SILKROAD ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY I
Elizabeth Errington Numismatic evidence for dating the "Kaniskat'reliquary
2002
Journal of the Institute of Silk Road Studies, Kamakura 10r
Numismatic evidence for dating the 6'Kanbka" reliquary
Elizabeth Errington
Ever since 1908, when Shah-ji-ki-Dheri was first excavated by Spooner (1912, pp. 38-59) and positively identified as the legendary stupa erected by the Kushan king Kanigka, the gilded bronze reliquary recovered from the ruined monument has remained one of the key items (and one of the most controversial issues) in studies relating to the art of Gandhdra. Its history is well-known: in brief, the initial belief that "there is no doubt at all that this is Kanishka's casker" (Spooner 1912, p. 50) has been endlessly disputed, following subsequent readings of the inscription (Konow 1929, pp. 135-138;Mukherjee 1964,pp.39-46; Fussman 1986, pp. 78-82; Errington and Cribb 1992,pp. 194-191). A crucial piece of numismatic evidence from the relic deposit has now resurfaced, which throws new light on the questions surrounding the casket. This was disregarded in the excitement of its discovery almost a century ago and has been overlooked ever since. The evidence came to light during the reorganisation, by Michael Willis, of British Museum collections in the Department of Oriental Antiquities. In the process, he found a box of photographs that had been bequeathed to the Museum by Sir John Marshall. This archive had evidently been collected by Marshall during his term as Director General of the Archaeological Survey of India and includes several photographs of the ShAh-ji-ki-Dheri relic deposit, taken at the time of excavation. Duplicates of the same official Archaeological Survey of India Frontier Circle photographs (1908-1909, serial nos 386-392) also exist in the British Library India Office Collections, and are listed in Ihe Frontier Circle Annual Report 1908-09 (Spooner 1909, pp. 9-10, nos 84-91). Edited sections of the photographs in the Sh6h-ji-ki-Dheri excavation report (Spooner 1912, pls XII-XIID illustrate details of the bronze reliquary from all sides, but only one complete photograph of the entire relic deposit was ever published (Spooner 1914, pl. LX). This shows the bronze casket, a sealed crystal reliquary and a bronze coin (Fig. 1). According to the legend visible on the coin in the photograph (Figs 1, 3.1b), the deity depicted is the Kushan sun god Miiro. The obverse of this coin.(Fig. 3.la) is illustrated in one of the unpublished photographs (Fig. 2). Although the coin appears worn and uncleaned, the figure of a standing king is still easily recognisable and, together with the reverse image, confirms Spooner's identification of the object as a bronze coin of Kani5ka (of the same type as Fig. 3.2), which he says was discovered in the relic chamber close to the bronze casket. According to Spooner (I9I2,p.49), the hexagonal crystal reliquary (2.5 x 1.5 inches/63.5 x 38 mm) contained three small bone fragments, and was probably originally sealed with a piece of clay, before being placed inside the bronze casket. At the time of discovery, however, the bottom of the bronze reliquary "dropped out as the upper part was lifted". The "piece of clay" had been "partially dissolved by the infiltration of water", but it nevertheless still bore "traces of its original 102 S.R.A.A., VIII12002) device, namely, an elephant standing to the right, which we may assume was the impression of the king's seal". That it had actually been used as a sealing, as Spooner suggested, is uncertain, since it was found simply lying beside the crystal reliquary on the detached base of the bronze casket. In the second view of the relic deposit (Fig. 2), the image on the "clay sealing" is also illustrated. I first saw this photograph many years ago in the India Office archives, and accepted at the time, Spooner's identification of this particular item. But since then I have been lucky enough to benefit from the tuition of an expert numismatist, Joe Cribb. So when I saw the photographs again,I immediately realised that the so-called seal depicted, not a lone elephant, but an elephant rider (Fig. 3.3), of the kind commonly shown on the coins of HuviSka. The size and image moreover correspond so closely to issues of this ruler (Figs 3.4-3.5), that, at very least, it must be directly copied from the coin design. Personally, I am almost certain that it is not a clay seal at all, but a coin of HuviSka, coated with clay. A detail noted by Joe Cribb reinforces this impression: instead of being more or less round, one section is straight, which suggests that part of the object has been deliberately cut off. This can also be seen on the two other HuviSka bronze issues shown here (Figs 3.4-3.5). The practice only became commonplace in the latter part of Huviqka's reign as a means of adjusting coins to the correct weight, and therefore provides a similarly late date for the interment of the reliquary in the stffpa. The casket image depicts a king with a moustache and a high, rounded hat with earflaps and diadems, his cloak knotted at one side (Figs 2, 5). As Professor Tanabe very kindly pointed out to me, the left hand of the king is covered by a long sleeve. After he drew attention to this detail of the covered hand and the fact that it also occurs on coins, Joe Cribb noticed the same feature on two reliefs depicting Kushan donors, from Hdda and Shotorak respectively (Rosenfield 1967, p. 2I9, figs 94,98a), and on certain double staters of Vima Kadphises (Fig. 3.7). A significant parallel for the coin images is also found at Surkh Kotal (Schlumberger, Le Berre and Fussman 1983, p.114, no. M8, pl. 57.172-173), where one of the stepped merlons shows virtually the same representation of a male figure in Kushan dress, seated on a low stool and holding an indistinct object in his right hand: a similar club-like object is held by Huvi5ka on his coins, or perhaps a bunch of flowers is intended, as on the casket, but the detail in the photographs is not clear enough to confirm identification. More importantly, the left hand, like the coin portraits of Vima, is clearly covered by a long sleeve. The style of dress worn by the donors in all three reliefs and in the coin- portraits of Vima Kadphises and Kani:ka I appears very similar. This suggests either that they may be approximately of the same date, or, given the provenance of the reliefs, that this costume and the covered hand were largely fashions of the lands to the west of the Khyber Pass. Interestingly, the elongated sleeve is only shown on coins when Vima is depicted seated, either cross-legged on a rocky mountain top, or in European style on a throne (Gitbl 1984, types 10-11). On his portrait busts or when he appears standing before a fire-altar (Fig. 3.8), the left hand can be clearly seen extending from the sleeve (Gdbl 1984, types 4, 160-764).It is similarly visible on all the coins of his successors. Errington/Falk : Kaniqka Reliquary 103
The convention of the covered hand seems to derive from Iranian practices. Xenophon (Hellenica,lI.I.8; Historia Graeca Institutio Cyri, YIII.3.10), writing in the fourth century BC, records that hands were placed in the corA (a kind of long sleeve) or kandys in the presence of the Achaemenid king from the time of Cyrus the Great (c. 558-530 BC) onwards (Shahbazi 1983, pp. 262-263). Although Xenophon's interpretation of this custom has been questioned (Santoro 1973), it is clearly illustrated on the Greek "Vase of Darius" (c. 350 BC), which shows a figure with his left hand covered, facing the Persian king. The practice is also represented more ambiguously by four figures on the Parthian-style bone plaques from Olbia (Ghirshman 1962,p\s.351-352): one figure stands with both hands covered by elongated sleeves, while two have the left hand covered and hold a ring in the right. Masking the left hand because it was considered unclean is understandable, but the significance of the gesture seems more complex, for the fourth figure (seated and possibly representing the king) has his right hand covered and his left bared.
