The Ancient Art Analysis - Essay Example

Ancient Art AnalysisComparison and contrast of the seated Buddha on the Lion Throne and Indra and SuryaThe seated Buddha on the Lion Throne and the sculpture of Indra and Surya play a significant role in the Indian history. As depicted in the picture, the two images present a primary figure, Buddha, who is believed to have immense power in the Indian culture. The two sculptures are significant in both the political and spiritual powers. The symbol of the lions represents courage and supremacy in relation to another inferior culture or political group.

The difference in the making of these two sculptures is that, unlike in the Seated Buddha on the Lion Throne, the Buddha on Indra and Surya is not represented as a human form until later dates. In addition, the Indra and Surya are engravings as depicted in this picture. Nonetheless, the two sculptures are a depiction of the final existence and the past lives the Buddhism founder, Siddhartha Gautama. The size of the sculptures is also similar as it ranges from 50 to 200 feet in height.Comparison and contrast between the four-ram Fangzum and the Reliqaury Buddhist StupaThe four-ram Fangzum is a bronze cast sculpture while the Reliqaury Buddhist Stupa is cast in gold.

The two sculptures have a great significance in the culture of the Chinese and the Indians respectively. These two sculptures depict the respect given to the dead, and especially to sages and religious teachers. However, there is a great difference in the age of their molding with the four-ram fan zun cast in the second Millennium BCE, during the era of the Shang dynasty with the Reliqaury Buddhist Stupa cast in the 3rd century CE, which was during the Kushan dynasty.The two sculptures are also a symbol of commemorating significant occurrences in the Chinese and Indian religion.

Hence, their main subject or significance is more of spiritual beliefs than political. Their complexity and evident in the way that the bronze is carved into the four-ram Fangzum and the way the pillars erect the Reliquary Buddhist Stupa. This artistic feature is a clear evidence of the prowess and the passion of the Chinese and Ancient Indian sculptures of the time. The sculptures also have a gloss finish that clearly distinguishes them from the past sculptures that had a dull finish.Comparison and contrast between the Bowl and the Inlaid Mirror at the Lineage TombThe bowl is red and made of earth.

The bowl also has designs of a human head that are black in color and imposing fish designs. The bowl was made for worshiping the ancestors in Ancient China during the Neolithic Period, which was crucial in the Chinese history. Despite the non-development of the potter’s wheel during the time of making the bowl, the bowl is perfectly round with highly polished surfaces. In effect, this indicates that the sculptors used high technology to develop bowls and other artifacts during the time (Pichet).

On the other hand, the inlaid mirrors at the lineage tombs in Juncun, Henan, China symbolize the way the mirror was used as a source of light, which effectively illuminated the tombstones in the eternal darkness of the tomb (“Chinese Bronze”). These mirrors, cast in bronze and hammered with gold and silver, were decorated at the back with a central loop that worked as a handle. Like the bowl, these inlaid mirrors had a spiritual aspect during their sculpting with the bowl honoring the ancestors while the mirrors served as the light in the eternal darkness of a tomb.

Works Cited“Chinese Bronzes: The Zhou Dynasty.” Encyclopedia Britannica. N.d. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. .Pichet, Pitts. Neolithic Period. Study Blue. 19 Feb. 2009. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. .