廖 旸
论文题目：克孜尔石窟壁画分期与年代问题研究
作者简介：廖 旸，女，1972年08月出生，1998年09月师从于中央美术学院金维诺教授，于2001年07月获博士学位。
摘 要
克孜尔石窟壁画的年代是研究西域美术史和中国佛教美术史的基础课题之一。近百年来，已经产生了若干种分期断代意见。目前，勘测著录的普遍开展，图像材料的大量刊布，个案研究的深入进行，为重新审视这一问题提供了新的条件。
针对历史与宗教文献记载有限的现实条件，本文利用洞窟内现存画面、被揭取的壁画（包括已毁但有图像传世的部分）以及洞窟内清理出的木板画等材料，参考早期的考察记录，将壁画放置在洞窟的建筑空间里来进行考察，试图还原壁画在石窟寺整体中所演绎的角色，结合对龟兹佛学与部派演变的认识，将图像程序与图像功能确立为分期的首要标准。同时对图像结构与装饰母题、壁画风格与绘制技法的发展演变进行关注。在年代方面，围绕一些经多方研究得到普遍认同的样本窟，推断出每一期壁画大致的绝对时间。此外，还将借助于洞窟组合、打破关系、重绘现象等方面的石窟寺考古成果，关心碳十四年代测定数据，采用壁画榜题的识读成果，重视与龟兹地区的其它石窟以及龟兹周边的佛教文化艺术中心（如以东的焉耆、高昌、敦煌与以西的巴米扬石窟）进行对照比较。从这样的角度出发，将克孜尔石窟壁画的主要绘制时段分为四期。
第一期（4世纪晚期至5世纪中叶）。这一时期为了配合禅观修行，出现了帝释窟禅定、山岳禅定以及和禅修关系密切的弥勒菩萨形象。画面的视觉效果和图像结构表现出犍陀罗雕塑的影响；河西石窟中最早的天梯山北凉洞窟与炳灵寺西秦洞窟，与克孜尔此期壁画的渊源关系最为明显。
第二期（5世纪中叶至6世纪中叶）。在中心柱窟纵轴线上，主室正龛帝释窟说法、后甬道后壁涅槃以及主室前壁的弥勒形成一个完整的体系，构造出法灭－弥勒救世的图像学体系。壁画上体现的舍利与佛塔崇拜引人注目，中心柱作为塔的象征是洞窟之内礼拜的对象。
第三期（6世纪中叶至7世纪上半叶）。供养人像地位大幅度提高，并出现在甬道侧壁这样的重要位置，王权崇拜愈演愈炽。护持正法、降伏外道成为此期壁画的重要内容，护神形象大量涌现。以立佛为中心的画面结构逐渐形成。中心柱的地位呈现出下降的倾向。出现了一些大乘佛教的迹象（如千佛图），但可能是短暂的、次要的。
第四期（7世纪中期）。中心柱由塔的象征降低为正龛主尊塑像的依托，绕塔柱礼拜实质上转变为绕佛像礼拜。涅槃－弥勒体系解构，以立佛为主体的誓愿图与继承传统方格坐佛为主体的誓愿图渐见流行。王权崇拜仍在继续，并直接将供养人表现在说法图或誓愿画内。图像所据文本上，根本说一切有部的痕迹越来越明显。唐、突厥与吐蕃在龟兹地区的长时间争夺可能是克孜尔石窟陷于衰微的重要原因之一，在一些壁画细节上，可以见到异质文化进入龟兹地区的苗头。
Studies on the Chronology
for the Kizil Mural Paintings
(ABSTRACT)
When researching the West
Region art or Chinese Buddhist art, it is one of the key and fundamental tasks
to date the Kizil wall paintings. Many scholars have advocated their theories since 1912. Investigations in situ, publications of images and
case studies up to now are adequate enough to allow
us to reconsider this question.
Besides extremely limited
historical and religious textual evidences and the early descriptions, we will
examine the wall paintings (including what is left in
Kizil and what has been cut off) and some panel paintings found there. Since painting, sculpture together with
architecture construct a rock-cut sanctuary as a whole, the wall paintings must be explored
within the architectural space in the interest of recovering the role it
played. Combined with the knowledge of the Buddhist doctrine and sects existing
in Kutscha, pictorial program and the image's function are the prime criteria
for a timeline analysis. In the next place, the compositional devices, the
decorative motifs, the style and the techniques will also be taken into
account. Based on some well-researched sample caves, approximate time series could be
proposed. It's absolutely necessary to compare Kizil with the adjacent Buddhist
art centers, for example, Karashar, Turfan and Dunhuang to the east, and Bāmiyān to the
west. Furthermore, we'll count on the methods and scholarship in other fields, such as
archaeology and epigraphy. In light of such an approach, Kizil mural
paintings could be divided into four groups.
Phase I: late fourth century - middle fifth century. Śākyamuni contemplating at the Indraśilāguhā, monks meditating in the mountains and Boddhisattva Maitreya -- which are related to dhyāna -- prevail. The earliest paintings are in style and composition indebted to the Gandhāran sculptures. Meanwhile, Northern Liang caves at Tiantishan and West Qin caves at Binglingsi are relatively close to this group.
Phase II: middle fifth - middle sixth centuries. On the fore-and-aft axis, Śākyamuni preaching at the Indraśilāguhā (shrine), Nirvāna scene (back passage) and Boddhisattva Maitreya (front wall) jointly build an integrated scheme, in order to represent the Buddhist theory about the Dharm's destruction and Maitreya the Saviour. The central-pillar is worshipped as a indication of stūpa, and Śarīra and stūpa cult embodied on the paintings was remarkable.
Phase III: middle sixth - second half of seventh centuries. Portraits of the patrons become more and more important and magnificent, kingship veneration more and more enthusiastic. Gods of sorts appear frequently, and all kinds of the legends depicting how the Buddha defeated the tīrthakas and māras are emphasized. Organization with a standing Buddha in the center begins to spread. the significance of central-pillar turns obscure. The thousand Buddhas revealed the Mahāyāna's impact, which is probably transient and subordinate.
Phase IV: middle seventh century. In many cases the central-pillar serves merely as a wall to which the icon clings. The iconological scheme -- Nirvāna and Maitreya -- was deconstructed, while Pranidhi- scenes dominate instead. Kingship veneration carries on, and patrons appear in the preaching scenes or Pranidhibilds. The texts on which the images are based likely belong to Mūla-sarvāstivādin. The long- term warfare between the Tang government, Turks and Tibetans maybe resulted in the decline of Kizil Caves; some painting details implicate that heterogeneous cultural elements had entered Kutscha region.