Evidence of the covered left hand in a royal context continues in early Sasanian rock reliefs, as can be seen in the Naqsh-i Rajab depiction (Tanabe 1983, p. l21,fig.4) of two figures attending the investiture of Ardeshir I (AD 224-239140). In the Bishapur III reliefs, tributaries bringing gifts to Shapur I (AD 241-272) are also shown this way (Herrmann 1998, p. 45, fig.3), as are women elsewhere: one offers Varhran II (AD 276-293) a lotus in the Sarab-i Qandil relief (Splendeur des Sassanides 1993, p.80, fig. 66); another offers the ring to Narseh (AD 293-303) in the scene of his investitureat Naqsh-i Rustam (for the identification of the latter as AnAhitd, see Shahbazi 1983, pp.
262-266, pls. 25 -26; Tanabe 1 986). The covered hand in a religious context appears to have strong links with Zoroastrian practices. Evidence for this exists already in the Achaemenid period, in the relief above the entrance to the tomb of Darius at Naqsh-i-Rustam, which shows the king standing before the fire altar. The scene is framed by narrow panels, in which six figures are set one above the other, three to each side (Schmidt 1970,pL.60). According to Mary Boyce (1987, pp. 57-58), these figures represent the six noble Persians who helped Darius to gain the throne, who thus stand on either side of the Great King as the six Amesha Spentas stand, according to the Pahlavi books, on either side of Ahuramazda. Darius thus declared visually, it is suggested, his conviction that he ruled as Ahuramazda's representative on earth. ... The three nobles who face the king in the right-hand panel are all shown raising their left hands, covered by the sleeve, towards their mouths in a ritual gesture of mouming (a gesture which Zoroastrian priests still make today when reciting confessional texts for the dead). There are also a number of minor Zoroastrran rituals that may be conducted by the laity, not just priests and, again according to Mary Boyce (1996, p. 168), celebrated anywhere - at home, on the mountains, by streams, or in the field. One regularly performed is the dfrtgAn or ceremony of blessing, which may be solemnized in honour of any member of the pantheon, to reference him, to secure his favour, or to thank him for benefits received; and this probably continues some form ofpagan usage. In the present-day Parsi community, during the jashn (a prayer ceremony for obtaining blessings on such auspicious occasions as birthdays and wedding anniversaries) the priest covers t04 s.R.A.A., VIIr (2002) his left hand with his robe (Boyce 1987, frontispiece) while invoking the names of the guardian spirits, great kings and priests of the past. But the practice is not confined to Zoroastrian ritual. An eighteenth-century depiction (Untracht 1997, fig. 99) of Rdja Sidh Sen of Mandi performing the pfijd of reciting the Gayatri mantra (the holiest verse of the Vedas, addressed to the Hindu sun god, Surya), the rAja's right hand is covered by an elongated bag. According to Untracht (1997, p. 69), "it is common among some Hindu sects to place the rosary and the hand holding it into a small cloth bag while reciting ... to prevent others from observing the act, and to eliminate personal risk of injury from the possibility of the evil eye falling upon both the rosary and the counter". It seems that these examples provide a useful model for interpreting the potential layers of meaning underpinning the Kushan imagery. Both on the coins and the casket, the Kushan king is shown in a subservient position: Vima as an acolyte of the supreme Kushan god, Oesho, depicted on the reverse of his coins; and the king on the casket in a similar role as a devotee, complete with an offering of lotus flowers for the Buddha. But, at the same time, the imagery carries an underlying political message. The depiction of Vima as pious and devout, asking for and receiving blessing from the supreme Kushan god, emphasises the legitimacy of his rule by virtue of his righteous conduct. Seen from a Buddhist perspective, the king on the casket is similarly portrayed as a temporal ruler blessed by the attendant gods, Miiro/lVlioro and Mao, but nevertheless seeking ultimate salvation by following the teachings of the Buddha. All the other elements in the design are variously found on the coin images of Vima Kadphises (Figs 3.6-3.8), Kaniska I and HuviSka (Figs 4.I-4.7), or in depictions of Kushans in sculpture. There is no exact prototype. The high hat, for example, is only vaguely reminiscent of those worn by the three kings. Its closest parallel is not found on coins, but in the fragmentary head of a portrait statue from Surkh Kotal (Rosenfield 1967, ftg.l22). One clue to dating the casket image is that on later issues of HuviSka, the hat becomes pointed, a fashion which continues under subsequent kings (Figs 4.7-4.9). The earflaps, similarly, only occur in Kushan coin portraits from Huvi:ka onwards (Figs 4.4-4.9), but most closely resemble those found on the earlier issues of this ruler (Figs 4.4-4.5). Several scholars (Rosenfield 1967,p.196; Bussagli 1968, pp.53-54) have already arguedthat the casket image cannot depict Kaniska I, who is always shown with a full beard (Figs 4.1-4.3). Equally though, it cannot be the beardless Kani:ka II (Fig. 4.9), because the style of dress not only closely follows that of the