However, leaving aside the rigidity of the pose of the sculpture, the colossal Avalokitesvara statue at Dambegoda (Panel 13) is analogous to the central fi gure of the two Tissamaharama guardstones (Panels 5 & 6). In the both images, the cone-shaped jatamakuta is decorated with jewelled ornaments. The similitude of the jewellery, such as a fl at collar necklace, a long chain made of beads decreasing in size, double-bracelets and long earrings, all worked in exquisite detail, is surprising. It is certain that one should not regard these images as Naga kings. Once again the ancient Ruhuna departs from the Rajarata with these unusual images. However, I would hesitate to consider, without further evidence, the depiction of princely fi gures as pioneers of the classical Naga Raja images. They may have developed independently in two different zones.

It is interesting to observe that some of the guardstones attested in ancient Ruhuna are deprived of the two pot-bellied dwarfs. Three guardstones unearthed from the Mahagawewa Sâliya Pabbatha Vapikaramaya at Padikemgala depict a multi-hooded anthropomorphic Naga Raja carrying a fl owering branch in one hand, but instead of the purnaghata he holds a fl ower in the other. No gana images have been carved. Another guardstone with the same features from the Maligawila area is now placed in front of the Okkampitiya Avalokitesvara statue. Their princely garments are quite similar to the early sculptures from the same site. The fact of the presence of two types of sculptures, one with a halo of cobra hoods and the other with elaborate head gear alone, may indicate that the transition from one to the other took place in the same area.

As I have shown here, and as Senerat Paranavitana has emphasised, although Sri Lankan artists were inspired by sculptures from the Buddhist centres of Andhra Pradesh, two distinct art schools developed, each ingenuously completing the sentiments and aesthetics of their respective populations.

Panel 13. Colossal Avalokitesvara statue at Dambegoda.

Osmund Bopearachchi



NOTES

1 S. Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese, Colombo: 1971, p. 13.2 Ibid. p. 13.3 I would like to express my sincere gratitude Dr. Senerath Disanayake, Director General

of the Archaeological Department and Dr. W. Wijeyapala, Former Director General of the Central Cultural Fund, for encouraging me to undertake this study and also for authorising me to illustrate the sculptures discussed in this study, some of which remain until today unpublished.

4 The monks of the Abhayagiri Vihara who have propagated Mahayanism on the island are called the Abhayagirivasin. The Abhayagiri Vihara was built by king Vattagamani Abhaya (109 BC and 89–77 BC). The stupa and the monastery were gifted by the king to the Buddhist monk Mahatissa of Kupikkala as a token of his gratitude at a period when the king’s throne was contested by seven Damila conquerors. Mahatissa was accused of accepting a personal gift and was expelled from the Mahavihara. The Abhayagirivasin then welcomed a group of Buddhist monks from South India who were the disciples of Dhammaruci of the Vajjiputra sect. Since then the monks of the Abhayagiri came to be known as the followers of Dhammaruci (for these events see The Mahavamsa or The Great Chronicle of Ceylon XXXIII, translated into English by W. Geiger, London: 1912, edn. 1950, Colombo: 33–103).

5 The slabs depicting Maha Maya’s dream and the interpretation of Maha Maya’s dream now in the Colombo National Museum found in 1894 during the irrigation works in a paddy fi eld about a mile from Anuradhapura were imported to Sri Lanka from Nagarjunakonda. These two pieces imported from the Krishna valley have their iconographic and stylistic counterparts in many of the sculptures of Amaravati-Nagarjunakonda. They have been executed using Amaravati marble (a kind of hard limestone) from the same region. The Bodhighara in which these slabs were found is popularly known as “Kurunagala-Road-Shrine”. The stone pediment and the inner basement of this shrine have now been reconstructed at the Colombo National Museum. S. Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese, Colombo: 1971, pl. 18; U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Hong Kong: 1990, p. 76, 618–619; fi gs. 8D, A 135–139 with an exhaustive bibliography.

