‘There is no subject, in which we must proceed with more caution than in tracing the history of the arts and sciences; lest we assign causes which never existed and reduce what is merely contingent to stable and universal principles.’ David Hume
[This comment by skeptic philosopher David Hume could be applied to the preconceived notion that all Etruscan art is solely derived from Greek art, which is not really true.]
Before tackling the subject of the Monteleone Chariot found near Spoleto, Italy, which is now on display at none other than the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, I want to give you the context in which this large artifact came to fruition. Sybille Haynes’ book Etruscan civilization: A Cultural History provides us with the following background:
“Taken over from the Near East by the aristocracy in Etruria for transport, warfare, and racing from the mid-eighth century B.C., chariots as well as carriages became status symbols and eventually purely ceremonial vehicles: they served to parade the social rank of their owners in triumphal and other processions and were finally deposited in tombs. Of the surviving remains of over 250 chariots in Italy, Etruria has yielded far more examples than Piceno, Lazio, and Umbria. This proves the overwhelming importance attached to such vehicles by the Etruscans.” (pg. 102)
The Tomb of the Chariots in Populonia, approximately dated from 650-575 B.C., contains the remains of a chariot with a classic design of eight-spoked wheels. The Aryan chariot warriors were clearly important role models for men in the higher strata of Etruscan society. The Monteleone Chariot, a ceremonial chariot depicting key episodes of the Ramayana, beckons from a similar time period (sixth century B.C.) which comprises the major transition from abstract to personal representations of divinity. Haynes believes that “representation of the gods in human form seems not to have taken place until the end of the Orientalizing period,” or about 575 B.C. (pg. 126).
Haynes comments on the Monteleone chariot: “The three relief panels on the front and sides of the box are linked by the frontal figures of two nude, long-haired youths standing on lions.” She adds her opinion that the chief who had it commissioned was a Sabine, and he wanted “the vehicle made to display his high social position and heroic warrior qualities, likening himself to the heroes of the Iliad.” (pg. 168-169). The problem with her analysis is the assumption that a Greek hero served as the Sabine aristocrat’s inspiration. Critiquing this default conclusion, Otto Brendel states: “One must doubt that the narrative method of the bronze chariot was derived from a Greek source, even if the story itself was Greek, which is uncertain… Greek art on the whole was reluctant to accept this form of narrative by progressive episodes: instead it preferred to collect the essential aspects of a story in one single action.” (pg. 150-151, Etruscan Art).
In my humble opinion, the greatest fighters of the Ramayana - Rama, Lakshmana, and Ravana - are likely portrayed on this chariot, NOT the heroes of the Iliad including Achilles. The youths standing between and linking the three relief panels are probably ornamental, based on their non-descript nature and relatively small size (they might also be identifiable as Lava and Kusha). By examining each of the three panels closely, starting from the front, there will be little doubt that this is a Ramayanic scene, primarily the Golden Deer episode. Additionally, I will use the Campana plaques alongside the Monteleone panels for comparative purposes.