earlier Kushan kings, especially Huviqka, but is directly at odds with that of the later rulers. One of the details worth noting is that the cloak worn by KaniEka I is always shown tied in the cenffe (Figs 4.1-4.3), while some of the examples worn by Vima Kadphises (Fig. 3.6) and HuviSka (Figs 4.4-4.5, 4.7) are knotted to one side, as on the casket. None of the later kings has a cloak. Vasudeva I (Fig. 4.8) and, more rarely, KaniSka II, are shown in full armour. The latter king (in most instances) and all subsequent Kushan rulers wear a pointed head-dress, tightfitting trousers and shoes, a tunic and an open coat, with a hem line that is no longer straight (as on the casket Errington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary 105 image), but dips increasingly at each side (Fig. 4.9). An excellent parallel for the dress of the later Kushans on coins is that worn by the royal donor on a schist relief in the Lahore Museum (reg. no. 105; Rosenfield 1967, tig.77). The tunic bodice is only decorated on certain coins of Huviska (Fig. 4.7; Rosenfield 1967, pl. X, nos 201, 204). However, the ornamentation visible on the coins is much more elaborate than on the casket figure, which has a simple band or fastening running down the centre. An analogy for this detail is found in several relief depictions of devotees in Kushan dress from Sahri Bahlol and Hdda (Rosenfield 1967 , figs 63, 67 -68,94). Behind the right side of the king's head, there is a circular incised line indicating a halo (Fig. 5). This device first appears as an exceptional feature on bronze issues of Kaniqka from one particular mint (Gcibl 1984, types J96,80I,805; Cribb 1999/2000, p. 159), but only becomes commonplace on coins of Huviska, where it occurs either with, or in place of, the motif of flaming shoulders used on his earlier issues and those of his predecessors. Use of the halo (with or without the flaming shoulders) continues under his successors into the Kushano-Sasanian period, although it is noticeable on the majority of later Kushano-Sasanian gold issues that the halo is omitted while the flames persist. The flaming shoulders have been seen essentially as a Kushan device, which was adopted for depictions of the Buddha in the Kapisi-Begram region of Afghanistan, but is rarely found further afield in GandhAra (Tsuchiya 199912000, p. 103). Its absence on the royal figure of the Shdh-ji-ki-Dheri casket is perhaps therefore to be expected. Equally, it is possible that the device was only used by the Kushans on coins issued in Afghanistan, not in India, in which case, the presence or absence of flames on otherwise stylistically similar coins of HuviSka and his successors can perhaps be used as a marker for distinguishing the issues of two different mints - one in Afghanistan and the other in GandhAra, or further south - but for this a die-study of the relevant coinage is needed. A final detail in the imagery of the casket, which strengthens the arguments for a date in the time of HuviEka, is the appearance of the sun and moon gods, Miiro/Mioro and Mao, to the left and right of the king (Fig. 5). Although only Miiro is mentioned in the Rabdtak inscription (Sims- Williams and Cribb 1995196, p. 108), both deities feature as two of the most popular images on the coins of KaniSka and Huviska (Figs 4.2-4.7). They are not found on the coins of later kings, although this might be due solely to the standardisation of Kushan coinage and the resulting limited use of just two divinities, Oesho and Ardochsho, in place of the comprehensive Kushan pantheon of the two earlier kings. It has already been noted that Miiro and Mao are only found together on a rare gold stater of HuviEka (Errington and Cribb 1992, pp. 196, 198, no. 194). The details of the two gods on the casket, moreover, correspond more closely to their images on certain coins of Huvi5ka (Figs 4.6-4.7 ), than on those of Kanigka. Mao appears, on one early Huvi5ka issue (Fig. 4.5) and the casket (Fig. 5), with the standard moon crescents on either side of his head, holding a torque in his right hand and the pommel of his sword in the left. On all issues of Kani5ka, the right hand is simply raised in a gesture of blessing (Fig. a.3). The sun god on the casket (Fig. 5) wears the Phrygian cap of Mithra, whereas on coins he is always shown simply with a diadem. 106 s.R.A.A., VIIr (2002)
Apart from this detail, the image on the casket corresponds closely with a Huviska coin image of Mioro (Fig.4.7): both have arayed halo and the right hand raised in blessing, while the left rests on a sword pommel. The two figures are also similarly dressed in a belted tunic, with a cloak evidently tied at one side. The sum of the parallels between the casket images and those appearing on the coins of Vima Kadphises, KaniSka I and Huviska points to a date for the reliquary in the reign of Huviska. The fact that the portrait of the king does not correspond exactly with any of the Kushan coin portraits. but appears to be an amalgamation of a number of earlier and later features culled from diverse sources, including coins, suggests that it is not a portrait taken from life, but a composite image of an idealised Kushan king. If idealised, then the king it is intended to represent must surely be the legendary founder of the sttpa, Kaniska I.
