Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c23: Chapter XVI: The Dravidian Style, Its Genesis Under the Pallavas (c. 600 A.D. to 900)
Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c23
- Language
- English
Chapter XVI: The Dravidian Style, Its Genesis Under the Pallavas (c. 600 A.D. to 900)
c23.2
IT has already been shown that the building art as it was developing in Southern India was assuming a separate form. Also that this form, in view of the fact that it was being practised almost entirely in the Tamil country, anciently known as Dravidadesha, has been referred to as the Dravidian style This southern type of architecture, it has been found convenient to resolve into five periods, corresponding to the five principal kingdoms which ruled in the south of India during the course of its evolution. These are as follows :
c23.3
(1) Pallava (A.D 600-900) ; (2) Chola (900-1150) ; (3) Pandya (1100-1350) ; (4) Vijayanagar (1350-1565) , (5) Madura (from 1600).
c23.4
Of all the great powers that together made the history of southern India, none had a more marked effect on the architecture of this region than the earliest of all, that of the Pallavas, whose productions provided the foundations of the Dravidian style Originally the political successors of the Andhras, under whose rule the Buddhist architecture of Southern India attained its finest form, the Pallavas came into prominence in the seventh century, and continued paramount in the south until the beginning of the tenth century. The centre of their kingdom lay on the lower reaches of the Palar river, and the chief examples of Pallava architecture are to be found in the country around the town of Conjeeveram (Kanchipuram) the ancient capital. There are however a few instances of the work of this dynasty located as far south as Tanjore and Pudukkottai.
c23.5
The Pallava dynasty maintained its varying forms of architecture for some three centuries, from A.D. 600 to 900, and its productions resolve themselves into two phases, the first of these occupying the seventh century, and the second the eighth and ninth centuries In the former the examples were entirely rock-cut, in the latter they were entirely structural. There were four principal rulers during the period of their power, and the works of each phase have been divided into two groups, comprising four groups in all, each of which is named after the king who was ruling at the time.
c23.6
| 1st Phase | Mahendra Group, A.D. 610 / to 640, pillared halls / (mandapas) only / Mamalla Group, A.D. 640 to / 690, mandapas, and rathas / (monolithic temples). | .wholly / rock-cut. |
| 2nd Phase | Rajasimha Group, A D. 690 / to c. 800, temples. / Nandivarman Group, c. A.D. / 800 to c. 900, temples. | .wholly / structural. |
c23.7
It will be seen from the above that the rock architecture of the first phase takes two forms, referred to as *mandapas*, and *rathas*. In this connection, a mandapa is an excavation, while a ratha is a monolith. The former is an open pavilion, and, as excavated in the rock, takes the shape of a simple columned hall with one or more cellas in the back wall. A ratha is in reality a car or chariot, provided by the temple authorities for the conveyance of the image of the deity during processions. But here, by common usage, it refers to a series of monolithic shrines, which are exact copies in granite of certain structural prototypes.