For those of you who are unacquainted with the story of the golden deer, I will give a brief summary. King Ravana’s sister Shurpanakha convinces her brother to kidnap Sita, wife of Rama. Ravana, the demon king of Lanka, instructs his uncle Maricha to decoy the two brothers, Rama and Lakshmana, away from their habitation in the woods, using the attractive golden deer disguise as bait. After Maricha, the demon with magic powers, assumes the deceptive form of a pretty spotted deer, Sita asks Rama to capture it, to either make it their new pet animal or at least acquire its beautiful skin. When Rama kills Maricha, his frightful, demoniac human form reappears just before his death. Maricha cunningly cries for help while imitating Rama’s voice before falling, so that Lakshmana is also drawn away from the hermitage. Sita is now alone, and Ravana pounces on her after fooling her with his own disguise as a humble sage. Then Ravana forces her into his aerial vehicle harnessed with donkeys, which is what we see in one of the side panels in the Monteleone Chariot. The following stanzas from Valmiki’s work make this description explicitly clear:
“Ravana and Maricha ascended the chariot, which was like an aerial car, and quickly departed… Ravana, king of the demons, accompanied by Maricha, then reached Dandaka forest and saw Rama's hermitage.” (3.42.9-11)
“There arrived the great golden chariot of Ravana, illusive and wonderful, harnessed with donkeys and braying like donkeys. Reproaching the princess from Videha (Sita) loudly and harshly, Ravana took her on his lap and put her on the chariot… Passionate Ravana took hold of Sita who was not willing and was writhing in pain. He seized her like an eagle carrying away a serpent queen and flew up. While Sita was being carried off in the sky by the king of demons, she screamed a lot in agony.” (3.49.19-23)
The Monteleone Chariot represents something akin to the Pushpaka Vimana, which was owned by both Ravana and Rama after conquering an enemy. When Rama defeated Ravana he received the special flying chariot called Pushpaka Vimana, which could be symbolized by this parade chariot from Spoleto. The chariot Ravana uses to abduct Sita, however, is not the same as the Pushpaka Vimana. Therefore, there is some chance the front scene features Ravana and his sister Shurpanakha, or Ravana and his wife Mandodari (as opposed to Rama and Sita). Then the Monteleone Chariot would symbolize Ravana’s golden chariot, which he used to kidnap Sita, and Rama would thus be absent from the iconography. However, I am going to assume the man in the front panel conforms to Rama’s attributes rather than Ravana’s, while the other man standing in the chariot drawn in the side panel is almost certainly Ravana. I believe the male characters in the two side panels are not necessarily matchable to the male warrior in the front panel. The shield in the central panel, for example, is not equivalent to the shield in the mortal combat scene depicted on the right side of the central panel. The front panel, in my opinion, shows Sita asking Rama to hunt down the spotted fawn positioned between them. The left side panel shows Ravana abducting Sita, who displays figurative resistance when she puts her hand above her head. The right side of the chariot shows Ravana wounding Lakshmana with his guided spear, a famous story from the Yuddha Kanda (Book of War) of the Valmiki Ramayana. The sequence of events runs counterclockwise, starting with the front panel scene.
If we close in on the front panel, the Jatayu-like birds hover over Rama (right) and Sita (left) while she hands her husband a helmet with a ram’s head on top (signifying he is indeed Lord Rama, the great king) and the mysterious shield with two faces that are identifiable as the demons Shurpanakha, Ravana’s sister, and Maricha, who disguises himself as a golden deer. This front chariot scene represents the golden deer chase by Rama, who kills Maricha, and Shurpanakha’s humiliation at Panchavati. Maricha’s mask is sitting below Ravana’s sister’s mask, with hair and mustache strands that match the deerskin and limbs of the animal, respectively. The spotted deer is drawn upside down, clearly signifying its death. Its skin has ring-like patterns to highlight its attractiveness and these patterns are duplicated in smaller sizes on both sides of Maricha’s hairline. His hair, eyes, and ears represent the deer’s frame in miniature, thus connecting him to the creature he disguises himself as to lure Rama. The pointed ears of Maricha’s face mask mirror the shape of the deer’s ears, and are distinct in shape from the ears of the wicked woman Shurpanakha above. The two dot-sized eyes on Maricha’s forehead and his spotted hair are meant to indicate that he has an alter ego, the golden deer, in my opinion. The spots are oval-shaped, with one smaller oval drawn inside a larger oval, in both Maricha’s hair and in the deer skin. The deer touches the mask of Maricha right under his face. Clearly, the artists were matching the rakshasa (demon) to the spotted fawn.