6 For the excavations at Nagarjunakonda, see A.H. Longhurst, “Excavations at Nagarjunakonda”, Annual Report, Archaeological Survey of India, 1927–1928, pp. 113–121; “Excavations at Nagarjunakonda”, Annual Report, Archaeological Survey of India, 1928–1929, pp. 100–104; 145–151; “The Great Stupa at Nagarjunakonda”, The Indian Antiquary, 1932, pp. 186–192.; “The Buddhist antiquities of Nagarjunakonda, Madras Presidency”, Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India 54, 1938, New Delhi.

7 R. Knox, Amaravati. Buddhist Sculptures from the Great Stupa, London: 1992, pp. 10–11.

8 For a critical analysis of these trade activities, see R. Champakalakshmi, Trade, Ideology and Urbanization. South India 300 BC to AD 1300, New Delhi: 1996, pp. 109, 111, 119; S. Suresh, Symbols of Trade. Roman and Pseudo-Roman Objects in India, Delhi: 2004, p. 98: “Dharanikota has yielded a wharf and navigational channel together with multicoloured foreign glass objects, earrings, bangles and a seal of the second century BC.” Also see pp. 156, 166, 178,

9 O. Bopearachchi “Archaeological evidence on changing patterns of international trade relations of ancient Sri Lanka”, in Origin, Evolution and Circulation of Foreign Coins


65

in the Indian Ocean, ed. by Osmund Bopearachchi and D.P.M. Weerakkody, New Delhi: 1998, pp. 133–178; “Sites portuaires et emporia de l’ancien Sri Lanka: nouvelles données archéologiques”, Arts Asiatiques 54, 1999, pp. 5–22.

10 In his excellent study, J. Deloch (1985) has discussed in detail the role of ancient ports, situated beside rivers or lagoons on the coast of Tamilnadu. See J. Deloch, “Études sur la circulation en Inde. IV. Notes sur les sites de quelques ports anciens du pays Tamoul”, BEFEO, LXXIV, 1985, pp. 141–166; “V. Le chenal de Pampan et la route de pèlerinage de Rameésvaram : un exemple d’aménagement ancien”, idem, pp. 167–182, pl. I-X. Also see R. Nagaswamy, “Alagankulam: An Indo-Roman trading port”, Indian Archaeological Heritage, K.V. Soundara Rayan Felicitation Volume, New Delhi, 1991, pp. 247–254..

11 K. Karttunen, “Early Roman trade with South India”, Arctos: Acta Philologica Fennica, XXIX, 1995, pp. 81–91.

12 O. Bopearachchi, “Circulation of Roman and Byzantine gold coins in Sri Lanka: fact or fi ction”, dans Dal Denarius al Dinar l’Oriente e la Moneta Romana, Rome, 2006, pp. 181–200.

13 L. Casson, 1991. “Ancient naval technology and the route to India”, Rome and India, 1991, pp. 8–11.

14 D.P.M. Weerakkody, “The sea in between is shallow, not more than six yards deep, but in certain channels so deep that no anchors touch the bottom. For this reason ships have prows at either end so that they do not need to turn about in the narrows of the channel. Their capacity is about three thousand amphorae.” Taprobanê. Ancient Sri Lanka as known to Greeks and Romans, Turnhout, 1997, p. 226.

15 C. Sivaramamurti, “Amaravati sculpture in the Madras Government Museum”, Bulletin of the Madras Government Museum, New Series-General Section, IV, Madras 1942, pp. 283–284. On Mahasangikas and their role in Mahayana Buddhism, see G. Schopen, 2005, pp. 115, 241, 266.

16 H. Sarkar, Studies in Early Buddhist Architecture of India, Delhi, 1966, p. 94; H. Sarkar & S.P. Nainar, Amaravati, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, 2003, pp. 19–20.

