Szilágyi András (szerk.): Ars Decorativa 24. (Budapest, 2006)

Béla KELÉNYI: Two Trunks from London. Hungarian aspects of the 'discovery' of Nepalese art

artefacts through Schwaiger. Our assumption that Havell and Schwaiger were on good terms is corroborated by an account given by Felvinczi Takács, who on a visit made during a study tour to India, found 'souvenirs' from Havell at Schwaiger's as late as 1936.

26 Regrettably, during my short stay in Calcutta in 1998, I could find no documents relating to the 1908 exhibition at the school of art there. All I learned was that the artefacts belonging to the Calcutta Art Gallery had since passed into the possession of the Indian Museum, where I was able to identify some of the pieces presented in Havell's book. On the other hand, in the General Register of the Indian Museum I found only a few objects that had come from Schwaiger in 1910, and none of these was Nepalese.

27 It was not easy to collect Nepalese artefacts during those years. This is vividly illustrated by the fact that the Journal of Indian Art and Industry, which supplied the most modern presentation and systématisation of the applied arts practised in India and Southeast Asia, could give only very few examples of Nepalese art.

28 In his long monograph on the significance of the Hopp Museum, Zoltán Felvinczi Takács analysed Schwaiger's various donations, making the point that Nepalese and Tibetan artefacts scarcely differed from each other.

29 Even in 1936 he found it necessary to mention that Schwaiger had been 'the first' to start collecting Nepalese works of art, and that he did so in a most original way: 'He was the first person to deal with the art of Nepal. He made friends with Himalayan natives; he had them stay at his house, and they in return took all their valuable works of art to him. [...] Splendid artefacts in the Indian, Tibetan and Nepalese sections of British and American museums derive from him.'

30 Ervin Baktay, who visited Schwaiger in Delhi in the late 1920s, was of the same opinion: 'Schwaiger [...] specialised, as it were, in Nepalese artefacts, which were little known at that time. With his remarkable artistic taste and practical skills, he established contact with itinerant Nepalese traders; they were always warmly welcomed by him, found accommodation at his house in Delhi and took Nepalese works of art to him readily.'

31 (111. 2) When classifying material that came to the Hopp Museum, Baktay was able to identify artefacts as Nepalese by relying on information concerning Schwaiger's immediate contacts.

32 However, the main evidence for Schwaiger's being in possession of Nepalese art works dates from as early as the first years of the 20"' century, i.e. from a time when there were hardly any Nepalese artefacts in the major Western (or Hungarian) collections.

33 This evidence is in the form of his first donation (made in 1914) to the Museum of Applied Arts in Budapest.

34 In the August of that year, Dr. József Schwaiger, a judge in Szeged, informed Jenő Radisics, the director of the Museum of Applied Arts, that his (Schwaiger's) 'brother, Imre, has sent two trunks of artefacts to the Museum from London'.

35 However, the list compiled by Imre Schwaiger mentions no more than nineteen artefacts, of which four are of European origin and most of the rest items of Nepalese and Tibetan jewellery.

36 However, according to the General Register of the Museum of Applied Arts, fiftythree artefacts were donated at that time, not only items of jewellery, but also Nepalese statuettes, Gandhara statues, and works of Indian applied art.

37 The Museum of Applied Arts found these artefacts so special that in 1915 it staged an exhibition to display them.

38 Without doubt, it was the statuettes that constituted the most extraordinary part of the donation. The Nepalese statues sent by Schwaiger differ from the works once held by the Calcutta Art Gallery in that there is no early artefact among them (Schwaiger donated earlier works later on), but the styles of the later works are highly similar. It seems obvious that Schwaiger was at this time turning his attention mainly to external, decorative effects. Consequently, all the statues are very spectacular yet late (island 19

lh-century) artefacts. In Newar Buddhism, the worship of Manjusri bodhisattva is highly popular: as the Svayambhü-puräna says, it was he who created the Kathmandu Valley.

39 The four-faced, eighthanded Dharmadhätu Vägisvara Manjughosa is a Tantric form of the bodhisattva often depicted