The recent re-evaluation by Harry Falk (2001a) of the calculations given in the Yavana - jilmka, which links the Kushan era with that of the Saka era of AD 78, arrives at a convincing date of AD 127 fot year 1 of KaniSka I. This provides, for the first time, a firm date for the reliquary and the reign of HuviSka of AD 153-191, or the second half of the second century AD. Work also by Robert Gttbl (1984) and Joe Cribb (1999-2000) on the Buddha coins shows clearly that these were all produced late in the reign of Kanigka I. So we now have three bench marks to aid our understanding of the development of Buddhist iconography in Gandhdra. Ever since its discovery, the reliquary has been generally damned as a work of "crude and unaccomplished craftsmanship" (Rosenfield 1967, p. 259), which Marshall dismissed as showing "manifest proof of artistic decadence" (Spooner 1912, p.50). This assessment has perpetuated, largely because photographs do not do the objectjustice and few people appear to have had access to the original in Peshawar, or to have examined its replica in the British Museum. Judging only from the replica, the detailed execution of the tiny figures in high relief is superb, notwithstanding the limitations of casting and chasing such a small object in bronze. The most comprehensive analysis of the reliquary to date has been given by Neil Kreitman (Errington and Cribb 1992, pp. 194-197), but several questions concerning its complex imagery still need to be addressed. One of the major issues concerns the three Buddhas seated in meditation on the body of the reliquary and the three attendant figures, who, together with Miiro and Mao, are also contained within the upper loops of the garland. The artistic intention behind the design seems to be that the undulating garland supported by seven putti should function as a boundary line between two distinct zones, with the upper one apparently symbolising the heavens. The poSition of the figures in the upper register of the casket thus emphasises their divine status. Two of the deities flank one of the seated dhydni Buddhas and have been identified as Brahmd and Indra respectively (Fig. 6; Errington and Cribb, p. 195). The same combination of figures is repeated on the lid (Fig. 7), except that here the Buddha is seated in abhayamudrd on an inverted lotus and the position of the two gods is reversed. Dobbins contends that the one attendant could be Vajrapft.ri, not Indra (Dobbins 1971,p.27),blut the two representations of this figure, on the lid and on the Errington/Falk : Kaniqka Reliquary r07 body of the casket, both clearly show the hands clasped together in anjalimudrd, and there is no evidence of any attribute (Figs 6-7). What Dobbins appears to have mistaken for a thunderbolt is actually part of the lower right arm and hand of the deity. It seems that these two groups depict, superficially at least, two phases of the Entreaty to preach the Doctrine by the gods: the earlier stage in the TrdyastripSa heaven, with the Buddha still in meditation, being represented on the body of the casket and, on the lid, the next phase, with his hand raised in abhayamudrA b signify assent. In the latter instance, the Buddha is seated on an inverted lotus, which suggests that the scene is still set in Paradise. The final haloed attendant divinity is more enigmatic (Fig. 8). In dress, he most closely resembles a Bodhisattva, with a robe draped over his left shoulder, his arms and right shoulder bare and a bracelet around the right wrist. The visible ear is certainly elongated and may contain an earring. His hair is gathered in a topknot, with an incised division in the centre that suggests a double loop of the type commonly worn by Maitreya (Ingholt and Lyons 1957, fig. 292),bttthis may be illusory, given the tiny scale of the figure. The head-dress comprises a band or diadem, with three circular discs above, that resemble, in shape and execution, the lotuses held by the king. There is a round object in his left hand, while from his outstretched right hand rays emanate towards the incised outline of a flower suspended slightly behind the left shoulder of a Buddha seated in dhyAnamudrd. The figure throwing lotuses is commonplace in Gandhdran reliefs, but the halo and emanating rays deny the possibility that this attendant is merely a princely worshipper, as some have suggested (Ingholt and Lyons 1957, p.181). Interesting in this respect are two reliefs from the Sikri st0pa of the Entreaty to preach the Doctrine by the gods, which both include haloed figures with lotuses in the upper register above Indra and Brahmd: one figure in the first instance (Ingholt and Lyons 1957, fig.70) and two in the second (Ingholt and Lyons 1957, fig. 104). So the inclusion on the casket of a figure throwing lotuses clearly echoes the depiction of this scene in the reliefs. But does the use of the existing iconography of the Entreaty to preach carry additional levels of meaning? The presence on the casket of three meditating Buddhas, one of which is linked by a lotus/flower to a Bodhisattva-like figure, indicates the possibility of another implicit interpretation. Indeed, the combination of rays and lotus-like flowers associate this figure with Padmap6pi. If PadmapAr.ri, then the meditating Buddha to whom he directs his rays could be Amitdbha, the transcendental Buddha of Boundless Light and of the Western Paradise. At Mathurd, both Amitabha and Padmapdr-ri are attested early in the reign of Huvi$ka on inscribed sculptures: the one - from Govindnagar - dated in year 26; the other in year 32 of the Kaniska era (Sharma 1995, pp. 177, 2I4, 216, fig. 88; Haesner 1999, p. 428). Sharma (1995, p. 2I4) remarks in connection with the AmitAbha Buddha inscription of the year 26 (which he reads as year 28) that "the most important contribution [to Buddhist art in Mathurd in the period of Huviskal is the portrayal of the personality of the Master in different forms". The imagery of the Sheh-ji-ki-Dheri casket suggests that a similar process was also taking place in GandhAra at this time, albeit in this particular example the iconography is not explicit. 108 s.R.A.A., VIII (2002)
