Tamil Nadu, Kaveri delta region
Mid- to late-tenth century CE
Bronze; 57.8 x 24.1 x 24.7 cm
(22-3/4 x 9-1/2 x 9-3/4 in.)
Gift of F. B. Vanderhoef, Jr. in honor of Charles W. Millard, 91.23
Provenance: Acquired 10 June 1991.

As beautifully ornamented as the Consort Goddess appears in the museum, she would have been further adorned in her original context with fresh flowers, rich silks and brocades, and colorful gemstones (Figs. 9, 10, 11, 12, 55). During certain festivals, she would have been the focus of extravagant processions, carried high above the crowd by sticks inserted through the lugs on the sculpture’s base.1 Members of the temple staff may have even carried an umbrella over her to celebrate her status as a royal figure.

While ornamented and paraded among devotees, this female consort would have been treated as a living god, and devotees would have flocked to experience darshan, the spiritual process of seeing and being seen by the goddess.2 After the festival, such bronze sculptures were stored in the temple, but not worshipped. Rather, the divine essence would have been transferred from the bronze to the immobile stone sculpture in the sanctum. The bronze figure, while awaiting the next festival, would have appeared as she does today in the museum.

This elegantly dressed and bejeweled figure, typical of the Chola period, would have been placed next to a male deity to whom she was a consort. Her passive pose, closed eyes, and lack of specific attributes suggest that she is presented as a married goddess, not an independent one worshipped in her own right. Typically, her pose and jewelry would have matched those of her partner, making their relationship explicit to the viewer.3

This bronze may depict Parvati standing beside her husband Shiva; most female bronze figures from the Chola period are identified as such. However, this identification cannot be certain. Unless female consort figures like this one are found with a corresponding god, it is difficult to determine their specific identities. It is just as likely that the bronze depicts other consorts such as Lakshmi, Rukmini, or Satayabhama, who accompanied Vishnu and Krishna respectively.4

Comparisons with dated bronzes suggest that the Ackland sculpture was created in the tenth century, early in the Chola reign. She resembles both the inscribed Devi from Karaiviram, dated to 917 CE, and the Uma Parameshvari, dated to 1012 CE in her relaxed pose with the body fairly upright.5 The Ackland figure tucks her hips under so that the sculpture occupies little horizontal space. Her jewelry melts into the body, unlike the later harder treatment of jewelry on the surface of the body. Her quiet elegance is characteristic of the earlier Chola period. MCKB

1 Joanne Punzo Waghorne, “Dressing the Body of God: South Indian Bronze Sculpture in Its Temple Setting,” Asian Art (Summer 1992): 9–33, provides an excellent description of festival bronzes in use.
2 Diana Eck, Darsan: Seeing the Divine Image in India, 2nd ed. (Chambersburg, Pa.: Anima Press, 1985). There would have been an elaborate ritual to bring the bronze to life. For an explanation of the processes involved, see Richard Davis, “Loss and Recovery of Ritual Self Among Hindu Images,” Journal of Ritual Studies 6.1 (1992): 43–61.
3 See the bronze Shiva with Parvati from the Cleveland Museum of Art, reproduced in Vidya Dehejia, Art of the Imperial Cholas (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), fig. 27. The Ackland figure, however, has her own base, unlike the Cleveland Parvati.
4 Oral communication from Padma Kaimal, 09/11/2001.
5 See R. Nagaswamy, Masterpieces of Early South Indian Bronzes (New Delhi: National Museum, 1983), fig. 20 and plate 2. I thank Padma Kaimal in helping me determine a date for this bronze sculpture.