Gadyarāja: a fourteenth century Marathi version of the Kṛṣṇa legend . Translated from the Marathi with annotations by Ian Raeside. pp. xxxv, 312. Bombay, Popular Prakashan Pvt. Ltd; London, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1989. £20.00.

R. S. Mcgregor
{"title":"Gadyarāja: a fourteenth century Marathi version of the Kṛṣṇa legend . Translated from the Marathi with annotations by Ian Raeside. pp. xxxv, 312. Bombay, Popular Prakashan Pvt. Ltd; London, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1989. £20.00.","authors":"R. S. Mcgregor","doi":"10.1017/S0035869X00108822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"been defined, but it needs to be reconsidered in view of the sectarian and stylistic factors. The dating of Elephanta in light of the stylistic and political uncertainties has differed by hundreds of years among scholars\" (p. 1). Collins sets out to redress this situation. His study is divided into six major chapters. The first chapter (pp. 4-15) looks at the historical background in order to justify the establishment of a firm date for the construction of the rock temple. It re-examines both the political situation in the Deccan between the fifth and the seventh centuries and the position of the Kalacuris, members of the Pasupatu sect of Saivism, who are the most likely patrons of Elephanta. The following chapter (pp. 16-30) chronicles the visitors and their descriptions of the cave temple, the sculptures and their surroundings. The first traveller who wrote about the area after the completion of the temple seems to have been Xuan Zang who visited India between 633 and 641 (p. 16). European references date from the sixteenth century onward; the earliest record of a visit to Elephanta can be found in Gracia da Orta's Coloquios dos Simples e Drogas da India which was published in Goa in 1563. Da Orta, a Portuguese physician and scientist, visited the rock-temple in 1534 and thought it a \" sight well worth seeing\" though he felt that both the devil and the Chinese might have had a hand in its construction (p. 17). In the nineteenth century \"a new and more consistent approach by individuals trained in the scientific methods and sensitive to Indian culture brought penetrating insight to the study of Elephanta\" (p. 23). At the beginning of the twentieth century the island was placed under the Indian Archaeological Department and, in addition to scholarly accounts, guide books began to appear for the assistance of the ever increasing number of tourists. Chapters three (\"Mythological sources for the Elephanta sculptures\" pp. 31-40) and four (\"Iconographical analysis of the Elephanta sculptures\" pp. 41-94) assess and analyse literary sources, both religious and secular, to define more clearly the \"iconography of the sculptural program at Elephanta, and also to explore the contextual significance or iconology of the reliefs\" (p. 3). No precise chronology exists for these writings but Collins successfully establishes a relative sequence in relation to the construction of the temple. Chapter five (\"Artistic sources and parallels of the Elephanta sculptures\" pp. 95-120) represents the first systematic attempt to \"relate literary sources in the chronological framework to Elephanta's relief-panels\" (p. 41). The next chapter (pp. 121-48) looks at artistic sources and stylistic parallels to determine the direction of influence on the sculptors. The final chapter examines two important, rediscovered, ritual texts of the Saivite Lakullsa Pasupati cult, the Pasupata sulra and the Ganakarika, in the context of Elephanta. The Kalacuri rulers were followers of the Pasupati sect and Collins ventures a new theory about how LakullsaPasupata rituals may have been performed inside the temple. In his opinion the major reliefsculptures relate to a sectarian programme in which the cave temple itself was conceived as a unit, fostered by royal donation. The date he finally arrives at is either that of Sankaragana (reigned c. 575-600) or Krsnaraja (reigned c. 550-575) (p. 149). This is an original, carefully documented study, supported by an extensive bibliography (pp. 217-36) and some useful appendices.","PeriodicalId":81727,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland","volume":"122 1","pages":"403 - 405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0035869X00108822","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain & Ireland. Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0035869X00108822","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

