Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 brill.

nl/acss

Orientalised Hellenism versus Hellenised Orient:

Reversing the Perspective on Gandharan Art

Anna Filigenzi*

Abstract
Studies on Gandharan art have not yet produced an unbiased interpretation of its participation
in the wide phenomenon of ‘Hellenism’. This incertitude is mirrored by ambiguous and debat-
able definitions such as ‘Hellenised Orient’ or ‘Gréco-bouddhique’, which contain an implicit,
though mostly unintentional, notion of civilising influence. The emphasis on Hellenistic forms
may mislead our interpretative efforts, especially when, as in the case of India, art history is based
on weak historical grounds. Indeed, in order to develop more effective analytical tools we have
to draw upon methodical and scientific archaeology. The aim of the present work is to offer an
overview of the most important achievements of the IsIAO’s Italian Archaeological Mission in
Pakistan with regard to the vexata quaestio of the inception of Gandharan art and, implicitly, the
inclusion of Hellenistic elements into the local figurative languages. In the course of over fifty
years of field research the Italian Archaeological Mission has created a repository of data that
enables us to bring vis-à-vis the single site and the regional environment, as well as the religious
settlement and the lay world around, thus providing reliable grounds for a better understanding of
the historical, political and social framework of Gandharan art and its Hellenistic components.

Keywords
Pakistan, Gandharan art, Hellenistic influence, Italian mission

This paper is, first of all, in homage to Domenico Faccenna and his work, but
also to all my field companions, including those I never met, those who – like
Domenico Faccenna – are no longer with us, and those who are today active
members of the team, which is now working under the direction of Pierfran-
cesco Callieri and Luca M. Olivieri. To Pierfrancesco Callieri, in particular,
my thanks are also due for his perseverance in pursuing the modest goal of
having this paper included in the volume.1

* FWF Stand-alone Project P21902 “The cultural history of Uddiyana 4th to 8th century CE”,
ÖAW – Numismatische Kommission, Postgasse 7/1/1, A-1010 Vienna – Austria, Email anna.
filigenzi@oeaw.ac.at.
1
This paper was first presented at the Thematic Symposium “Hellenism in Central and South
Asia: from Archaeology to Society”, organized by P. Callieri and S. Stride in the frame of the
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2012 DOI: 10.1163/157005712X638663
 A. Filigenzi /
112 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Indeed, the only ambition of the present work is to offer an overview of the
most important achievements of the IsIAO’s Italian Archaeological Mission in
Pakistan with regard to the vexata quaestio of the inception of Gandharan art
and, implicitly, the inclusion of Hellenistic elements into the local figurative
languages.

The Formal Question of ‘Hellenised Arts’

It is a fact that more than one hundred years of studies on Gandharan art have
not yet produced coherent paradigms for an unbiased interpretation of its
showiest – at least to our eyes – feature, i.e. the coalescing of its distinctive
Buddhist/Indian nature in the wide phenomenon of ‘Hellenism’. This is a
crucial matter that nevertheless we risk to vitiate ab ovo with ambiguous and
debatable definitions such as ‘Hellenised Orient’ or ‘Gréco-bouddhique’,
which contain an implicit, though mostly unintentional, notion of civilising
influence. These terms, still dominant in our field language, reflect our inca-
pability to decipher and properly name the intercultural dialogues that made
that phenomenon happen.
Names reflect a viewpoint and become substantive arguments. The empha-
sis on Hellenistic forms may mislead our interpretative efforts, especially
when, as in the case of India, art history is based on weak historical grounds.
Labelling an artistic phenomenon as ‘Hellenistic’ without knowing how, why,
and on which substratum it developed – as we are still compelled to do by the
force of a petrified tradition, in a way defines an approach that brings us back
to our point of departure, which is neither the local culture we try to investi-
gate nor its dynamic interaction with a living environment but rather an
a priori knowledge based upon western paradigms. ‘Hellenism’ certainly rep-
resents an objective fact. Nevertheless we have to place ourselves in the world
that is to be understood in order to work out more sensitive and effective
methods to investigate cross-cultural differences, and to combine objective
evidence with a sympathetic standpoint of aesthetic relativism.
Archaeology may provide more robust analytical tools, which are nonethe-
less not fully embedded in the practice of archaeology. One needs to get a
critical mass of data that makes relevant analysis possible but at the same time

19th Meeting of the European Association of South Asian Archaeology, held in Ravenna, Italy,
in July 2007.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 113

one has to process material evidence according to conscious strategies that

result from a blend of deductive and inductive inferences.
The IsIAO Italian Archaeological Mission has always oriented its efforts
towards both these aspects, following a consistent and long-term program in
spite of the modest means it could count upon, at least in terms of financial
resources. Instead, it has always been led by prominent scholars with an idea
of archaeology as a capillary discipline whose primary goal is a safe retrieval of
material data. This can sound extremely banal but is in fact an extremely dif-
ficult task. It implies not only technical know-how, but also the ability, or the
chance, to cross vertical and horizontal perspectives, to understand the soil as
well as the territory, to isolate objects without losing their original setting. It
takes time and, moreover, a good acquaintance with the places, of a kind that
one cannot gain through personal experiences only, but has to draw on the
dynamic reservoir established by a permanent centre, which over time collects
and amplifies the contributions of the individuals. In this respect, this small
institution can be considered a successful experience, though nowadays endan-
gered – as many others of the same kind – by political and financial constraints
and by a different rhythm of life which urge us on to rethink our approaches
and try to work out different methods and strategies. Many things can and
must be changed. Nevertheless, I still think that nothing will ever replace the
patient work of well-trained trowels and pencils, and their imperative need to
know exactly where a wall starts, ends, or joins another structure.

