Ramayana in Archaic Greek and Etruscan Art at Caere, Part VI

Description (Main Presentation, Part VI):

European scholars recognize the iconographic parallels between the two nude hunters armed with bows on the Caeretan hydria in Boston and the Greek heroes Heracles, Apollo, and Artemis. The same parallels are observable between those two nude hunters and Indian paintings of Rama and Laksmana living and hunting in the wilderness. Because of their ignorance of Indian mythology, classical historians are unable to make these connections between Mediterranean and Asian works of art portraying Rama and Laksmana, and label the Caeretan hydria an unidentifiable or generic hunting scene with unnamed heroes. The same ignorance and cultural arrogance is apparent in their inability to understand the mythological subject matter depicted on the Campana plaques. Because of their wrong assumption that every artifact should be representative of some Greek myth or another, western scholars cannot recognize the true meaning of the narratives shown on the Campana panels and the Caeretan hydria. 

My first proposal to mitigate this offensive lack of knowledge of South Asian legend in academic circles is to rename the 'Boston Deerhunt' with an appropriate title such as 'The Golden Deer Episode of Rama and Sita'. We will conclude this part of the presentation with a brief discussion of the purpose of the Caeretan hydriae - purifying water ceremonies, comic entertainment, and narration of stories with supernatural elements. The Busiris Painter, responsible for the Caeretan Hydria No. 2 that includes Sita's abduction and Rama's deer hunt, employed a detailed style displaying the physical strength and cunningness of his characters for an amusing effect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyYFoY_Ykm4

Transcript (Main Presentation, Part VI):

Now that we’ve analyzed the deer hunt pretty thoroughly, I want to move to another topic that’s connected to the same issue of now the nude hunters themselves on the front side. So I’m going to make an iconographic comparison of Rama and Laksmana to Heracles as well as the Letoids, that is the children of the mother Leto in Greek mythology, Apollo and Artemis.

So I’ll just quote from Raffaella Bonaudo in La Culla di Hermes, page 216. She writes that “Nudity and the attribute of the bow appear together within the corpus only for Heracles in relation to the episode of Alyconeus against whom the hero is also equipped with a club.” And you see that on the bottom left here where Heracles is holding a bow and a club and he’s attacking Alcyoneus, the giant demon who’s looking pretty shocked.

So she’s already making a comparison to Heracles because of the nudity and the attribute of the bow to the two nude hunters which are Rama and Laksmana. So she continues and says, “If, then, we consider the iconographic scheme and adopt a structural perspective of permutation, the placement of the figures on the hydria no. 2 corresponds to the pursuit of Tityos by the Letoids, who strike the giant armed with bows.” So that’s the no. 12 hydria in which Apollo and Artemis are also using their bow and arrows to attack Tityos, the demon. So the Letoids are another word for Apollo and Artemis, the siblings. 

So these two heroes, Apollo and Artemis, are analogous to the two heroes Rama and Laksmana. And she’s recognizing that the structure of both scenes is basically the same where Tityos is being striked with the bow and arrows by two siblings, just as Rama and Laksmana are striking the golden deer with their arrows. So they recognize the similarity and it’s pretty obvious because of these similarities that the nude youths must be great heroes, just like Apollo and Artemis, or Heracles. It’s just a natural conclusion that one should make. 

And just another point that I want to make, if you look at the images on the bottom for comparison, you can see that the action is from right to left in both the No. 12 and the No. 2 hydriae, where the hunters are stationed on the right side and they are looking at their target, who is fleeing on the left. In the case of Artemis and Apollo, it’s Tityos who’s on the far left, looking back at them. And then in the No. 2 hydria, of course, it’s the golden stag Maricha, who is looking back at the two hunters, Rama and Laksmana. On the bottom right, you have two images. One of them is a zoomed in photo of the second hunter, which is probably Laksmana, just for your information.