c23.8
Beginning with the rock-architecture produced during the reign of Mahendravarman (A D. 610-640), constituting the earlier of the two groups of the first phase, this represents the mode that found favour with the Pallavas in the first half of the seventh century. The examples of the Mahendra group consist of one type only, namely pillared halls or mandapas. In this connection, it is perhaps only natural to infer that because the surviving relics of an ancient civilization are those formed out of the lasting rock, people were acquainted solely with that method. It will be shown however that a true picture of the time would represent these rock-cut halls supplemented by a very considerable miscellany of other buildings structurally formed Although the latter have perished, owing to their impermanent character, the style and certain distinguishing features of their architecture are preserved by copies cut in the rock. But it is obvious from the examples of the early group, which are fourteen in number, and enumerated below,¹ that the architecture, whether structural or otherwise, of the Pallavas at this particular stage was of a definitely primitive type. Each rock-cut mandapa consists of a pillared hall serving as a kind of portico to one or more cellas deeply recessed in the interior wall The exterior presents a facade formed of a row of pillars, each pillar averaging seven feet in height with a diameter of two feet, the shafts being square in section except for the middle third which is chamfered into an octagon. An immense and heavy bracket provides the capital, the composition as a whole suggesting as its origin a very elemental structure in which a ponderous wooden beam and bracket were the main features. So plain and simple is the Mahendra type that in the earliest examples, as at Mandagapattu and Trichinopoly, there is not even a cornice above the pillars, but later a roll-moulding was added as at Pallavaram. Afterwards, at Mogalrajapuram, this roll-cornice was ornamented at intervals with a motif known as a *kudu* (acroteria), which is readily identified as the Buddhist chaitya-arch much reduced and converted into an object of decoration
c23.9
¹ Dalavanur, 10 m S E. of Ginjee, in S Arcot dist, (2) Trichinopoly "Rock Temple," (3) Mandagapattu, 6 m. S. W. of Dalavanur, (4) Pallavaram, Chingleput dist., (5) Mahendravadi, 3 m. S E. of Sholinghur, N Arcot dist., (6) Vallam, 2 m. E. of Chingleput, (7) Malacheri, 3 m N. W. of Gingee, (8) Singavaram, 1 m S. of Malacheri, (9) Tirukkalukkunram, 9 m S E. of Chingleput, (10) Kilmavilangai, S Arcot dist, (11) Bezwada, Kistna dist, (12) Mogalrajapuram, 3 m. E of Bezwada, (13) Undavalli, Guntur dist, (14) Bhairavakonda, Nellore dist.
c23.10
Towards the end of Mahendra's reign some efforts were made to break away from this singularly plain treatment of the mandapa, as may be seen in the rock-cut temple of Anantasayana at Undavalli, and in the series of shrines at Bhairavakonda. The former is a definite departure, as although in some senses a mandapa, for it consists of several of these pillared halls one above another, it is fairly clear that it was an attempt to reproduce in the rock technique a pyramidal composition, evidently based on the conventional form of a Buddhist vihara or monastery, as it is in four stories and rises to a height of some fifty feet. Yet except for its size and more complex design, its architectural rendering shows but little advance on the single storied examples already referred to. It is, however, in the series of eight excavated examples at Bhairavakonda, probably the latest of this reign, that a marked step forward is observable, for here is the beginning of the distinctive Pallava type It is true that here also the mandapas are of the same simple plan as are all the foregoing, but it is in the design of the facade, and specially in the elaboration of the pillars, that a new spirit seems to have entered architectural effort of the time It is the stage at which the characteristic pillar, or "order," of the Pallava into the style makes its appearance.
c23.11
Up to this point the pillar in the Mahendra group of mandapas has been a rudimentary type of beam and bracket, serviceable in principle, but the idea of minds evidently in possession of very limited experience At Bairavakonda, this crude production is still visible, but superimposed on its simple shape is an entirely different and much more sophisticated design of capital and shaft, a formation which has already been referred to as representing the Dravidian mode. And moreover, with the fusion of the two forms of pillar, there was also added another element, that of a lion, a figure of one of these animals being combined with the lower portion of the shaft, and another introduced into the capital. This heraldic beast, which from now onward occupies a prominent position in the architectural productions of the Pallavas, was appropriated by the ruling dynasty, and made to serve as a symbol of their Simhavishnu, or "lion" (*simha*) ancestry. The Bhairavakonda pillars therefore depict the Pallava order in the making, the blending of the stark realism of the beginner, with the more reasoned results of endeavour. How this order of pillar design, as yet unformed, was refined and adapted until it developed into a type of column of exceptional character and elegance, is shown in the productions of the succeeding reign
c23.12
The second group of the first phase of Pallava architecture, mainly executed during the reign of Narasimhavarman I (A.D 640-68), while still adhering to the rock-cut method, in addition to a series of mandapas, is also represented by a number of rathas or monoliths. Practically all the examples of this group are found on one site, marking the position of the deserted seaport town of Mamallapuram, and named after its royal founder, one of whose titles was Mahamalla. This archaeological record of the one-time might of the Pallavas lies towards the mouth of the Palar river, thirty-two miles south of Madras, and indicates that here was the harbour for Conjeeveram, the capital seat of the dynasty, situated some forty miles up the river. Here the configuration of the coastline was singularly suitable for its purpose, as rising out of the sand near the seashore was a large rocky hill of granite gneiss, aligned from north to south, measuring half a mile long and a quarter of a mile wide with a height of over a hundred feet. Detached from this main prominence, and towards the south, was another and much smaller rocky outcrop, consisting originally of a whale-backed mound of granite about two hundred and fifty feet long and fifty feet high. It was out of these two formations that the rock architecture of the Mamalla group was excavated and sculptured. As already implied, however, in conjunction with the rock productions, there was a large amount of structural architecture some of it of considerable importance, but all of which has perished. There are still visible foundations of a citadel which may be traced on the heights of the large hill and within this were palaces and similar royal residences, apparently built on raised masonry basements, while the buildings themselves consisted of a wooden framework filled in by brick and plaster walls. As was not an uncommon practice, therefore the secular buildings were structural while the halls for religious purposes were quarried out of the natural rock.
