This article reopens the discussion on two celebrated early Buddhist bronzes, one in the Harvard Art Museums seated in dhyanamudra and with flaming shoulders, and the other in the Asian Art Museum of San Francisco, dated to 338. The article suggests that the Harvard Buddha is not Chinese, as generally believed, in light of a series of iconographical details, the most important of which—the dhyana mudra—has been overlooked in the previous scholarly research. Focusing on the form this mudra takes in India and China, the author shows that it underwent significant modifications as it moved east, which has important implications for the wider field of the transfer of Buddhist art to China.
Chinese or Not Chinese? Investigating Early Bronze Buddhas
Nicoletta Celli
2018
Abstract
This article reopens the discussion on two celebrated early Buddhist bronzes, one in the Harvard Art Museums seated in dhyanamudra and with flaming shoulders, and the other in the Asian Art Museum of San Francisco, dated to 338. The article suggests that the Harvard Buddha is not Chinese, as generally believed, in light of a series of iconographical details, the most important of which—the dhyana mudra—has been overlooked in the previous scholarly research. Focusing on the form this mudra takes in India and China, the author shows that it underwent significant modifications as it moved east, which has important implications for the wider field of the transfer of Buddhist art to China.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
