Talk:Greco-Buddhist art

Removed Section regarding influence

Removed the part that said Greco-Buddhist art influenced China, Korea, and Japan. East Asian art is NOT influenced by Greco-Buddhist art in any way, and only lightly influenced Theravada Buddhist art. Must more influence comes from Daoism (Zen Buddhism forming from a combination of Daoism and Mahayana) Intranetusa 21:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hair

So Buddha's curly hair is reminiscent of Mediterranean hairstyle. I read somewhere that this is due to the Dravidian origin of prince Gautama. So what do you think? Meursault2004 13:07, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Buddha's hair is a typical babylonial style of depicting the human hair , the protruding knobs on the surface can be seen in babylonian and later persian statues, it further nullifies the argument that these are greek statues. Rameezraja001 (talk) 17:46, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Mersault. How about Physical characteristics of the Buddha or Gautama Buddha? 61.213.82.143 13:17, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. According to the article Gautama Buddha, he was probably an Aryan (i.e. Indo-European) as he was a kshatriya. Off course, so he was not of Dravidian origin (at least not purely). Meursault2004 15:58, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Featured article candidates

What a fantastic article. Are the authors aiming to nominate it as a Featured article? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:17, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Map

Could you add a map showing the gradual extension of these styles for those who don't know exactly were those empires are?

Version 0.7

I'd love to include this article - it's exactly the kind of article we need (serious academic topic, much non-Western content, lots of content) but I'm rather concerned that it needs better referencing. There are a few inline refs, but I think such a long article needs more - the sources may be in the general refs, and just need pulling out by someone with those sources available. There is even one section tagged with a cleanup tag (needing refs.), and overall these things make it C-Class, not B. A little bit of work should make it a B, though, then it would be ready to be included in our offline releases, I think. Walkerma (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Impact on Indian Art

The article seems to suggest that deities in India were never depicted in human form before the influence of Greco-Buddhist art. I have two questions regarding that claim:
1. Is that what the article is actually saying? If not, I think some clarification may be needed.
2. If so, is the statement correct? In other words, were there really no Indian depictions of deities in human form previous to the arrival of Greeks and their art in Bactria and northwest India/Pakistan? I'm not saying it's necessarily wrong, it just sounds odd to me. Maitreya (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

ΒΟΥΔΙΣΜΟΣ

ΕΛΛΗΝ0ΒΟΥΔΙΣΜΟΣ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.138.191.131 (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Banerjee

>Banerjee in "Hellenism in India"

A source must be given.--Gleb95 (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Very dishonest article

what is buddhist art? where did it originate? and why is it being called that buddhistic characteristics are from central asia? buddhist art is indian, not greek or central asian, and buddhist art originated from india not indo greece or central asia.

these statues are buddhist indian statues with greek elements of influence, how does that make it a greek art? its assimilation of greek features in an typically indian statuary.

what i understand and get the general idea is:

Greeks settlers came to periphery of indian sub continent and made cities like ai khanoum

Greek settlers produced pre buddhist arts like posidon (which are very few in quantity)

Greek settlers became buddhist by the religious proliferation of king ashoka

ashoka lays foundation of indian buddhist statuary

greeks become patrons and fund the monuments of sanchi and bharut stupas

greeks adopt buddhist arts to proliferate buddhist statuary in ai khanum

Greek settlers started making indian buddhist statues while incorporating greek elements

buddhistic statues start proliferating due to buddhist religion and world wide spread of buddhist art

as the time goes on greek elements in gandhara statues fade away and incorporate more and more indian stylistic elements?