As Snellgrove (1978, p. 135) has pointed out: "It is clear from the texts and certain surviving traditions that Buddhology progressed through a stage of three great Buddhas (Vairocana, Amitdbha and Aksobhya) to the cosmic set of five". From this it follows that if one transcendental Buddha is depicted on the casket, then surely the other two meditating figures suspended in the upper loops of the garland must also be cosmic manifestations. Although there are no distinctions between the three figures, only a repeated, stereotyped representation, another small clue towards identifying the possible underlying concepts behind the expressed iconography is that one of the Buddhas is being entreated to preach. This could be tenuously interpreted as anticipating the later development of Vairocana, the preaching Buddha of the Centre. However, it also should not be forgotten that the iconographic distinctions identifying the later five individual great Buddha manifestations are "all typical of S6kyamuni in an earlier period [and] continue to relate to him in those Buddhist schools that did not adopt MahAydna teachings" (Snellgrove 1978, p. 135, footnote 5). This is particularly relevant in the present context, since the reliquary is proclaimed in its inscription as an offering to the HinayAnist Sarvdstiv6din sect. On the other hand, the I'alitavistara, the major surviving text of this sect, is seen as a work "strongly tinged with Mahdydnism" (Lamotte 1988, p. 575).k also seems possible that what is hinted at in the reliquary are the beginnings of Mah6ydnist ideas, expressed in the form of existing iconography. As Michael Willis has remarked, ideas change before the iconography does, and the rich imagery of the casket seems to represent, above all, ideas in flux, although the precise intended meanings remain inevitably elusive. Much has been written about the find spot of the reliquary, for it was located some 8 feel or 2.4 metres from the centre of the st0pa, within the angle of two reinforcement ribs (Spooner 1912, p. 48): ,/ the remainil1 the relic chamber were reached at a point which proved to be two feet below the level of the brick pavement surrounding the stttpa as a whole. ... It was not in the exact centre, but a little more to the east and appeared to have been built against the end of that one of the radiating central walls which ran due east from the centre of the stfipa.... The chamber itself was of the rudest possible construction. A long, smooth slab of slate had been laid down extending in its length from north to south, and across the southern end of this was laid a heavy slab meeting at right angles with another heavy slab along the western edge. These two thus formed two sides of a possible square, with the corner intact at the south- west. But no trace whatever could be found of any corresponding slabs on the east and north, and from the general position of the whole it is my opinion that the chamber was not enclosed on these sides save by the massive rubble masonry of the radiating walls to the east and north-east. The calculation of c.2.4 metres is derived from the position of these two radiating walls as marked on the plan of the site (Hargreaves 1914, pl. XIIf . Colours are used on the plan to denote the three different building phases noted at the site: from this it appears that Hargreaves considered that reinforcement ribs of the st0pa belonged to phase 1.' In his written excavation report, however, he only notes evidence for one phase of rebuilding (Hargreaves 1914, p. 26: colour coded phase 3 on the plan, pl. X[I). This concerns the four perimeter bastions of the stfipa, for he says that the Errington/Falk : Kanilka Reliquary 109 alignment of the small stupas at the north-west corner "is curious, and one appears to have been partly demolished as if to allow for the building of the tower" or bastion. Kuwayama (1997, pp. 58-61) similarly suggests three phases for the sttpa, which is quite feasible, but given the paucity of the archaeological evidence, we can never be sure if there were not more. In fact, it seems inevitable that the structure, like Butkara I, must have undergone a number of enlargements in the course of its long life. It is also quite feasible that the account given by the Chinese pilgrims of KaniSka building a stone stupa encasing the little st0pa made by the cowherd or boys (Kuwayama 1997, pp' 62, 65, 69), is an allegory referring to the existence of a st0pa at the site before the time of Kani$ka, although the question remains as to how much reliance should be placed on such legends. What is clear is that the references in the reliquary inscription to the KaniSka monastery in the town of KaniEkapura (see Harry Falk below) both emphasise a connection with this particular king. But the existence of the HuviSka coin denies the possibility of a date in the time of Kaniska I for the relic deposit. In the final analysis, either the sttpa was really founded by KaniSka I and enlarged in the time of Huviska; or the original st0pa predated KaniSka, but became associated with this king during his reign and was enlarged during the reign of HuviSka; or there were two enlargements: one dating from the time of Kani5ka and another from that of HuviEka. In any event, the reliquary is clearly identifiable as a secondary deposit associated with a subsequent phase of rebuilding dating from the time of HgrjSta. Its position off-centre not only suggests this, but also allows a respectable diameter of s6ite 14-15 feet or 4.5 metres for any earlier structures enclosed within the later enlargements of the st0Pa. Elsewhere, the stfipa deposits of Ahinposh, Guldara, Wardak and Manikyala all contained combinations of HuviSka coins with those of his two predecessors, Kaniqka and Vima Kadphises (Errington Igggl200}, pp. 196-197), while at Butkara I, the last enlargement is dated by coins of Huviskaro the second century AD (Faccenna 1980, pp.45, 116-117). Dating the ShAh-ji-ki-Dheri relic deposit in the time of Huviska tallies neatly with the archaeological evidence from these other sites, and helps to confirm the impression that the most flourishing period for the monasteries began during the reign of this king. Finally, this reassessed evidence from ShAh-ji-ki-Dheri helps resolve two disputed points of the casket's inscription (Errington and Cribb 1992, p.197): namely, it cannot be dated in the year 1 of Kanfka, according to Konow's reading, nor can it be a gift of Kanigka, as Mukherjee claims. A new study by Harry Falk (see appendix below) of the inscription on the original casket in the peshawar Museum happily agrees with this conclusion. In this new reading, it can be seen that the inscription convincingly does not mention KaniSka himself, and that the reliquary was the gift of the architecls (navakarmiana) of the fire room, who, we may surmise, perhaps also renovated the sttpa., That architects rather than monks (as Fussman proposed) were responsible for the deposit receives support from similar evidence at Manikyala: the stone inscribed in the year 18 of Kaniska which sealed the relic deposit of the Mera-ka Pind sttpa records the name of the architect, while 110 s.R.A.A., Vrrr (2002) the Great St0pa relic deposit from the time of Huviska also included a donation by the architect (Konow 1929, pp. 149-I5l). In the final analysis, although the Sh6h-ji-ki-Dheri inscription fails to shed light on the date of the reliquary, the coin and archaeological evidence indicate that the deposit took place during an enlargement of the st0pa in the time of HuviSka. However, the inscription and imagery of the casket nevertheless intentionally appear to recall the association of the st0pa with its legendary founder, Kaniska I.
