Two Chinese Buddhist Stele

Two Chinese Buddhist SteleAuthor(s): Osvald SirénSource: Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America, Vol. 13 (1959), pp. 8-21Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20067014 .

Accessed: 18/06/2014 02:02

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.86 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:02:54 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=asiasoc

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20067014?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3



Two Chinese Buddhist Stele

Osvald Siren

Stockholm, Sweden

I

The two Buddhist stele which form the subject of the present article have re

mained almost unknown or very little known to students of Chinese sculpture, with the possible exception of the few who have visited the National Museum of

Stockholm. Both sculptures have now been on exhibition in the Museum for several years ?one as a deposition of Mr. Ernest Ericson of New York, the other as a part of the perma

nent Museum collection?although owing to the somewhat crowded conditions of dis

play, neither of them can be completely examined or fully appreciated in their present

position. But since we have reasons to hope that a special museum for Far Eastern art will be established in Stockholm within a year or two, these sculptures will, no doubt, then become better known. In the meantime some notes on these two monuments of early Chinese sculpture may not be unwelcome, and it is to be hoped that they may lead to a more general appreciation of their historical significance and artistic beauty.

The larger of the two monuments has, to my knowledge, never been reproduced or described; whereas the smaller stele (Figs. 1-2) is included in the compendium known as Chinese Sculpture from the Fifth to the Fourteenth Century (London 1925), where it is reproduced on plates 120-21 and described as follows:

"Votive Stele, front. Sakyamuni Buddha

standing with his right hand lifted in the

abhaya mudra (the left pointing downward). On his left is Maitreya, on his right Kuanyin

(Padmapani), both standing on lotus pedestals. In the halo of the main figure are several small

Buddhas and soaring apsaras. The nimbus is

decorated with flame ornaments along the

borders. Weathered dark grey limestone; height 4 ft. 3 in.

"The reverse of the same stele. At the top three seated Buddhas (engraved in low relief), below this (in the middle section) Sakyamuni and Prabutharatna seated in a draped pavilion, and further towards the sides adoring donors.

The bottom section is occupied by an inscription

containing the date Ching-ming 3rd year, 11th

month, 11th day, i.e., December 25, 502."

The above description giving the main facts

concerning the date and general character of

the stele may now be complemented by a trans

lation of the whole inscription, which proves to contain historical references of some interest;

these have been revealed by Professor Etienne

Balazs in Paris, to whom I rest under great

obligation for active assistance in deciphering the inscription, and they will be further noted

presently. The text (which contains a few

incomplete characters) may be translated as

follows:

"On the eleventh day of the eleventh month

of the third year of Ching-ming the (Buddha-) disciples Liu Wei, Liu Tui, Liu Chi and Liu Hai, four persons, (have) had this statue of Maitreya

made primarily for the benefit of the emperor

and the dynasty, but also for the fathers and

9



Fig. 1. Front of a Votive Stele, dated 502. Grey limestone;

height 4 feet 3 inches. Deposited in the National

Museum, Stockholm, by Mr. Ernest Ericson.

Fig. 2. Reverse of the Ericson Stele. Detail, lower portion.

mothers of seven generations, for all their parents

and villages and communities, whether small or

large. They beseech the Buddha constantly, to

the end that they may be reborn among the

gods above and among men below, that they

may occupy important positions, that their

family property may grow richer, their wishes

be granted and that the whole empire may

remain in peace, so that the harvest of the five

kinds of grain may be ample and the population may be contented and joyful and forever pro

tected from every kind of suffering."