The classic spotted deer is known as the cheetal (chital), which is native to India (see above photos). Considering its natural range is the Indian subcontinent, there should be no doubt this panel is describing an Indian legend. Notice that the bearded Rama on the front panel of the Monteleone Chariot looks almost the same as the man in the Campana Plaques walking with Sita and Lakshmana. In addition to the similar facial expression, the clothing Rama wears is reminiscent of the clothing worn in the Campana panels. Rama is standing barefooted in the chariot panel along with Sita, whereas he and Lakshmana are wearing some primitive-looking shoes in the Campana plaque. Thus the chariot panel and the Campana plaque are hinting that Rama is living a simple life in the wilderness (see below to compare the portrayals of Rama in the two artworks, one from Perugia on the left and the other from Caere on the right).
In the case of Shurpanakha, the demoness had transformed herself into a beautiful woman with a lovely figure to seduce Rama. Rama was curious to know who she was, as she suddenly arrived at his hermitage one day (3.17.5). Since the Dandaka forest where Rama lived was mainly inhabited by demons, Rama is surprised by her appearance, remarking to Shurpanakha that “with lovely limbs you do not appear to be a demoness.” (3.17.19). She explains that she is “a demoness who can assume any form at will” and moves alone in the forest. Her romantic advances are not only rebuffed by Rama, but the nasty woman also threatens to literally eat his dear wife Sita (3.18.16). Once her threat becomes serious, Rama responds by ordering his brother Lakshmana to check her. Lakshmana proceeds to cut off her nose and ears with his sword.
We can certainly see from this narration the similarities between Shurpanakha, the horrible Indian Rakshasi, and Medusa, the infamous Greek Gorgon. Medusa is beheaded by Perseus, the Greek hero, while Shurpanakha is defaced by Lakshmana, the Indian hero. Both have ugly and hideous forms, as well as ravishingly beautiful forms, at different stages. According to Ovid (Metamorphoses 4.770), Medusa was originally an attractive woman, but Athena transformed her hair strands into serpents, and her face into one so terrifying as to turn others who peered at it to stone. Because Medusa was a Gorgon, and Gorgons have monstrous forms, there is confusion over whether the Greeks originally thought of her as hideous or pretty. Nonetheless, the Ionian artists of the sixth century BC Monteleone chariot must have had Medusa and Gorgons in mind as models when designing the mask of the wicked Shurpanakha (see pictures below, notice the difference in the two noses).
Analyzing the front panel of the Monteleone chariot again, we see that Sita hands Rama a shield with the ugly face of Shurpanakha (identified by the longer hair, like that of Medusa) above the grim face of Maricha. This seems to be appropriate for a couple of reasons - the deer chase and the confrontation with Ravana’s sister are both initiated after Sita plays a central role. Sita is the one whose life is threatened by Shurpanakha, which leads to Lakshmana cutting off her nose and ears. On her mask, her flattened nose seems to be more torn or ripped than Maricha’s protruding nose (lines and wrinkles are usually seen on the forehead and not the nose), though her ears are intact on her face on the shield. At Panchavati Lakshmana cut off the nose of Shurpanakha and this place came to be known as “Nashik" (from Sanskrit word Nāsikā – meaning nose). Several other references to the Ramayana can be found in Nashik, which includes the Sita Gumpha caves, from where Sita, Lord Rama's wife, was abducted by Ravana. The act of cutting off the nose (as opposed to the ears) thus holds a more prominent place in the memory of Shurpanakha, because presumably that is a more centralized and uglier scar on the body. Therefore, we should not be alarmed if we do not see ears mutilated in the Monteleone chariot scene. The mutilated nose is probably enough evidence to identify it as Shurpanakha. It was easy to model her after Medusa because both had (or could assume) gorgeous forms, before their hideous form became permanent and unbearable (see Valmiki Ramayana 3.17.21-22 - Aranya Kanda, Sarga 17, Verses 21-22, https://www.valmiki.iitk.ac.in/).