So to continue our discussion about the two ‘nude’ young male heroes Rama and Laksmana, if we see the image down here as well, this is another Indian painting. And you can see how the two young brothers are very close to naked, whereas Rama’s wife Sita is very well-dressed in red. And that is something that accords with the Caeretan hydria as well because on the back side of the Caeretan hydria No. 2, the author Hemelrijk has noted the elaborate dress of the maenad, of both maenads, both of whom are Sita. So it’s very clear that the hydria and this Indian depiction; they’re both very much symmetrical in terms of the dress of all three characters.

The following quote may be the most important quote in the entire presentation, regarding the Caeretan hydria No. 2 in Boston. In it Raffaella Bonaudo in her book La Culla di Hermes, page 217 writes, “In light of this network of relationships that can be established with respect to the criteria for selecting iconographies within the corpus, the two hunters (in the Boston deer hunt) seem to be evoking a particular status with respect to the others, which cannot be defined exactly, and which does not necessarily correspond to a mythical tale not otherwise attested.” Now there’s a lot of negatives in this quote - “not necessarily correspond”, “not otherwise attested”, “cannot be defined”. And it indicates that the author is very non-committal, but is willing to nonetheless admit that this may be the mythical tale of the Ramayana being attested, and that the two hunters are evoking a particular status with respect to other figures on other hydriae, as we have mentioned, including Apollo and Artemis and Heracles. 

So she recognizes the network of relationships that can be established based on the iconographies, compared to other hydriae. And based on that, she realizes that it definitely could be a mythical tale, but she’s non-committal about it, and especially because it hasn’t been otherwise attested, at least in her eyes. But as we have seen with the Campana plaques, they are otherwise attested. That is why I have titled this slide with the question, “Mythical Tale of Ramayana Not Attested?” And interestingly, the Louvre Museum in Paris has made a similar statement as Bonaudo has here about the Campana panels, which we will see on the next slide. These scholars have made the same error in labeling both the Caeretan hydria No. 2 and the Campana series as generic or unidentifiable scenes. They often only publish the image of the lone figure at a fire altar, which is one of the Campana plaques which we will be seeing on the next slide, because it is the hardest among the Campana plaques to pinpoint in terms of the mythological story and the identity of the character, which is probably Bharata from the Valmiki Ramayana, in my opinion.

The Campana slabs, which are currently kept in the Louvre Museum in Paris, France, are also said to have inconclusive mythological interpretations, just like the Caeretan hydria in Boston. And in an archived article titled, “Campana Slab: Man before an Altar”, a French scholar at the Louvre gives us this following commentary, much like Raffaella Bonaudo did about the hydria earlier. They say that “the significance of the decoration and the exact identification of the subjects represented by these paintings, that is the Campana plaques, are still causing controversy today.” But what kind of controversy? Controversy because they’re not Greek in origin and Oriental instead? I mean, for them the definition of controversy in Western Europe seems to be anything that’s non-European in origin or Oriental. And this is again a very good example of the xenophobia that’s blatantly there in many of their comments and works.

Then the next point the scholar at the Louvre adds: “The location in which they (the Campana slabs) were discovered does not allow us to conclude that this is a strictly funerary iconography,” which is correct. That’s a good point. But the next thing that they say is: “Mythological interpretations are hardly more conclusive.” But as we have shown, we can definitely get to an interpretation or reach an interpretation that is very conclusive. And the last point they make is that “moreover, the six slabs,” five of which we are really examining. The sixth one is not actually connected to the other slabs, that is correct. But at least four or five of them are connected to one another. But even here the author says that they (the slabs) “do not consitute a continuous and coherent ensemble.” 

But as I already have shown on the previous slides, I’ve already refuted that claim that this is not a continuous narrative and this is not a unitary narrative. That is just an incorrect claim, and it’s clear that there is a very clear sequence in what we see in the Campana slabs - from the Ayodhya Kanda in terms of the Book of the Kingdom to the Book of the Forest and then the ending, where in the Book of War, Rama finally rescues his wife. So, we’ve already gone through that and it’s quite obvious that they’re just simply wrong here and have not studied these plaques properly or interpreted them properly, because of their xenophobia and their ignorance of Oriental myth.