Acknowledgements
This paper has greatly benefited from the collaborative efforts of colleagues and friends. I would therefore like to take this opportunity to thank the following people for their helpful comments and generosity in sharing information and ideas with me in the course of my research: Joe Cribb, Vesta Curtis, Richard Salomon, Arcangela Santoro, Katsumi Tanabe, Marzbeen Todywalla, Michael Willis and especially Harry Falk, for agreeing to publish here his new reading of the casket inscription. Errington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary Appendix: The inscription on the so-called Kanbka casket
Hany Falk
The text on the casket has been edited several times; the version in Konow (1929, p. 137) is unfortunately cited to this day,3 in stern defiance of recent research, done by Mukherjee (1964 and 1989) and Fussman (1987,p.77f). The text is written in four lines around the casket and on the lid. It is the sequence of these four lines which is the topic of this paper, expanding on an earlier note (Falk 2001b, p. 595). In all editions hitherto, the text appears strangely distorted, not answering the requirements of syntax and, in addition, with several truncated words. In this sequel, I would like to show that a simple look at the object leads to a much improved text. The four lines from top to bottom are:
\ 1. The top of t{e tiO is decorated with concentrically arranged lotus leaves, each separated by a \ vertical line. On m{st leaves two letters are punched, one to the left and the other to the right of the central vertical line. The top-most text thus hands the casket into the care of the SarvdstivAdin teachers. Konow reads correctly:
ac ary ana s arv a stiv atina p rati g rahe Usually this formula is found at the end of a dedication. This sentence certainly does not start the text.
2. On the vertical sides of the lid a row of flying geese is found. In-between every pair of geese some 3-5 letters are incised. In two places the text is completely eroded. In one of these eroded spaces Konow expected the proper beginning of the text, starting with a date. He had only rubbings of the fragments and he did not realise that he in fact started reading the text from the back of the lid. Since the lid is crowned by a seated Buddha and two attendants, it is perfectly clear that the eye of any onlooker would start from a point directly in front of the Buddha, running clock-wise around the band. In Konow's edition it reads: sw U malfharajaxlsa Kani(ni)lskhasa*l . imqta (na)g(r)arle] ldhal . . g(r)aryaka A big step forward was made by B. N. Mukherjee (1964), who, after inspecting the electrotype copy at the British Museum, read: ..jasa fumi kaniskapure nagare ayqt gwdha-karu.rde This reading is accepted by Fussman (1987 , p.79).
3. The third line is found on the casket body itself, dispersed between the heads of the king, gods and cupids. Its reading is not disputed: deyadharme sarva satvana hita suhartha bhavatu. 112 s.R.A.A., VIIr (2002)
4. The fourth line stands below the third; the letters are dispersed between the legs of the diverse figures. It was read as
dasa agifalaTtavakarmia [Ka*lneQte)shkasa vihare mahasena(r1a) s(am)gharame by Konow (1929, p. I37) and translated as "the slave AgiSala was the architect, - in Kanigka's VihAra, in MahAsena's Sa:ngh6rAma". This line was improved quite early by Burrow (1944), who did away with the "slave AgiSala". The most recent improvement comes from Fussman, who corrected Mukherjee's ...sa agiialarlavakarmmia lsicl (ka*)naskara vihare mahasenasa s(am)gharame into a re-arranged and much better
mahas e na s a s m.n g h ar al
With the permission of the director and the curator, I was allowed to inspect the original casket at the Peshawar Museum for several hours in early October 2000. The incised letters are very difficult to read, and look very different when viewed in full sunlight or in shade. My first impression was that the traditional beginning on the side of the lid must be wrong since it starts at the back of the lid; my second thought concerned the meaning of the sentences which appeared, as a result, so strangely fragmented. The riddle was soon solved by simply starting all lines in the middle of the casket, right under the Buddha and to the left of the royal figure, both of which leave no doubt that they once commanded the centre of the composition. With this clue, it became apparent that the lines have to be read in the succession 2-4-3-[1]. This means, the scribe started in the centre of the lid. to the left of the first goose. writing: (goose l) ka ni; lka pzl (goose 2) re qta ga (goose 3) re lal yw ga dha lkal (goose 4) rcr.n de (I or 2 letters obliterated) ta or i (goose 5) all letters obliterated (goose 6) ja sa ka ni (goose I). This amounts to: kaniskapure rlagarea aycvn gadhakarcv.rde.. ta/i ..... jasa kcryi. Konow was perfectly right when he expected the jasa to be the en{ of an original maharajasa. But then why should the line end so abruptly n kcv.ti? ff this is the beginnlng of krnti;kasa, where then is the rest of the name? It can be found to the left of the royal figure in li\re 4, where the text continu es: skasa vihare mahasena scr.ngharalqitasa agiSala-navakarmiana. Now\this line again ends oddly with a genitive hanging in the air, until we continue in line 3 above, again starting to the left of the middle of the front, where we get deyadharme sarvasatvana hitasuhartha bhavatu. Line 1 on top of the lid presents the usual final phrase, placed apart, as on the Wardak vase, on a separate line (Konow 1929,p.17O). Errington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary 113
The whole text thus looks like this: 2: kaniskapure ryagare ayqn gadhakarorlqle .. ta/i (mahara)jasa kcr.ti
4: ; ka s a v ihare maha s e n a s a s qn ghar alq i t a s a a g i S al a - nav akarm i ana
3 : d ey adharme ( . ) s arv a s atv ana hit a s uha rt ha b hav atu( . )
I : ac ary ana s artt astiv atina p rati g rahe "In the town Kani5kapura this perfume box ... is the pious donation of the architects of the fire- hall, viz. of Mahdsena (and) Sa:.ngharaSita, in the monastery (founded by) the (Mahdrd)ja Kaniska. May it be for the welfare and happiness of all beings. In the acceptance of the teacl2.6rs of the SarvAstivdda school". The structure of the fif sentence seems to forbid the restoration of any sort of date for the missing letters, which Mukheljee has discarded as well, but which is still present in the translation of Fussman (1984, p.79a), "[In the year x of the great hng]". When reporting this reading to R. Salomon, he kindly drew my attention to the article written in Japanese by Sadakata (1998), who, likewise, starting from the original casket (then in Tokyo) had linked lines 2 and4. But his sequence is [1]-[3]-2-4 and he regards line 3 as also independent: "May this religious gift be for the welfare and happiness of all beings", whereas in my sequence 2-4-3-lll, the first word of line 3 closes the sentence running from 2 and 4. This awkward sequence must be due to a miscalculation on the part of the engraver: he punched line 2 and thought he could end the sentence in line 4 near the base of the body of the casket. But after filling the available space, he still had one word left. This he could only write in the space between lines 2 and 4. So having ended the sentence with deyadharme, he then completed another full line by adding the stock phrase sarvasatvana hitasuhartha bhavatu.