Buddhism and Hellenism: Archaeological Evidence from Swat

In the history of Swat, or ancient Uḍḍiyāna, Buddhism certainly played a

prominent role, as it is clearly evidenced by literary and archaeological docu-
mentation. Its diffusion, implantation, social impact, and doctrinal and
artistic expressions are such tangled issues that a multifaceted system of inves-
tigation is required. In the course of over fifty years of field research the Italian
Archaeological Mission has created a repository of data that relate to a wide
and homogeneous cultural background. Thanks to this expanded framework
the focus on the Buddhist phenomenon can be concentrated deeply on the
single site as well as on the regional environment and, moreover, it can be
submitted to cross-reference analysis that brings vis-à-vis the religious and the
lay world.
As the first, most important and long-lived Buddhist settlement so far exca-
vated in Swat, Butkara I represents the obligatory starting point for a general
reflection on the process of assimilation by Buddhist art and architecture of
 A. Filigenzi /
114 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Hellenistic features, insofar as it provided for the first time that ‘critical mass’
that allowed a totally different approach to the question.2
The life span of the site, which dates from the 3rd century BCE to the
9th century CE,3 was divided into five main building periods corresponding to
the five stages of construction/reconstruction of the Great Stūpa, a Dharma-
rājika one,4 and to a secure stratigraphic sequence that enables us to itemise
diachronic variations of technical and stylistic patterns. These latter, in turn,
provide reliable reference points for the mass of architectural and sculptural
fragments found in the site and no longer referable to their original settings.
Leaving out the detailed analysis of the different periods, for which I refer
the readers to the relevant literature,5 I will focus on the period of Great Stūpa
3, when, around the beginning of the Common Era, a complete renovation
brought the sacred area to its very peak of balance and grandiosity.
In this period, the two main focal points of the layout were represented by
the main stūpa (Great Stūpa 3) and the Great Vihāra,6 facing each other at the
opposite sides of an area then still unencumbered, with staircases on the same
axis, and a row of free standing columns and small stūpas whose straight course
was probably aimed at creating an harmonising line between the circular plan
of the Great Stūpa and the square of the Great Vihāra.
The shape of Great Stūpa 3 (Fig. 1) displays powerful innovations that do
not only embellish, but rather transforms the ancient and simple mound-
shaped stūpa in a far more elaborated building that reflects new architectonic
concepts. What we see here fully accomplished is nonetheless the result of a
process of experimentations and adaptations already detectable in the previous
period (Period of Great Stūpa 2), when more sophisticated techniques and
materials were introduced in smaller scale works.
To begin with, the black schist of the early monument is abandoned in
favour of a green talc schist and chlorite schist that, although more difficult to

2
I refer the reader to the main literature on the site (Faccenna 1980-81; Faccenna 2007;
Faccenna in Faccenna, Callieri, Filigenzi 2003), where a copious apparatus of bibliographic
references gives a detailed account of all the relevant data along with a vast range of comparisons.
3
The chronology is based on a consistent cluster of archaeological data, coherently supported
by numismatic evidence. For a quick overview see Filigenzi 2010a, footnote 2.
4
This is attested by concomitant occurrences: circular plan, building technique, chronology,
and epigraphic records (Faccenna 1980-81, part 1, 167 esp.).
5
See especially Faccenna 1980-81, part 1. In this volume the reader will find a summary of
the five periods of the Great Stūpa and related monuments. For an exhaustive account I refer to
the following volumes, where every surviving element, from the single monument to its archi-
tectural components, is scrupulously described and analysed in the framework of the strati-
graphic sequence.
6
This latter identified as Great Building (GB) in the earlier publications (Faccenna 1980-81,
part 1, 151).
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 115

Fig. 1. Great Stūpa 3. Reconstruction sketch. After Faccenna 1980-81, part 1,

fig. 30.

work, complies much better with the rendering of the plastic volumes required
by an increasingly rich repertoire of decorative elements. The dome rests now
on two receding cylindrical storeys (respectively: diam. 15.22 m, h. 1.80 m;
diam. 12.84 m, h. [max. preserved] 1.1 m), the lower one with four flights of
steps at the cardinal points giving access to the upper one. The profile of the
two storeys was marked by moulded base and cornice – a feature absent from
the single cylindrical storey of Great Stūpa 2;7 many of the several superim-
posed coats of plaster detected on the wall (about twenty) show traces of red
or pinkish colouring and in one case (the tenth layer from the outside) of a
painted decorative motif in the shape of a straight festoon. The surface, smooth
at the beginning in both storeys, was later articulated in the upper storey by a
harmonious row of pilasters (h. 0.78 m; interaxis 0.70 m). A coin of Azes II
found in a relic casket inside the plinth of Column No. 135 – stratigraphically
related to the original floor (F4) of Great Stūpa 3 and therefore a little later

7
Gently complying at the beginning with the moulding, the subsequent additions of plaster
coats progressively transform the composite outline of the latter to a simple and clumsy curved
profile.
 A. Filigenzi /
116 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

than the pavement itself – affords a reliable clue to the building of Great Stūpa
3, which must have taken place at the end of the 1st century BCE or, more prob-
ably according to Faccenna, the beginning of the 1st century CE.8 The projecting
juts of the stairways and a number of uprights and crossbars found reused in
later monuments, either in their façades or cores, led to the hypothetical –
though very likely – reconstruction of a parapet or balustrade. Other surviving
elements such as a cylindrical spacer with its capital and supporting disk, and
smaller uprights and crossbars allowed a more detailed reconstruction of Great
Stūpa 3, with its imposing and sophisticated chattravālī and, most probably, a
second railing at the base of the dome, possibly attached to the wall.9
If Great Stūpa 2 had already marked an important transitional stage from
the Indian stūpa of the origin to new architectural concepts,10 Great Stūpa 3
provides us with the picture of an accomplished process that, on account of its
progressive refinement and final results, “cannot be dissociated from a wider
phenomenon in the history of the country and its culture”.11
Nevertheless, respect for the venerated origin of this monument, no doubt
memorialised as a landmark in the local Buddhist tradition, must have com-
mitted the new generations of architects to some faithfulness to its ancient
model. The maintenance of the circular plan over the centuries and through-
out the reiterated rebuilding is an eloquent witness to such an attitude.
Indeed, the innovations are more freely experimented in the newly built
monuments. The two small stūpas 14 and 17, stratigraphically related to the
Great Stūpa 3, bear the more significant evidence. Of the original monuments
only the lower part survives (Stūpa 14 up to the coping of the first body,
whilst Stūpa 17 retains part of the second body). Nevertheless, the square
plan of this latter – with the surface of the first body rhythmically spaced by
Gandharan-Corinthian pilasters – and the moulded cornices, in which we
observe the adaptation of classical motifs, unequivocally attest to a successful
amalgamation of the traditional stūpa model with elements of western origin.12