This dedicatory inscription is accompanied

by more than twenty names, mostly of members

of the Liu family, but also of monks. They have

been inserted wherever there was some empty

space and in addition to the names there are

a few engraved silhouettes or low reliefs repre

senting donors in the act of adoring the Buddha

images, but the engravings are not all suffi

ciently well preserved to make them legible, nor

do they contain any references to events or

personalities of historical importance. Yet

through the comparative study of the engraved

inscription and the printed reproduction of it,

which is included in the Tuan-fang publication known as Tfao-chai Ts'ang-sbih chi (vol. 6, 6b

8a) under the title "A Record of Buddha made

by Liu Wei and Others," Professor Balazs has been able to identify at least seven of the most

prominent members of the Liu family who all held important government positions at certain

places in the southern and central sections of

the present Hopei province.1

The names of the ancestors of the Liu family,

together with their official titles and the indi cations of the places where they lived and exer

cised their authority, may be said to form a

kind of social or local background to the family monument here under discussion. The text makes

no reference to major historical events or per

sonalities, yet in leading us to the various locali

ties to which prominent members of the Liu

family were attached by official appointments and tradition, it may provide some valuable

10



indications concerning the most probable origin

of the family stele.

These place names lead more or less towards

the southwestern section of the present province

of Hopei and beyond its borders into the adjoin

ing provinces of Shansi and Honan, i.e., to parts

of northern China which at the time formed

important sections of the Northern Wei state

with its capital at Ta-t'ung in Shansi. The

extraordinary importance of this foreign dynasty

for the spread of the Buddhist religion and Buddhist art in northern China is too well known to require further comment; students

who have paid some attention to sculpture in

particular will no doubt readily admit that the

great majority of the most significant early

examples were made under the Northern Wei

rule, as there are numerous inscriptions to

testify. It should furthermore be remembered,

that the general appreciation of these archaic

sculptures of the Northern Wei period is due not only to their stylistic refinement and intrin

sic beauty, but also to the distinctive place which they occupy in the general flow of

religious sculpture in China, both from an

artistic and an historical point of view, as signifi cant links between Central Asia and the Far

East. They were made in China for the new

Buddhist converts, but in close adherence to

types and models which had been developed further west at centers of Buddhist learning and art which were already flourishing in the fourth and fifth centuries in the western oases

such as Khotan, Kyzil, Kutcha, Turfan, Bami

yan and elsewhere along the roads from India

to China.

This kind of religious sculpture is nowadays known through numerous examples scattered

all over the western world. Its main foothold in

China proper from the beginning of the fifth

century onwards seems to have been close to

the cave-temples at Y?n-kang near Ta-t'ung, where the Northern Wei dynasty held its sway between 386 and 494, when the capital of the

dynasty was moved to old Loyang. The sculp

tural activity was resumed with great zeal at

the Yiin-kang caves after the Buddhist persecu

tion of 446-450, when the place became the

largest and most eastern center of that Buddhist

art which stretched all through Central Asia

and which seems to have had its main source in

northern India (as illustrated by Mathura sculp tures of the Kushana period), although at the

same time it received important tributaries from

Iranian art. And beside the very large, not to

say monumental, statues modelled in the rela

tively soft sandstone rocks at Yiin-kang there

were created in the same neighbourhood, or

further south, quantities of minor things in stone

as well as in metal and clay which reflect the same stylistic features, though with individual variations.

It is hardly necessary to dwell here on special examples from the Yiin-kang cave-temples or

from the extensive series of minor bronze statu

ettes of the fifth century scattered in private

and public collections in Japan and America, because their characteristic features have been

repeatedly described by various authorities. But

for the sake of illustration and comparison, I

would like to recall two remarkable sculptures which now both belong to the Metropolitan Museum, one in stone and the other in gilt bronze.

The former (Fig. 3) is a stele more than seven

feet high, carved in light grey friable sandstone, which is common in the Yiin-kang area, and

probably the largest of its kind still preserved. According to the inscription it was made in 495

and meant to represent Maitreya, though ren

dered exactly in the same fashion and position

(with the now missing hand in abhaya mudra) as Sakyamuni. He stands upright, almost in full

round against the very broad leaf-shaped nim

bus, accompanied by a dozen donors arranged in rows on the one side, while the halo is deco

rated with the seven Buddhas of the past and an outer border of flame patterns. The enormous

11



Fig. 3. Front of a Votive Stele, dated 495. Greyish sand

stone; height (approximately) 7 feet. Metropolitan Museum of Art, N. Y.

square head is almost detached from the back

ground; it forms the center, and attracts the

main attention not only on account of its

monumental dimensions but also through the

expression of blissful serenity radiating from the

smiling mouth and the half-closed eyes. The

mantle which clings almost like an outer coat

of skin to the well-rounded limbs and torso,

is laid in pleated folds which form an orna

mental pattern around the figure. It corresponds in this respect quite closely to some of the

Yiin-kang sculptures which, however, show

different variations of the schematic fold-design.