The terracotta relief panel below, conventionally dated to the Gupta period (c. 5th century CE), was found at Deogarh, Uttar Pradesh. On the left is Rama, sitting with his bow and right hand raised (just like the Etruscans depicted him centuries earlier). In the middle is Sita, standing with her hands over her chest in a defensive posture. On the right Lakshmana raises his sword to cut off the nose of Shurpanakha, who is kneeling down and has been restrained by the hair.
Shurpanakha, a dreadful, monstrous female rakshasa, fits the description of a Gorgon. The name Gorgon comes from the ancient Greek word gorgós, ”dreadful”, and its root form is also the source of the Sanskrit word “garjana”, a roaring and grunting sound, like the growling of a beast. The Gorgoneion, or a Gorgon face with the tongue sticking out menacingly, is usually accompanied by snakes protruding around the face, and utilized as an apotropaic symbol. Wikipedia notes how the ancient Greeks and Hindus both share this symbolism: “In Hindu mythology, Kali is often shown with a protruding tongue and snakes around her head.” When Rama receives the shield from Sita with Shurpanakha’s ugly expression on it, the signification is that the defensive armour will avert demoniac influences, such as those of Shurpanakha. In the Valmiki Ramayana, Sita does not literally hand Rama a shield or helmet in the forest conflict with rakshasas, so this scene is also figurative as a symbol of good luck against evil forces.
Shurpanakha, after returning from her humiliation at the hands of Lakshmana in the Ramayana, apparently poisoned her brother Ravana’s mind with covetousness and lust for Sita. To get her own revenge, she convinced him with sweet words to abduct Sita for himself. He could satisfy his base desires as a rakshasa and deal a devastating blow to Rama. Besides, it was his nature to assault the wives of other men, so the plan was very tempting to him and he salivated over the opportunity to feast his eyes on Sita. Shurpanakha can thus be observed as a key instigator in the Ramayanic war. We should not underestimate her importance just because she was a minor character in the epic. The Halloween trick-or-treat masks on the Monteleone chariot panel of Ravana’s sister Shurpanakha and Ravana’s uncle Maricha are critical to a correct decryption of the story being narrated. Apparently the Etruscan or Ionian artists realized how to cleverly imbue the shield with an ominous quality that foreshadowed the wicked deeds of Ravana, the demon king of kings. Both Shurpanakha (first disguised as a pretty woman) and Maricha (first disguised as a beautiful deer) used deception to ‘trick’ Rama with a fake treat; one failed and the other succeeded. The Halloween nightmare that ensued was best encapsulated by the two most painful episodes for Rama before the climax of the war: Sita’s kidnapping and Lakshmana’s near-fatal wound from Ravana’s spear. The other two panels on the sides of the chariot are depicting exactly those two events, albeit with a Mediterranean/Near Eastern flavor.
German scholar Otto Brendel in his book Etruscan Art makes an extremely important observation regarding this point I am making, which is thought provoking for all modern scholars. He realizes that the artistic technique and style may be Greek and Etruscan, but the content and iconography could easily be Oriental:
“By this time (beginning of the sixth century) Etruscan artists had acquired sufficient freedom and mastery of representational form to attempt occasionally the rendition of subjects which lay outside the limits of the Greek parent art… The possibility must at least be taken into consideration that Etruscan works occasionally represent subject matter acquired from oriental art, which may not be immediately obvious to a modern critic because it has been translated into Greek or Greco-Etruscan techniques and forms of representation.” (pg 66-67)
Larissa Bonfante’s book Etruscan Life and Afterlife has provided a drawn reconstruction of the Monteleone chariot (dated c. 550-540 BC). When the Persians conquered Ionia during that period, resulting social changes facilitated the transfer of religious myth from India to Etruria. The artist's rendering above shows the characteristic open tongue of Indian female goddess Kāli on the shield, usually the emblem of the Rakshasas, along with the spotted deer. The bottom face just on top of the deer is a representation of Maricha, and the face above him (with what looks like a broken or wounded nose) is Shurpanakha.
