Orientations | Volume 45 Number 3 | APRIL 2014

Or
A fifth Buddha made of grey limestone, today
located in the small ‘image hall’ , or vihan, of Wat Na
Phra Men, Ayutthaya, is even larger in size at some
420 centimetres in height, and unique in its style, even
made by a monkey and an elephant to the ‘Blessed
One’ in the Parileyyaka forest, as narrated in the
Dhammapada commentary in Pali (Brown, 2009, pp.
47–52, fig. 5). Normally, however, the right-hand palm

i en
in comparison with the four other Buddha images
(Fig. 3). As is the case with the other statues, it has
undergone extensive restoration. The two forearms, for
instance, are certainly not genuine, which may explain
the unusual gesture of the two hands resting on the
faces up. Referring to the fine relief of the Buddha
preaching from Wat Sai, Nakhon Pathom (Fig. 4), we
may infer that the original right hand of this colossal
Buddha was most likely raised in vitarkamudra, as it
would seem with the other four statues. The head and

Five Monumental knees, otherwise unknown in Dvaravati art. In later

Thai art and tradition, pendant-legged Buddhas with
two hands placed on the knees celebrate offerings
part of the nimbus are probably authentic.
An interesting fragment of a cross-piece with an
open-mouthed makara turning outward with a lion

Bhadrasana Buddhas

ta
from Nakhon Pathom
Nicolas Revire

F ive colossal stone Buddhas from Nakhon Pathom

are probably the most outstanding extant
examples of Dvaravati mature art. Dvaravati was one
of Thailand’s oldest religious and artistic cultures,
tio
decades of the 7th or early years of the 8th century
(Revire, 2010).
Today, two of the images are located in Thai
museums: one in the Bangkok National Museum
flourishing during the 7th–8th centuries (Baptiste
and Zéphir, 2009). All five Buddhas are seated in
bhadrasana, a posture with both legs pendant
and feet firmly planted on a lotus pedestal. These
are the only known examples of this type in stone,
carved in the round, that we have for the entire 1st
millennium in Thailand, although a few other stone
or cave reliefs, terracotta, stucco or small bronze
welcomes visitors and devotees at the southern
entrance of Wat Phra Pathom Chedi, Nakhon Pathom
ns
(Fig. 1), the other in the Chao Sam Phraya Museum in
Ayutthaya (see Revire, 2010, fig. 9). The third Buddha

(Fig. 2), while the fourth is still worshipped in the

images have survived in situ or are found in museum
or temple collections (Revire, 2011, 2012a). The
importance of these Buddha icons, therefore, cannot
be underestimated for defining the art and the nature
of Dvaravati Buddhism.
Four of these Buddha images, each approximately
375 centimetres tall and probably made of white
‘ordination hall’ (T. ubosot) of the local monastery (see
Revire, 2010, figs 5–6). Residents call the latter ‘Luang
Pho Sila Khao’, the ‘Venerated White Stone [Buddha]’
because of its colour. All these images display the
while the left rests on the knee, palm up—but none of
the hands is authentic.
This set of sculptures, as we find them today,
was subjected to extreme reassembling and
remodelling with plaster in the 1960s by Thailand’s
d
right hand in the teaching gesture (Skt. vitarkamudra)

limestone, are reported in the literature to have
originated from Wat Phra Men, Nakhon Pathom. They
are thought to have been originally seated facing
in the four cardinal directions backed against the
central elevation of the now ruined monument. Based
on stylistic and iconographic considerations, the
proposed dating for the sculptures is close to the last
ra (Fig. 1) Buddha
Thailand, Wat Phra Men,
Fine Arts Department, an organization responsible Nakhon Pathom, 7th–8th century
for the preservation and promotion of arts. This White limestone, remodelled with plaster
Height c. 375 cm
reconstruction took place following the discovery of
National Museum, Bangkok (594/2509)
fragments at excavations in Nakhon Pathom (Dupont, (Photograph: Paisarn Piemmettawat,
1959, pp. 43–46), with other fragments found later
in Wat Phaya Kong, near Ayutthaya, and even in a
Bangkok antique dealer’s shop (Dhanit, 1967).
f t courtesy River Books)