8
Faccenna 1980-81, part 1, 57; for the coin see Göbl 1976, No. 15.
9
On the reasons for the attribution of these elements to Great Stūpa 3 see Faccenna 1980-
81, part 1, 58-59, footnote 2; 74, footnote 1. Further clues are provided by comparison with a
silver stūpa-shaped relic casket from Column No. 33, belonging to the same period as Great
Stūpa 3 (ibidem, 57-58 and fig. 23).
10
The building of Great Stūpa 2 was assigned to a period prior to the end of the 2nd/beginning
of the 1st century BCE, a date to which the final phase of Great Stūpa 2 is related by a coin of
Menander (Faccenna 1980-81, part 1, 45).
11
Faccenna 1980-81, part 1, 75.
12
The cornices are composed (from below) of architrave with double band, row of ovoli,
ovolo, cavetto, fillet, figured cavetto decorated with lion protomae (alternated with small pilasters
and horizontal scrolls in Stūpa 17, with palmettes, eagles, or winged cupids on lotus flowers in
Stūpa 14), row of dentils, cyma reversa decorated with Lesbian kymation, and reversed ovolo.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 117

In particular, Stūpa 17 displays a distinguishing feature on the surviving part

of the second body, i.e. a keen re-modelling of the Doric frieze, where the
glyphs are replaced by a motif inspired to the pillars of the vedikā (Fig. 2).
Albeit quite anodyne from the visual point of view, this replacement marks a
radical change of ideological perspective, destination, and meaning. The West-
ern source is assimilated into a new language that is, exactly, neither ‘Indian’
nor ‘Greek’ but Gandharan. Moreover, as pointed out by Faccenna,13 this
decorative device anticipates one of the most innovative features of Gandharan
art, i.e. the characteristic vision of the space with scenes separated by architec-
tural elements, which represents the formal framework of the narrative cycles.
The emergence of an original artistic language is also visible in Stūpa 14,
whose figural decoration provides us with a substantive stratigraphical refer-
ence according to which we can assemble, in the same group, reliefs sharing
the same scheme, decorative elements and stylistic features (Figs. 3-5).14
This is the earliest stylistic group, called by Faccenna ‘disegnativo’ (or ‘draw-
ing’) for its pronounced graphic taste, characterised by a minute play of lines

Fig. 2. Stūpa 17, second body: the vedikā motif. After Faccenna 1980-81,
part 5.1, pl. 152c.

(Faccenna 1980-81, part 2, 241-255, part 5. 1, pls. 132-154. See also Fabrègues 1987, 34-35
esp.; on the cornice of Stūpa 14 see Provenzali 2005, 168-171).
13
Faccenna 2004.
14
The starting point in this process is represented by three fragments of a cornice (Inv.
Nos. B 6841, B 2587 and B 3792) that, besides lion protomes alternating with eagles on lotus
flowers on the upper band, on the lower band bear a row of human busts. This additional feature
allows the investigation expand upon a much wider range of sculptural remains (Faccenna 2001,
143-145).
 A. Filigenzi /
118 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 3. Stūpa 14, detail of the cornice. After Faccenna 1980-81, part 5.1,
pl. 139b.

Fig. 4. Drawing style: fragment of cornice B 6841. After Faccenna 2001, pl. 99a.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 119

Fig. 5. Drawing style: relief B 1690. After Faccenna 2001, pl. 87a.

combined with wide, flat volumes. Closely related to the contemporary Indian
art – and at the same time unmistakably different on account of its strong
local character – this group shows a striking expressive force and a masterly
morphological balance between physiognomic realism and spatial abstraction.
It is within this first group that the earliest images of the Buddha are to be
found:15 their features are, as in the rest of the ‘drawing’ group, basically

15
Faccenna 2001, 145-148.
 A. Filigenzi /
120 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Indian, which is to say very close to the more or less contemporary prototypes
of Mathura.
The inception and duration of the ‘drawing’ style cannot be precisely
defined but it can nonetheless be inferred from some firm points in the archae-
ological sequence of the site, which can be cursorily summarised as follows:

a) This figurative language is already formed around the beginning of the

Common Era, as demonstrated by the stratigraphic correspondence
between the Great Stūpa 3 and stūpas 14 and 17,
b) The life span of the drawing style must have been long enough to allow
a range of shades and changes that nonetheless seem to rapidly evolve
in the ‘naturalistic’ style of Hellenistic ascendance,
c) The relative chronology according to which the ‘drawing’ style precedes
the ‘naturalistic’ one is firmly established by the whole of the archaeo-
logical setting that include cross comparisons with other sites of the
same geographic and artistic province. Moreover, the material evidence
provided by re-worked reliefs, where one can see artworks of the second
group obtained by re-cutting older pieces belonging to the first group,
adds an irrefutable confirmation to the stylistic sequence,
d) The history of the ‘drawing’ style has a further benchmark in the frieze
of the Main Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I, which is datable – again not on
isolated pieces of evidence but on the basis of a cluster of archaeological
data – to the early second quarter of the 1st century CE.16

Nevertheless, our enquiry into the period cannot be confined to stylistic issues
but has to include other considerations about the historical, cultural, social
and economic milieu. Once again, things run in circle, because we will not be
able to detect significant associations until we define diachronic patterns of
change. This is another reason why a reliable archaeological sequence such as
that established in Swat – indeed, a very rare occurrence produced by a lucky
combination of patient work and favourable environmental circumstances –
sets the stage for follow-up achievements that go much beyond the mere art
historical domain.17

16
Given the exceptional value and breadth of the data related to this frieze, and the detailed
analysis of intrinsic and extrinsic elements that led to its identification and interpretation, I refer
the reader to the available literature, first of all the splendid monograph by Faccenna (2001)
that, being in Italian, seems to have passed quite unnoticed. Nevertheless, useful summaries can
be found in Faccenna, Callieri, Filigenzi 2003; Faccenna 2007.
17
The monumental work on Butkara I and others such as the volumes dedicated to the sacred
areas of Saidu Sharif I and Panṛ I (Faccenna 1995, and Faccenna, Khan, Nadiem 1993 respec-
tively), which represent a true compendium of Gandharan archaeology, were conceived as the
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 121