[This comment by skeptic philosopher David Hume could be applied to the preconceived notion that all Etruscan art is solely derived from Greek art, which is not really true.]
Before tackling the subject of the Monteleone Chariot found near Spoleto, Italy, which is now on display at none other than the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, I want to give you the context in which this large artifact came to fruition. Sybille Haynes’ book Etruscan civilization: A Cultural History provides us with the following background:
“Taken over from the Near East by the aristocracy in Etruria for transport, warfare, and racing from the mid-eighth century B.C., chariots as well as carriages became status symbols and eventually purely ceremonial vehicles: they served to parade the social rank of their owners in triumphal and other processions and were finally deposited in tombs. Of the surviving remains of over 250 chariots in Italy, Etruria has yielded far more examples than Piceno, Lazio, and Umbria. This proves the overwhelming importance attached to such vehicles by the Etruscans.” (pg. 102)
The Tomb of the Chariots in Populonia, approximately dated from 650-575 B.C., contains the remains of a chariot with a classic design of eight-spoked wheels. The Aryan chariot warriors were clearly important role models for men in the higher strata of Etruscan society. The Monteleone Chariot, a ceremonial chariot depicting key episodes of the Ramayana, beckons from a similar time period (sixth century B.C.) which comprises the major transition from abstract to personal representations of divinity. Haynes believes that “representation of the gods in human form seems not to have taken place until the end of the Orientalizing period,” or about 575 B.C. (pg. 126).
 | |||||||||
| Monteleone Chariot in Etruscan Exhibit at Metropolitan Museum of Art, NYC Bifurcating Appendage at Front of Car Appears to Represent Winged Flight |
Haynes comments on the Monteleone chariot: “The three relief panels on the front and sides of the box are linked by the frontal figures of two nude, long-haired youths standing on lions.” She adds her opinion that the chief who had it commissioned was a Sabine, and he wanted “the vehicle made to display his high social position and heroic warrior qualities, likening himself to the heroes of the Iliad.” (pg. 168-169). The problem with her analysis is the assumption that a Greek hero served as the Sabine aristocrat’s inspiration. Critiquing this default conclusion, Otto Brendel states: “One must doubt that the narrative method of the bronze chariot was derived from a Greek source, even if the story itself was Greek, which is uncertain… Greek art on the whole was reluctant to accept this form of narrative by progressive episodes: instead it preferred to collect the essential aspects of a story in one single action.” (pg. 150-151, Etruscan Art).
In my humble opinion, the greatest fighters of the Ramayana - Rama, Lakshmana, and Ravana - are likely portrayed on this chariot, NOT the heroes of the Iliad including Achilles. The youths standing between and linking the three relief panels are probably ornamental, based on their non-descript nature and relatively small size (they might also be identifiable as Lava and Kusha). By examining each of the three panels closely, starting from the front, there will be little doubt that this is a Ramayanic scene, primarily the Golden Deer episode. Additionally, I will use the Campana plaques alongside the Monteleone panels for comparative purposes.
