Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Manasara Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Manasara-Shilpashastra; III. Manasara on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Manasara: Translation; V. Architecture of Manasara: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v6.c42.s1.78

Mānasāra Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Mānasāra-Śilpaśāstra; III. Mānasāra on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Mānasāra: Translation; V. Architecture of Mānasāra: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v6.c42.s1.78

Language
English

v6.c42.s1.78

The publication of the *Mānasāra*, text and translation each forming a bulky volume, accompanied by a third one containing the plates, was preceded by two other contributions from the pen of Dr. Acharya, his *Dictionary of Hindu Architecture* and *Indian Architecture according to Mānasāra Śilpa-śāstra* (both s.a., probably 1927 and 1928 respectively). The former work brought an alphabetically arranged terminology of Indian technics, art, settlements, etc., with ample quotations from texts and inscriptions, and in two appendices a valuable list of Sanskrit works on architecture and of 'historical architects, with short notes on their works.' The second book was a preparatory one in regard to the present three volumes, giving a survey of *Śilpa-śāstra*, summaries and synopses of some texts, especially of the *Mānasāra*, of its position in the literature, drawing a comparison with Vitruvius, and finally summing up all the indications of the age of *Mānasāra*; an appendix notes down a florilegium of grammatical peculiarities, to use an euphemistic expression, what Dr. Acharya himself calls a 'barbarous' Sanskrit. All that extensive work goes back to the year 1914, when Dr. Acharya took up what Professor Rapson predicted to him would become a life's undertaking. Now the scholar may be proud of having published the volumes, though they, according to his modesty, 'do not claim to be other than provisional.' No doubt, much more will have to be done in that field, but the credit of 'beginning of a new line of Indology, which, it may be perhaps hoped, is likely to prove not merely of cultural and historical interest, but possibly of some practical benefit to the country and to the nation' is due to Dr. Acharya.