Finally a freer transformation of the same pat tern may also be observed on the Ericson stele

here under discussion, which is a more distant

relative of the Yiin-kang sculptures executed in

Fig. 4. Large Gilt-Bronze Statue, dated 477 (or 486).

Height 4 feet 7 inches. Metropolitan Museum

of Art, N. Y.

a harder material and reflecting, particularly in

the long curving lobes, influences from models

in metal.

The bronze statue, (Fig. 4) on the other

hand, (also in the Metropolitan Museum) illus trates a different variation of the early Buddha

type and fold-design, though one no less clearly

derived from Central Asian prototypes. Accord

ing to an acceptable tradition this statue once

decorated one of the temples on Wu-t'ai shan

in eastern Shansi, then an important centre of

Buddhist pilgrimage closely linked to India by religious tradition. The inscription on the pedes

tal of the statue has been variously interpreted?

the date being read either 477 or 486?i.e., with

a difference of nine years, which does not alter

12



F?g. ,5. Stucco Relief of a Seated Buddha from Aktarek.

Height 12 inches.

its position at the beginning of the stylistic tradition.

The figure, which measures 5 5 inches in

height, is the largest of all surviving archaic

bronze statues from China, and must, indeed,

have been far more impressive in its original state than it now appears deprived of its large nimbus. The relative importance of the two

main portions of the composition?the figure and the nimbus?can best be appreciated if we

recall certain minor statuettes of this kind on

which the large nimbus, engraved with apsaras

and flames, may be said to represent or reflect

the luminous atmosphere in which the Buddha

appears to his devotees. But even as it stands

today, shorn of the celestial aura, this statue is

a most striking example of the kind of votive

icon which enjoyed the greatest popularity in China during the latter part of the fifth century.

Equally, it must be regarded as an outstanding link in the stylistic chain which connects the

early Buddhist sculptures of China with the

figurative art of Central Asia. This raises a

fundamental problem which cannot be discussed here at any length, but one or two examples of

the kind of art produced among the oases of the

?til

Fig. 6. Front of a Votive Stele, dated 500. Limestone;

height 3 feet 1V4 inches. Cleveland Museum of Art,

gift of Mr. and Mrs. Severance A. Millikin.

so-called "Western lands" (i.e., the Gobi region), as made known through the publications of

Aurel Stein and von le Coq, may not be without

interest.

The stucco relief of a seated Buddha from

the Aktarek site at Khotan (cf. Serindia, vol.

IV, pi. VIII) is an excellent example of this kind

of Central Asian art (Fig. 5). The neck and torso are here completely covered by the curving

ridges or seams of a tightly fitting mantle, in a

manner which reminds us of sculptures from

Mathura of the Kushana period, but the head

is of a type more frequent in Chinese sculpture.

13



*r

& #^i

tf&s

?W ?> *'i

>*?*<

F*g. 7. Fr o?/ i/#>?/ 0/ a Large Stele.

Light grey limestone; height about 6 feet 7 inches. National Museum, Stockholm.

It is almost round like a ball, powerful and

plump, with an air of youthful energy radiating from the closed lips and eyes. Practically the same type reappears on the Ericson stele of the

year 504 and also, though slightly modified, on

a somewhat similar stele in the Cleveland Mu

seum (Fig. 6) which is dated four years earlier,

i.e., on the 9th day of the 12th month of the

23rd year of the T'ai-ho reign; which corre

sponds to January 25 th, 500.

