One of the most important historical sites
on the ancient Silk Road between China and the West is Bamiyan in Afghanistan.
An article published on the BBC News website this week discusses the issues
surrounding calls to rebuild the famous colossal Buddhas which were destroyed
by the Taliban in March 2001, versus calls to leave the giant niches standing
empty.
The Statues which date to the 6th century
were carved directly into the sandstone cliff-face, and the surrounding hillside
is riddled with man-made caves. The site was once a great Buddhist sanctuary
with Buddhist monks occupying the caves, many of which were decorated with
Buddhist frescoes that are now thought to represent the earliest use of oil
painting in art. The two giant statues of standing Buddhas were modelled
largely in the Gandharan-style – in which Hellenistic forms merged with
Buddhist themes, strongly characterised by sensuous lines which made for a
distinctive aesthetic of idealistic-realism – most notably marked by the
stylised flowing forms of drapery laid over serenely beautiful representations
of the human figure. The Statues were carved into the cliff with surface details
embellished in moulded stucco and adorned with precious stones and metals.
Bamiyan was visited in 630 AD by a Chinese
Buddhist pilgrim, named Xuanzang
(c.596-664), who wrote the classic Chinese text Great Tang Records of the Western Regions – which in turn is said
to have inspired the better known classic, Journey
to the West, perhaps more popularly known as Monkey (attributed to Wu Cheng’en). Xuanzang described Bamiyan at
the time of his visit, noting that there were ten monasteries situated there
with over a thousand monks in residence. Curiously, he also describes a third
statue of a reclining Buddha which has since been lost – and some think still
exists and lies waiting, yet to be discovered.
The two standing Buddhas were destroyed in
March 2001, using a combination of dynamite, artillery shelling and anti-tank
mines, under the orders of the ruling Taliban regime, who are said to have
decreed that the Statues were symbols of idolatry and therefore were contrary
to the principles of an extremely strict interpretation of Islamic Sharia Law.
Even though the Buddhist community who created the monuments have long since left
the site and the local community is now in the present era an all Muslim
population, international calls to preserve the monuments as cultural assets of
world historical importance were ignored by the Taliban leaders who went ahead
with their destruction. It seems that before this occurred several governments
and international bodies made various offers to try to induce the Taliban to
hold fire, some of which possibly only further raised or inflamed contentious
issues concerning the provision of aid to the local communities of the Bamiyan area; issues which
have since muddied the perception as to exactly why the Taliban proceeded with
such a drastic and regrettable destruction. Many countries around the world,
including the few foreign Governments who supported the Taliban regime, roundly
condemned their actions.
Yet the legacy of this destructive act
remains an indefinitely contentious and complex one. There are increasing calls
to attempt to restore one, if not both, of the Statues; other proposals have
suggested recreating the figures using laser projections; yet some insist that
the niches should remain empty as monuments in themselves. The arguments for
each case are complex even within the camps of their own supporters. Some argue
that they should be recreated in defiance of the Taliban’s arbitrary decree; while
the motivation for some in proposing they should be rebuilt is perhaps
religious or purely in the interests of historical preservation, seeking to
uphold notions of a ‘world heritage’; others say the niches should remain empty
as a monument to the intolerant and ignorant exclusivist ethos which decreed
their destruction. But by the very nature of such an international debate,
opinions will naturally vary widely, and not everyone will see eye to eye. Too
many different agendas are at play. Some argue that the essentials are what
matters most. The Statues were remnants of a superseded faith which no longer
populated the area, and so to rebuild them would be contrary to the belief
system of the present local populace. Even though that populace had (we assume)
largely been happy to live in the shadow of these colossal monuments for
centuries without problem or offence. Yet to ask them to support or even
participate in their restoration or rebuilding would run contrary to all the
tenets of their system of religious beliefs. And yet, to allow outsiders to
come in and undertake the work would smack of the imposition of old world
imperialistic projections into an area suffering from the day-to-day realities
of poverty, deprivation and lawlessness, when such an area could clearly
benefit from international interventions of a drastically different ethos and orientation.
Why put the Buddhas back on their feet and yet not assist the local people to get
back on their feet? – Naturally some would argue that such a project would
indeed be just such an investment, bringing jobs, wealth, and a sustainable
source of income in the form of future foreign tourism. Each argument can be
cancelled by another and vice-versa; and so the wheel of misunderstanding
continues to revolve, stuck in the cycle of its own intellectual death and
rebirth. With the coming of Genghis Khan (c.1162-1227) in 1221, the
site had already been long abandoned by its Buddhist founders, Bamiyan remained a substantial city; but the extant local population was ruthlessly driven from the
valley in revenge for the death of the Khan’s grandson who had been sent with a
military force to seize Bamiyan. The city was never fully rebuilt. The irony here is not lost though – in the
simple fact that one of the original tenets of the Buddhist faith itself is
that all things are subject to change, the sutras state that nothing remains
forever; consequently, one has to consider whether rebuilding the Buddhas is not
so much contrary, as possibly even acceptable to the Buddhist faith?
Whether or not this debate or these issues
will be resolved or instead a resolution imposed without the full consent,
agreement, or satisfaction of all the parties concerned, one thing is clear. In
their destruction more has been learnt about the Buddhas. A small wooden
reliquary cache was recovered from the chest of one of the Buddhas which has
enabled the date of its creation, or rather its consecration, to be accurately
established. There has been very little proper archaeological investigation of
this vast ancient site, which apparently remains seeded with landmines. It is
clear though that there is much more to be discovered at this crossroads of
antiquity, a place where a turbulent past meets an equally turbulent present.
BBC News: In Pictures – the Buddhas of Bamiyan
* * *
UPDATE: (February 6th 2014) UNESCO Stops Unauthorised Reconstruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas - The Art Newspaper
UPDATE: (February 21st 2015) UNESCO Reveals Winning Scheme for the Bamiyan Cultural Centre - One of the judging panel is my former colleague, Bob Knox. More information on the international competition can be found here.
Thanks to Llewelyn Morgan for correcting and clarifying a mistake I made in the text above when originally posted (now updated). To read more about the history of the Bamiyan Buddhas in greater depth, please see Llewelyn Morgan's book, The Buddhas of Bamiyan (Harvard University Press, 2015). Llewelyn also writes about Bamiyan on his blog, see here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments do not appear immediately as they are read & reviewed to prevent spam.