NOTES
I The direct translation of this coloured plan (Hargreaves 1914, pL. XIII) into black and white (Errington 1981 , p. 316, fig. 8) led
Kuwayama (1997 , p.20) inconectly to atffibute Hargreaves' chronological interpretation to me. My discussion in the article cited solely concerned the bastions of Hargreaves' phase 3, not the other structural features of the stopa. 2 According to Harry Falk, in Sanskrit the word would be nava-karmikAndrt, the genitive plwal of navakarmika, meaning "renovator". Like modem architects, they seem to be the brains behind the conshuctions, building anew as well as doing repair work. The term seems to be found exclusively in Buddhist contexts. 3 Satya Shrava 1993, p. 140:' Nasim Khan 1999, p. 196, where a second, uninscribed casket of a similar style is presented.
.l Kaniskanag(r)are. Mukherjee and Fussman regard it as a diacritical mark, Fussman (1987, p. 79b) refening to Brough (1962, p. 58, $4). I take it as a plain ga, and interpret the stroke as a mark developed to distinguish a ga from other "oneJegged" letters on coins, where very often only the lower part is visible. 114 s.R.A.A., Vrrr (2002)
BIBLIOGRAPHY Archaeological Survey of India Frontier Circle 1908-09 British Library India Office photographic collections: Photographs, serial nos 386-92. Boyce, M. 1987 Zoroastrians, their Religious Beliefs and Practices, London,4th rev. ed. 1996 A History ofZoroastrianism, vol.l, The Early Period, Leiden-New York-Cologne, 3rd rev. ed. Burrow, T.
1944 "The term Agifala in two Kharmtfhi inscriptions", Journal of the Greater India Society, 17, pp. I 3- 1 6. Bussagli, M. 1968 "The problem of Kani$ka as seen by the art historian" , Papers on the D(lte of Kani;ka, ed. A. L. Basham, Leiden, pp. 39-56. Cribb, Joe l999l200o "Kanqka's Buddha image coins revisited" , Silk Road Art and Archaeology, 6 (Papers in Honour of Francine Tissot), pp. 151-189. Dobbins, K. Walton l97l The Stfipa andVihdra of Kanishka I, The Asiatic Society Monograph Series, XVIII, Calcutta. Errington, E. 198'l "Tahk0l: the nineteenth-century record oftwo lost Gandhdrasiles", Bulletin ofthe School ofOriental and African Studie s, Ll2, pp. 301-324. 1999/2000 "Numismatic evidence for dating the Buddhist remains of Gandhdra", Silk Road Art and Archaeology, 6 (Papers in Honour of Francine Tissot), pp. 19I-216. Errington, E. and Cribb, J. (eds) 1992 The Crossroads of Asia. Transformation in Image and Symbol in the Art of Ancient Afghanistan and Pakistan, Cambridge. Faccenna, D. 1980 Butkara I (Swat, Pakistan) 1956-1962, part 1, ISMEO Reports and Memoirs, III.1, Rome. Falk, H. 2001a "TlteyugaofSphujiddhvajaandtheeraoftheKr4frras", SilkRoad.ArtandArchaeology,T,pp.12l-136. 2001b "Rez. ofNasim Khan: Buddhist Paintings in Gandhara", Orientalistische Literaturzeitung,96,pp.594-596. Fussman, G.
1987 "Numismatic and epigraphic evidence for the chronology of early Gandharan art" , Investigating Indian Art, Verijffentlichungen des Museums fiir Indische Kunst, 8, ed. M. Yaldiz and W. Lobo, Berlin, pp. 67-88. Ghirshman, R. 1962 lran.ParthesetSassanides,Pais. G6bl, R. 1984 System und Chronologie der Miin4trrigung des Kuidnreiches,Yienna. Haesner. C. I 1999 "Paradise scenes in Central Asian art: autochthonous or modelled after Gandfdra arI?", Coins, Art and Chronology. Essays on the pre-Islamic History of the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, ed. M. Alram ar{d O. n. Klimburg-Salter, Vienna, pp. 423-452. Hargreaves. H. I l9l4 "Excavations at Shah-ji-ki-Dhef', Archaeological Suney of Ind.ia Annual Report 1910-1 I, Calcutta, pp. 25-32. Herrmann, G. 1998 "Shapur in the East. Reflections from his Victory reliefs", The Art and Archaeology ofAncient Persia. New Light on the Parthian and Sasanian Empires, ed.V.Sarkhosh Curtis, R.Hillenbrand and J.M.Rogers, LondoniNew York, pp. 38-51. Ingholt. H. and Lyons. I. 195'7 Gandhlran Art in Pakistan, New York. Konow, S. 1929 Kharaslthi Inscriptions with the Exception of those of Aioka, Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, II. l, Calcutta. Kuwayama, S. 1997 The Main Stupa of Shdh-ji-K-Dheri. A Chronological Outlook, Kyoto. Lamotte,6. 1988 History of Indian Buddhism from the Origins to the Saka Era,Irans. S. Webb-Bonn, Publications de l'Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, 36, Louvain-La Neuve. Errington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary 115
Mukherjee, B. N. 1964 "Shdh-ji-ki-Dheri casket inscription", British Museum Quarterly, XXVII, pp. 39-46.