The last point is that if you look at the graphic on the right here, the Campana slab in the graphic on the right, it is somehow less vague than the others, meaning the other three main Campana slabs that we have already discussed, according to this same scholar, even though you could argue the opposite is true. They write that “the scene taking place on this slab seems more explicit” somehow. “A man, a priest, or simply a devout person, perhaps,” (perhaps, I don’t how that’s explicit) “appears to be making a sacrifice before an altar upon which a fire is lit.” And this “ritual basin is resting,” as you see on the upper right corner, “on a small column placed at the edge of the altar, adding to the religious character of the ceremony depicted.” 

So clearly this is some kind of religious scene with a solitary person doing some kind of sacrifice. And the best interpretation I can come up with is that this character is the younger brother of Rama, Bharata, who is the son of Kaikeyi, (and) who refuses to become the heir to the throne. He refuses the kingdom of Ayodhya, which is what his mother was trying to make happen through her devious plan, and he instead renounces the kingdom and decides to live like a hermit just like his older brother Rama. And this is a very important and famous episode in the Ramayana as well. So there’s no reason to think that this can’t be positively identified even though it is a little bit more vague because of the fact that there’s only one character in it.

Cultural arrogance of western scholars is the fundamental reason why these artworks including the Caeretan hydria in Boston and the Campana slabs in Paris have not been identified correctly, and the reason why they continue to try and somehow insist that they could be, or perhaps could be, Greek myths, even though they clearly are not. So that’s why I make this sort of a joke that, “No way these artworks could be depicting anything but Greek myth!” I mean, how dare we even suggest such a thing? But it’s not just me who’s saying this. Even the classical scholars themselves acknowledge this. 

So we have the following quote from Nancy Thomson de Grummond, an Etruscan scholar, in her book Etruscan Myth, Sacred History, and Legend. In the preface she says: “For many classical scholars, Etruscan myth is to be understood as a reflection of Greek mythology, which was indeed known and influential among the Etruscans… But what is erroneous about such an approach is that there is a tendency to recognize first what is known and familiar (i.e., the Greek material) and to turn away from and ignore the representations that cannot be explained easily.” (pg. xii). So in essence they’re like the golden deer - they turn away and ignore anything that’s inconvenient. Anyway, if you look at the graphic on the right, we see again the same scene that we see in the Caeretan hydria depicted in Indian art. Rama, who is barefooted and practically nude, just like the nude youth in the Caeretan hydria, is hunting the stag, which has also the added black shadow of the demon Maricha. And the deer turns its head to look back at the hunter while fleeing away, which is really just the common iconography that you’ll see in all of these scenes of the Golden Deer episode.

On an earlier slide, I mentioned that the Indologist Sheldon Pollock also criticized this cultural arrogance of western scholars, when he makes the comment of the “presumption of truth of a western vision”. So it’s not only the Etruscan scholar here who recognizes this cultural arrogance, which leads to an interpretation of everything as being a Greek myth. But also you can see that even in the community of Indologists they recognize this cultural arrogance as well, that pervades the entire scholarly community in the western world.

So there are many possible titles that we can give to the Caeretan hydria No. 2 to name it instead of the Boston deer hunt, which is too generic. And one title I would offer as a possibility is the Golden Deer Episode of Rama and Sita. That would be L’Episodio del Cervo Dorato di Rama e Sita in Italian. And so it would be like the title of the book La Culla di Hermes, which means ‘The Cradle of Hermes’ by the Italian author Raffaella Bonaudo. That title references the Caeretan hydria No. 3. The title that I’m offering here as a possibility would be L’Episodio del Cervo Dorato di Rama e Sita for Caeretan hydria No. 2, and I think that would be perfect for it. It’s certainly much better than the Boston deer hunt. Other possibilities would be, maybe the Golden Deer Hunt of Rama and Sita’s Abduction, but that may be a little bit too long-winded. So I think that the Golden Deer Episode of Rama and Sita is probably the best title that can be given to the Caeretan hydria No. 2.

