An enigmatic script from Gandhara

[Joe Shearer]

i never said that there was no greek influence, i only said that over all they are not greek statues.

I am not sure, in that case, where there is any disagreement, since I did not claim it as Greek statuary either, only as Greek influenced. So if I said that, and you did not deny it, what exactly are we discussing? Unless we are vociferously agreeing with each other, which is quite acceptable to me, but may make spaghetti of the innards of a Pakistani fan-boy who has crept into this thread.

in regards to gradual evolution of greek statues try researching ''minoan pylos combat agate'', this is 1500 BC we are talking about and already shows matured level of the greek statuary or arts to come, if we go even further back,, all the elements of the greek statuary are depicted in mesopotamian bronze age arts. The theory of greek classical evolution of its statues has flopped badly since the discovery of pylos artifact

I did look it up, and was disappointed. There is an enormous difference between seals and statuary; to draw lessons and inferences from this seal to the general body of Greek sculpture is rather a stretch. There is also the difficulty of working out why later, much later, in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, Greek sculptors regressed and made near full-size statuary that were wooden in their execution, displayed fixed grimacing smiles and were arranged in unrealistic poses. We can trace the evolution from these koine pieces to the magnificence of Praxiteles in clearly-defined steps.

Without contradicting the knowledge of the human anatomy that was displayed in the Minoan agate, one has to take note of the fact that translating this into large sized statuary was not an overnight task, and mastering their tools took the Greek sculptors centuries, not decades. The Minoan agate cannot be seen to have any negative impact on the theory of Greek classical evolution of its statues, unless we equate the execution of miniature seals with the execution of life-sized statuary.

same goes to the gandharan statues, there is a bronze age piece called ''red jaspar torso'' excavated from harappa, which was declared as gupta era statue due to classical look but it is really from indus valley civilization.

Here, too, there is much to wonder about, both in the facts as they appear and in your assertions around those facts.

First, there is no connection between the 'red jasper torso' and Gandharan art. If there is supposed to be one, it should be on evidence somewhere.

Second, that the torso was from the Indus Valley Civilisation is due to its finding in the ruins. The problem lies elsewhere. Given that it is a unique piece, one will wonder how a unique piece of statuary permits generalisation regarding an unconnected culture that flourished more than a millennium later. If the suggestion is that this piece alone proves the maturity of IVC sculpture, and that by example shows that Gandharan sculpture could also have achieved early and Athena-like maturity, there is an argument worth going through.

Third, even the Mauryan art on display shows the clear differences between Indian art, even that considered tinged with a Greek touch, and the far more evolved Gandhara art.

It is difficult to draw the inferences that have been drawn from these two examples. However, I shall confine myself, during the course of the day, to present pictures and samples of the primitive and the later, evolved styles on Greece proper.

In regards to your folds of the garments, this is shown in mauryan era terracotta statues as well, but then the western scholars have declared entire mauryan art as hellenistic influenced.

regards

i never said that there was no greek influence, i only said that over all they are not greek statues.

in regards to gradual evolution of greek statues try researching ''minoan pylos combat agate'', this is 1500 BC we are talking about and already shows matured level of the greek statuary or arts to come, if we go even further back,, all the elements of the greek statuary are depicted in mesopotamian bronze age arts. The theory of greek classical evolution of its statues has flopped badly since the discovery of pylos artifact

same goes to the gandharan statues, there is a bronze age piece called ''red jaspar torso'' excavated from harappa, which was declared as gupta era statue due to classical look but it is really from indus valley civilization.

In regards to your folds of the garments, this is shown in mauryan era terracotta statues as well, but then the western scholars have declared entire mauryan art as hellenistic influenced.

regards

 

[W.11]

First, there is no connection between the 'red jasper torso' and Gandharan art.

yes, please try to analyse the body shapes of the indus torso and the body shapes of the gandharan statues and then the greek statues and then tell me which ideal does it finds itself close to, greek r indus body type.

I did look it up, and was disappointed. There is an enormous difference between seals and statuary; to draw lessons and inferences from this seal to the general body of Greek sculpture is rather a stretch. There is also the difficulty of working out why later, much later, in the 6th and 5th centuries BC, Greek sculptors regressed and made near full-size statuary that were wooden in their execution, displayed fixed grimacing smiles and were arranged in unrealistic poses. We can trace the evolution from these koine pieces to the magnificence of Praxiteles in clearly-defined steps.

im not sure why do you think that it will be a stretch to compare this art piece to the classical greek statuary? here the article has even quoted a scholar who seems to be convinced that this may debunk the ''greek art evolution theory''

Researchers have asserted that this discovery challenges previously established consensuses regarding the artistic development of the Minoan civilization.[3] The agate's researchers state that this discovery necessitates a reevaluation of the time-line on which Greek art developed.[13] While dated as belonging to the Aegean Bronze Age, Davis notes that it bears more resemblance to Classical period art, which developed a millennium later, due to the breadth of anatomical knowledge embodied in the stone's engravings.

There are compelling evidences that ashokan period arts have derived from the indus civilization ideals (please try to check out lohanipur torso and the red jasper torso, both of them represent a body type completely unknwn in the greek arts), obviously one cannot connect the millennium gap but there are very strong evidences that they are related.

regards