Physical details: bronze, 215mm tall, the halo is separate, attached to bosses on the back, and is loose.
Provenance: acquired from a colleague in Swat, Northwest Frontier, Pakistan.  He only buys locally.  He told me it is from a site near Chakdara.
Condition: the patina is complete, smooth, hard.  There is no damage & no repair.  I don't think it is hype to call this choice, choice, choice.
Price: oh, how about $4000.00.

    Now for some discussion.
    First for the attribution.  When I first saw it my "heart" said "Kushan," though it is not the least bit "Gandharan" in style.  The term "Gandhara" is traditionally applied to the art of Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan during the Kushan period, c. 100-500 AD.  The center of gravity of Kushania at its height was in the Northwest Frontier province of Pakistan.  After c. 450 AD the political entity was pushed eastward into Kashmir and northern India.  The pushing was done by the "Hephthalites," who are traditionally considered to be barbarians with "primitive" artistic esthetics and methods.  The Hephthalites finally extinguished the Kushans.  In India proper, from the 4-5th centuries, the government was the Hindu Gupta monarchy.  The western border of the Gupta realm was the Indus river.  From the 6th century northern India was ruled by several smaller Hindu states, while in Pakistan the Hephthalites were succeeded by Turks before the whole region was invaded by Arabs in the 8th century.
    The "Gandhara" art of the Kushans is generally typified by a highly realistic rendition of human forms in sculpture, clearly adopted from the Greeks who had preceded them (with a Scythian interlude).  When examining art classified as Gandharan one looks for this naturalistic and humanistic representational style in objects coming from the right place.  A lot of this stuff is overtly Buddhist, but it is important to remember that the Kushan government under the rule of which these things were produced was tolerant rather than Buddhist.  You look at their coins and what do you see?  Gods and goddesses of the Hindu and Greek pantheons, rarely joined by Buddhist images.  So you can, in theory, have Gandharan art that is Hindu rather than Buddhist, and it is reasonably safe to say that Pakistan and eastern Afghanistan were as heavily populated by Hindus as by Buddhists, if not more so.
    Not all art of the appropriate place and period bears the ineffable "Greek touch" that typifies high "Gandharan" art.  A much more stylized rendition is also seen, and a more primitive rendition became the norm later in the dynasty.  Kushan coins of the highest style lack the "Greek touch," and by the 4th century have declined, stylistically speaking, to stick figures and cartoons.  The Bamian Buddhas blown up by the Taliban are late Kushan products, and showed not a trace of Hellenistic influence.  A few pieces found in my web search start to have that slanty eyed, smooth haired, thick lipped style that typifies the art of the Guptas.  How to distinguish this stuff from high Gupta art?  How to decide that a given piece was produced in the 3rd century under the Kushans, or the 5th under the Hephthalites, or the 8th century under the Hindushahi Turks, or further east under the Guptas or their successors?  Well...
    Most of the Gupta sculpture I've seen is more ornate than the more western stuff.  The figures are more rounded, especially the female figures, many of which present mammary contours that only exist today as a result of surgical intervention.  The clothing tends to be more complex, the hair too.
    OK.  I have looked at pictures of bronze sculptures of northern India on numerous websites and have come to the
conclusion that a lot of what the dealers have they don't know exactly where it came from and they are guessing at the attribution.  This is partly the fault of international and local national patrimony laws, which ineffectively try to keep artifacts where they are but instead promote their clandestine destruction, theft, sale, etc.  They (we) get these things with find data that cannot necessarily be taken at face value.  When a thing is attributed to "Northern India, 5-9th century" that covers a lot of ground, almost the same as saying "I don't know."
    For what its worth, this piece came to me in a box straight from Pakistan with a customs form describing the contents as well as customs forms usually do.
      Well then. I tried to identify and attribute the thing.  In my first attempt I came to the following conclusion, which I quote verbatim:
+++
    First, who is it?  Turns out that the lotus in her left hand and the position of her right hand are attributes of the Mahayana Buddhist diety Tara.  I can't find any direct references to Tara as early as the Kushan period, but the Mahayana was developing during that time.  Of course we could be looking at a Hindu diety, and I found a picture of  one "Bhudevi" in a somewhat similar attitude, though rendered in a vastly different style, as a statue from 19th century southern India.  Shall we provisionally call her Tara?
