Bura Standing Female Figure, 1100 CE - 1300 CE
Terracotta
14
GD.112 (LSO)
This imposing ceramic figure was made by one of the most inscrutable groups in pre-colonial Africa: the Bura. Most Bura pieces are either cephalomorphic or phallomorphic, and are additionally deconstructed...
This imposing ceramic figure was made by one of the most inscrutable groups in pre-colonial Africa: the Bura. Most Bura pieces are either cephalomorphic or phallomorphic, and are additionally deconstructed to the point of abstraction. Fuller length figures, especially those with any detail below the neck, are vanishingly rare. This is therefore a notable piece of Bura art. It is made in the likeness of a figure of indeterminate sex, comparatively broad and flat and a thin cross-section. The face is broad with a peaked top and a chin that merges with the neck. The face is archaic, with coffee-bean eyes and mouth, a sharp nose and large brows. The ears lie low, almost at the level of the neck, and the hair is rendered as a single eminence in the dead centre of the brow. Detail beneath the neck is varied. The limbs are short, the trunk elongated. Pressure moulding around the thighs has produced a slightly prominent abdomen – perhaps a marker of wealth – and there is a groove in the midline from the umbilicus to the chest. The hands and feet are nugatory. The trunk is decorated with breasts, and four other small eminences of unknown purpose. The rear is flat, so it may have been designed for adoration as a shrine piece or similar.
The Bura are a true paradox: almost nothing is known of this shadowy Nigerian/Malian group. They appear to have originated in the first half of the first millennium AD, although the only archaeologically-excavated site (Nyamey) dates between the 14th and 16th centuries. They are contemporary with – and probably related to – the Djenne Kingdom, the Koma, the Teneku and a satellite culture known as the Inland Niger Delta. Insofar as can be ascertained, the Bura share certain characteristics with these groups; for our purposes, these include extensive ceramic and stone sculptural traditions. The Bura appear to have been sedentary agriculturists who buried their dead in tall, conical urns, often surmounted by small figures. Their utilitarian vessels are usually plain, while other “containers” – the function of which is not understood – are often decorated with incised and stamped patterns. Their best-known art form is radically reductivist anthropomorphic stone statues, with heads rendered as squares, triangles and ovals, with the body suggested by a columnar, monolithic shape beneath. Phallic objects are also known; some phallomorphic objects may have been staffs, perhaps regalia pertaining to leaders of Bura groups. Ceramic heads are usually more complex than their stone counterparts, with incised decoration and variable treatment of facial proportions and features. There are a few very rare equestrian figures, which bear some resemblance to Djenne pieces; almost no intact human or equestrian figures are known. The range of figures is so large that it presumably indicates differing geographical and temporal trends in aesthetics within the Bura polity. Equally, similar figures with different scarifications of coiffures could imply production by a range of different workshops or areas. However, without more complete contextual information it is impossible to explore this possibility, and it is necessary to glean what we can from the art itself.
The role of Bura art is almost totally obscure. Equestrian figures probably represent high status individuals, and the very few full-body representations of humans may be portraits or ancestor figures. Intuitively – as with so many other groups both inside and beyond Africa – figures with exaggerated sexual characteristics would tend to be associated with fertility and fecundity, as would any artefact modelled in the shape of pudenda (although the sceptre-like qualities of some such pieces should be noted – see above). The distribution of decoration on some ceramic pieces (notably phalluses) may suggest that they were designed to be viewed from one angle only – perhaps as adorational pieces. This is true of decorated urns that have no obvious secular importance. Stone figures could have been stuck in the ground, perhaps as portable representations of deities or similar. Many pieces are believed to have been found in burials, perhaps implying an importance that would have been linked to social standing and status.
This is an ornate and unusual Bura sculpture, and a striking and attractive piece of ancient art from one of Africa’s lost civilisations.
The Bura are a true paradox: almost nothing is known of this shadowy Nigerian/Malian group. They appear to have originated in the first half of the first millennium AD, although the only archaeologically-excavated site (Nyamey) dates between the 14th and 16th centuries. They are contemporary with – and probably related to – the Djenne Kingdom, the Koma, the Teneku and a satellite culture known as the Inland Niger Delta. Insofar as can be ascertained, the Bura share certain characteristics with these groups; for our purposes, these include extensive ceramic and stone sculptural traditions. The Bura appear to have been sedentary agriculturists who buried their dead in tall, conical urns, often surmounted by small figures. Their utilitarian vessels are usually plain, while other “containers” – the function of which is not understood – are often decorated with incised and stamped patterns. Their best-known art form is radically reductivist anthropomorphic stone statues, with heads rendered as squares, triangles and ovals, with the body suggested by a columnar, monolithic shape beneath. Phallic objects are also known; some phallomorphic objects may have been staffs, perhaps regalia pertaining to leaders of Bura groups. Ceramic heads are usually more complex than their stone counterparts, with incised decoration and variable treatment of facial proportions and features. There are a few very rare equestrian figures, which bear some resemblance to Djenne pieces; almost no intact human or equestrian figures are known. The range of figures is so large that it presumably indicates differing geographical and temporal trends in aesthetics within the Bura polity. Equally, similar figures with different scarifications of coiffures could imply production by a range of different workshops or areas. However, without more complete contextual information it is impossible to explore this possibility, and it is necessary to glean what we can from the art itself.
The role of Bura art is almost totally obscure. Equestrian figures probably represent high status individuals, and the very few full-body representations of humans may be portraits or ancestor figures. Intuitively – as with so many other groups both inside and beyond Africa – figures with exaggerated sexual characteristics would tend to be associated with fertility and fecundity, as would any artefact modelled in the shape of pudenda (although the sceptre-like qualities of some such pieces should be noted – see above). The distribution of decoration on some ceramic pieces (notably phalluses) may suggest that they were designed to be viewed from one angle only – perhaps as adorational pieces. This is true of decorated urns that have no obvious secular importance. Stone figures could have been stuck in the ground, perhaps as portable representations of deities or similar. Many pieces are believed to have been found in burials, perhaps implying an importance that would have been linked to social standing and status.
This is an ornate and unusual Bura sculpture, and a striking and attractive piece of ancient art from one of Africa’s lost civilisations.