Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c20.7

c20.7

A detailed analysis of the temple structure will show that much of its architectonic character was obtained by the surfaces being treated as if they were an organism of repeating cells. This particularly applies to the tower or sikhara which is often built up of repetitions of the same architectural motif, converted into an element of decoration. In a word the *sikhara* is composed of an orderly grouping of miniature multiples of itself, and the same applies very largely to the other parts of the structure. In employing this artistic expedient the designers were proceeding in a perfectly logical and safe manner, for although such a plan may lead to monotony owing to mechanical reiteration, it can never be incongruous, or result in a display of bad taste. But these structural elements repeated so artistically, yet so emphatically, in the temple design are something more than mere architectural motifs; they have a much deeper meaning. It will be found that each unit or constituent part making up the whole building is a reduced model of what is obviously a shrine, and furthermore that two different types of shrine have been utilized, one kind being employed entirely in one form of temple design, and the other in another. Thus it comes about that the bulk of the temple architecture of India resolves itself into two distinct and separate styles in which the pillars, capitals, mouldings, and architectural details generally differ in each, so that as in the case of Greek and Roman architecture, these buildings may be classified into "orders". In India there are two such orders, which emerge about the eighth century, and have been designated by Fergusson the one as Dravidian and the other Indo-Aryan, the former being found in the south of India, a country anciently known as Dravida, while the latter is confined to the north. In its geographical aspect, however, a dividing line between the two regions occupied by the two modes cannot be definitely drawn, as temples in the Dravidian style extend towards the north as far as Ellora (Aurangabad), while there are Indo-Aryan examples as far south as Dharwar on the upper Kistna; in fact in the town of Pattadakal in this region, during the eighth century, both kinds of buildings were erected side by side. It should be also noted that the entire area in which Dravidian temples may be found comprises only one fifth of the country as a whole, the Indo-Aryan being distributed over the remainder, and therefore buildings of the latter type are more numerous and more diversified. Much may be said in favour of a regional and ethnological method of classification, but on the other hand the difference in the two styles seems to be more fundamental, and to be derived from some other sources deep down in the early culture of the people.