The stylizations of the fold design in these two stele, however, reveal a noticeably individual

attempt to modify the more common type of

treatment observable on the large bronze statue

and also (in slightly modified form) on the

above-named stucco relief from Khotan. The

general correspondence in the draping of the

mantles and the stylization of the folds in all

these sculptures is obvious, in spite of certain

differences due to the varied materials. But at

the same time it seems evident that the stone

sculptures represent a somewhat more advanced

stage of stylistic development than the bronze statue described above. They are no longer, to

the same extent as this hieratic figure, schematic

repetitions of Central Asian models, but fore

runners of an increasingly free Chinese mode

of interpretation. Chinese sculpture was becom

ing at this time a more or less independent off

shoot of that mighty tree which had its roots

in India and spread its branches all over Central

Asia.

If we consider the dates of the early works

mentioned above (and a few others), we are

led to the conclusion that the Chinese spirit or

style in this field of art hardly reached full

maturity before the last quarter of the fifth

century. The earlier examples of Buddhist fig urai art consist mainly of bronze statuettes

(beside the two stone stele, reproduced on plates

116-118 in Chinese Sculpture) and for stylistic reasons may all be placed in the Central Asian

group. The same is true of such Yiin-kang

sculptures as may have been executed before

14



the beginning of the last quarter of the fifth

century, whilst those which can be dated by inscriptions to the 480s are, on the other hand,

already stylistically akin to the two stele here

under discussion. They may be said to represent

approximately the same stage in the general

stylistic evolution, though with understandable variations resulting from material criteria and

technical propensities.

While our initial endeavour to determine by means of the dedicatory inscription the exact

source of our stele has led to no definite con

clusion, some grounds were nevertheless adduced

for assuming that it was produced not in Shansi

(where this kind of hard limestone is rare) but more probably in northern Honan, if not in the

adjoining part of Shensi. But it must not be

forgotten that sculptures of this kind sometimes

were transported long distances and, equally, that skilled craftsmen sometimes were called in

from distant places to execute votive offerings to Buddhist temples.

II

The other stele to which I should like to draw attention in this connection is a rather different

thing as a work of art (Figs. 7-8). It is somewhat

larger, measuring about six feet 7 inches in

height, but incomplete, because a large piece on

the left side has been sliced off and the top section cut away. At the same time it is more

advanced from a stylistic point of view.

The original composition evidently consisted

of three figures; a larger one in the middle, standing out practically in the round, and two

smaller ones at the sides executed in high relief

(one of them now lost). The feet have been

damaged by the cutting of the figure from its

pedestal, and so has the left section of the lotus

shaped halo; otherwise it is well preserved.

Before attempting any appreciation of the

artistic significance of this remarkable work of

Buddhist sculpture, it seems necessary to ask,

.; *$**$

i SIL

r..." . v^ /' -v Vn,. i

?

~fj a.

.?:

F*g. 8. ???0 Wew o/ F*g. 7.

l?



Fig. 9. The Bodhisattva Head from the Stele in the National Museum, Stockholm.

what does it represent? The simplest answer to

this question at first sight may be: three

Bodhisattvas?a large one in the middle, two

smaller ones at the sides. But on second thought

this answer may seem more surprising than

convincing, since no such hierarchical represen

tation of three Bodhisattvas is known to us in

Chinese sculpture, and all the more so because

the still preserved two Bodhisattvas may be in

terpreted as Kuanyins. The smaller figure is

carrying the attributes of this Bodhisattva, viz.,

the vase with amrita water and the leaf-shaped

object well known from other statues of this

merciful being.

But does the main figure, which stands out

almost in the round from the background slab,

also represent Kuanyin? Certain features seem

to support this supposition, while others make it

less probable. The head (Fig. 9) is certainly formed like a Bodhisattva head. It has the high

topped protuberance on the skull, covered by rich hair laid in regular waves, which is so

characteristic of the Bodhisattva attire. It has

no crown or diadem, but on the front of the

protuberance there has been a large oval orna

ment, now cut away. The place and size of this

ornament make it probable that it contained a

small relief of a meditating Amitabha Buddha, i.e., the most conspicuous element or attribute

of Kuanyin as a spiritual emanation from

Amitabha, the Buddha of Boundless Light.

