the tibetan himalayan style 143
grated into the Buddhist pantheon as protective deities (fig. 4.5).44 As already
noted, pan-Indian protective deities figure prominently in the iconographic
pantheon associated with the Tibetan Himalayan Style.
Manuscripts were also an important medium for cultural transfer. Scherrer-
Schaub has discussed similarities between manuscripts from the Tabo ‘Kanjur’,
and Tibetan manuscripts in Dunhuang.45 While it remains difficult to recon-
struct the mechanics and chronology of the transfer of visual traditions from
Central Asia to Western Tibet either directly or via Central Tibet, or both ways,
there is evidence that provides hints of stages in this process, as seen in the
style of the sculptures of Keru temple (Tib. Ke ru lha khang) and the pillar from
Purang in West Tibet.46
4 Patronage and the Tibetan Himalayan Style
Several recent articles already quoted above have discussed the heterogeneous
religious atmosphere, which can be seen in the iconographic programme in
the Tabo entry hall. Only one example, recently discussed in the literature,
is the meaning of the left-turning swastika prominently displayed on the seat
of many of the Tabo monks. The meaning and function of the left-turning
swastika, a prominent symbol of Bön, is still not understood.
The compositions depicting the historical figures on both the North and
South walls in the Tabo entry hall show a far more loosely structured political
44 Brahmanical or local gods were frequently painted on Khotanese wooden panels.
According to Williams, Joanna, “The Iconography of Khotanese Painting,” East and
West New Series 23.1–2 (1973): 116, Śiva and Gaṇeśa were the first Hindu gods regularly
integrated in Buddhist art in Khotan.
45 Scherrer-Schaub, Cristina, “Towards a Methodology for the Study of Old Tibetan
Manuscripts: Dunhuang and Tabo,” in Tabo Studies II. Manuscripts, Texts, Inscriptions,
and the Arts, ed. Cristina Scherrer-Schaub and Ernst Steinkellner (Rome: Istituto Italiano
per l’Africa e l’Oriente, 1999), 27: “[.. .] some of the Tabo mss present striking similarities
with the Dunhuang mss, both as far as formal characteristics are concerned, and as to
their philological filiations and we assume that they constitute the oldest part of the Tabo
collection, [.. .]”. Both manuscript collections use mostly hemp paper.
46 For a discussion of the Avalokiteśvara pillar from Purang and the importance of the Dro
clan in this context, see the explanations above and also Jahoda, and Papa-Kalantari,
“Eine frühe buddhistische Steinstele (rdo ring) in sPu rang, Westtibet,” 349–400.