No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 March 2011
We learn from the ancient legends, that in the very earliest periods of Buddhism relics and images of Buddha were highly honoured. The religious works recommend their worship, as also that of the monuments in which the relics are deposited; and we find it mentioned that the images sent to royal personages at their desire were previously inscribed with the sacred dogma, “Ye Dharma,” &c., and similar formulas, in order to make those personages acquainted with the Bhuddist doctrines. Such were the first objects of worship. In the seventh century A.D., however, this adoration and worship had already been considerably increased; for Thien Thsang, the Chinese pilgrim, mentions, that all the principal disciples of Sákyamuni were then addressed, as also the Bodhisattwas who had excelled in virtue and the sciences, as Manjusrí. “The Maháyána schools,” he says, “have adored even all Bódhisattwas without any further distinction.”
page 437 note 1 Burnouf, , “Introduction,” pp. 837–51Google Scholar. Sykes, , “Miniature Chaityas and Inscriptions of the Buddhist religions dogma.” Jour R. As. Soc., vol. xvi, p. 87Google Scholar.
page 438 note 1 I here limit myself to an analysis of the human forms, referring, for varieties in attitude, dress, and emblems, to chapter xiv of my volume on Buddhism, entitled, “Buddhism in Tibet, illustrated by Literary Documents and Objects of Worship.”
page 438 note 2 The entire series of 275 facial casts (published in a metallic edition by F. A. Barth, Leipzig, and Trübner, London) are to be seen in the India Museum, London, and in various other Museums. In this reproduction four principal shadings are distinguished, corresponding to the variations of complexion.
page 438 note 3 The ethnographical materials collected by my brothers during their travels will be the object of vol. viii of the “Results of a Scientific Mission to India and High Asia.” Such of the numeric values as were wanted here for comparing the measurements of the sculptures with the mean proportions of the Brahmang (the purest caste of the Hindus), and of individuals of the Tibetan race, have been calculated for the purpose at once.
page 439 note 1 As the principal works which treat of these interesting and delicate questions, I quote “Types of Mankind,” and “Indigenous Races,” by Nott and Gliddon. As another phenomenon in corroboration of the comparative invariability of the original type, may be quoted the Jewish colonies in India, whose members have preserved the Semitic features, and even the fair complexion, wherever they have abstained from intermarriages with natives; but have become assimilated in form to the natives where intermixture with them has taken place.
page 439 note 2 As a curious and till now isolated instance of an apparent deviation in sculpture from the natural proportions, I may here mention that my brother Hermann observed in the Niniveh sculptures that the foot was considerably longer than the ulna; whilst arbitrary deviations in this respect from nature in sculpture most generally show the opposite error. It must be added, however, that as yet it appears impossible to decide whether this deviation is based upon a real anatomical feature or not, as no human remains from these countries, nor portraits of the Ninivites by other nations which would corroborate it, are to be seen even in the rich oriental museums of London. Perhaps the continued researches and important discoveries in these regions made by Sir Henry Bawlinson, to whom my brother had occasion to communicate his remark, will one day assist in deciding the question. Foreign nations figured as prisoners by the artists of Niniveh have not these exceptional proportions; this decidedly increases their importance wherever we meet with them.
page 440 note 1 I limit myself here almost exclusively to Tibetan Buddhism. China, Japan, and Ceylon, as also the Indian Archipelago, hare gods of their own; and these latter show, as was to be expected, types differing from those of the Tibetan representations.
page 440 note 2 Sculptured figures of Buddha of enormous dimensions are not rare either in Burmah or Tibet. An album of ninety-six photographs by Colonel Trype, of which the Madras Government ordered several copies for official distribution, contains numerous instances of such figures varying from 20 to 40 feet in height. They are sometimes in a sitting, sometimes in a standing attitude. In Tibet my brothers saw an unusually large figure in the temple at Leh. The statue represents Buddha in meditation (in a sitting attitude), and is a little larger than the temple iteelf, a part of the head going through a hole in the roof into the open air. The composition of this statue is not less curious than its dimensions; the body and legs are formed by a framework of wood, draped with cloth and paper, while the head, arms, and feet are the only parts moulded in clay.
page 441 note 1 For the anatomical definition of the parts measured, and for the instruments employed, see Hermann de Schlagintweit's Memoir in Bär and Wagner, “Bericht über die anthropologische Versammlung in Göttingen,” 1861.