18 19
Orientations | Volume 45 Number 3 | APRIL 2014
Or
emerging from the mouth was also found in Nakhon
Pathom (Fig. 5). French archaeologist Jean-Yves
Claeys (1896–1979) first claimed that this fragment,
made of the same grey limestone, formerly belonged
to the throne of the fifth Buddha statue. But somehow
Prince Damrong (1862–1943), the celebrated ‘father
of Thai history’, was mistaken in believing the piece
originally came from Wat Phra Men, Nakhon Pathom,
the ultimate provenance of the four other colossal
Buddhas (see Figs 1 and 2). Dhanit Yupho, then
Director-General of the Thai Fine Arts Department
(tenure 1956–68), corrected Damrong’s assertion in
his later study of the colossal stone Buddhas and
(Fig. 2) Buddha
Thailand, Wat Phra Men, Nakhon
Pathom, 7th–8th century
Current location: Wat Phra
Pathom Chedi (southern terrace),
Nakhon Pathom
White limestone, remodelled
with plaster
Height c. 375 cm
20
(Photograph: Nicolas Revire)
made no mention of Wat Phra Men, Nakhon Pathom,
as the place of discovery for the cross-piece (Revire,
2010, pp. 84–85).
Even though evidence supports the conclusion
that this fifth statue should not be grouped with the
i en
other four, Thai scholarship continues to follow Prince
Damrong and associates this fifth Buddha and its
cross-piece with the group of four from Wat Phra
Men (see, for example, Piriya, 2012, pp. 64–67; see
also Revire, 2013, p. 239). But the exact provenance
of this monumental Buddha, nowadays at Wat Na
Phra Men in Ayutthaya, some 100 kilometres by air
from Nakhon Pathom, remains uncertain. There is no
ta
tio
(Fig. 3) Buddha
Thailand, Nakhon
Pathom, 7th–8th
century
Current location:
Wat Na Phra Men,
Ayutthaya
Grey limestone,
remodelled with
ns
plaster
Height c. 420 cm
(Photograph: Paisarn
Piemmettawat,
courtesy River Books)
d
doubt, however, that it was transported to Ayutthaya Regardless, before being moved to Wat Na Phra
along with at least two other colossal Buddhas from Men, this fifth statue was installed in Wat Mahathat
Nakhon Pathom at an unknown date, even though at the very centre of Old Ayutthaya (see Fig. 3). Only
we do not know for sure when, why, and by whom during the reign of King Rama III (1824–51) did an
ra
the move was made. This issue raises the important
question of the mobility of art in ancient times, which
often confuses the archaeological record. According
to Dhanit Yupho (1967, pp. 14–15), such a transfer of
images could be compared to that at the beginning of
the Rattanakosin or Bangkok period when King Rama
I (r. 1782–1809) had hundreds of statues moved from
official decide to move the Buddha to Wat Na Phra
Men, on the northern outskirts of the town, where it
is still located and worshipped (Revire, 2010, p. 85,
no. 39). Based on its craftsmanship, size and material,
this Buddha icon must be categorically dissociated
from the group of four described above and cannot
have originally come from the same temple complex.
f
Sukhothai and the northern regions and installed in
temples in his new capital at Bangkok.
t Its strong stylistic links with the relief of the preaching
Buddha from Wat Sai, Nakhon Pathom (see Fig. 4),
21
Orientations | Volume 45 Number 3 | APRIL 2014

Or
however, lead to its assignment at a similar place of each one being assigned a cardinal direction as
origin, and date to the late 7th–early 8th century. follows:
I have elsewhere re-evaluated in depth the East—Kanakamuni/Akshobhya
symbolism of these monumental Buddhas from South—Kashyapa/Ratnasambhava
Nakhon Pathom. In brief, I have posited that the West—Shakyamuni/Amitabha

original arrangement at Wat Phra Men consisted
only of the four colossal Buddhas in white limestone
discussed above and seated against the central
structure of the monument, not five (Revire, 2010).
It is difficult to determine with certainty which
arrangement this group of four Buddhas might have
originally represented. However, drawing on different
Buddhist traditions and architectural practices
of the time, I infer that they might have mainly
corresponded to the group of past Buddhas of this
i en
North—Krakucchanda/Amoghasiddhi
In both schemes, however, it is necessary to get to a
five-Buddha organization. Therefore, one hypothesis
is that the ‘conceptual’ scheme at Wat Phra Men
actually included five Buddhas, the fifth one being
‘invisible’ and identified as Maitreya, following the
first exoteric interpretation, or Vairochana, if the
second esoteric understanding prevails. The fifth
Buddha of the centre—although ‘physically’ absent

ta
‘auspicious aeon’ (Skt bhadrakalpa) or, even perhaps, here—could have been embedded symbolically
the transcendental Jinas found in esoteric Buddhism, or imagined in the solid central structure of the

tio
(Fig. 5) Makara throne element
Thailand, Nakhon Pathom, 7th–8th century
Grey limestone
Height 49 cm, width 98 cm
Phra Pathom Chedi National Museum (626/2519)
(Photograph: Thierry Ollivier)