been defined, but it needs to be reconsidered in view of the sectarian and stylistic factors. The dating of Elephanta in light of the stylistic and political uncertainties has differed by hundreds of years among scholars" (p. 1). Collins sets out to redress this situation. His study is divided into six major chapters. The first chapter (pp. 4-15) looks at the historical background in order to justify the establishment of a firm date for the construction of the rock temple. It re-examines both the political situation in the Deccan between the fifth and the seventh centuries and the position of the Kalacuris, members of the Pasupatu sect of Saivism, who are the most likely patrons of Elephanta. The following chapter (pp. 16-30) chronicles the visitors and their descriptions of the cave temple, the sculptures and their surroundings. The first traveller who wrote about the area after the completion of the temple seems to have been Xuan Zang who visited India between 633 and 641 (p. 16). European references date from the sixteenth century onward; the earliest record of a visit to Elephanta can be found in Gracia da Orta's Coloquios dos Simples e Drogas da India which was published in Goa in 1563. Da Orta, a Portuguese physician and scientist, visited the rock-temple in 1534 and thought it a " sight well worth seeing" though he felt that both the devil and the Chinese might have had a hand in its construction (p. 17). In the nineteenth century "a new and more consistent approach by individuals trained in the scientific methods and sensitive to Indian culture brought penetrating insight to the study of Elephanta" (p. 23). At the beginning of the twentieth century the island was placed under the Indian Archaeological Department and, in addition to scholarly accounts, guide books began to appear for the assistance of the ever increasing number of tourists. Chapters three ("Mythological sources for the Elephanta sculptures" pp. 31-40) and four ("Iconographical analysis of the Elephanta sculptures" pp. 41-94) assess and analyse literary sources, both religious and secular, to define more clearly the "iconography of the sculptural program at Elephanta, and also to explore the contextual significance or iconology of the reliefs" (p. 3). No precise chronology exists for these writings but Collins successfully establishes a relative sequence in relation to the construction of the temple. Chapter five ("Artistic sources and parallels of the Elephanta sculptures" pp. 95-120) represents the first systematic attempt to "relate literary sources in the chronological framework to Elephanta's relief-panels" (p. 41). The next chapter (pp. 121-48) looks at artistic sources and stylistic parallels to determine the direction of influence on the sculptors. The final chapter examines two important, rediscovered, ritual texts of the Saivite Lakullsa Pasupati cult, the Pasupata sulra and the Ganakarika, in the context of Elephanta. The Kalacuri rulers were followers of the Pasupati sect and Collins ventures a new theory about how LakullsaPasupata rituals may have been performed inside the temple. In his opinion the major reliefsculptures relate to a sectarian programme in which the cave temple itself was conceived as a unit, fostered by royal donation. The date he finally arrives at is either that of Sankaragana (reigned c. 575-600) or Krsnaraja (reigned c. 550-575) (p. 149). This is an original, carefully documented study, supported by an extensive bibliography (pp. 217-36) and some useful appendices.
Gadyarāja: 14世纪马拉地语版本的Kṛṣṇa传说。翻译自马拉地语,由Ian Raeside注释。第三十五页,第三十二页。孟买大众普拉卡山私人有限公司;1989年,伦敦大学东方和非洲研究学院。£20.00。
已被定义,但鉴于宗派和风格因素,它需要重新考虑。根据风格和政治上的不确定性,学者们对大象岛的年代的看法存在数百年的差异”(第1页)。柯林斯着手纠正这种情况。他的研究分为六个主要章节。第一章(第4-15页)考察了历史背景,以证明建立岩石神庙的确切日期是合理的。它重新审视了五世纪到七世纪之间德干的政治局势,以及卡拉库利人的地位,卡拉库利人是湿婆派帕苏帕图教派的成员,他们最有可能是象岛的赞助人。接下来的一章(第16-30页)记载了游客和他们对洞穴寺庙、雕塑和周围环境的描述。第一个在寺庙建成后写下该地区的旅行者似乎是玄奘,他在633年至641年间访问了印度(第16页)。欧洲的参考文献可以追溯到16世纪以后;访问象岛的最早记录可以在格拉西亚·达·奥尔塔1563年在果阿出版的《印度的简单生活》一书中找到。葡萄牙医生兼科学家达·奥尔塔于1534年参观了这座岩石神庙,他认为这是一个“非常值得一看的景象”,尽管他觉得魔鬼和中国人可能都参与了它的建造(第17页)。在19世纪,“接受过科学方法训练、对印度文化敏感的人采用了一种新的、更一致的方法,给对象岛的研究带来了深刻的见解”(第23页)。20世纪初,该岛被划归印度考古部门管辖,除了学术记录外,还开始出现指南书,以帮助越来越多的游客。第三章(“象岛雕塑的神话来源”第31-40页)和第四章(“象岛雕塑的图像分析”第41-94页)评估和分析了宗教和世俗的文学来源,以更清楚地定义“象岛雕塑项目的图像学”。并探索浮雕的语境意义或图像学”(第3页)。这些作品没有精确的年表,但柯林斯成功地建立了一个与神庙建设有关的相对顺序。第五章(“象岛雕塑的艺术来源和相似之处”第95-120页)是第一次系统地尝试“将文学来源与象岛的浮雕板按时间顺序联系起来”(第41页)。下一章(第121-48页)着眼于艺术来源和风格的相似之处,以确定对雕塑家的影响方向。最后一章考察了两个重要的,重新发现的,湿婆拉库尔萨帕苏帕提崇拜的仪式文本,帕苏帕塔苏拉和加纳卡里卡,在象岛的背景下。卡拉库里的统治者是帕苏帕提教派的追随者,柯林斯大胆提出了一个关于拉库尔萨帕苏帕塔仪式如何在寺庙内进行的新理论。在他看来,主要的浮雕与一个宗派项目有关,在这个项目中,洞穴寺庙本身被认为是一个整体,由皇家捐赠培育。他最终到达的日期要么是Sankaragana(约575-600年在位),要么是Krsnaraja(约550-575年在位)(第149页)。这是一个原始的,仔细记录的研究,支持广泛的参考书目(第217-36页)和一些有用的附录。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信