{"title":"Images of Patronage in Khotan","authors":"Erika R Forte","doi":"10.1163/9789004417731_004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patronage of Buddhism at the highest levels of Khotanese society is attested to in literary sources that stress the close ties between political sovereignty and Buddhist religious power. These sources present the history of the kingdom as continuously intermingled with accounts of Buddhist epiphanic events, which occurred in connection with actions taken by the kings. The artistic production and the richness of Buddhist archaeological remains in Khotan prove that Buddhism greatly flourished there, and confirm that this prosperity was only possible through strong political and social support. However, how, and to what extent, this support worked in practice is difficult to establish. Two kinds of written evidence refer expressly to royal patronage: legendary accounts, which underline royal agency in the foundation of basically all the important Buddhist institutions in Khotan; and the historical accounts of Chinese pilgrims, which mention royal support and involvement in the affairs of Khotanese monasteries. Additional evidence, yet to be systematically explored, concerns indigenous manuscripts and documents, like wooden tablets, and Chinese documents found mostly in the area of the Dandān-öiliq site, northeast of Khotan (map 2.1). Expressions of patronage are less explicit in the art historical evidence from Khotan. To my knowledge, there are no paintings or sculptures that are clearly identifiable as a depiction of a royal patron or donor, nor do the few studied inscriptions on paintings give any hint in this direction.1 Khotanese royals are only depicted in the Mogao Caves (Chin. Mogao ku 莫高窟) at Dunhuang (敦煌) and in the Yulin Caves (Chin. Yulin ku 榆林窟), where they are identified by inscriptions (in Chinese).2 This evidence—chronologically later (10th century) than the surviving, local Khotanese material—is related to Khotanese","PeriodicalId":221661,"journal":{"name":"Buddhism in Central Asia I","volume":"759 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Buddhism in Central Asia I","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004417731_004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Patronage of Buddhism at the highest levels of Khotanese society is attested to in literary sources that stress the close ties between political sovereignty and Buddhist religious power. These sources present the history of the kingdom as continuously intermingled with accounts of Buddhist epiphanic events, which occurred in connection with actions taken by the kings. The artistic production and the richness of Buddhist archaeological remains in Khotan prove that Buddhism greatly flourished there, and confirm that this prosperity was only possible through strong political and social support. However, how, and to what extent, this support worked in practice is difficult to establish. Two kinds of written evidence refer expressly to royal patronage: legendary accounts, which underline royal agency in the foundation of basically all the important Buddhist institutions in Khotan; and the historical accounts of Chinese pilgrims, which mention royal support and involvement in the affairs of Khotanese monasteries. Additional evidence, yet to be systematically explored, concerns indigenous manuscripts and documents, like wooden tablets, and Chinese documents found mostly in the area of the Dandān-öiliq site, northeast of Khotan (map 2.1). Expressions of patronage are less explicit in the art historical evidence from Khotan. To my knowledge, there are no paintings or sculptures that are clearly identifiable as a depiction of a royal patron or donor, nor do the few studied inscriptions on paintings give any hint in this direction.1 Khotanese royals are only depicted in the Mogao Caves (Chin. Mogao ku 莫高窟) at Dunhuang (敦煌) and in the Yulin Caves (Chin. Yulin ku 榆林窟), where they are identified by inscriptions (in Chinese).2 This evidence—chronologically later (10th century) than the surviving, local Khotanese material—is related to Khotanese