Szilágyi András (szerk.): Ars Decorativa 19. (Budapest, 2000)
Béla KELÉNYI: Biographical Details from the Year of the Fire-Monkey
fdGa ' rong] du grfvja skor mdzad pa / 31 31. "He entered the seminary at Garong monastery." fNgamJ rings du grfvja skor mdzad pa / 32 32. "He entered the seminary at Ngamring monastery." Jo nang du Phyogs legs par Dus 'khor spf=bjyaf-ojr drug gi 'khrid sogs gsan pa / 33 33. "At Choglekpa's school* at the Jonang monastery he studied the six yogas of the Kalacakra tantra." * Although Jamyang also gives the above mentioned name, as Tucci notes, the master's name is Phyogs las mam rgyal in the Tibetan biographies. sPyi lhas par lam rim sogs gsan pa / 34 34. "At Chilha monastery he studied the Lamrim." 35. There is no caption to Scene 35. sNar thang du flo chen Don] bzang la mngon par mdzod gsan pa / 36. "At Narthang monastery he studied the Abhidharmakosha under the great translator Döndub Zangpo." gNas sf=rjnying du grfvja skor mdzad pa 37. "He entered the seminary at Nenying monastery." Nya dbon Kun dga ' dpal la phar phyin gsan pa / 38 38. "[In Tsechen] he studied the Prajnaparamita under Nyapön Künga Pel." Determining the style of a picture of this type is especially difficult, since its composition repeats woodcut designs again and again, 15 and only from the background — in other words, from the painted parts of the landscape - is it possible to infer a particular stylistic trend. With regard to a thangkha of similar style kept in the Rubin collection and likewise originating from a series depicting the life of Tsongkhapa, the authors remark merely that it differs from the "New Menri"style customary in Middle Tibet at this time. 16 According to Rhy and Thurman, the scroll was made during the first half of the 19 th century, probably in Derge, in Eastern Tibet; it is, however, difficult to discover on it marks of expressedly Eastern Tibetan styles. Although Pratapaditya Pal speaks of a rich band of colour hues regarding a Middle Tibetan thangka made in the 18 th /19 th century and currently held by the National Gallery of Canada, 18 on this, too, it is hard to discover stylistic marks. Finally, an interesting stylistic comparison is afforded by contrasting the Rév thangkha with a painted scroll bearing the same number in the series belonging to the collection at the Musée Guimet. Perhaps the most striking difference is that while on the earlier Guimet thangkha only the person of Tsongkhapa is the colour of gold (this relates both to the main protagonist and to the different scenes from his life), on the Rév thangka, which is a great deal later, the main protagonist is white, although Tsongkhapa's teachers in the smaller scenes are also painted in gold. (This, of course, could have depended on what the customer wanted, and could have been a function of his financial means.) While the Guimet thangka is in any case an artistically mature work, the Budapest thangka seems to be a somewhat provincial version. This is suggested not only by the simplified painting of the various figures, but also by the painting of the background. Although the Budapest scroll was clearly brought to Hungary from Middle Tibet, solutions used in various landscape parts (the green of the background, shapes of the trees, etc.) indicate that it may have actually been made in Eastern Tibet. This may also be suggested not only by the missing Tibetan captions, but also by the Chinese character featuring in Scene 27.
