@Speaking Archaeologically , Guys you have done a very beautiful job in analysing different schools of art of Bhartiya cultures and especially focussing the art forms related to Buddha, the great . My sincere gratitude for your work and keep us updated with more of your future works :)
I think this video really brings forth that one important facet of Object analysis- carefully understanding the context of the site. While describing and observing an object is good, all that factual information will only make sense if it is very skillfully and carefully juxtaposed with its historic, social and cultural context as well as the variations of the same theme and object in various primary texts. Object analysis, as seen in this video, becomes stronger when you further juxtapose it with parallels across regions or time. There are times when certain figures get obscured or wrongly identified with other set of figures such as in the case of Darpandharini. All of this then becomes important to carefully delineate and classify the specific kinds of objects.
The main centres where Buddhist sculptures were made were the regions of Gandhara , Mathura and the Deccan.The material used in Gandhara buddhist sculpture was schist stone. Mathura used red mottled sandstone. The Deccan centres used the local limestone. None of these materials were marble as mentioned. Also. All these sculptures were painted where the base material wasn’t visible in antiquity. Traces of polychrome are still evident in some of the relief panels and statues in the round, as seen in a few museums where these pieces were dispersed.
The video lecture made the perspective of looking at a sculpture maybe it be in terms of a pillar relief or a free standing one. I think the thing that is important to note from this video is the perspective of looking at a sculpture in terms to analyse it specifically by noting the mentioned characteristics. Also not only visually it is necessary but also to side by side refer to the primary texts which give us a brief overview of why the sculptures were included with say specific ornaments, dressing style or maybe also the standing or the sitting posture. This video sums up all the basic characteristics which shall be kept in mind while studying a particular sculpture. I definitely learnt more by watching this and eager to learn more in terms of studying the iconography so that while a writing a paper, things are pretty good and clear to understand. Thank you ma’am for such an inclusive video on board.
In terms of the ancillary features, like background landscape etc., how might one get to know if these features are generalised or prescribed in canon (to make a landscape in a particular way) or local influences of the regional style? If a generalisation / conformity to prescription has happened in these sculptures, then how might they be used for study?
They are not. Which is why they are more factual and act as a true window into the times of commissioning.What appears in the background is more secular in nature and can consequently be used for anthropological and archaeological reconstruction of society and setting of the time.
@Speaking Archaeologically , Guys you have done a very beautiful job in analysing different schools of art of Bhartiya cultures and especially focussing the art forms related to Buddha, the great . My sincere gratitude for your work and keep us updated with more of your future works :)
So nice of you!
Such an excellent short explanation. Great Work people.
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
I think this video really brings forth that one important facet of Object analysis- carefully understanding the context of the site. While describing and observing an object is good, all that factual information will only make sense if it is very skillfully and carefully juxtaposed with its historic, social and cultural context as well as the variations of the same theme and object in various primary texts. Object analysis, as seen in this video, becomes stronger when you further juxtapose it with parallels across regions or time. There are times when certain figures get obscured or wrongly identified with other set of figures such as in the case of Darpandharini. All of this then becomes important to carefully delineate and classify the specific kinds of objects.
The main centres where Buddhist sculptures were made were the regions of Gandhara , Mathura and the Deccan.The material used in Gandhara buddhist sculpture was schist stone. Mathura used red mottled sandstone. The Deccan centres used the local limestone. None of these materials were marble as mentioned. Also. All these sculptures were painted where the base material wasn’t visible in antiquity. Traces of polychrome are still evident in some of the relief panels and statues in the round, as seen in a few museums where these pieces were dispersed.
Hellenistic influence in Buddhist art was more visible in the Gandhara region during the Kushan period
Correct you are.
The video lecture made the perspective of looking at a sculpture maybe it be in terms of a pillar relief or a free standing one. I think the thing that is important to note from this video is the perspective of looking at a sculpture in terms to analyse it specifically by noting the mentioned characteristics. Also not only visually it is necessary but also to side by side refer to the primary texts which give us a brief overview of why the sculptures were included with say specific ornaments, dressing style or maybe also the standing or the sitting posture. This video sums up all the basic characteristics which shall be kept in mind while studying a particular sculpture.
I definitely learnt more by watching this and eager to learn more in terms of studying the iconography so that while a writing a paper, things are pretty good and clear to understand.
Thank you ma’am for such an inclusive video on board.
In terms of the ancillary features, like background landscape etc., how might one get to know if these features are generalised or prescribed in canon (to make a landscape in a particular way) or local influences of the regional style? If a generalisation / conformity to prescription has happened in these sculptures, then how might they be used for study?
They are not. Which is why they are more factual and act as a true window into the times of commissioning.What appears in the background is more secular in nature and can consequently be used for anthropological and archaeological reconstruction of society and setting of the time.
Amazing.....
Where to place the Sarnath School?