The Development of Hindu Iconography
Author(s): S. V. Venkateswara
Source: The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland , Jul.,
1918, (Jul., 1918), pp. 519-526
Published by: Cambridge University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25209412
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cambridge University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
MISCELLANEOUS COMMUNICATIONS
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
Professor Macdonell in his rejoinder (JHAS. 1917,
pp. 592-602) invites further remarks from me. But they
must be brief.
, 1. Professor Macdonell is unable to see "any possible
reference to images" in U.V. viii, 09.12. But Ballantyne ?
has rendered the expression in question by "a beautiful
perforated iron image 'V As regards the other passage
(R.V. i, 21. 3), Professor Wilson has translated the word
6umbhata by " decorate with ornaments ". Again, in
R.V. ii, 33. 9, we find babhruh 6ukr?bhih pipi6?
hiranyaih ("shines with golden ornaments"?Wilson).
In R.V. iii, 4. 5, the word nrp?6as is translated by
Professor Roth as " formed, adorned by men ", and by
Wilson "sensible shapes ". Dr. Bollensen discovered
a reference to images of Maruts in nu manv?na ?sam
dev?m aecha (" To the gods of these images?the Maruts,"
R.V. v, 52.15). E.V. ii, 33. 8, speaks of Rudra as " white
cornplexioned " (6vitice). The view that the Vedic
word sarndr6 may denote an image appears supported by
the N?r?yana Upanishad (verse 11), where we have
na saijidrse ti^hati rupam asya. My object in these
citations is not " to prove any theory of far-reaching
importance ". What I said was that " one cannot accept
without hesitation " Professor Macdonell's decisive state
ment that images of gods were not yet iconographically
represented in the earlier Vedic age.
2. Professor Macdonell has, I am afraid, misunderstood
my meaning in the quotation of Vedic attributes. The
individuality of a god is made up of the sum total of
1 Ballantyne, Mah?bhdsya, p. 34.
JRAS. 1918. 35
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
520 THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
several attributes, the poet now referring to one, now
to another. To which other deity, for instance, could we
aPP'}r susipraas well as hari?ipra better than to Indra ? or
tryambaka and kapardin, to which I may add krttivdsas
and pindkin (TS. iv, 5), than to Rudra ? I thought
the epithets cited were specially appropriate because of
their possible iconographie significance. It might be
argued that the ?ipra of Indra does not refer to any
prominent feature of the chin of Indra, but. it may be
cited on the other side that it does, on the strength of
R.V. v, 45. 6. In this hymn Mann is said to have over
come Vi?ipra ("noseless," i.e. nasal ridge not prominent).
One may argue in the same way that the p?et is referring
to the prominent nasalit}' of the A?vins in ndsatya.
Professor Macdonell says that this term " certainly does
not suggest any physical appearance to the mind ".
I beg to remind him that Y?ska explains the term as
ndsikdprabhavau, i.e. he thinks it has something to do
with the nose. The obscurity in the meaning of the
word is cleared up by taking ndsatya in the same way
as salya and nitya, for instance. Similarly, one might
find reference to an imago when the invisible V?yu is
spoken of as dar?ata. I do not at all suggest that these
passages furnish conclusive evidence of the use of images.
My point is that the evidence of the Vedas is not con
clusive either way.
3. As regards the date of the Gltd, I need only mention
that I hold it to be considerably anterior to*the Christian
era, on the strength of the internal evidence furnished by
that work, as I hope to be able to show in a subsequent
issue of this journal. Vishnu has four hands not only in
the Gltd but in the Rdmdyana (i, 15. 16).
My view of Pur?nic chronology is already given
elsewhere.1 My point in citing a Pur?na was that the
order of evolution of iconographie details indicated by it
1 Indian Antiquary, 1915, pp. 41-52.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY 521
(let alone the cosmic cycles) is the reverse of that adduced
by Professor Macdonell. Whatever Pur?nic evidence may
be worth, it cannot be denied that the image-makers were
close students of Pur?nic lore and that they sought in
several respects to represent the deities as described in
the Pur?nas. I may add that though the Pu ranas
in their existing form are obviously later than the
Christian era, they existed in some form centuries earlier,
as they are mentioned?to cite a reference?in the Artha
6?8tra of Kautilya.
4. To proceed to iconographie details. Professor
Macdonell challenges me to cite an example of a figure
of Indra distinguished by the vajra when he is not
seated on his elephant. I remember to have seen one
in the S?rn?th Museum l when I was at Benares.
Is it necessary to add that India's thunderbolt?and not
the elephant?is mentioned in some of the earliest Vedic
hymns ? (R.V. i, 100.18 ; ii, 12.10).
As regards Sfirya and his steeds, my meaning is that
the seven steeds are not unavoidably present, and that
therefore it is not right to say that "S?rya is recognized
by the seven steeds of his car ". The number of steeds of
Surya's car represented are'only three in the S?rn?th
sculpture (G 36) and four at B?dh Gay?. The steeds
are absent in South Indian images in the round. Turning
to the literature on iconography, they are not mentioned
by Var?hamihira2 or by Hem?dri,3 while the Silparatna,
a later work, mentions their number definitely as seven.