 | |
| The Golden Deer Episode where Ravana kidnaps Sita |
 |
| Rama kills the demon Maricha who entices him away by posing as a spotted deer |
“Ravana and Maricha ascended the chariot, which was like an aerial car, and quickly departed… Ravana, king of the demons, accompanied by Maricha, then reached Dandaka forest and saw Rama's hermitage.” (3.42.9-11)
“There arrived the great golden chariot of Ravana, illusive and wonderful, harnessed with donkeys and braying like donkeys. Reproaching the princess from Videha (Sita) loudly and harshly, Ravana took her on his lap and put her on the chariot… Passionate Ravana took hold of Sita who was not willing and was writhing in pain. He seized her like an eagle carrying away a serpent queen and flew up. While Sita was being carried off in the sky by the king of demons, she screamed a lot in agony.” (3.49.19-23)
 |
| Front Panel of Monteleone Chariot: Bearded Rama (right) receives shield from Sita (left) |
The Monteleone Chariot represents something akin to the Pushpaka Vimana, which was owned by both Ravana and Rama after conquering an enemy. When Rama defeated Ravana he received the special flying chariot called Pushpaka Vimana, which could be symbolized by this parade chariot from Spoleto. The chariot Ravana uses to abduct Sita, however, is not the same as the Pushpaka Vimana. Therefore, there is some chance the front scene features Ravana and his sister Shurpanakha, or Ravana and his wife Mandodari (as opposed to Rama and Sita). Then the Monteleone Chariot would symbolize Ravana’s golden chariot, which he used to kidnap Sita, and Rama would thus be absent from the iconography. However, I am going to assume the man in the front panel conforms to Rama’s attributes rather than Ravana’s, while the other man standing in the chariot drawn in the side panel is almost certainly Ravana. I believe the male characters in the two side panels are not necessarily matchable to the male warrior in the front panel. The shield in the central panel, for example, is not equivalent to the shield in the mortal combat scene depicted on the right side of the central panel. The front panel, in my opinion, shows Sita asking Rama to hunt down the spotted fawn positioned between them. The left side panel shows Ravana abducting Sita, who displays figurative resistance when she puts her hand above her head. The right side of the chariot shows Ravana wounding Lakshmana with his guided spear, a famous story from the Yuddha Kanda (Book of War) of the Valmiki Ramayana. The sequence of events runs counterclockwise, starting with the front panel scene.
 |
| Left Side Panel of Bronze Chariot: Ravana's Winged Chariot Subdues Sita |
If we close in on the front panel, the Jatayu-like birds hover over Rama (right) and Sita (left) while she hands her husband a helmet with a ram’s head on top (signifying he is indeed Lord Rama, the great king) and the mysterious shield with two faces that are identifiable as the demons Shurpanakha, Ravana’s sister, and Maricha, who disguises himself as a golden deer. This front chariot scene represents the golden deer chase by Rama, who kills Maricha, and Shurpanakha’s humiliation at Panchavati. Maricha’s mask is sitting below Ravana’s sister’s mask, with hair and mustache strands that match the deerskin and limbs of the animal, respectively. The spotted deer is drawn upside down, clearly signifying its death. Its skin has ring-like patterns to highlight its attractiveness and these patterns are duplicated in smaller sizes on both sides of Maricha’s hairline. His hair, eyes, and ears represent the deer’s frame in miniature, thus connecting him to the creature he disguises himself as to lure Rama. The pointed ears of Maricha’s face mask mirror the shape of the deer’s ears, and are distinct in shape from the ears of the wicked woman Shurpanakha above. The two dot-sized eyes on Maricha’s forehead and his spotted hair are meant to indicate that he has an alter ego, the golden deer, in my opinion. The spots are oval-shaped, with one smaller oval drawn inside a larger oval, in both Maricha’s hair and in the deer skin. The deer touches the mask of Maricha right under his face. Clearly, the artists were matching the rakshasa (demon) to the spotted fawn.
 |
| Maricha's Demoniac Face Mask Above Spotted Deer |
 |
| Demoniac Face of Rahu "Swallowing the Moon" from Cambodia |
Otto Brendel describes the scene in his own words:
“The centre panel shows a bearded man and a woman facing each other while a spotted fawn lies on the ground between them, obviously dead… From the sky birds swoop down, perhaps as lucky omens.” (pg. 146, Etruscan Art)
The classic spotted deer is known as the cheetal (chital), which is native to India (see above photos). Considering its natural range is the Indian subcontinent, there should be no doubt this panel is describing an Indian legend. Notice that the bearded Rama on the front panel of the Monteleone Chariot looks almost the same as the man in the Campana Plaques walking with Sita and Lakshmana. In addition to the similar facial expression, the clothing Rama wears is reminiscent of the clothing worn in the Campana panels. Rama is standing barefooted in the chariot panel along with Sita, whereas he and Lakshmana are wearing some primitive-looking shoes in the Campana plaque. Thus the chariot panel and the Campana plaque are hinting that Rama is living a simple life in the wilderness (see below to compare the portrayals of Rama in the two artworks, one from Perugia on the left and the other from Caere on the right).
