5.3 Chronology Based on Comparative Material

5.3.1 Dating on the basis of analogous ivory and bone carvings

The architectural evidence from Begram provides a date of the 1st century CE for the construction of the buildings where the ivory and bone carvings were found. It is not clear when the buildings were sealed but it seems from the collective numismatic evidence found at the level of the finds in Rooms 10 and 13 that it took place approximately between the reigns of Kujula Kadphises and Kaniska, which provides a date of mid-1st- to first quarter of the 2nd century CE. As will be discussed in this section, this 1st to early 2nd century CE date for the ivory and bone finds is corroborated by analogous finds of ivory and bone carvings.

The first secure date for analogous ivory and bone carvings is provided by the ivory statuette discovered at Pompeii, very similar to Begram ivory figurines (see section 4.1). This statuette was discovered by Amedeo Maiuri in one of rich houses overlooking the Via dell’Abbondanza in Pompeii (Maiuri 1939: 11-115). The Pompeii figurine carries a terminus ante quem date of 79 CE, when the Vesuvius erupted and buried Pompeii in a layer of ash. It is unknown how long before this date the Pompeii ivory was carved. Some scholars date it in the mid-1st century CE (During Caspers 1979:341-353), while others have placed in the latter half of the 1st century BCE on the basis of a comparison to the arts of Sañci and Bharut (Dwivedi 1976:66). However, judging from the Kharosthi inscription on the base of the Pompeii ivory, it may have been made somewhere in the northwestern regions of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan [1] , which would make dating it based on Sañci and Bharut, in heartland India, more problematic. And since the building in which the Begram objects was discovered is dated in the first century CE, the stylistic analogies between the ivory figurines from Begram and the known ante quem date of the Pompeii ivory would seem to argue in favor of placing the Begram carvings, too, in the 1st century CE.

If the Pompeii ivory figurine presents the furthest extent of the trade in Indianesque ivory and bone objects, the finds from Dal’verzin-tepe and Tillya-tepe indicate intermediate stages in this commerce. Dal’verzin-tepe is situated on the right bank of the Surkhan-darya, 5 miles north of Surci in modern Uzbekistan. The excavations [2] at Dal’verzin-tepe have revealed a rich documentation of fortifications, religious and urban architecture, monumental sculpture in baked clay, frescoes and ceramics. According to Pugachenkova (1978), the original establishment of the site lies in the 3rd-2nd centuries BCE. The formation of the town is to be placed in the last centuries BCE, reaching its zenith during the Kushan period. Several small finds from Dal’verzin-tepe indicate the extent of commerce during the Kushan period. Carnelian intaglio, an intaglio with Roman glyptics, a small hoard of golden objects and gold bars with Kharosthi inscription, dating to the latter half of the 1st century CE, as well as Indianesque ivory and bone carvings (see section 4.1), which Pugachenkova dates to the 1st or 2nd century CE, all attest to the connection during that era between the Indian world and Central Asia.

An ivory comb discovered at a small sanctuary in Dal’verzin-tepe (Figs. 108-109) is identical in style to some of the Begram ivory and bone carvings (Plate 170), so much so that it seems almost certain that both came from the same atelier, and were even made by the same hands. The date assigned to the ivory comb from Dal’verzin-tepe, i.e. 1st to 2nd century CE, although broad, correlates with the 1st century CE date attributed by this thesis to the entire Begram finds.

Another ivory object which is analogous to the ivory and bone carvings from Begram is a small ivory comb from the Tillya-tepe necropolis. Situated two miles from the city of Sibergan, to the west of modern Balkh, Afghanistan, Tillya-tepe is a mound site with a diameter of eighty meters. Archaeological research by V. Sarianidi led to the conclusion that the site had first been occupied during the end of the 2nd to the beginning of the 1st millennium BCE; during that period a community had existed around a main fire temple. In the Achaemenid period, the temple was still in use and the community continued to flourish. At the end of the Achaemenid period, the structures were destroyed by fire and Tillya-tepe was left abandoned until the 1st century BCE, when it was used as a necropolis by early Kushan invaders.

The discovery of the Tillya-tepe ivory comb dating to the 1st century BCE or, in some scholars’ opinion, to the early 1st century CE, suggests that commerce in Begram-type ivory and bone objects occurred at least that early and thus provides additional support for a possible 1st century CE date for the Begram objects themselves.

A first century CE date for the Begram ivory and bone objects is further attested by the finds of ivory combs in Taxila. Taxila is situated in modern Pakistan, on the outskirts of Islamabad. Recent excavations have shown that, contrary to the previous belief that Taxila’s origin lay in the Achaemenid period, this site witnessed an occupation as far back as 3100 BCE (Saifur Rahman Dar 1984:12). Later levels of occupation included an Achaemenid period level and layers dating to the Maurya, Greek, Saka-Parthian and Kushan periods. The most important ivory finds, at least from the perspective of Begram, are two combs (Figs.112-115) found in Sirkap, at Taxila, which dates between 190 BCE and 60 CE (Saifur Rahman Dar 1984:14). On the basis of their stylistic characteristics and dating of the exact pit in which they were found, both these combs have been assigned to the 1st century CE (Dwivedi 1976:76).