Again, Professor Macdonell states that the data of the
S?ry?panishad in regard to the four arms of Sfirya
" contradict all the concrete evidence of actual images ".
1 Probably the same as is described in the Catalogue of the Sdrndth
Museum, p. 3)8 (No. 0 21(c)). For India's thunderbolt in Buddhist
art see (Jr?nwcdel A. Burgess, Buddhist Art in India, pp. 38, 87.
2 Brhalsamhitd, ch. ii, vv. 47-8.
s Ddnakhanda, ch. ii, pp. 757 f. The rath a is mentioned, but not the
horses.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
522 THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
But the image of Siirya referred to at S?rn?th has four
arms, and I have in my possession a bronze figure of
Siirya with four arms. I may add that the Matsya
Parana describes Surya as caturbdhu.
Professor Macdonell challenges me to cite evidence for
my statement that Agni has two heads and seven hands
in the U.V. My reference is to the well-known hymn in
U.V. iv, 58. 3: catvdri ?ritg? tray? 'sya pddd dv? ??r?e
sapta hastdso asyo, etc. The hymn is found again in the
Mahdndrdyona Upanisad of the Yajur Veda. There
is a sculpture of Agni corresponding to this description
in the Chidambaram temple.1
Of Sesa-?ayana Professor Macdonell says that the
motive of distinctiveness in giving an image four arms
was present in the early stage of Hindu iconography, but
that in the course of time this feature was increasingly
introduced even when unnecessary. In support of his
statement he cites the image of ??sa-?ayana at Mah?bali
puram, which has only two hands, and a two-armed image
of Skanda belonging to the Gupta age. But the image of
Mah?balipuram is later than that of Deogarh, which has
four hands, and which is assigned by Mr. Smith2 to the
sixth century A.c. A figure*of Skanda with twelve hands
is found in the rock-cut temple of Tirupparankunram
near Madura. The twelve hands are referred to in the
Silappadilcdram,a Tamil work assigned by Mr.Smith3 to
about 200 A.c., and described in detail in the Tirumuru
gdttuppadai, another work of the third Tamil Sangam.
It is said that wived of gods appear with only two arms
when they are represented beside their spouses because
their identity is then clear. But Gauri and P?rvati have
1 H. Krishna Sastri, South India? Images of Gods ami Goddesses,
tig. 147.
1 V. A. Smith, History of Fine Art in India awl Ceylon, p. 162 and
tig. XXXV.
3 One of the works of the Sangam is assigned by Mr. Smith to as early
a date as 100 A.c. {Early History, 3rd ed., p. 453).
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY 523
sometimes only two hands even when represented alone.1
Gajalaksmi is so generally represented, not because the
elephants were originally an inevitable adjunct of the
goddess, but because the Hindu artists'skill is unsurpassed
in depicting that animal. Though Gajalaksmi is only
one of the forms of the goddess she is for this reason
architecturally the most-favoured form. The distinguishing
marks of Laksmi, in whatever form, are the lotuses in
her hands.2 I am unable to find any evidence for
Professor Macdonell's view that the other forms of
Lak?tni are later developments from Gajalaksmi with
the elephants left out.
5. Professor Macdonell says that the additional hands
were introduced for holding the weapons. But there are
early specimens of sculptures without four hands where
weapons are held in either or both of the natural hands,3
and of sculptures with four hands carrying no weapons at
all.4 On the coins of Kadphises II the figure of Siva has
two arms, with combined trident and battle-axe in the
right hand and the tigers skin over the left arm. On
those of Kanishka it has four arms, but the lower arms
have no weapons at all, or have in one of them a goad,
a noose, or a water-vessel. Some Kanishka coins show
Siva with two hands armed with the spear and the club.
Even in the coins of Huvishka we find both a four-armed
and a two-armed ?Siva. Two-armed Siva figures appear
even in the latest coins of the series, those of V?sudeva.6
If the purpose of the " innovation " had been as alleged, we
should find the later coiners taking full advantage of it
and introducing an extra pair of arms for holding weapons.
1 V. A. Smith, History of Fine Art, figs. 101, 192.
2 As always on Oupta coins. See also Cunningham's Bh?rhut,
plates xxi-iii (Sir! holding lotus in hand).
3 Ibid., p. 113 ; Catalogue of the S?rn?th Museum, pp. 318-20.
4 V. A. Smith, History of Fine Art, pp. 138, 163.
5 Catalogue of Coins in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, vol. i, see No. 1
of KadphiseslI; Nos. 9, 10, 67, and 71 of Kanishka; Nos. 15, 16, 40,
and 43 of Huvishka ; and No. 1 of Vfisudeva.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
524 THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
The same remark ma}' be made of sculptures too. Even
in the Gupta period we have images of Siva with two
hands. Visnu, as P?nduranga, has only two hands
throughout, but has peacock feathers, as described by
K?lid?sa1 (fifth century A.c.) and Sankara2 (ninth
century A.c.), and as found in the sculptures of Tirupati,
Ah?balam, etc.