In the case of Shurpanakha, the demoness had transformed herself into a beautiful woman with a lovely figure to seduce Rama. Rama was curious to know who she was, as she suddenly arrived at his hermitage one day (3.17.5). Since the Dandaka forest where Rama lived was mainly inhabited by demons, Rama is surprised by her appearance, remarking to Shurpanakha that “with lovely limbs you do not appear to be a demoness.” (3.17.19). She explains that she is “a demoness who can assume any form at will” and moves alone in the forest. Her romantic advances are not only rebuffed by Rama, but the nasty woman also threatens to literally eat his dear wife Sita (3.18.16). Once her threat becomes serious, Rama responds by ordering his brother Lakshmana to check her. Lakshmana proceeds to cut off her nose and ears with his sword.
We can certainly see from this narration the similarities between Shurpanakha, the horrible Indian Rakshasi, and Medusa, the infamous Greek Gorgon. Medusa is beheaded by Perseus, the Greek hero, while Shurpanakha is defaced by Lakshmana, the Indian hero. Both have ugly and hideous forms, as well as ravishingly beautiful forms, at different stages. According to Ovid (Metamorphoses 4.770), Medusa was originally an attractive woman, but Athena transformed her hair strands into serpents, and her face into one so terrifying as to turn others who peered at it to stone. Because Medusa was a Gorgon, and Gorgons have monstrous forms, there is confusion over whether the Greeks originally thought of her as hideous or pretty. Nonetheless, the Ionian artists of the sixth century BC Monteleone chariot must have had Medusa and Gorgons in mind as models when designing the mask of the wicked Shurpanakha (see pictures below, notice the difference in the two noses).
 |
| Terracotta Gorgoneion Antefix (540 BC), South Italy |
 |
| Shurpanakha with empty slot for tongue and lacerated nose |
Analyzing the front panel of the Monteleone chariot again, we see that Sita hands Rama a shield with the ugly face of Shurpanakha (identified by the longer hair, like that of Medusa) above the grim face of Maricha. This seems to be appropriate for a couple of reasons - the deer chase and the confrontation with Ravana’s sister are both initiated after Sita plays a central role. Sita is the one whose life is threatened by Shurpanakha, which leads to Lakshmana cutting off her nose and ears. On her mask, her flattened nose seems to be more torn or ripped than Maricha’s protruding nose (lines and wrinkles are usually seen on the forehead and not the nose), though her ears are intact on her face on the shield. At Panchavati Lakshmana cut off the nose of Shurpanakha and this place came to be known as “Nashik" (from Sanskrit word Nāsikā – meaning nose). Several other references to the Ramayana can be found in Nashik, which includes the Sita Gumpha caves, from where Sita, Lord Rama's wife, was abducted by Ravana. The act of cutting off the nose (as opposed to the ears) thus holds a more prominent place in the memory of Shurpanakha, because presumably that is a more centralized and uglier scar on the body. Therefore, we should not be alarmed if we do not see ears mutilated in the Monteleone chariot scene. The mutilated nose is probably enough evidence to identify it as Shurpanakha. It was easy to model her after Medusa because both had (or could assume) gorgeous forms, before their hideous form became permanent and unbearable (see Valmiki Ramayana 3.17.21-22 - Aranya Kanda, Sarga 17, Verses 21-22, https://www.valmiki.iitk.ac.in/).