Orders of Magnitude, Historical Meanings

The fortunes of the ‘drawing’ style are closely connected not only to those of
the sites where it has been observed but also to the more general issue of the
inception of Gandharan art and, implicitly, the spread of Buddhism, in so far
as they tell us when, by whom, and how freely the Saṃ gha started getting the
support that transformed a loose distribution of Buddhist foundations in a
tight network of monastic settlements.
A meaningful clue in evaluating this process is provided by two sculptural
fragments from Butkara I, both of considerably large size. I start from them
intentionally, sure as I am that they will strikingly illustrate how far an analy-
sis of isolated and incomplete objects can go when supported by a critical mass
of discriminative archaeological data.
The first one (B 6795; total h. 0.845; w. 0.69; total thickness 0.30;
Figs. 6-8) is a profiled stela with back-to-back relief figures. The stela – recom-
posed from several fragments – is incomplete: the upper part with the heads is
missing, and ample zones of the extant sculpture are badly chipped. In any
case, what remains still allows an unambiguous identification of the subjects:
a tutelary couple on one face, a single stout figure of a kneeling yakṣa/atlas on
the other.
The image of the couple broadly corresponds to a well known scheme18 and
is perhaps to be understood as an iconographic variant of the divine pair
Skanda/Pāñcika-and-Hāritī. Both the characters stand frontally with right
hand raised to the breast level, and are clothed in Indian dresses, which are
characterised by an extremely sheer fabric. The male character wears a coat of
mail, paridhāna and uttarīya, and with the left hand grips the hilt of a sword
hung to a belt. The female character wears a paridhāna, a short tunic, a cloak,
and a rich set of personal ornaments; in the left hand she holds a standing
small male figure (this also headless) wearing a short tunic tied with a belt at
the waist and with the right hand performing the same gesture as the two
main characters. One can think of a child, although the dress, the proportions

archaeological introduction to deeper insights into the activity of local workshops and their
contribution to the development of Gandharan architecture and sculpture. After the monograph
on the narrative frieze of the Main Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I (Faccenna 2001), two additional
works by Faccenna will be sadly published posthumous, the first one devoted to the Swat Buddhist
architecture, which is expected to be out quite soon (Faccenna, Cimbolli Spagnesi, in print), the
second one dealing with the sculptures. This latter was left unfinished, but it will be hopefully
completed – following the indications annotated by the author himself in the manuscript –
thanks to the collective effort of Faccenna’s family and collaborators.
18
Callieri 1997, 262-263, 269-275; Callieri 2002; Quagliotti 2003; Faccenna 2006, 182.
 A. Filigenzi /
122 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 6. Stele B 6975: face with tutelary couple. After Faccenna 2006, fig. 1.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 123

Fig. 7. Stele B 6975: face with yakṣa/atlas. After Faccenna 2006, fig. 2.
 A. Filigenzi /
124 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 8. Stele B 6975: graphic representation (drawing by F. Martore, 2001).

After Faccenna 2006, figs. 3-4.

and the static posture of this figurine, as pointed out by Faccenna,19 do not fit
the usual images of children and are rather reminiscent of a small statue.
The profile of the kneeling yakṣa/atlas on the other face of the stela almost
perfectly complies with that of the couple on the opposite face. The yakṣa/
atlas, with left hand on the raised knee to unload the body’s weight, wears a
dhotī rolled up at the waist. Only the lower part is relatively well preserved.
The head is missing, and the torso is badly chipped (in particular, right fore-
arm and breast show signs of being chiselled away).
I refer to Faccenna’s relevant work for a more detailed analysis of the icono-
graphic subjects. Here I will limit myself to recall the comparison made by
Faccenna with a frontal view statue portraying a female figure (B 6000; total
h. 1.245; Fig. 9) that, on account of its marked affinity in terms of style, ico-
nography, size and visual prominence not only can give an idea of how the
female character of the stela must have looked like, but moreover opens a
broader view of the artistic period and of its sophisticated formal language.

19
Faccenna 2006, 183.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 125

Fig. 9. Female figure B 6000. After Faccenna 2006, fig. 5.

Investigation on the intrinsic and extrinsic features of the early artistic produc-
tion finds a further key piece of evidence in a fragment showing the right leg
of a human figure (B 6011; h. 0.655; Fig. 10).20 A careful analysis of constitu-
tive elements (orientation, projection, volumes) allowed Faccenna to recon-
struct the original subject as the Great Departure (Figs 11-12),21 a theme that
we see often represented at Butkara I, where usually small reliefs are repeated
in a larger scale that, despite a different treatment and richness of details, basi-
cally follows fixed patterns.22 The proportions, once developed according to

20
Faccenna 1985.
21
Ibidem, 326-328 esp.
22
Ibidem, 332; Faccenna 1997.
 A. Filigenzi /
126 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 10. Fragment of relief B 6011, from an original depiction of the Great
Departure. After Faccenna 1985, pl. 1.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 127

Fig. 11. Relief B 2892: the Great Departure. After Faccenna 1985, pl. 3.

such a scheme, are impressive: h. 2.78 m, w. 3.03, without the cornice. And
yet, the effect of grandiosity was probably emphasised by the painted and
gilded surface, according to a decoration technique largely attested at Butkara
I in many sculptural fragments, although only by minimal traces.23

23
Faccenna 1980-81, part 3, 719-722.
 A. Filigenzi /
128 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 12. Relief B 5852: the Great Departure. After Faccenna 1985, pl. 8.

Given the unusual size and features of these sculptures, the search for their
original setting is extremely limited. The only coeval building that may have
housed them – certainly along with several others sharing analogous features –
is the Great Vihāra.24
Following Faccenna’s reconstruction, we can imagine this monument very
similar in shape to the still extant and well preserved vihāra of Gumbat, in the
Kandak valley, which shows a tall platform, single cell surrounded by a corri-
dor, and double dome roof, according to a typology often represented in
Gandharan reliefs (Figs 13-14).25 The grandiose image of a monument and its
sculptural decoration emerges indeed from a persistent chain investigation as
a further decisive witness to a real burst of creativity that in a few decades
seems to have swept up the region, marking a unique point in the unfolding
of the Gandharan phenomenon.
To the second quarter of the 1st century CE (possibly at its very beginning,
i.e. around 25 CE) another outstanding specimen of Buddhist architecture is
to be dated, the Main Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I.26 The importance of this monu-
ment for the history of Gandharan studies can hardly be overemphasised:

24
Ibidem, part 1, 151-160.
25
Faccenna 2006, 190-191, with references.
26
Faccenna 1986, Faccenna 1995.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 129

Fig. 13. Gumbat: Vihāra, N elevation (drawing by E. Cimmino, 1964). After

Faccenna 2006, fig. 10.