1989 "A note on the Shdh-ji-ki-Dheri casket inscription of Kanishka I" , Berliner Indologische Studien, 415, pp. 37 5-379. Nasim Khan, M. 1999 "Kaniskarelic-casketfromQunduz,Northern-Afghanistan",ArchriologischeMitteilungenauslranundTuran,3l,pp. 191- 198. Rosenfield, J. M. 1967 The Dynastic Arts ofthe Kushans, Berkeley-Los Angeles. Sadakata, Akira 1998 "kanishika sari yoki meibun kaidoku no kokoromi" [How to read the inscription of the Kaniska reliquaryl, Shunjyu, 4Ol, Aug.-Sept., pp.26-29. Santoro, A. 1973 "A proposito del cerimoniale delle "mani copefte" nel mondo achemenide", Rivista degli Sndi Orientali,XLYII,pp.3T-42. Satya Shrava 1993 The Dated Kushfoa tnscrip4ions, New Delhi.
Schlumberger. D.. Le Berre. M. and $ussman. G. 1983 Surkh Kotal en Bactrione.u[t. I, f"" rcmples: architecture, sculpture, inscriptions,MDAFA XXV, Paris. Schmidt. E. \ 1970 Persepolis, III. The Royal Tombs cnd Other Monuments, University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications IXX, Chicago. Shahbazi, S.A. I 983 "Studies in Sasanian prosopography", Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus lran, 16, pp.255-268. Sharma, R. C. 1995 Buddhist Art. Mathura Scy'rool, New Delhi, London et al. Sims-Williams, N. and Cribb, J. 1995196 "A new Bactrian inscription of Kanishka the Great", SiIk Road Art and Archaeology,4, pp.75-142. Snellgrove, D. (ed.) 1978 The Image ofthe Bud.dha,Paris-London. Splendeur des Sassanides 1993 Catalogue ofexhibition Splendeur des Sassanid.es. L'empire perse entre Rome et Ia Chine (224-642), Mus€e royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, Brussels, 12 February-25 April. Spooner, D. B. 1909 "List of photographs taken and drawings prepared during the year 1908-09", Archaeological Suntey of India Frontier Circle Annual Report 1908-09,Peshavrar, appendix II, pp. 9-10, nos 84-91. l9l2 "Excavations at Shdh-ji-ki-Dhefi', Archaeological Survey of India Annual Report 1908-09, Calcutta, pp. 38-59. Tanabe, K.
1986 "A study of the Investiture of Narseh at Naqsh-i Rustam: Anahitah or Queels?", Orient, XXII, pp. 105-127 . Tsuchiya, H. 1999/2fi)o "An iconographic study of the Buddhist art of Shotorak, Paitava and Kham ZNgar'' , SiIk Road Art and Archaeology, 6 (Papers in Honour of Francine Tissot), pp. 97 -114. Untracht, O. 1997 Traditional Jewelry of India, New York. tt6 s.R.A.A., Vrrr (2002)
Fig. 1. Snan-1i-ki-Dheri relic deposit. British Museum, Department of Oriental Antiquities
J. Marshall photograph collection.
Fig.2 Snan-.;i-ti-Dheri relic deposit. British Museum, Department of Oriental Antiquities:
J. Marshall photograph collection. Errington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary ttl
Fi-9.3 ttlEnhancedenlargementofbronzecoinofKaniskalfromhAh-ji-ki-Dherirelicdeposit;(2)Coinofthesame type. Obverse: standing king. Reverse: Miiro. BMC 49/EIC 93. (3) Enhanced enlargement of bronze elephant rider coin of Huvi.ska from Shdh-ji-K-Dhef relic deposit. (4-5) Coins of the same type. 1894.5.6.1477, Masson
collection. (6-8) Vima Kadphises. IOC 272 (tuom Guldara sttpa), 1867.12.18.10/BMC 2, 1922.4.24.3597 . Photographs couftesy of the British Museum, Department of Coins and Medals. 118 s.R.A.A., VIII (2002)
Fig.4 fan;staI: (1)Bronzeobverse,Massoncollection,(2)Reverse:Mao, 1894.5.6.13,(3)Reverse: Miiro, 1894.
5.6.17. Huviska: (4) Reverse: Miiro, 1894.5.6.63, (5) Obverse, 1841.72.1.258 (from Manikyala Great Stiipa) (6) Reverse: Mao, 1879.5.1.59, (7) Reverse: Mioro, 1888.12.8.548. (8) Vasudeva l. 1879.5.1.91. (9) Kaniska II, 1921 .3.6.12. Photographs courtesy of the British Museum, Depaftment of Coins and Medals. Er:rington/Falk : Kaniska Reliquary 119
Fig.5 netait of casket showing the Kushan king with Mao and Miiro. British Museum replica,
Department of Oriental Antiquities 1880-270.
Fig.6 netait of the casket body showing the Buddha flanked by BrahmA and Indra.
-/ t20 s.R.A.A., VIIr (2002)
Fig.7 l"tult of the lid showing Intlra and Brahmd.
Fig.8 letait showing Padmapad(?).