c23.13
One other feature is observable at Mamallapuram, now almost obliterated, but which when in full use gave the town, and particularly its religious architecture, some of its character. This was a well-designed and extensive water system, drawn from the Palar river, and distributed by means of canals and tanks to all parts of the port. There are indistinct but none the less definite traces of this installation, so that in its palmy days such a constant supply of running water must have made it a very pleasing seaside resort. But this was not provided solely for public use, it was also maintained for ritualistic purposes, as proved by the design of some of the temples in which cisterns and conduits appear to have formed an essential part of the scheme The significance of what appears to be a popular belief in water worship, combined with the Naga or serpent cult, is embodied in a remarkable scene sculptured on the eastern face of the main hill, and now misnamed Arjuna's Penance. This rock-cut drama is an allegorical representation of the holy river Ganges issuing from its source in the distant Himalayas; the water, fed from a receptacle above, cascading down a natural cleft in the rock in the centre of a magnificent picture carved in relief.
c23.14
Yet even with such vivid relics still in situ, it is difficult to reconcile this deserted area consisting of a bare rocky hill, and desolate sand dunes, with what was once a populous maritime centre. The drifting sands have covered up and obliterated most of its landmarks, while the warring elements of wind and tide have altered the contours of the coastline, so that its ancient appearance can only be imagined. But in its art connections alone this port had more than ordinary significance For there is little doubt that from Mamallapuram, in the middle of the first millennium, many deepladen argosies set forth, first with merchandise and then with emigrants, eventually to carry the light of Indian culture over the Indian Ocean into the various less enlightened countries of Hither Asia. Amidst the opalescent colouring of Java's volcanic ranges, and on the lush green plains of old Cambodia, in the course of time there grew up important schools of art and architecture derived from an Indian source That the origin of these developments is to be found in the Brahmanical productions of the Pallavas, and, before them in the stupas and monasteries erected by the Buddhists under the rule of the Andhras, is fairly clear. It is possible to identify in the Khmer sculptures at Angkor Thom and Angkor Vat, and in the endless bas-reliefs on the stupa-temple of Borobudur, the influence of the marble carved panels of Amaravati, while the architecture that this plastic art embellishes owes some of its character to the rock-cut monoliths of Mamallapuram. In addition therefore to providing the foundations of the Dravidian style of architecture in southern India, the vigorous creations of the Pallava craftsmen exercised considerable effect over a much wider field, and it was from this now deserted port that their art was probably conveyed to more distant lands.