The terracotta relief panel below, conventionally dated to the Gupta period (c. 5th century CE), was found at Deogarh, Uttar Pradesh. On the left is Rama, sitting with his bow and right hand raised (just like the Etruscans depicted him centuries earlier). In the middle is Sita, standing with her hands over her chest in a defensive posture. On the right Lakshmana raises his sword to cut off the nose of Shurpanakha, who is kneeling down and has been restrained by the hair.
 |
| Gupta Art Collection, National Museum, New Delhi, India |
Shurpanakha, a dreadful, monstrous female rakshasa, fits the description of a Gorgon. The name Gorgon comes from the ancient Greek word gorgós, ”dreadful”, and its root form is also the source of the Sanskrit word “garjana”, a roaring and grunting sound, like the growling of a beast. The Gorgoneion, or a Gorgon face with the tongue sticking out menacingly, is usually accompanied by snakes protruding around the face, and utilized as an apotropaic symbol. Wikipedia notes how the ancient Greeks and Hindus both share this symbolism: “In Hindu mythology, Kali is often shown with a protruding tongue and snakes around her head.” When Rama receives the shield from Sita with Shurpanakha’s ugly expression on it, the signification is that the defensive armour will avert demoniac influences, such as those of Shurpanakha. In the Valmiki Ramayana, Sita does not literally hand Rama a shield or helmet in the forest conflict with rakshasas, so this scene is also figurative as a symbol of good luck against evil forces.
Shurpanakha, after returning from her humiliation at the hands of Lakshmana in the Ramayana, apparently poisoned her brother Ravana’s mind with covetousness and lust for Sita. To get her own revenge, she convinced him with sweet words to abduct Sita for himself. He could satisfy his base desires as a rakshasa and deal a devastating blow to Rama. Besides, it was his nature to assault the wives of other men, so the plan was very tempting to him and he salivated over the opportunity to feast his eyes on Sita. Shurpanakha can thus be observed as a key instigator in the Ramayanic war. We should not underestimate her importance just because she was a minor character in the epic. The Halloween trick-or-treat masks on the Monteleone chariot panel of Ravana’s sister Shurpanakha and Ravana’s uncle Maricha are critical to a correct decryption of the story being narrated. Apparently the Etruscan or Ionian artists realized how to cleverly imbue the shield with an ominous quality that foreshadowed the wicked deeds of Ravana, the demon king of kings. Both Shurpanakha (first disguised as a pretty woman) and Maricha (first disguised as a beautiful deer) used deception to ‘trick’ Rama with a fake treat; one failed and the other succeeded. The Halloween nightmare that ensued was best encapsulated by the two most painful episodes for Rama before the climax of the war: Sita’s kidnapping and Lakshmana’s near-fatal wound from Ravana’s spear. The other two panels on the sides of the chariot are depicting exactly those two events, albeit with a Mediterranean/Near Eastern flavor.
German scholar Otto Brendel in his book Etruscan Art makes an extremely important observation regarding this point I am making, which is thought provoking for all modern scholars. He realizes that the artistic technique and style may be Greek and Etruscan, but the content and iconography could easily be Oriental:
“By this time (beginning of the sixth century) Etruscan artists had acquired sufficient freedom and mastery of representational form to attempt occasionally the rendition of subjects which lay outside the limits of the Greek parent art… The possibility must at least be taken into consideration that Etruscan works occasionally represent subject matter acquired from oriental art, which may not be immediately obvious to a modern critic because it has been translated into Greek or Greco-Etruscan techniques and forms of representation.” (pg 66-67)
Larissa Bonfante’s book Etruscan Life and Afterlife has provided a drawn reconstruction of the Monteleone chariot (dated c. 550-540 BC). When the Persians conquered Ionia during that period, resulting social changes facilitated the transfer of religious myth from India to Etruria. The artist's rendering above shows the characteristic open tongue of Indian female goddess Kāli on the shield, usually the emblem of the Rakshasas, along with the spotted deer. The bottom face just on top of the deer is a representation of Maricha, and the face above him (with what looks like a broken or wounded nose) is Shurpanakha.