To further reinforce the title (Golden Deer…) that I am proposing for Caeretan hydria No. 2, I am displaying below an Indian version of what you see on the Caeretan hydria. It is from central India in the 17th century AD. And if you look on the left, you see what is analogous to the front side of the Caeretan hydria, which is Rama and Laksmana with bow and arrows spotting the golden deer Maricha. And then on the right side what you see is analogous to what you see on the reverse side of the Caeretan hydria, especially on the leftmost side. So on this side in this Indian painting you see Ravana carrying Sita away with long strides across the ocean to the island of Lanka. Modern day Sri Lanka is definitely an island situated south (of India), close to the southern tip of India, across the Indian Ocean. 

You can definitely see the parallels with the hydria, particularly the long strides of Ravana here, which are kind of mimicking what you see with him galloping with horse hooves like a centaur on the reverse side of the Boston hydria. To recap, this central Indian painting from Malwa has two parts to it and those two parts are very similar to the two sides of the Boston hydria. And also just to reiterate, the long strides of Ravana indicate long distance travel in a very short period of time and continuous movement towards a destination, as we see on the reverse side of the Boston hydria.

We’ve looked at the Etruscan depictions of the Golden Deer episode and we’ve also looked at Indian depictions of the Golden Deer episode. So, I just wanted to briefly give you a sample of the Southeast Asian depictions of the Golden Deer episode. On the left side, you’ll see Ravana, who is known as Thotsakan in Laos. He’s again abducting Sita with his arm firmly around her waist, just like the satyr in the Caeretan hydria in Boston. So this is a gilded wooden panel from Luang Prabang in Laos and Sita is known as Nang Sida and Ravana is known as Thotsakan, but the iconography is pretty much identical. And on the right side we have Rama eyeing the golden deer, which is twisting its head to look back at the pursuer again. And this is from the National Library in Bangkok, Thailand.

So now moving on from the Caeretan hydria No. 2 and the deer hunt and the abduction scene, I just want to get back to a more high-level understanding of the Caeretan hydriae themselves. I’m going to examine the purpose behind them in the first place. And according to the author Hemelrijk, who discusses many of these things, he remarks that regarding the ornaments on the hydriae, he believes that the lotus palmettes “derive from East Greek architecture and therefore belong to a sphere of solemnity.” (pg. 70, More on the Caeretan Hydriae: Addenda and Clarifications). Thus, Hemelrijk realizes that they do have a serious and dignified purpose and a sacred value, but they also, as we will see, have an entertainment value for humor as well. 

Another comment made by Konrad Schauenberg is that the painted imagery, not the pottery itself, is what distinguishes the Caeretan hydria. He says that “the Caeretan hydriae are not nearly as good in pottery as they are in painting. It is all the more remarkable that, given their form, they can be considered unmistakably original creations.” And I think that it’s not just the pottery itself or the painted imagery itself that’s original, but it’s also (sometimes) the subject matter. That’s what Hemelrijk gets to in the next point. He says (pg. 70) that “the narrative themes of the hydriae… are bewilderingly numerous. The painter (formerly the hydriae were believed to be the work of one painter only, but now two) has been described by Webster in 1928 as a ‘great comic descriptive artist, he likes seeing somebody done in’ and it is true: catching and killing an enemy or victim is one of the main subjects on the hydriae.”

So in this one (quote), Hemelrijk recognizes that there are numerous themes and in my opinion, they can’t just be all included in the purview of Greek mythology. And he also hints at the fact that this is not just for serious purpose, but also for comic description. And that’s what we see in the abduction of Sita as well as the deer hunt. He’s highlighting the futility of their deer hunt and indicating that they’re being done in, that both Rama and Laksmana and Sita are being done in. And the catching of Sita by Ravana is definitely one of the major subjects, that is the abduction. The next point that I’m trying to make is that the Caeretan hydria No. 2 is thus related to the Campana slabs, but the latter, meaning the Campana slabs, have a more solemn, religious tone. They’re more serious and kind of sacred in their importance, and they might have some value for what you would call salvation or liberation. But the former work of art, that is the hydria, is meant more for entertainment and comedy.