Fig. 14. Gumbat: Vihāra, N-S section (drawing by P. Gui, 1964). After
Faccenna 2006, fig. 11.
 A. Filigenzi /
130 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

firstly, it represents one of the earliest attestations of the stūpa with columns,27
a type that translates in an architectural form a mandalic concept of the ritual
space. Secondly, for the first time a chronology firmly based on archaeological
grounds assigns the monument and the frieze that constituted its original
decoration to one and the same moment. The surviving fragments of this
frieze – that technical elements prove conceived and realised contextually with
the monument itself – were recovered thanks to painstaking work among the
huge mass of debris encumbering the sacred area. They once belonged to a
narrative frieze 42 m in circumference, originally composed of about 65 big
panels of a size that Faccenna reconstructs as 41 × 51 cm, framed by a cornice
with a balustrade motif above and moulding below (Fig. 15).28
Stylistically, the frieze of Saidu Sharif I is still to be assigned to the same
‘drawing’ group we have seen at Butkara I, but the experimentations already
observed there are pushed even further at Saidu.29 When viewed from the
internal perspective of its own context, in spite of the very fragmentary state
of preservation, this frieze discloses a touching beauty in which we read – as in
the whole of the coeval production – a sort of human adventure, a challenge
courageously answered. Space, volumes, rhythms, fluidity of the masses,
capacity of condensing in minimal variations events and emotions, the inten-
sity of the figures, the extraordinarily bright and lively eyes, the majestic aus-
terity of gestures and movements, all speak of a masterly command of the
technical tools, of the material medium, of the formal language, of the ideal
contents, which successfully integrate the main doctrinal and hagiographical
issues and their local adjustments in a coherent vision. As a case in point, men-
tion can be made of the relief S 241, which depicts a king mounted on an
elephant, carefully holding in his hands a cylindrical reliquary. The original
setting of this fragment, inferred from its fall spot, likely coincides with the
cycle of the Nirvāṇa, which allows the hypothesis that the scene may repro-
duce an apocryphal tale we know from Xuanzang – one of the many connect-
ing Uḍḍiyāna to the Buddha’s life. According to this legend the king
Uttarasena, having taken part in the division of the relics, would have erected
the stūpa on the exact spot where, in the proximity of the capital, his elephant
suddenly fell dead.30
Needless to say, being the only narrative sequence that can be safely placed
within its original setting – not only in terms of mere physical space, but also
in terms of a broader artistic culture – this frieze represents an invaluable

27
Faccenna 1986, 62.
28
Faccenna 2001.
29
Ibidem, infra; Filigenzi 2006a, 34 ff. esp.
30
Faccenna 2001, 227-229; as for the Xuanzang’s account see Beal 1884 [2004], III, 126.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 131

Fig. 15. The Main Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I. Reconstruction sketch. After
Faccenna 1995, fig. 280.

source of knowledge. Its features, which have been analysed with unparalleled
mastery and sensitiveness by Faccenna,31 witness to an advanced stage of the
drawing style and, more in general, of the new artistic language that we can
call ‘Gandharan’. We are at a nodal point where techniques, materials, archi-
tectural settings, and iconographic schemes have by now coalesced in an
organic and harmonious unit that, despite changes in time and space, will
constitute for centuries to come a strong and coherent artistic tradition.
In the great collective effort of the workshop the figure of an artist stands
out, who certainly designed and directed the work, and most probably person-
ally executed the most difficult parts of it. The unmistakable touch of an indi-
vidual, whom with Faccenna we can call the ‘Maestro di Saidu’, emerges for
the first time from that indistinct crowd of anonymous stonemasons who gave

31
I would like to repeat here what I had the opportunity to say on the occasion of Faccenna’s
commemoration held in the IsIAO, Rome, on March 29th 2010: besides the usually keen insight
into the archaeological and stylistic matter, some of Faccenna’s works (and particularly Faccenna
1985, Faccenna 2001) represent the first, penetrating essays on Gandharan aesthetics.
 A. Filigenzi /
132 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

expression to the Gandharan idiom. Far from being a marginal detail in the field
of Gandharan studies, this close focusing represents the outcome of a progres-
sive and scrupulous refinement of the analytical investigation, which implied
cross comparisons with materials coming from the same site, from other sites
of the same artistic province, and from the entire corpus of Gandharan art.
With the frieze of Saidu Sharif we are at the apex, and at the end, of an artis-
tic season. A very short distance separates the ‘drawing’ style from the following
one – which we see attested at Butkara I, Saidu Sharif I and other sites and
which has been labelled as ‘Hellenistic’ – where naturalism becomes predomi-
nant. Just a visual comparison between two reliefs belonging to the two different
stylistic groups is enough to catch their proximity to each other (Figs 16-17).
Now that a dedicated archaeological and analytical work passed on to us a
reliable rendering of the Main Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I, with its imposing size
and innovative features, we can venture a guess at its vast impact on the coeval
Buddhist world, since it seems quite unlikely that the fame of this monument
could have remained confined to a provincial environment.32
Already in the early 1960s the Italian scholar Mario Bussagli had pointed
out the striking similarity of some of the paintings of Miran,33 one of the east-
ernmost sites of the Silk Road, with the Gandharan – and notably Swati –
sculptures, at the time already known from various collections, in particular
the collection of the Guides Mess of Mardan. Bussagli went even further, sug-
gesting that Tita, the painter recorded at Miran, and the sculptor of Mardan
were one and the same person.34 The discovery and analytical study of the
Saidu Sharif frieze, which safely assigns this latter to the second quarter of the
1st century CE, definitely rules out the possibility of a direct correspondence
with the Miran paintings, attributed by the majority of the scholars to the
3rd/4th century CE.35 Although untenable, Bussagli’s hypothesis nonetheless
contains a sharp intuition that can be re-evaluated in a different perspective.
Now that an order of chronological succession has been established, the mean-
ing of the coincidences changes accordingly, and we can look at the Saidu
Sharif frieze as the model, and at the paintings of Miran as a free yet faithful
transposition of this latter (Figs 18-19), postulating – why not – the existence
of handy models, for instance in the form of drawings.36
Copying originals was a normal occurrence in ancient times and it had a
totally different meaning from our contemporary world. A copy was not – at