All the analogous ivory and bone finds mentioned above (and described at length in section 4.1), support a 1st century CE date for the Begram ivory and bone objects. This is consistent with architectural characteristics which point to a 1st century CE construction of the buildings in which these Begram objects were discovered, and is not inconsistent with the coins discovered near the other finds (see section 5.2).

5.3.2 Dating on the basis of comparative sculptural styles

Disparity in dating the Begram objects -- from the 1st century BCE to the 3rd/4th centuries CE -- has arisen in part because the ivory and bone comparative material discussed above in section 5.3.1 was either not known or not referred to for the purpose. Instead, comparison was made primarily to stone sculptural art, and for the most part by stylistic reference to one Begram object, the top of footstool IX (Plate 57). Given the establishment of a consistent 1st century CE dating for all the comparative ivory and bone objects, however, the question in a comparison to stone monumental art should be not whether the ivories might conceivably be dated in separated eras, but rather whether they can be dated contemporaneously.

The latest, i.e. 3rd-4th century CE, dating of the Begram ivory and bone figures was based primarily on the style of one Begram ivory plaque (Plate 57 ), in particular on the slender curvy body type of the four female figures shown in the central scene, which some scholars argued belonged to the mid-phases of the Amaravati style (Hackin 1939: 20). In addition, other scholars noted that the hairstyles of the figurines in this Begram plaque and the ‘degree of interplay’ on other Begram examples seemed reminiscent of the 3rd-4th century CE style of Nagarjunakonda (Rosen Stone 1974-75 & 1994).

Several points can be made with regard to these arguments pertaining to the style of footstool IX. First, in addition to the ‘heavy’ body type common in the art of Mathura and which seemed so unlike the Begram figurines on this plaque, Mathura art also includes a number of ‘elegantly’ carved sculptures. As pointed out by B. Rowland (1981:162), the exact body curvature of the Begram figurines can be seen in a yaksi figure from Mathura, which is depicted with a slender waist and slightly fleshy hips( Fig.129). This same body type can also be seen in a 1st century CE Ayagapatta [3] slab, also from Mathura (Fig.127). Also, Rosen Stone’s assertion that the ‘degree of interplay’ between Begram figurines is analogous to that of Mithuna [4] couples from Nagarjunakonda, remains unconvincing because the subject matter in the two types of scenes is so completely different. Moreover, even if one accepted the analogy, there is no reason that the Begram examples might not be the prototypes for the art of Nagarjunakonda.

Aside from the stylistic aspects of this plaque from footstool IX, the unique ‘sunken relief’ technique used in this and so many other of the Begram ivory and bone carvings seems to undermine a different, later date for this one plaque. The technique of relief in reverse, or sunken relief, is unknown in Indian art and its appearance on a number of Begram finds, including footstool IX, points to one atelier as the place of origin of the pieces. Moreover, the Begram carvings which display this type of technique include a wide variety of figure types: in some plaques the figures are more sturdy and less elegant than on other plaques, such that there is no basis for separating out footstool IX because of the body type of its figures.

To the extent that a comparison to stone sculptures is at all useful for dating the Begram ivory and bone carvings, then the closest analogies seem to come from the early art of Mathura, i.e. 1st century CE. As discussed in section 4.2., the style of the matsyayugma symbol (Plate 395), for example, is very close to the style of early Kushan Mathura (Fig.131). The depiction of the vyala-yaksa also points to an early date, since these figures were popular in Sunga and early Kushan art (Czuma 1985:59). The composite humanoid-animal creatures, too, were a favorite subject in early Mathura (Sharma 1994:fig.16-19). And although a few elements of subject matter from Begram are to be found in the later monumental arts of southern India, the examples fall far short of the analogy presented by Mathura.

A last point concerning a 1st century CE date for the Begram ivory and bone carvings, based on the stone sculptural art of India, is the absence of any iconic Buddhist representations. A few Buddhist and other religious symbols, and possible narratives, appear on the Begram objects (see Chapter 3), but all of these symbols belong

to the aniconic phase in ancient Indian religious art when the Buddha was represented solely by symbols. When Buddhist art moved into its iconic phase in the late 1st century CE, these symbols persisted, but always in conjunction with the Buddha in human form.

A comparison to the monumental reliefs of Mathura, then, joins with the archaeological evidence and the comparative ivory and bone material, to support a 1st century CE date for the Begram carvings. And as the following section will demonstrate, the last chain in this line of evidence is provided by the dates proposed for the other two groups, Roman and Chinese, of objects discovered together with the ivory and bone material.

MNT1]    

Website Maintained by:
Information Systems and Services,
International and Area Studies,
UC Berkeley

Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative
URL: ECAI.org