The head can hardly be explained in any other way, but it is placed on a draped body which is more characteristic of a standing Buddha than of a Bodhisattva. The garment

consists of a closely fitting dhoti and a mantle

of heavier material which covers both the

shoulders and the arms; it is arranged in large

curving folds over the front and thinner pleated

folds at the sides which are drawn out into wing

like lobes at the feet. The well controlled fold

design enhances the structural quality of the

figure and the positions of the hands in the

abhaya and the varada mudra lend further sup

port to the interpretation of the figure as a

Buddha.

From a formal viewpoint it cannot be denied

that the main part of the figure corresponds

perfectly to the usual representations of Sakya muni or Maitreya, in spite of the fact that the

head is formed in accordance with the Bodhisat

tva types. The combination of the two distinct

iconographie elements can hardly escape our

attention, but whether this has been caused by some scriptural record or should be explained as

the result of an independent conception by a

prominent Chinese artist, is more than we can

tell. We have no actual historical foundation

that would enable us to decide the case. It is

not strictly speaking unique, but relatively rare

and complete of its kind, and as such one of the

best illustrations of the well known fact that

the Chinese sculptors or craftsmen did not

follow strictly the Indian rules of Buddhist

iconography, but enjoyed a degree of license

16



which sometimes makes it difficult to identify the actual subjects.

The stonemason who executed the stele here

under discussion was evidently no simple crafts

man but something of a creative genius, with

an intuitive grasp of the spiritual concepts which

it was his task to symbolize. If he had been in contact with the broad stream of Mahayana

ideology, which reached China through Central Asia in the fourth century, he might have

realized that the Bodhisattva Kuanyin, as well

as Sakyamuni or Maitreya, could be interpreted as emanations from the central source of light and wisdom, often represented as Amitabha, and

that both, though in different ways and degrees, were concerned with the protection and guid ance of humanity of the present manvantara. If,

indeed, the sculptor was familiar with some of

these fundamental concepts of Mahayana philo

sophy, he may well have found it more natural

than strange to combine symbols of the merciful

Bodhisattva with the body of a human Buddha

(Sakyamuni or Maitreya), thus creating a motif

with a spiritual significance of its own which

animates the figure and endows it with a reflex

of introspective beauty.

Beside the large central figure and the accom

panying Bodhisattva, which are carved almost

in the round, though still attached to the back

ground, there are?on the front as well as on

the reverse of this stele?a number of minor

figures rendered in quite low relief or line

engraving (Figs. 10-13). Among them may be

pointed out the soaring apsaras on the left side

of the Buddha's halo, which are visible in part, and the well-preserved portrait of a donor stand

ing at the Buddha's feet (Fig. 10). Judging by his elaborate costume and high headgear he must

be an official of distinction, an impression also

strengthened by the minor figures who form

his retinue and support an ornamental umbrella

over his head. His name and rank are recorded

on the large tablet in front of him as follows: "The district magistrate (I chung-cheng) Liu

Po-yii venerating Buddha."

The name of this stately official, Liu Po-yii,

may well remind us of the donors of the preced

ing stele who also were called Liu, but whether

there was any relationship between them is not

known. Nor have we found any historical indi

cation of the place or district where this stele

was made. Our only guide in deciding its place of origin is perhaps the material: a very hard

but brittle kind of limestone which is found in the southernmost part of Hopei province.

The historical interest of this stele was origi

nally enhanced by the figure-scenes engraved on

the reverse and in part also rendered in low

relief. But since almost one-third of the stone

block has been chipped off and a number of holes and cavities have been caused by the de

composition of the brittle stone, it has become

very difficult to disentangle and decipher all these scenes completely. Their main portions

may, however, be clearly observed in photo

graphs.

The scenes are arranged in three tiers or

storeys, one on the top of the other, and seem

to depict successive moments or stages in the

development of a Buddha?probably Sakya

muni; they were perhaps inspired by some of

the Mahayana scriptures which had recently become known in translation. The lowest tier

is dominated by a large Buddha in a mountain

ous landscape (Fig. 11). He sits on a rocky

ledge with crossed legs and hands resting on his

lap (partly destroyed), possibly teaching or

meditating. The head is surrounded by a very

large halo, while the youthful body is covered

by a mantle which forms broad folds over the

shoulders and arms. The landscape to the left

of the figure has been damaged in places, but

enough of it remains to arouse a vivid impression of craggy mountain scenery where some tall

leafy trees are growing in the crevices between

rocky ledges and grassy hills. It is rendered in a sketchy abbreviated manner, but with a re

markable effect of life.