32
An influential role of this stūpa, at least in the spreading of the model of the stūpa with
columns, was already implicitly suggested by Faccenna (Faccenna 1986, 62).
33
Stein 1921, 349, 485 ff., 506; Stein 1928, 170 ff.
34
Bussagli 1963, 22-24.
35
Filigenzi 2006b, 73-74, note 19; for a stimulating insight into this topic see Lo Muzio
forthcoming.
36
For a more detailed discussion on this subject matter see Filigenzi 2006b.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 133

Fig. 16. Relief S 708: the Fight for the Relics, from the frieze of the Main
Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I. After Faccenna 2001, pl. 36.

Fig. 17. Relief S 800: the Athletic Contest, Naturalistic style. After Faccenna
2001, pl. 120a.
 A. Filigenzi /
134 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Fig. 18. Relief S 1112: the Gift of the Elephant, from the frieze of the Main
Stūpa of Saidu Sharif I. After Faccenna 2001, pl. 47.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 135

Fig. 19. Miran: fragment of painting with scene from the Vessantara-Jātaka.
After Stein 1921, fig. 137.
 A. Filigenzi /
136 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

least in public spaces endowed with special meanings as a religious monument

certainly was – a mechanical reproduction. It was rather an ‘intertextual’ imi-
tatio of a model held as an authoritative excellence, if not a way of re-enacting
some idealised place or condition, as the ancient Uḍḍiyāna must have been
perceived by the Buddhist oecumene. Probably, it is exactly in the crucial
decades corresponding, in the artistic calendar of the local ateliers, to the
blooming of the drawing style and related architectures that Uḍḍiyāna worked
out its physiognomy as Holy Land, and it should be no surprise that its mon-
uments may have constituted a reference point not only for pilgrims but for
artists and patrons as well.
As archaeology proves, by the mid 1st century CE the ‘Gandharan language’
of Swat (and cognate cultural areas as well) had reached a high level of com-
plexity and internal coherence, in which the narrative frieze represents one of
the greatest achievements, not only in mere artistic terms but also, and more-
over, as a forceful expression of the religious culture of the period. The stories
of the Buddha’s life incorporate a rich literary, oral and visual tradition, re-
worked in the new perspective of an ethical biography entering into the human
dimension of historical time.37 It is by now not only strictly ‘Indian’ but, in a
way, cosmopolitan.
The Gandharan production seems to reassume the sense of the Buddha’s
incitation to speak sakāya nyruttiyā, to each one in its own language.38 In this
frontier land, regionalism and universalism found a melting pot and gave
birth to an intensely creative season, where Hellenistic models seem to have
offered a bridge to elsewhere and anywhere, also thanks to their versatile rich-
ness and adaptability.39
This happened within a specific chronological and cultural context: the
Saka-Parthian period, as not only the sacred areas, but also the civil settle-
ments confirm. To the well known evidence from Taxila we can now add that
from Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai, the Bazira of the ancient classical sources, still under
excavation.40 The archaeological strata clearly speak of a process of Hellenisation

37
This is a sensitive issue in Gandharan art and, more in general, in the history and ethics of
early Buddhism. One of the most penetrating analyses is to be found in Taddei 1993.
38
Vinaya Texts III (Sacred Books of the East, XX), 151. I acknowledge here Rhys Davids’ and
Oldenburg’s translation (accepted by most scholars), although taking into account the debate on
the interpretation of the sentence, which according to other scholars meant “in its own grammar”,
i.e. the Buddha’s own language, or primitive māgadhī (see for instance Thomas 2005, 254).
39
For a recent and interesting attempt at summarising the complicated matter of the spread
of Hellenistic models in Asia without loosing a polycentric perspective see Invernizzi forthcoming.
40
On Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai see Callieri et alii 1992; Callieri et alii 2000; Olivieri 2003; McDowall
& Callieri 2004; Taddei 2004; Callieri 2005; Filigenzi 2005. From these works (reports on
excavation, surveys, and main general issues) the reader will retrieve a more detailed bibliography.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 137

of the material culture that seems to become a pervasive permeation during

the Saka-Parthian period,41 when it reaches the most conservative domains, as
for instance the female terracotta figurines, a popular expression of beliefs that
had known little changes from the Harappan period.
Buddhism is a part of this process, which is not a simple question of fashion
or ‘influence’ but rather of an adoption of models that, though maintaining
some semantic tie with the original sources, are transformed and integrated in
a coherent artistic syntax, where they acquire new and specific meanings.
Probably we will never completely understand the reasons and shades of this
process. They belong to a sphere where the quality and quantity of variables
cannot be squeezed into the domain of exact sciences. We can nonetheless
venture some hypotheses. As for Buddhist art, the attractiveness of Hellenistic
models might possibly have lain in their being in a way ‘neutral’ and ‘interna-
tional’ at the same time, exactly what Buddhism needed in order to find its
way both within India and without.
Significantly, their adoption accompanies a strategy of visual pedagogy that
is anti-traditional in many respects. As a matter of fact, the strong impulse to
a form of ‘universal’ proselytism implying dialogue and conversion is in patent
opposition to the non-missionary character of Brahmanism, which reverts to
the observance of a status quo (a Brahman nascitur, non fit) rather than to the
possibility of a rescue from it. One cannot exclude that the ‘neutral’ and
‘international’ touch of Hellenism might have complied with a new view of
the social hierarchy that, far from representing a sort of revolution of lower
classes, was nonetheless against the pivot of the Hindu world, i.e. the prestige
of the born-priests.
The ‘linear’ narration of Gandharan art – such as it takes shape, maybe for
the first time, at Saidu Sharif I – certainly played an important role in the
Buddhist propaganda, but once again one has to avoid the trap of considering
Hellenism the intellectual ingredient of it, indeed the only one capable of
inspiring a storytelling visual art with strong focus on temporality. ‘Hellenism’
transplanted in the ‘Hellenised Orient’ is a matter of adaptive forms, differently
used in different contexts, and not of a content-conditioning mentality – at
least not to a greater extent than normal historical dynamics, the traces of
which very often escape our attention, or our cultural sensitivity. Moreover, as
Taddei demonstrated going by the evidence provided by the Saidu Sharif ’s
frieze, this mode of visual narration has no Western antecedents.42 It is rather