ns Amoghasiddhi
Krakucchanda

d ra Amitābha
Śākyamuni
Vairocana
Maitreya

Ratnasambhava
Akṣobhya
Kanakamuni

Kāśyapa

(Fig. 4) Relief depicting the enthroned Buddha preaching (Fig. 6) Reconstruction of the
Thailand, Wat Sai, Nakhon Pathom, 7th–8th century sacred enclosure of Wat Phra Men,
Grey limestone Nakhon Pathom, Thailand
N
Height 60 cm, width 111 cm (After Dupont, 1959, pl. 4)
Phra Pathom Chedi National Museum (19/635)
(Photograph: Thierry Ollivier)
f t
22 Figure 6 23
Orientations | Volume 45 Number 3 | APRIL 2014
Or
monument. This architectural scheme would hence
have formed a mandala-like structure, possibly
reflecting both exoteric and esoteric practices at the
same time (Fig. 6).
i en
Similar arrangements of four or five Buddhas
in bhadrasana, although scarce, are not unknown
in India. A low relief from Kanheri cave 90,
Maharashtra, shows the central pendant-legged
Buddha surrounded by four identical figures in
the four corners of the composition (Revire, 2010,
fig. 12). Moreover, a unique miniature chaitya
from Nalanda, Bihar, stylistically assigned to the
early Pala period (c. 8th–10th century), exhibits
a similar Buddha seated in a niche and repeated
ta
identically on four sides (Fig. 7). The only noticeable
difference from our Nakhon Pathom sculptures
is that, in India, the Bhadrasana Buddhas always
perform the gesture of ‘turning the Wheel of the
Law’ with both hands (Skt dharmachakramudra or
dharmachakrapravartanamudra), a hand gesture
practically unknown in Dvaravati art, but one that is
tio
(Fig. 7) Miniature chaitya with Buddha in niche
regularly found in Javanese Buddhist art (Griffiths, India, Nalanda, Bihar, c. 8th–10th century
Revire and Sanyal, 2013). It is therefore difficult Black stone
Height c. 20 cm
to assume any direct influence from ancient India
Archaeological Museum Nalanda
to Dvaravati regarding this iconography. For this (Photograph: John C. and Susan L. Huntington,
reason, I have endeavoured to search elsewhere courtesy of The Huntington Photographic Archive)
and have located in early Tang China a possible
prototype with the mysterious and short-lived ‘King
Udayana’ sculptures at the Longmen caves, dated by
ns
inscriptions to circa 655–80 (Revire, 2011, 2012b), but
Piriya Krairiksh, The Roots of Thai Art, Bangkok, 2012.
this takes us well beyond the scope of the present Nicolas Revire, ‘Iconographical Issues in the
paper. Archeology of Wat Phra Men, Nakhon Pathom’,
Journal of the Siam Society vol. 98 (2010): 75–115.
Nicolas Revire is a PhD candidate at Paris 3–Sorbonne —, ‘Some Reconsiderations on Pendant-legged
nouvelle, and a visiting lecturer at Thammasat Buddha Images in the Dvāravatī Artistic Tradition’,
University, Bangkok. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association
vol. 31 (2011): 37–49.
Selected bibliography —, ‘A Comprehensive Study of Bhadrāsana Buddha
Images from First-Millennium Thailand’, Rian Thai:
d

Pierre Baptiste and Thierry Zéphir, eds. Dvāravatī : aux
sources du bouddhisme en Thaïlande, Paris, 2009.
Robert L. Brown, ‘Telling the Story in Art of the
Monkey’s Gift of Honey to the Buddha’, Bulletin of
International Journal of Thai Studies vol. 5 (2012a):
91–152.
—, ‘New Perspectives on the Origin and Spread of
Bhadrāsana Buddhas throughout Southeast
ra

the Asia Institute n. s./vol. 23 (2009): 43–52.
Dhanit Yupho, Quartzite Buddha Images of the
Dvāravatī Period, Bangkok, 1967.
Pierre Dupont, L’archéologie mône de Dvāravatī, Paris,
1959.
Arlo Griffiths, Nicolas Revire and Rajat Sanyal,
‘An Inscribed Bronze Sculpture of a Buddha
Asia (7th–8th centuries)’, in Mai Lin Tjoa-
Bonatz, Andreas Reinecke and Dominik Bonatz,
eds, Connecting Empires and States. Selected
Papers from the 13th Conference of the European
Association of Southeast Asian Archaeologists, vol.
2, Singapore, 2012b, pp. 127–43.
—, ‘Review Article: Piriya Krairiksh, The Roots of Thai
f

in bhadrāsana at Museum Ranggawarsita in Art, translated by Narisa Chakrabongse (Bangkok:

Semarang (Central Java, Indonesia)’, Arts Asiatiques River Books, 2012)’, Journal of the Siam Society vol.
vol. 68 (2013): 3–26. 101 (2013): 233–42.
t

24