c23.15
Of the rock-cut examples of Pallava architecture at Mamallapuram, the mandapas may be referred to first: these excavated halls are ten in number¹, and are to be found on various suitable sites on the main hill. In most instances they are of the same general character and proportions as those of the previous group, but much more highly developed, a proof of the rapid progress that took place during the short period that intervened. None of them is large, their approximate dimensions being as follows:—width of facade 25 feet; height from 15 to 20 feet; depth overall including cella 25 feet; pillars 9 feet high and 1 to 2 feet wide diameter; cellas, rectangular and from 5 to 10 feet side. It will be seen from these measurements that the mandapas are relatively shallow halls or porticos, and are remarkable therefore not for their size but for the exceptional character of their design and execution. This character is shown in two ways, first in their architectural treatment, and secondly in the disposal and quality of the sculpture combined with the architectural forms. As regards the former, except for the pillars which are the main features of the composition as a whole, the actual architectural treatment is of the simplest kind. On the facade there is a roll cornice decorated with chaitya arch motifs (*kudu*), and above this a parapet, or attic member, formed of miniature shrines, a long one alternating with a short one. The remainder of the scheme both inside and out consists principally of pilasters of mouldings acting as a framework of the figure sculpture, the display of which appears to have been one of the prominent objects of the mandapa idea. For it is fairly clear that the rock-cutter was primarily and fundamentally a sculptor, and these pillared halls were regarded very largely as a means of presenting to the visiting devotees pictures of mythological and other subjects produced in this plastic manner. Not that the treatment of the architectural features was in any way inferior to the relief work, some of the architraves, cornices and strings-courses being as finely wrought as the figures. As an instance the precision with which the basements were designed and executed is admirably shown in the Varaha mandapa, where the stylobate has been sunk so as to form a long narrow receptacle for water. (Plate LIX, Fig. 2). Apart from the manner in which this important part of the facade has been conceived and carried out so as to compel ablutions before entering the temple, it is an excellent illustration of the artistic handling of a purely material adjunct.
c23.16
¹ Dharmaraja, (2) Kotikal, (3) Mahishasura, (4) Krishna, (5) Pancha Pandava, (6) Varaha, (7) Ramanuja, (8) Five celled Saivite, (9 & 10) unfinished.
c23.17
and combining all their attributions, implying the accomplishment of a craftsman of more than ordinary powers. The lion as a pillar base is not an uncommon motif in the architecture of several civilizations. It is found in late Roman work, and also in Lombardic Romanesque buildings of Europe dating from the eleventh century, but in these occidental examples the shaft is usually supported on the animal's back. In the Pallava type the pillar is made to rest on the sedent animal's head, and, in the case of the lion in the Mahishasura interior, it is not the horned grotesque of the mandapas, but a more natural leonine figure yet sufficiently conventionalised to suit its architectonic purpose. The remaining members forming this particular class of pillar are equally well designed, the fluted and banded shaft (*stambham*), the refined necking (*tadi*), the elegant curves of the "melon" capital (*kumbha*), and its lotus form (*idaie*) above, with its wide abacus (*palagai*), are all so united as to produce an "order" of marked propriety and stability. (Plate LXII, Fig. 1).
c23.18
Passing now to the other type of rock architecture of Mamalla's reign, namely the series of monolithic temples called *rathas*, and widely known as the "Seven Pagodas", these exemplify an entirely novel form of expression. Although in much the same architectural style as the mandapas, they enunciate a completely different idea. Each is obviously a replica, quarried out of the whale-backed rock previously mentioned, of a separate type of religious structure evidently common at the time, and built largely of wood, as is shown by the beam-heads, rafters and purlins faithfully represented in the granite reproduction. Each example, with all these features is so well preserved as to be perfectly comprehensible, but the question at once arises, what was the object and intention of recording so faithfully and with such infinite toil each architectural type, as if it were a full sized model, or to be regarded as a standard pattern for the guidance of the temple builders? Solitary, unmeaning, and clearly never used, as none of their interiors is finished, sphinx-like for centuries these monoliths have stood sentinel over mere emptiness, the most enigmatical architectural phenomenon in all India, truly a "riddle of the sands". Each a lithic cryptogram as yet undeciphered, there is little doubt that the key when found will disclose much of the story of early temple architecture in Southern India.