41
Saka-Parthians were represented in Swat and adjoining regions by local dynasties such as
Oḍi and Apraca (recorded as patrons of Buddhism), which owed some sort of allegiance to them;
recently McDowall (McDowall 2007) with relevant bibliography.
42
Taddei 1993; Faccenna 2001, 182-184.
 A. Filigenzi /
138 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

a Gandharan invention of which we can now, thanks to analytical works on

archaeological sequences, trace back a prelude and a beginning. We see these
latter going hand in hand with the emergence of a new architectural concept
of the stūpa, which gives room for the incorporation into the body of the stūpa
itself of a narrative structure arranged as a full circle communication. Hellenis-
tic models flowed into a wide scope enterprise, which had to construct for
Buddhist visual arts a distinguishing cross-cultural connotation.
But certainly Buddhism was not alone in this search for a composite and
more flexible visual language. The tremendous artistic, ideological, economic
commitment one can observe at Butkara I, Saidu Sharif I, and many other
sites, is certainly devoted to a project that transcends the land enclosed by the
sacred precincts. It goes much beyond, meeting the taste and needs of a ruling
class that, being well accustomed on its own with Hellenistic models, supports
with its demands specialised ateliers where these models are not simply
repeated, but keenly adapted to different notions of social hierarchies, spatial
relations, philosophical and religious concepts. The same ruling class looks
with great favour at Buddhism for its being theoretically opened to a cosmo-
politan perspective, which means, in social terms, to new economic systems
based on trade, urbanisation, and extensive agriculture.
In such a system, the Saṃ gha seems to have played a primary role.43 As for
Swat, this is suggested by big barrage works recently documented in the
Kandak Valley, in close connection with several monasteries that in all likeli-
hood were directly involved in the management of water and in a wide territo-
rial plan of economic development.44 What it meant in terms of social balance
and potential conflict with pastoralist communities and their alternative sys-
tems is another chapter of history, to which we should pay more attention.
Probably we will never know of which substance Gandharan Buddhism was
made until the history told by macroscopic evidence, such as great religious
monuments and their formal paradigms, are crossed with a more analytical
investigation on a wider social and cultural framework, far from hasty and
schematic categories.
Archaeology has begun to throw a glimmer of light on the variegated fabric
of the ‘Hellenised’ arts. Hopefully this glimmer will widen in rapid progres-
sions, as often happens once it catches attention and a convergence of efforts.

43
I refer to Filigenzi 2010b, 316-318 for a quick overview of the question and relevant
bibliography.
44
Olivieri 2008, 297.
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 139

Bibliography

Beal, S. (transl.) 1884: Si-yu-ki. Buddhist Records of the Western World. Translated from the Chi-
nese of Hiuen Tsiang, AD 629 (London; Repr. 2004, New Delhi).
Bussagli, M. 1963: Painting of Central Asia (Geneva).
Callieri, P. 1997: Seals and Sealings from the North-West of the Indian Subcontinent and Afghanistan
(4th century BC-11th century AD): Local, Indian, Sasanian, Graeco-Persian, Sogdian, Roman.
With contributions by E. Errington, R. Garbini, Ph. Gignoux, N. Sims-Williams, W. Zwalf
(Istituto Universitario Orientale, Dissertationes 1) (Naples).
Callieri, P. 2002: Regalità, guerra e fecondità: interpretazione iconografica della glittica del
Nord-Ovest del sub-continente indiano di età Kuṣāṇa. In Ch. Silvi Antonini, B. M. Alfieri
& A. Santoro (eds.), Oriente & Occidente. Convegno in ricordo di Mario Bussagli (Pisa,
Rome), 53-65.
Callieri, P. 2005: Excavations of the IsIAO Italian Archaeological Mission in Pakistan at Bīr-
kot-̣ ghwaṇḍai, Swat: the Sacred Building on the Citadel. In C. Jarrige & V. Lefèvre (eds.),
South Asian Archaeology 2001. Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference of the
European Association of South Asian Archaeologists held in Collège de France, Paris, 2-6 July
2001 (Paris), 417-425.
Callieri et alii 1992: Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai 1990-1992: A Preliminary Report on the Excavations of the
Italian Archaeological Mission, IsMEO (Annali dell’Istituto Universitario Orientale Suppl.
73) (Naples).
Callieri et alii 2000: Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai, Swat, Pakistan. 1998-1999 Excavation Report. East and
West 50, 191-226.
Fabrègues, C. 1987: The Indo-Parthian Beginnings of Gandhara Sculpture. Bulletin of the Asian
Institute 1, 33-43.
Faccenna, D. 1980-1981: Butkara I (Swāt, Pakistan) 1956-1962 (IsMEO Reports and Memoirs
III. 1-5.2), 6 vols. (Rome).
Faccenna, D. 1985: Note Gandhariche-2. Sulla ricostruzione di un grande rilievo da Butkara I
raffigurante la partenza di Siddhārtha da Kapilavastu. In G. Gnoli & L. Lanciotti (eds.),
Orientalia Iosephi Tucci memoriae dicata (Serie Orientale Roma LVI. 1-3, 1985-1988)
(Roma), 1, 325-341.
Faccenna, D. 1986: Lo stūpa a colonne dell’area sacra buddhistica di Saidu Sharif I (Swāt, Paki-
stan). In G. Brucher et alii (eds.), Orient und Okzident im Spiegel der Kunst. Festschrift
Heinrich Gerard Franz zum 70. Geburtstag (Graz), 55-80.
Faccenna, D. 1995: Saidu Sharif I (Swat, Pakistan). 2. The Buddhist Sacred Area. The Stūpa Ter-
race (IsMEO Reports and Memoirs XXIII. 2) (Rome).
Faccenna, D. 1997: Sculptors’ Trial Pieces in Gandharan Art. East and West 47, 67-93.
Faccenna, D. 2001: Il fregio figurato dello Stūpa Principale nell’area sacra buddhista di Saidu
Sharif I (Swat, Pakistan). (IsIAO Reports and Memoirs XXVIII) (Rome).
Faccenna, D. 2004: Fregio dorico nel Gandhara? In M. Fano Santi (ed.), Studi di archeologia in
onore di Gustavo Traversari (Rome), 1, 317-322.
Faccenna, D. 2006: Reconstruction of a Sculptural Complex in the Buddhist Sacred Area of
Butkara I. East and West 56 (1-3) (Special Issue for the 50 th Anniversary of the IsIAO Italian
Archaeological Mission in Pakistan, ed. L. M. Olivieri), 177-94.
Faccenna, D. 2007: The Artistic Centre of Butkara I and Saidu Sharif I in the Pre-Kuṣāṇa
Period. In D. M. Srinivasan (ed.), On the Cusp of an Era: Art in the Pre-Kuṣāṇa World
(Brill’s Inner Asian Library 18) (Leiden, Boston), 165-199.
 A. Filigenzi /
140 Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141