In his book More on the Caeretan Hydriae: Addenda and Clarifications, Jaap Hemelrijk makes an important observation. He says that regarding the purpose of the hydriae, “They were made for storing water for ceremonial purification both in private and public buildings. Such water served domestic and municipal rituals. Ritual water required special containers, special care, and cleanliness. It was to be used for all family rituals: at birth, coming of age, marrying, death, and the countless lesser occasions for feasting and for cleansing during sacrifices. Such lustral water had to be kept apart from the considerable amount of water used in the household; it had to stand ready in ornate containers, such as the Caeretan hydriae actually are.” (pg. 69) 

He continues and concludes that “such containers of holy water should be decorated in a festive, rich way, with scenes that are meaningful for all kinds of occasions, illustrating human life, human strife, tragedy and comedy; and also (this is the most important thing), scenes pregnant of the superhuman, the mysterious world that transcends human life and understanding.”  (pg. 69). And that’s exactly what the Valmiki Ramayana is about - the superhuman dimension and all the incredible interactions that Rama has with the raksasa demons. And it (Ramayana) definitely highlights human strife and tragedy, as well as comedy. So it’s definitely a perfect topic for the artists who painted the Caeretan hydriae.

I would like to talk in more detail now about the Busiris Painter, who has been called a “great comic descriptive artist.” His forte was presenting mythological conflicts in an amusing style and detailed manner. So examples of his great work among the Caeretan hydria include the Boston deer hunt No. 2 that we’ve analyzed; Heracles fighting the Egyptians on No. 34; and Alyconeus the giant being attacked by Heracles with Hermes witnessing and directing on No. 21. What I have observed about this painter is that he enjoys the interplay between brute strength and strategem, with Heracles and Hermes personifications of each respectively, in the number 21 example. 

Now in the No. 2 example, Ravana is the satyr who is employing physical force or brute strength, whereas Maricha meanwhile is applying the strategem of an illusory deer to decoy Rama in the Boston hydria. So on one side you see brute strength being employed and on the other side you see the strategem or trickery. So the Busiris Painter, he likes how a cunning trick coupled with violence leads to corresponding misery for the victim, whether it be the shocked Alcyoneus on No. 21, or the timid Sita on No. 2 vase. And both of these characters are ambushed. Alcyoneus is ambushed by Heracles and Sita is ambushed by Ravana. And Sita definitely fits into the category of victims who, according to Hemelrijk, are “the white maenads (done in) by the big, black satyrs.” (pg. 151, Caeretan Hydriae). These are the characters who are done in, and that’s what the Busiris painter, the comic descriptive artist, specializes in.

And Hemelrijk further concludes that “indeed, for their tendency to caricature and their powerful way of putting across a story, the hydriae are, I think, the best examples of popular humor in Greek art.” (pg. 151, Caeretan Hydriae). And also Rama and Laksmana are being done in by the raksasa Maricha, disguised as the golden deer. So the ‘doing in’, or the characters being done in, are on both sides of the hydria - Rama and Laksmana on the front side and Sita on the back side. So Maricha is disguised as the golden deer and he leads them away from Sita, leaving her unprotected, so that way they are done in. And this theme of being deceived or defeated by one’s recklessness or lack of forethought is thus emphasized on both obverse and reverse sides of the hydria No. 2, and Hemelrijk only notes the latter example (Sita deceived by Ravana).

Ramayana in Archaic Greek and Etruscan Art at Caere, Part V (Deer Hunt)

Description (Main Presentation, Part V):

An in-depth study of the deer hunt on the front side of the Caeretan hydria in Boston. Excerpts from Valmiki's text describing Rama's chase of the golden deer Maricha help explain the meaning of the three different poses of the stag on the Etruscan vase, confirming that it is one deer moving away from the hunters in a dynamic scene. Indian medieval artists prefer to employ the device of multiple heads on the golden deer (instead of multiple poses) to illustrate its deceptive form, elusiveness, rapid movement, and duplicity. The turning or twisting of the head of the deer to look back at the hunters is a common feature shared between the Greco-Etruscan and Indian depictions of Rama and Laksmana's deer hunt, however. Both artistic styles, either through multiple poses or multiple heads, emphasize the extraordinary nature of this particular deer that the two 'nude youths' in the forest are pursuing. In the Caeretan hydria, the three poses from right to left signify a sequence of actions by the deer: panicking when seen by Rama (rearing); looking back with a twisted face to spy the hunter Rama aiming a bow and arrow; and fleeing away at full speed beyond the hunter's range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dbXZD2zpZE

