APPENDIX C

REUSE OF IMAGES AND ITS BEARING ON THE DATING OF GANDHARAN SCULPTURE

In Greater almost no sculpture has been found in situ; instead, it appears in collapse debris and in reuse contexts (fig. 58). Some of the earliest 19th century excavators who worked at sites like Takht-i-bah1 or believed that the disruption they observed was due to purposeful destruction of the sites; they mentioned only occasional in situ remains. 1 The extensive archaeological evidence available today shows that throughout Gandhara's history, schist, and to a lesser extent, stucco2 images were reused by the Buddhist com­ munity. This kind of recontextualization is also a reflection of chang­ ing devotional practices. Reused sculpture can be separated into two major categories: images that were discarded and used in sacred areas as building material, and sculptures that were moved from their original locations to serve new devotional requirements. The most common pattern was simply to place an old, commonly broken image in a relic shrine or against a . 3 This might have been a fast, cheap way of making a donation. It could also be that

1 Crompton noted that many of the sculptures atjamal Garhf had been removed from their original positions (A. Crompton, "Report on the Exploration of the Buddhist Ruins at Jamal Garhi During the '.\Ionths of !\larch and April 1873, by the 8th Company Sappers and Miners, in Puryab Public Worb Department Proceedings, Local Funds Branch, December 1873, Civil Works: Building no. I-a, Appendix a, 1-7; Punjab Government Gazette, Supplement, 12 February 1874, 1-7," in E. Errington "The Western Discovery of the Art of Gandhara and the Finds of Jamalgarhi" (Ph.D. thesis, London University, 1987), 446. \\'ilcher went so far as to suggest that at Takht-i-bahf the sculpture was intentionally destroyed and mutilated, as none of it was found in situ (Wilcher, "Exploration of the Buddhist Ruins at Takht-i-bai," 435). 2 Several phase III stucco Buddha figures were reused at the site of Lalma in , as Shoshin Kuwayama, one of the excavators, pointed out to me. See also Mizuno, ed., Durman Tepe and La/ma: Buddhist Sites in Afghanistan Suroeyed in 1963-65, pl. 22, fig. 2. A careful review of the archaeological evidence shows that stucco imagery was also reused at Sahrf-Bahlol and at the Dharmarajika complex, where many heads were placed in two-celled shrines. It seems likely that many of the loose stucco heads recovered throughout greater Gandhara were also reused. 3 I have discussed this at length in Behrendt, "Relics and Their Representation in Gandhara." APPENDIX C 289 the image itself had taken on sacred qualities and was not easily dis­ carded; this might account for imagery being incorporated into the masonry of or generally used as building material in the sacred area, in a location where it could not be seen or venerated. Occasion­ ally, reused images were integrated into a new stupa at the time of its initial construction. During the latest period of reuse (phase IV), a practice developed of gathering all of the extant devotional imagery from the sacred area and assembling it around relic structures that were apparently still being worshiped. It is significant that during all periods of reuse the sculpture was moved to the holiest points in the sacred area-almost without exception, relic shrines and stupas. This pattern indicates that such reuse was the result of a donative or devotional practice; many of these nodal structures were repaired and maintained, and in some instances it appears that the sculpture was deposited over a long span of time. In Greater Gandhara, imagery was being reused continuously, as structures fell out of use or were refurbished. However, it is possi­ ble to recognize two major chronological ranges when reuse was more prominent. The first period probably occurred near the end of phase II and into phase III, when many narrative sculptures were moved, most often to two-celled shrines in the sacred area. The sec­ ond period of reuse appears to correspond to a time in phase IV when patronage had collapsed and Buddhist population was declin­ ing. It is characterized by the reuse primarily of phase III devotional images. Although a few narrative images appear in such deposits, they are typically worn and broken and do not form coherent sequen­ tial sets, suggesting that they had been in circulation for a long period of time before their deposition. This late period of reuse can be roughly dated, especially at the sites of SahrI-Bahlol, as the major­ ity of recontextualized imagery found here consists of large devo­ tional images of Buddhas, bodhisattvas, Sravasfi triads, Sravasfi composites, and Sravasfi plaques, along with a few monumental stucco heads (see discussions of SahrI-Bahlol loose sculptural finds and Appendix D). It seems that the last Buddhist communities did not have the economic resources or perhaps even the ability to cre­ ate new images. The patterns of late reuse provide a valuable means to better understand this period of Gandharan Buddhism. The recycling of Buddhist imagery is to some extent a site-specific occurrence, though certain patterns are shared. Here, I discuss sculp­ tural reuse in the Dharmarajika complex and in ,