c23.19
As in all rock architecture of a similar type, the pillars, especially those of the facade, are the principal elements in the composition, and those of the Mamalla group are no exception. The beginning of the Pallava order of the column has already been referred to in the works of the previous reign, but the Mamallapuram mandapas show this feature in its rich maturity. In some of the examples the crude block bracket is still much in evidence, primitive traditions usually die hard, but on the other hand some of the pillars as for instance those on the exterior of the Mahishasura mandapa are singularly graceful conceptions, when the purpose and peculiar technique are taken into consideration. A further development, with the addition of the heraldic lion forming the lower half of the shaft, is seen in the facade pillars of the Varaha mandapa, one of the most finished examples in the entire group. But the culmination of this lion form of pillar is represented by the two interior columns of the former mandapa, so different from any of the others, yet refining
c23.20
As with all the rock productions of the Pallavas, the rathas are of no great size, the largest measuring only 42 feet long, the widest 35 feet, and the tallest is but 40 feet high. They number eight in all,∗ and, with one exception, are derived from the two types of structure hitherto attributed to the Buddhists, the vihara or monastery, and the chaitya hall or temple. The exception is that known as Draupadi's ratha, the smallest of the series, as well as being the simplest and most finished. This example is merely a cell or *pansala*, and the shape of the roof indicates plainly that it was a copy of a thatched structure, most probably a form of portable shrine belonging to a village community, as shown by its sub-structure. For its base is supported by figures of animals, a lion alternating with an elephant, their attitudes suggesting that they are bearers of a heavy burden. Such an idea is occasionally represented in Indian architecture of the temples and shrines borne along by supernatural creatures, or supported on poles by grotesque human beings, thus implying that these religious constructions were sometimes not fixtures, but could be carried in procession or moved about from place to place. The portable shrine represented by Draupadi’s ratha may have some connection with certain models of tabernacles depicted on the gable ends of the remaining rathas, to be referred to hereafter. (Plate LX)
c23.21
∗ North-west: Valaiyankuttai and Pidari. South: Draupadi, Arjuna, Bhima, Dharmaraja and Sahadeva. North: Ganesh.
c23.22
Of the vihara or monastery type of ratha at Mamallapuram, all of which are square in plan and pyramidal in elevation, there are five examples, varying in size and in their details, but all treated in the same architectural manner. In shape and appearance these vihara rathas seem to have been evolved out of a building composed of cells arranged around a square courtyard, the inner court being afterwards covered in with a flat roof on pillars. In the course of time, as the community of monks occupying the monastery increased another story was added, and, finally, still another, the whole structure eventually being finished off with a kind of domical roof. In the rock-cut interpretation of this composition, the cells have lost their original character and intention, and become modified into ornamental turrets, while other substantial alterations have been effected in order to make it suitable for its new purpose. The transformation from a Buddhist hostel to a Hindu shrine is best illustrated in the largest of these vihara rathas, that known as the Dharmaraja, enough of which has been completed to show the full architectural style of the exterior, as well as the manner in which it was proposed to treat the inner compartments As regards the elevation, this is in two parts, a square portion with pillared verandahs below, and the pyramidal shape or sikhara (tower) formed of the converted cells, above. With its strongly moulded stylobate, its lion pillared porticos casting their deep shadows, the scintillating appearance of its turreted roof, this type of design is not only an effective production in itself, but it is a storehouse of pleasing forms and motifs, besides being replete with potentialities. That such promises were amply fulfilled is shown by the architectural monuments developed from this rock-cut model which evolved later.