Transcript (Main Presentation, Part V):

We now return to a more in-depth analysis of the Boston deer hunt on the front side of the Caeretan hydria number 2. So this is a zoomed-in view of the front side of the Caeretan hydria or Boston deer hunt. And notice how the eyes of the two hunters seem to be honing in on the deer in the middle. And you can see how the stag also in the middle is also eyeing them with the twisted head. And so the reality is that this is a hunt of one deer or a single deer, not multiple deer. The other two poses are quite distinct and are from the same deer. And we’ll be going through that in detail on the next slide.

Before going to the next slide, however, I would like to read you a passage from the Valmiki Ramayana itself which describes this scene that you’re viewing right now on the hydria almost perfectly in some ways. So it reads in Aranya Kanda, Sarga 42, Verses 3-6, we have the following description: “The deer spied the Lord of Kings, that is Rama, rushing toward him and he led him on, now timorously hiding, now showing himself again. Taking up his bow, Rama ran toward the deer. At one moment he would spot him running through the deep forest, temptingly near, and would take his bow in hand, only to look once more and find the deer beyond the range of his arrow. In one stretch of forest he (Maricha in his deer form, that is) came into sight leaping through the air in frightful panic and then he passed into another stretch and out of sight.”

So the parts where the deer is beyond the range of his arrow and out of sight are represented by the deer which is fleeing away in the far left corner, you know, furthest away from the two hunters here. And then the leaping through the air in frightful panic when the deer comes into sight is represented by the first deer which is closest to the two nude youths. And you can see it, you know, in a panic mode leaping up, with its front legs; and of course the deer spying the Lord of Kings rushing toward him is represented by the deer in the middle. So really if you look at the description in the Valmiki Ramayana, you can see the multiple poses or positions of the deer as it tries to get in and out of sight of Rama’s range, of his bow and arrow. So it’s just, it’s quite remarkable that the artists were able to depict this in just one painting.

So just to summarize what we’ve discussed here, the Caeretan hydria in Boston on the front side depicts this dynamic chase through the multiple poses of the stag and represents the moments before Rama strikes Maricha with his arrow, killing the demon. Many depictions actually show the moment when Rama finally kills Maricha and his illusory form is disintegrated. This hydria, however, does not depict this last moment, probably because the focus of the artist is on the deception of Rama and Laksmana who are being done in while Ravana abducts Sita. The stag painted in the middle with the twisted head represents the moments when the deer spied the Lord of Kings, Rama, rushing toward him. And the situation where Maricha comes into sight, leaping through the air in frightful panic, is represented on the hydria by the stag closest to the nude hunters Rama and Laksmana. And of course, the leftmost stag, which is the farthest from the two nude youths, represents the deer beyond the range of Rama’s arrow, which passes into another stretch and out of sight, in Valmiki’s words.

So to identify the three positions, the distinct positions or poses of the stag, we have to view them from right to left. And the rightmost stag, we can see, we can observe the panicked fact and the front legs are raised because it has been alerted that it needs to start fleeing away. And we can also see the quote below: “the good East Greek parallel for the panicking of deer is seen on a Lycian wall painting,” which also dates to the same time period. And again, ‘Lycian’ is a hint that this is a scene that originates from East Greece and Asia Minor and also is probably a myth that is from the Eastern world, not from necessarily the Greek world. Now, the next pose is the twisted neck and the deer’s eyes looking back at the hunters while moving away. It (has) started to gallop away but not at full speed. And it’s also eyeing the hunters and making sure that they don’t have a perfect aim. And then the third pose is, clearly, it’s not looking back at all anymore. It’s only looking straight ahead and it’s running away at full speed with its front legs bent perfectly now. So it’s clearly an indication of a transition from, getting ready to flee, to starting to flee at half speed, and then finally fleeing at full speed without any hesitation.