17 See E.R. Stone, The Buddhist Art of Nagarjunakonda, Delhi.1994, p. 19.18 According to an inscription found at the site, the monastery was inhabited by the

Mahaviharavasin from Sri Lanka, see D.C. Sircar & A.N. Lahiri, “Footprint slab inscription from Nagarjunakonda”, Epigraphia Indica, 1970, pp. 240–250. 1970. The Mahavihara was founded by king Devanampiya Tissa, the fi rst Sri Lankan king to be converted to Buddhism by the Buddhist monk and envoy of king Asoka (For these events see Mahavamsa, XIII, 1–21). The Mahavihara was the seat of orthodox Buddhism in Sri Lanka known as Theravada as opposed to Mahayana.

19 Site 43, see E.R. Stone, The Buddhist Art of Nagarjunakonda , 1994, pp. 18–19.20 This sculpture was exhibited for the fi rst time in Tokyo: Cultural Heritage of Sri Lanka.

The Land of Serendipity, 17 September – 30 November 2008, Tokyo National Museum, 2008, Fig. R.9.

21 See O. Bopearachchi, “Archaeological evidence on changing patterns of international trade relations of ancient Sri Lanka”, 1998; “Sites portuaires et emporia de l’ancien Sri Lanka: nouvelles données archéologiques ”, 1999; O. Bopearachchi & R.M. Wickremesinhe, Ruhuna. An Ancient Civilisation Re-visited. Numismatic and Archaeological Evidence on Inland and Maritime Trade, Colombo: 1999.

22 S. Paranavitana, “Civilisation of the Early Period”, in History of Ceylon, vol. I, edited by H.C. Ray, Colombo: 1959, pp. 216–267. .

Osmund Bopearachchi



23 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, p. 106.24 S. Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese p. 21, 133–134.25 Considered as auspicious signs of a Maha Purusa or Great Being.26 For a close-up of the head, see S. Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese, p. 58.27 Cranial protuberance on the top of the head is one of the 32 auspicious signs of the

Buddha.28 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, p. 107–107, Fig. 18 C.29 Ibid., Figs. 18 E & F30 Mohan Aberatne (Central Cultural Fund, Sri Lanka) informed me that according to the

analyses carried out by the geologists of the Moratuwa University (Sri Lanka), this type of white marble is attested in the Dambulla area (Matale District). We, at present, do not know whether this kind of marble was known to ancient Sri Lankan sculptures. The statues made locally in Sri Lanka are of dolomite, crystalline limestone or granite.

31 H. Sarkar & S.P. Nainar, Amaravati, 2003, Panel 1.32 The head of the statue is greatly restored. E.R. Stone, The Buddhist Art of Nagarjunakonda,

Fig. 22. This statue is now housed in the Nagarjunakonda Museum, a replica of the same is placed in the nearby land in a full-scale model of the site.

33 They are now kept in the National Museum, Trincomalee, see U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Figs. 18 A & B.

34 A. Okada, Sculptures indiennes du Musée Guimet, Paris, 2000, pp. 53–55.35 Today the statue is housed in the site museum of Yata Dagaba, see U. von Schroeder,

Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Fig. 40 G.36 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Figs. 33 C–H; also see S.

Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese pp. 265–266.37 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones, Archaeological Department, Colombo: 1982, p. 17.38 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Figs. 101 A–104 L.39 Ibid., Figs. 101 A-I; 102 I, 103 C–E.40 Ibid., Figs. 102 A–D, G–H, K, L; 103 F–L; 104 A–E, H41 Ibid., Figs. 104 F, I–M 42 The Naga Raja depicted in two guardstones now exhibited in the garden of the

Archaeological Museum of Anuradhapura has thirteen cobra hoods.43 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Figs. 103 L.44 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones, p. 21.45 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Figs. 98 A–E.46 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones p. 21, Panel. 11. Also see U. von Schroeder, Buddhist

Sculptures of Sri Lanka, Fig. 98 G.47 D.T. Devendra, “The symbol of the Sinhalese guardstone”, Artibus Asiae, XXI, 1958, p.