c23.23
Even more significant than the foregoing are the remaining three examples of rathas known as Bhima, Sahadeva and Ganesh, which appear to be based on various types of chaitya hall, or Buddhist temple. They are all oblong in plan, and rise up into two or more stories, while each has a keel or barrel roof, with a chaitya gable end The Sahadeva type is apsidal, and structural replicas of this form were erected at a subsequent date, of which the later Pallava temple of Vadamallisvara is an example A still more informative instance of the chaitya hall type is Bhima's ratha, which is a copy of a building in two stories, the upper story displaying a perfect representation of a keel roof with a gable at each end A similar effect was produced later in two structures of the Indo-Aryan order, the tenth century temple of Vaital Deul at Bhubaneswar, Orissa (Chapter XXI), and in the eleventh century Teli-ka-Mandir in Gwalior Fort (Chapter XXVI). The remaining ratha of the group, that of Ganesh, is in some respects a combination of the two previous examples, but it is different inasmuch as the entrance is through a pillared portico on its long side. Not only were these three rathas the prototypes of temples, but they were also the pattern out of which was evolved an important later development, for it was on their oblong plan, diminishing stories, and specifically, the keel roof with its pinnacles and gable ends, that the *gopuram* was based. It is possible to see here the beginnings of those great towering pylons forming the entrance gateways to the temples of the south, and which give their chief character to the Dravidian style. (Plate LVII, Fig. 2.)
c23.24
These monolithic shrines were of Saivite attribution, and in their proximity are images, also carved in the rock, of a lion, an elephant, and a bull, symbolising respectively Durga, Indra, and Siva. Yet the fact that these Siva shrines are in a style of architecture traditionally associated with the Buddhists, seems to imply that they were a type of structure not the monopoly of any one religion, but had a common origin There is evidence in support of this in certain emblematical subjects carved within the gable ends of the three chaitya hall examples, each of which is full of allegory. (Plate LX) And in more than one of them there is a central symbol not unlike a stupa. Each gable illustrates a conventional or diagrammatic rendering of a prayer-hall, the curved barge-boards taking the place of the vaulted roof, the decorated brackets on either side simulating the ribs of the vault, while, most significant of all, the central object is a tabernacle or sacred relic. Each of these representations of tabernacles or reliquaries takes a different form, just as the ratha on which it is depicted also is of a certain design, so that both ratha and reliquary may be identified as belonging to one another. It is possible therefore that each ratha is a shrine consecrated to one of the manifestations of Siva, its shape being conditioned by the tradition which has ordained that it should take such a form for that particular manifestation.
c23.25
A remarkable feature of the Pallava rock-architecture is the fine quality of the figure sculpture which adorns both mandapas and rathas. But in its plastic form it was only part of a movement, which, extending over the whole of southern India, found expression in a school of sculpture of a grand classical order. Most of this is in the rock-cut technique, of which that on the Kailasa at Ellora, and at Elephanta, are rather later examples, but some of the finest and earliest productions were the work of the Pallavas These figure subjects at Mamallapuram are endowed with that same passionate spirit which pulsates in the Christian art of Europe of the corresponding date, but with even a finer feeling for form and more experienced craftsmanship. There is a notable sense of restraint and refined simplicity specially in the bas-reliefs of single figures, yet even more pronounced in several of the larger sculptured dramas, as for instance in the Vishnu panel of the Mahishasura mandapa, which has some of the breadth and rationality shown in the sculpture of the Greeks towards the end of their first period In view therefore of the superb quality of the Pallava plastic art it is not surprising that the schools of scultpure which developed out of this movement in Java and Cambodia displayed also the same high artistic character
c23.26
From the unfinished state of nearly all the rock architecture at Mamallapuram, much of it lacking that final effort which would have made these shrines really serviceable, it would seem as if some unexpected political cataclysm had intervened, causing the rock-cutter to throw down his mallet and chisel and hasten away, never to return History records no such upheaval, so that an explanation must be looked for elsewhere What these incomplete shrines reveal is that the patronage of Narasimha Mamalla having ended with his death in A D. 674, under his successor Rajasimha a new architectural movement began. For with the rule of this king, the rock method ceased, no further labour was put either into the excavated mandapas or the monolithic rathas, in a word as a form of expression it became obsolete [Figure: Fig. 1 Trichinopoly. Interior of Jambukeswar Temple; c. A D 1600]
c23.27
[Figure: Fig. 2 Madura, Tirumalai’s Choultry. Portrait and "Yali" pillars;
c23.28
Fig. 1 Travancore: Suchendram Temple: 16th century.
c23.29
Fig 2 Corridor in the Temple of Rameswaram; c. 17th century.