Jaap Hemelrijk explicitly notes that “hunting deer with the bow on foot is rare anywhere in Greek art.” So these nude hunters who are clearly hunting on foot with bow and arrow are not something you normally see in Greek art. That again is another alert that this is not really a Greek myth that’s being depicted. “The frontal head,” he continues, “of the third stag on No. 2 (hydria) is remarkable, a motif popular in East Greece.” And the third stag in this case is actually the first one from right to left, which is the one with the panicked face and the front legs raised to get ready to start fleeing. And so therefore he realizes that a good East Greek parallel as we have noted earlier for the panicking of deer is seen on a Lycian wall painting, and Lycia is located in Asia Minor. So clearly there’s a lot going on here and there’s not a lot of great, complete answers that they have. They only give hints.

So comparing this scene to the reverse side of the Boston hydria, I have noted that he has stated that the maenad Sita “looks round” (and that’s the key phrase) or looks back in fear while moving away when Ravana grabs her arm. The second pose here of the stag on the front side with eyes looking straight at Rama and Laksmana while striding away is comparable. And also the third pose of the stag which is, you know, the leftmost stag, is comparable to Ravana’s rushed movement with Sita fully in his grasp with bent legs and hooves. So we can see the analogy in many different ways here between Ravana and Maricha, who is disguised as the golden deer, as well as even the maenad Sita and the golden deer.

Classical scholars do hint at the realization of one stag making multiple poses. In his book Caeretan hydria, Jaap Hemelrijk recognizes the “lively” drawing of stags multiple times and he reminds us of the dynamic nature of Maricha who shifts from one position to another in his elusive movement away from the hunters. It really is an ingenious way to present the whole myth in my opinion in one vase or water jar. You have Rama and Laksmana distracted by the deer on one side, in a place far away from the two characters on the other side, which is side B, and those characters are Ravana and Sita, of course. The author does remark directly in a revealing way that the “drawing of stags is lively”, and that’s the key word, and he says, “one expects an arrow to be sticking in one of them.” And he explicitly says one of them. So that is exactly what we see happening in the Valmiki Ramayana. That’s what happens to Maricha the demon who disguises himself as an attractive stag. Eventually Rama catches him and kills him. So Hemelrijk also restates the same observation later on in his book emphasizing the deer’s movement. He says “the movement of the fleeing animals on number two is extremely lively.” So this really is a strong indication that the scholars are coming close to realizing the truth but don’t quite have the ability to connect the liveliness of the movement to the dynamic nature of the moving deer, the singular deer which is Maricha in disguise.

So how do the Indian artists depict Maricha’s multiples poses and trickery in their painting? Well, this is an example on the right side from Himachal Pradesh or Chamba painting. And in it, you can see Maricha’s two different poses, one on the left and one on the right (on the far right). On the left, Maricha appears before the two nude youths Rama and Laksmana and then appears again in his buck form with his head tilted back to look at them on the far right side. The Indian artists thus convey his elusiveness and seductiveness through multiple poses or even heads, which we will see on the next slide. And just to remind you, the demon Ravana is also shown with ten heads. So they (the Indian artists) were very fond of depicting these demons and depicting their treachery and elusiveness through multiple poses and multiple heads.

One example is the two-headed deer sculpture which you can see in Orissa, the state of Orissa (Odisha) in India, which is in the northeastern part of India. And the Indian artists in this state, they employ the magic illusion of two heads to illustrate the golden deer’s elusiveness. And so you can see both of these two pictures here. You can clearly see that one of the heads is tilted back to look at the pursuer and the other is feeding on something to seduce the hunter. And this is from Joanna Williams’ book on the two-headed deer in Orissa. 