Faccenna, D., Callieri, P. & Filigenzi, A. 2003: At the Origin of Gandharan Art. The Contribu-
tion of the IsIAO Italian Archaeological Mission in the Swat Valley, Pakistan. Ancient
Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 9, 350-380.
Faccenna, D., Khan, A. N. & Nadiem, I. H. 1993: Panṛ I (Swat, Pakistan) (IsMEO Reports and
Memoirs XXVI) (Rome).
Faccenna, D. & Cimbolli Spagnesi, P., in print: Buddhist Architecture in the Swat Valley, Pakistan.
Stūpa, Vihāra, Dwelling Units, with the collaboration of L. M. Olivieri (IsIAO Reports and
Memoirs, New Series) (Rome).
Filigenzi, A. 2005: Stone and Stucco Sculptures from the Sacred Building of Bīr-kot ̣-ghwaṇḍai,
Swat, Pakistan. In C. Jarrige & V. Lefèvre (eds.), South Asian Archaeology 2001. Proceedings
of the Sixteenth International Conference of the European Association of South Asian Archae-
ologists held in Collège de France, Paris, 2-6 July 2001 (Paris), 453-461.
Filigenzi, A. 2006a: From Mind to Eye: Two-Dimensional Illusions and Pictorial Suggestions at
Saidu Sharif I. In P. Callieri (ed.), Architetti, capomastri, artigiani. L’organizzazione dei
cantieri e della produzione artistica nell’Asia ellenistica. Studi offerti a Domenico Faccenna nel
suo ottantesimo compleanno (Serie Orientale Roma 100) (Rome), 17-40.
Filigenzi, A. 2006b: From Saidu Sharif to Miran. Indologica Taurinensia 32, 67-89.
Filigenzi, A. 2010a: Post-Gandharan/non-Gandharan: Archaeological Inquiry into a Still Name-
less Period. In M. Alram et alii (eds.), Coins, Art and Chronology II. The First Millennium C.E.
in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands (Vienna), 389-406.
Filigenzi, A. 2010b: Review Article: The Buddhist Monuments of Kabul (Review to G. Fussman,
B. Murad, E. Ollivier, Monuments bouddhiques de la region de Caboul * Kabul Buddhist
Monuments). Indo-Iranian Journal 53, 301-329.
Göbl, R. 1976: A Catalogue of Coins from Butkara I (Swāt, Pakistan) (IsMEO Reports and
Memoirs IV) (Rome).
Invernizzi, A. forthcoming: Concluding Remarks on the Intercultural Encounters in the Hellenized
Orient. Paper read at the international UNESCO symposium Intercultural Encounters in
the Hellenized Orient, Paris 28-30 September 2009.
Lo Muzio, C. forthcoming: Note sulla pittura gandharica. In T. Lorenzetti & F. Scialpi (eds.),
Proccedings of the symposium Uno sguardo alla storia e all’arte dell’India. Riflessioni sul pas-
sato, prospettive per il futuro, Roma, 18-19 aprile 2011, Sapienza Università di Roma –
IsIAO.
MacDowall, D. W. 2007: The Eras of Demetrius, Eucratides and Azes. In R. Gyselen (ed.), Des
Indo-Grecs aux Sassanides: données pour l’histoire et la géographie historique (Res Orientales
17) (Leuven), 103-109.
MacDowall, D. W. & Callieri, P. 2004: A Catalogue of Coins from the Excavations at Bīr-koṭ-
ghwaṇḍai 1984-1992. In Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇ ḍai Interim Reports II (IsIAO Reports and Memoirs,
New Series III) (Rome), 27-90.
Olivieri, L. M. 2003: The Survey of the Bir-kot Hill. Architectural Comparisons and Photo-
graphic Documentation. In Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai Interim Reports I (IsIAO Reports and Memoirs,
Series Minor IV) (Rome).
Olivieri, L. M. 2008: The Swat Case Study: Barikot and Its Environs. In Gandhara, the Buddhist
Heritage of Pakistan: Legends, Monasteries, and Paradise (Mainz), 294-297.
Provenzali, A. 2005: La figura infantile nella prima arte gandharica: modelli e corrispondenze
significanti. Parthica 7, 155-176.
Quagliotti, A. M. 2003: An Image in the Indian Museum with Some Considerations on the
Tutelary Couples in Gandharan Art. A Catalogue of the Standing Images in the Kushan
Period and Related Problems. Silk Road Art and Archaeology 9, 239-296.
Stein, A. 1921: Serindia (Oxford).
 A. Filigenzi /
Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia 18 (2012) 111-141 141

Stein, A. 1928: Innermost Asia (Oxford).

Taddei, M. 1993: Arte narrativa tra India e mondo ellenistico (Conferenze IsMEO 5) (Rome).
Taddei, M. 2004: Imported Artefacts from Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai. In Bīr-koṭ-ghwaṇḍai Interim Reports II
(IsIAO Reports and Memoirs, New Series III) (Rome), 10-24.
Thomas, E. J. 2005: The Life of Buddha as Legend and History (Repr. Delhi, first ed. 1927).
Vinaya Texts. Part III. The Kullavagga, iv-xii. Translated from the pâli by T. W. Rhys Davids and
H. Oldenberg. Sacred Books of the East XX (Oxford, 1885).