266, Fig. 6. pp. 259–268; U. von Schroeder (Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, p. 336, Fig. 98 G) also thinks that this may be the earliest example of a Naga Raja guardstone with Nidhi as attendant fi gure.

48 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones p. 28, Panel 23.49 U. von Schroeder (Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka, p. 338, Fig. 99 F) further admits:

“The coarse-grained dolomite marble combined with the bad state of preservation does not allow a more accurate description.”

50 It has to be emphasised, however, that the images carved in relief give more liberty to accentuate the fl exibility of the movement than a sculpture modelled in the round. There


67

are exceptions in Gandhara art where even the statues in the round are carved with much realism giving prominence to movement, see for example the statue of Padmapani, published in the catalogue De l’Indus à l’Oxus, p. 225, no. 266.

51 R. Knox, Amaravati. Buddhist Sculptures from the Great Stupa, no. 55.52 For such pot-bellied ganas in movement and jolly mood, see Ibid., nos. 11–14.53 See for example, Ibid., nos 60 & 62.54 This type of depictions are pertinent to Roman art and the Roman infl uence on Sri

Lankan art will be dealt in one of my forthcoming publications.55 This central fi gure is described as ‘Universal king’ in the exhibition catalogue: Cultural

Heritage of Sri Lanka. The Land of Serendipity, 17 September–30 November 2008, Tokyo National Museum, 2008, Fig. R.9.

56 See for example J.S. Smither: Architectural Remains, Anurâdhapura, Sri Lanka, Colombo: 1894, revised and edited by C. Wikramagamage, Colombo; 1993, Fig. 13; S. Paranavitana, Art of the ancient Sinhalese Panels. 4 & 12; U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka Figs 11 B & 12 D.

57 S. Paranavitana, Art of the Ancient Sinhalese p. 128, Panel 12.58 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka p. 82, Fig. 11 B. 59 R. Knox, 1992, Amaravati. Buddhist Sculptures from the Great Stupa p. 122, no. 62.60 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones p. 28.61 R. Knox, Amaravati. Buddhist Sculptures from the Great Stupa p. 178, no. 100 .62 T.N. Ramachandran, “Buddhist sculptures from a stupa near Goli village, Guntur

District”, Bulletin of the Madras Government Museum, New Series, vol. I, part 1, p. 16, Panel IX, no 6.

63 C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones p. 29, no. 24.64 It seems that this fi gure has four arms, which is quite unusual in guardstones; further

investigations have to be carried out to confi rm this observation.65 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka Figs. 99 G & H.66 Ibid., Figs. 99 A & B.67 Ibid., Fig. 99 E; C.E. Godakumbura, Guardstones Panel 13. At close examination,

it becomes clear that this fi gure also has four arms. I am most grateful to Purnima Muhandiram for drawing my attention to this detail.

68 U. von Schroeder, Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka Fig. 99 C & D.69 Ibid., p. 338.

Osmund Bopearachchi



BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bopearachchi, O. “Les données numismatiques et la datation du bazar de Begram”,ΤΟΠΟΙ, Lyon, 2001, p. 411–435.

De l’Indus à l’Oxus. Catalogue de l’Exposition : De l’Indus à l’Oxus. Archéologie de l’Asie Centrale, edited by Osmund Bopearachchi, Christian Landes et Christine Sachs, Association IMAGO - Muséee de Lattes, Lattes, 2003.

Nagaswamy, R. (1991), “Alagankulam: An Indo-Roman trading port”, Indian Archaeological Heritage, K.V. Soundara Rayan Felicitation Volume, New Delhi: 1991, pp. 247–254.

Sarkar, H. & Misra, B.N. Nagarjunakonda, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, fi rst edition 1966, revised edition 1999.

Schopen, G. Figments and Fragments of Mahayana Buddhism in India. More Collected Papers, Honolulu: 2005.

Seneviratana, A. Purana Anuradhapuraya, Colombo: 1995.


Documents

“Andhra-Tamilnadu and Sri Lanka” Early Buddhist Sculptures of Sri Lanka