The article seem to also generalise buddhist art as derivative of greek arts.

the prominent example of indian stylistic influence is the bindi buddha is wearing which is an indian culture, the bodhisatva is not displaying six packs of posidon rather natural body shape and draping indian style clothes and indian styled jewelry ornaments. The genstues and the postures are typically indian and have never been greek styles.

the greek art is not realistic, it is derived from idealistic form of babylonian arts where it depicts idealistic human features, which doesnt seem to be the case in buddhist statues as compared to greek posidon statues.

the article seems to be suggesting otherwise which is a typical reflection of british stereotypical eurocentric dishonesty nothing else.Rameezraja001 (talk) 17:37, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Title should be changed to Gandhara arts

i suggest the title of this article should be changed to gandhara arts to reflect more realistically on the subject which is art of gandhara region. The present title suggest eurocentric bias nothing else. Some members are also shoving greek god statues into this article, i suggest to make a different aticle which reflects on greek influence on central asian arts. Rameezraja001 (talk) 02:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree. It is the most neutral. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 18:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC))

• Oppose Unfortunately, Rameezraja001's edits are rarely about neutrality. Johnbod (talk) 18:51, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose not sure how I missed this back in August. But no, we shouldn't be doing that. Simonm223 (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rameezraja001 and Simonm223: can you guys provide references and sources why Gandharan art is less accurate than Greco-Buddhist art? (Highpeaks35 (talk) 22:23, 3 October 2018 (UTC))

Gandharan arts is more accurate because greco garbage is a eurocentric nonsense, in our schoools in south asia, we are always taught gandharan arts and not greco buddhist arts, you can also check encyclopedia britannica where the article is under the title of gandharan arts. labelling south asian buddhist art as some european arts is nonsense, and very eurocentric. But i care less about wikipedia and its politics, you can keep pulling your BS eurocentric BS here, nobody cares, as we dont learn that in our schools and we learn as gandharan arts and that should be enough to educate our youth. The hilarious thing is, there is a table about greco garbage where the indian arts of south east asia are also labelled as greco garbage, which is so extremely hilarious to say the least. this whole greco garbage is nothing but eurocentric politics played in wikipedia. If you have a chance to visit borobodur stupa, or prambanan temple or the khmer angkor wat, the guides dont tell you its greco garbage art descended from europeans, but its indian/ south asian. so you eurocentrics should better start paying bribes to all the south east asian guides to change this historical art fact into greco european stuff

regards. Rameezraja001 (talk) 04:10, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Lorstaking, Rao Ravindra, Shrikanthv, Pratyush, Accesscrawl, Satpal Dandiwal, Razer2115, and Capitals00: can you guys please provide your inputs. I know you guys were involved in similar debates. (Highpeaks35 (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC))

No WP:CANVASSING please! Johnbod (talk) 02:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

• One very good reason not to make the move is that Art of Gandhara is only a part of this subject. The current article ranges much wider. Rameezraja001 has already tried to move the article without discussion twice, to various titles. Johnbod (talk) 02:31, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
• "Gandhara arts" is a more WP:COMMON name.[1][2][3] Prevalence of the current title is mostly a production of Wikipedia mirrors and thus not a common name. Comments like "Rameezraja001's edits are rarely about neutrality" never help because they are about the user conduct than the content being discussed. Focus on content please and @Rameezraja001: you can start an official page move request, see WP:RM. Accesscrawl (talk) 04:51, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

india, central asia, china, japan, south east asia maybe even mars, titan, universe

why spare mars mate? greco- art reached even titan, you just need to send a probe to titan and you will discover greco art in titan, aliens are appreciating greco arts, maybe someday voyager will come across greco arts too. Rameezraja001 (talk) 07:55, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 4 October 2018

Greco-Buddhist art → Gandhara Art – "Gandhara art" is a more WP:COMMON name.[4][5][6] Prevalence of the current title is mostly a production of Wikipedia mirrors and thus not a common name.. Rameezraja001 (talk) 05:22, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

@Rameezraja001: Can you consider changing your proposal? "Gandhara Arts" is clearly a more common name than "Greco-Buddhist art", but the "Gandhara art" is the most common one. I would prefer if you replace every mention of "Gandhara Arts" to "Gandhara art" above. Lorstaking (talk) 05:49, 4 October 2018 (UTC)