In the second tier the holy man is placed within a large leaf-shaped nimbus with a border

17



Fig. 10. Engraved Portrait of the Donor and

Adjoining Inscription on the Stele in the National Museum, Stockholm.

Fig. 12. Reverse of the Stockholm Stele; middle portion: Engraving of Buddha Seated in a Flaming Nimbus.

Fig. 11. Reverse of the Stockholm Stele; lowest portion: Engraving of Buddha

Meditating in a Mountainous Landscape.

Fig. 13. Reverse of the Stockholm Stele; part of the uppermost section: A Bodhisattva Seated under a

Canopy and other Figures.

18



of rising flames forming a luminous aureole

around the whole figure (Fig. 12). Here too he

is seated on a stone bench or pedestal; if there

has been any indication of a surrounding land

scape, it is no longer discernible, but there are

adoring worshippers on both sides, some of

them with halos around their heads. If this is

the same man who is represented seated in

meditation below, he is now radiant with the

flaming light of spiritual illumination. And since he is turning with outstretched hand to

wards some adoring figures on the right, he may

be in the act of conferring a spiritual gift or

answering some petition.

The scene above (Fig. 13), on the third tier, is the most difficult to interpret, because essen

tial portions are missing and it seems to be alto

gether of a more fantastic or legendary kind.

It is not concentrated around a single Buddha

or Bodhisattva, but composed of two or three

figures of equal importance. The most visible

among them is a rather elegant Bodhisattva-like

being who is seated under a tasselled canopy

lifting one hand in the position of abhaya mudra and stretching the other towards a strange

demon-like figure who stands close by in an

arresting attitude. His connection with the

seated figure under the canopy is not quite

clear, but as the two are provided with the same

kind of elaborate head-dress and large halos they seem to be of almost equal rank. The demon-like

figure may be a celestial guardian; beyond and above him, however, appears the head of a third

figure, likewise surrounded by a large halo,

whose r?le in the assembly cannot be defined

since the intermediate links are missing. Could

this be the remains of an illustration to the

Vimalakirti Sutra} The motif?i.e., the hermit

Vimalakirti's disputation with the Bodhisattva

Manjusri?was very popular in the Northern

Wei period, as may be observed at Yiin-kang as well as in several paintings in the Tun-huang

caves, and it would thus from a historical view

point fit in here, but it is no longer clearly discernible.

While the literary significance of the scene

remains quite uncertain, however, its artistic

interpretation derives an uncommon impact

from the strong characterization of the two

principal figures. The artist who executed this

as well as the other engraved illustrations on

this stele was obviously no common stonemason

but a master of design and a great sculptor. His

work is an example of the very close connection

between sculpture and drawing (painting) at

the beginning of the sixth century, and may as such be compared with the engraved sar

cophagi in the Nelson Gallery of Kansas City, dated 525, and the stone shrine in the Boston

Museum, which is dated 529.

In my search for characteristic early Buddhist

sculpture from China which might prove of

some aid for the stylistic classification of the

monument under discussion, I have been obliged to review no small amount of material, but I

must here limit myself to two or three examples which for one reason or other appear especially relevant. The most interesting among these from

a comparative point of view was no doubt the

large stele which once formed part of the

Gualino collection in Turin, but like most of

the stone sculptures in this collection, was partly

destroyed or badly damaged during the transport

from Turin to Rome shortly after the war. The

truck on which the sculptures were loaded took

fire on the road, causing the stone monuments to

crack and smoulder. Their resistance to the heat

of the flames seems to have been of various de

grees (depending on their condition and their

more or less brittle stone material) ; the large

stele, which already at that time was partly dam

aged, was broken up into many minor pieces,

though without much damage to the head. Due

to the painstaking, long drawn out work at the

Istituto del Restauro in Rome its original form

was, however reconstructed, so that the statue

could be exhibited again, together with a few other early Chinese stone sculptures, in the

museum of the Istituto del il Medio ed Estremo

Oriente, now known as Museo Nazionale di Arte

19



Orientale. I saw it there again on my last stay in

Rome in its present dilapidated form which, however, had retained its fundamental stylistic features.