    The simplicity of her costume points very strongly to an early date.  Already by the 11th century the depictions of divinities in the South Asian context are adorned with all sorts of jewelry: multiple chains dangling over arms, legs, torsos, etc., with elaborate crowns and doodads.  The shape of the eyes tends towards the Guptan.  The shape of the mouth and the relatively svelte body tend towards the Gandharan.  Of course the find site screams Gandhara, but could it be an import from the east, perhaps 11th century Pala or somesuch?  I ask myself why would it be imported to the Northwest Frontier in the 11-12th century when the Turks were messing around causing trouble? ...
    I have to consider that this piece is no later than the 5th century.  And I think it is earlier, maybe 2nd or 3rd.  Look around on the web.  There is nothing like it to be seen, but the closest approach is either late Kushan or Gupta.
    So, to capsulize the tentative museum card, how about:
    "Bronze statue of the Buddhist diety Tara, late Gandhara or contemporary with early Gupta, c. 200-400 AD, from the Kushan ruins at Chakdara, near Swat, NWF, Pakistan."
+++
    I posted a version of this page with that attribution for exactly 2 days before I got an email from a guy who is from there telling me that my attribution was highly unlikely and I should be thinking 17-19th century.  Some emails back and forth with my guy in Pakistan.  He stuck to his story - out of the ground, Chakdara.  Promised to research further.
    So did I.  I sent queries to several dealers who handle southern Asian art.  Got back one response.  Told me to look east, at Nepal & Tibet.  So I did.  There are some similarities, but also some distinct differences, mainly in costume, but also in body shape and treatment of the face.  Look at any number of things from Nepal & Tibet and notice some persistent similarities that this piece does not have.  I tried the thought of it coming from there for several days but it did not seem right, although by then the thought that it might be late Kushan was seeming increasingly dubious.
    Speaking of dubious, no one who has seen this has raised the possibility that it is a modern product.
    So if it's not Kushan, not Gupta, not Pala, not Nepal or Tibet, what?
    Hephthalite?  Don't be silly.  Medieval India of some sort?  I don't think so.  Breasts too small, not enough jewelry.  Back to the drawing board.
    Various bits of data emerged.  No third eyes on Gandharan figures.  Earliest figure of Tara from 7th century Ceylon.  Um...
    I got an email from Pakistan.  My guy wrote that he talked to local expert who said "Hindushahi."  Aha!  A lead.  Back to the web and... nothing.  Rather, nothing but coins for about 50 websites before I finally blundered into this.  I went "Aha!"  And now I'm happy.
    I think this statue is Shahi.  The Shahis were Turks, or "Turko-Hephthalites," who ruled eastern Afghanistan and NWF in Pakistan starting around 700 AD.  They were pushed eastward by the Muslim Ghaznavid Turks in the 11th century, took up residence in Ohind, NWF, were pushed eastward again, and were finally extinguished east of Lahore.  Records are sparse, there is no coherent king list.  The coins are (mostly) abundant and well known.  The art is, how shall I say this?  How about "rare and underappreciated."
    I went looking for Shahi things for sale.  Simple.  There are none.  This is the only thing on the web at this time (10/1/03).
    Now, what about pricing?  Go look for "Gandhara sculpture" on the web.  You will find all kinds of prices, but everything is four figure, pretty much.  Prices at the source are interesting.  I have seen various things (mostly stone) offered for five figures and three figures.  Obviously the former do not get sold, and the latter, by the time they get to this side of the mirror, are all four figures.  I also know how the market works.  Someone like me beats on the seller until he gives in and sells it cheap as possible, then I jack up the price to sell to you, the mark.  However, this particular piece is being marketed cooperatively.  We are splitting the profits, him, me, and the guy who found it.  Fair as we can get in this world of unfair advantage.
    Is it worth it?  If it sells, yes.  If it doesn't, no.  Over to you.

back to Pakistan index