G. Some other iconographie details may be mentioned
which should be borne in mind before any explanation is
of le red as to the purpose of their introduction. Brahma,
as Praj?pati, has only one face and no swan vehicle. Ho
is usually four-faced. As Vi?vakarma, he has ten hands,
holding the symbols of the Trim?rti. Um?mahesvara
has eight faces and two hands according to Hcm?dri.
Siva appears both in literature and in sculpture with four
or five heads and eight or ten hands.3 A figure of a ten
armed Siva is found in the S?rn?th Museum.4 One
form of Siva (Mah?saddeiva) has even fifty hands/'
Taking only the images of Mab?balipuram which belong
to the later Pallaya period, Anantas*ayana has two hands;
Varaba four and Trivikrama eight hands; Mahis?sura
mardan? has eight and Brahma four. In the sculptures
of Ellora Candras?khara has four hands and Bhairava
eight; Sarabha has eight legs. Vishnu, at K?nchipuram,
has eight hands, and as M ad an ag? p?l a ten arms. How
is this bewildering variety of iconographie details to be
explained ?
7. The art of a nation is the mirror of its consciousness,
the expression of its beliefs and opinions, hopes and fears,
achievements and ideals. It is due to an overflow of
a3sthetic feeling, of thoughts too definite to be put into
1 The reference is to Mcghadftta {g?parisasya Vipn?h).
1 Pa ml tirait y?staka m of Sa?kar?carya. '
3 H. Krishna Sast i i, South Indian Images, pp. 84, 148.
4 Catalogue of the S?rn?th Museum, pi. xviii, p. 165. HCmadri
describes Rudra with fivo faces and ten hands.
* II. Krishna Sastri, op. cit., pp. 77, 148.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY 525
words. The atmosphere of religious feeling in India
had its efflorescence in spiritual conceptions of supreme
significance. It was created by the hoary traditions of
the land and shaped by the tendency to idealism natural
to this country. These traditions were embodied in the
Pur?nas, and the idealistic conceptions crystallized into
iconographie masterpieces. But in India the function of
art was not differentiated from that of education. Temples
and images have always been of the highest educative
value, teaching by sights and scenes, as music teaches by
sounds. An image has thus two aspects. The mind
versed in traditional lore must see in it an expression of
the national religious ideals taught by symbolism and
circumstance. The masses who come on pilgrimage must
be impressed with the expression of the figures, whether
S?tvik, Ii?jasik, or T?masik.1 Provided the artist is true
to the traditional description of the god and invests his
image with sculptural or structural details suited to the
performance of the deeds and functions ascribed to the god,
and provided his handiwork inspires religious feeling in
the spectator, the artist can embroider his own fancies
across the fabric of the representation. It is along these
lines, therefore, that we should proceed to distinguish
between the details essential to the conception of an image
and the details non-essential, but also pertaining to its
iconography.
8. The views set forth in the foregoing may now be
summed up :?
(1) Vedic evidence does not enable us to, decide
definitely whether gods were iconographically represented
in the earlier Vedic age. There is clear evidence of the
use of images from the latest Vedic age.
1 The number of hands in a Sdtvik image should never be more than
four, and in a Tdmasik image never less than eight. Bdjasik images
have six or eight arms {Silpasangraha). The distinction is illustrated
by the images of Natar?ja in 11. K. Sastri's book (op. cit.), pp. 77-88.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
52G THE DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
(2) Gods with four hands are referred to in the
Rdmdyana1 and the Bhagavad-gltd. They appear on
coins from the first century A.C. Gods with eight or
twelve arms can be traced in literature as far back as
about 200 A.c. They can be traced in existing images
as far back as the sixth century A.c.
(3) The purpose of iconographie representation was to
impress the beholder with the superhuman forms and
deeds of divinities as described in traditional accounts.2
(4) Iconographical details should be explained on the
three principles of symbolism common to all Indian art,
adaptation of structural details to the functions of the
god or goddess represented, and the pre-requisite condi
tions of the artistic effect and religious sentiment which
the image is calculated to engender.
S. V. Venkateswara.
KlTMBAKONAM COLLKOK.
November 12,1917.
DEVELOPMENT OF HINDU ICONOGRAPHY
I propose here to examine the points in the preceding
rejoinder that seem to me to require discussion.
1. As one who has studied such matters critically for
many years I am prepared not only to assert decisively
that none of the passages of the RV. quoted above contain
any explicit reference to images of gods, but to prove
that it is only by forced interpretations that even obscure
allusions to such images could be discovered in them.
Such proof would, however, take up much more space than
could be allowed here. I maj', however, remark that no
weight can be attached to the translations of Wilson and
Hal Ianty nc, which are worthless in such passages because,
though they were first-rate classical Sanskrit scholars, they
1 B?m?t/atta i, 15. IG.
2 Whether in the Veda, as in the case of Rudra and Agni ; or in the
Pur?nas, as in the case of Gane?a and other gods ; or in tho ? gamas,
Vaisnava, ?aiva, and S?kta.
This content downloaded from
15.206.221.204 on Tue, 12 Nov 2024 23:02:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