The photograph here reproduced (Fig. 14) shows the monument in an earlier state, i.e.,

before the war, and reveals some of the features

no longer clearly visible. The main figure is

essentially akin to the one of the Stockholm

stele, being also a combination of a Buddha

and a Bodhisattva head (on which the top-knot has been lost). The very tall slab which forms the background of this sculpture has further

more at a relatively early period (probably Yuan

or Ming?) been narrowed down, an alteration

which also caused the destruction of the two

small side figures. Yet the head of the main

figure is still in fair condition and noticeable for its strongly emphasized cubistic form, while the

face is illuminated by the serene smile of the Bodhisattva. The compositional correspondence between this and the Stockholm stele is quite

noticeable but a closer comparison makes it evi

dent that the Gualino stele is a more schematic

work in which the sharp-cut linear stylization

prevails over the more human or naturalistic

aspect. It is more akin to certain minor repre

sentations in bronze such as the two well-known

altar-groups in the Metropolitan Museum (one

of them dated 524) (Fig. 15), which are said to have been excavated in the Fang-fung village in the Cheng-ting area. The original inscription on the Gualino stele (no longer fully visible) contained the date 527 and the name of the

donor, a man called Chiang Po-ch'i from Tung

yen, a place within the Wei-hui prefecture in

northern Honan. The Stockholm stele may not

have been executed exactly in the same year or

at the same place, yet on stylistic grounds it

seems evident that the above indications of date

and locality may also be applied approximately to the Stockholm stele.

It may not be necessary to quote further com

parative examples for the sake of a closer dating

of our stele because it is less the exact year and

month of its execution that interests us at this

place than its artistic quality and exceptional

significance as a great religious monument. Its

individual appeal is not like that of an emotional

impulse or an exalted vision. It seems to be the

result of a long sustained effort to create in

hard, resistant material a symbol of the luminous

beauty and unapproachable character attained

by a human being who stands on the threshold

of Buddhahood. It is as if the creative faculty of the sculptor had been aroused by the universal

import of the motif and that this had enabled him to transmit in terms of structural form,

enobled by tactile beauty, the deepest spiritual

significance of the Bodhisattva ideal. The result

of the combination of inspiration and technical

mastery is a work of art whose appeal will never

diminish for those who realize that "beauty is

truth, truth beauty" even when confined within

a block of stone, so long as it is revealed by the

chisel of a genius.

NOTE

1. The following information, supplied by Professor Balazs, may here be quoted: The principal ancestor of the family, Liu

Huang, served at the end of the fourth century as a general of the so-called Ting-ling guard; a brother of his was governor of the Chi-chou province (then comprising Hopei, Shansi and

part of Honan). A third brother was Liu Ch'ing, district

governor of T'iao (or Hsiu) in Hopei, a fourth brother gover nor of Hsiang-chou (i.e. Lin-chang) on the border of Honan and Hopei, near the place called Yeh, which later served as

capital of the Northern Ch'i dynasty. A fifth brother was com

manding military officer at Ch'iu (a place near I-chou in

Hopei, known as Lai-shui). A sixth brother Liu Ch'iang was a member of the imperial guard; a seventh one had the title of a palace secretary and a general of the army for the subjection of the East. Other names are not clearly legible, but the above named place called Ch'iu is mentioned also in connection with

another man.

20



Fig. 14. Large Votive Stele, dated 527.

Grey limestone with traces of color; height 6 feet Museo di Arte Orientale, Rome.

Fig. 15. Central Figure from an Altar Group. Gilt bronze; dated 524.

Metropolitan Museum of Art, N. Y. (Rogers Fund).

21



Documents

Two Chinese Buddhist Stele