There are many characteristics of these extraordinary deers. They are elusive. They are illusory. And also the duplicity is another characteristic. So whether Maricha moves so fast that the hunters see multiple stags or (they see) one stag with multiple heads. So either multiple stags or one stag with multiple heads. Either way, the result is the same, duplicity. And Joanna Williams has stated very clearly, “The two-headed deer catches our eye as an emblem of illusion. What are the implications of this image? The golden deer was part of a trick that enticed Rama away from Sita. To endow it with an extra head is in the words of living painters, to emphasize that it is no ordinary deer. The two-ness of the heads implies duplicity.” 

And so yeah, I mean there’s so many characteristics here, but the main thing is that it’s a very extraordinary deer and it’s illusory and it also is duplicitous. And my own comment is that hunters with a bow and arrow do not normally hunt multiple deer at one time because shooting one arrow after another without stopping like a gun with bullets is not possible. So even though there are two hunters wielding a bow and arrow, the three deer we see on the water jar from Caere are the Ionian artists’ rendering of the hasty movement of one deer as it eludes both of them, in my opinion. The turning of the deer’s head in the second part of the sequence of fleeing is comparable to what we observe in many Indian paintings depicting that scene, i.e. the deer hunt of Rama hunting Maricha. So the fact that the artist paints the deer three times in a moving sequence serves to emphasize the difficulty of the hunter’s chase and the extraordinary nature of this particular deer, just as the two-headed deer from Orissa above is no ordinary deer.

So, just to summarize, whether the artists depict multiple stags or one stag with multiple heads, what they’re really trying to depict for us is that the hunters are seeing Maricha, disguised as the golden deer, moving so fast that it’s like a blur. And that can be, you know, depicted with multiple stags moving in a sequence or one stag with multiple heads, (the latter of) which is what the Indian artists in Orissa chose to do. But they can do it either way, but either way the result is the same, duplicity - the depiction of a duplicitous raksasa demon disguised as a golden deer.

Joanna Williams reinforces my point that both rapid movement and illusion, or Maya as they say in India, are encapsulated in the image of the two-headed deer. She writes that “the images also bear out the charm of the creature, which in the first place captivated Sita, and which both puzzles and amuses us. Thus the deer reminds us in a playful way of uncertainty and the difficulty of making judgements. This is true of the motive as it appears in Orissa, whereas in Gujarat, the same form implies primarily rapid movement, also appropriate to the deer but less specifically evocative of Maya.” So what she’s saying is that it can be interpreted in many different ways. The two-headedness or multiple deer moving in a sequence, they can be interpreted as implying rapid movement and elusiveness, but it also can be appropriate or evocative of Maya, or illusion, as well. 

But the two-headedness is better for implying illusion or Maya, whereas the depiction of multiple stags moving in a sequence is more evocative of rapid movement, of course. So it really is a judgement of the artist whether they want to emphasize one or the other. But they are both very important and they’re both applicable and appropriate to the story of the Golden Deer chase. And on the bottom you can see a picture from Williams’ book, figure 60, where it shows Rama and Laksmana on each corner, and they’re both preparing to hunt the two-headed deer. So you can see that in India as well as in the Ionian artist’s depiction, you can see Rama and Laksmana looking to hunt the deer. And both artists in India and the Ionian, they’re both emphasizing the puzzlement of the hunters and how they are being kind of seduced.

These two images that I’m going to show you are more examples from Indian art - Indian miniature paintings of the Golden Deer episode that illustrate Maricha’s duplicity, seductive form and rapid movement or elusiveness. On the left you see from Bengali folk art the golden deer twisting its head to seduce Rama, who’s almost looking like he’s leaping out of his hut getting ready to hunt it. And on the right side you see the chase is already on and Maricha is in full flight. And you can see that half of his body (is changed) - his body is the deer form but his (real) face is showing, and that indicates his duplicity quite explicitly. And he’s also galloping away fast, whereas Rama is about to aim his arrow at him. The right image seems to emphasize more of the duplicity and the elusiveness of the golden deer, whereas the left image from Bengali folk art is more evocative of the seductiveness of the golden deer. But clearly the characteristics of duplicity, seductiveness or illusory Maya form, as well as rapid movement of the deer or the elusiveness - those three characteristics are the ones that are primarily emphasized in different ways in all of these depictions.