c23.30
[Figure: DIAGRAM SHOWING PRINCIPAL PARTS OF AN ORISSAN TEMPLE REKHA DEUL PIDA DEUL AMLA BHUMI PARAGHAR GHANTA- KALASA PIDA RAHAPAGA BHUMI AMLA BHUMI AMLA JANGHA BARANDI JANGHA KALASA AMLA CHHAPRA BADA PISTA PIDA DEUL REKHA DEUL JAGAMOHAN GARBHA- GRIHA KONAKAPAGA ANARDHA- PAGA RAHAPAGA ANARDHA PAGA KONAKAPAGA ANARDHAPAGA RAHAPAGA KONAKAPAGA ANARDHAPAGA RAHAPAGA]
c23.31
[Figure: BRAHMANICAL TEMPLES AT BHUBANESWAR, ORISSA. PARASU-RAMESWAR CIR. 700 A.D RAJARANI CIR 1000 A.D. MUKTESWAR CIR. 900 A.D. ANANTA VASUDEV CIR 1200 A.D. BHOG MANDIR NAT-MANDIR JAGAMOHAN GARBHA-GRIHA
c23.32
Instead of the permanent yet inflexible carving of the granite, the art of structural building was taken up, as it was being realized that this process gave greater powers to the workman, it provided him with more freedom, so that he could place his structure where he pleased, and make it what shape he liked. The only limit to his performance was the extent of his knowledge of the principles of the mason's craft, and the size and strength of his materials. With the reign of Rajasimha therefore the second phase of Pallava architecture opens, in which all the buildings are entirely structural. The production of the first temples of this phase, and called the Rajasimha Group, began towards the end of the seventh century and occupied the whole of the eighth century, during which period several notable buildings were erected
c23.33
Of the Rajasimha mode there are some six examples, comprising the "Shore," Isvara, and Makunda temples at Mamallapuram; a temple at Panamalai in the South Arcot district; and the temples of Kailasanatha and of Vaikuntha Perumal at Conjeevaram. Three of these are of major importance as each illustrates a stage not only in the style as a whole, but in the development of the temple formation, in much the same manner as that already shown in the contemporary art of the Chalukyans on the other side of the Peninsula (Chapter XIV) These three examples are the "Shore" temple, and the two temples at Conjeevaram. The first Pallava building to be constructed of dressed stone was the "Shore" temple, so named in modern times as it stands on the extreme foreshore of the ancient port. (Plate LXII, Figs. 2 and 3). Although the earliest known production in this technique of the Pallavas, as it dates from the last years of the seventh century, the materials of which it is composed and the manner in which they have been applied indicate a certain amount of latent experience in the art of building construction. As a proof of its excellent workmanship for over a thousand years the "Shore" temple has endured on this exposed spur of rock, buffeted for half the year by the monsoon rollers, at other times.
c23.34
"The grey sea creeps half-visible, half-hushed,
And grasps with its innumerable hands
Its silent walls."
c23.35
Yet even with the ceaseless activity of the sea on the one side, and the insidious menace of the drifting sands on the other, its twin towers are still erect and its shrines remain intact, immutable it stands, a silent record of a great but almost forgotten people
c23.36
Owing to its unusual position, and also to the intention of its creators, the plan of the Shore temple is not according to custom The underlying idea was that the cella should face eastwards overlooking the sea, so that the shrine might be illuminated by the first rays of the rising sun, as well as being plainly observable to those approaching the harbour in ships For it was a landmark by day and a beacon by night, as out amongst the breakers still rises a stone pillar on which a lamp would be placed to shine across the waters and guide the mariner to his anchorage. Such an arrangement, however, with the cella actually on the ocean's brim, left no room for a forecourt or assembly hall, and not even for an entrance gateway, all of which had to be placed at the rear of the shrine. In this instance therefore the central building is surrounded by a massive enclosure wall, entry being obtained through the western side of the courtyard which was left entirely open. But quite early in its production this simple scheme was complicated by two additional shrines being attached, rather unsymmetrically, to its western end, one of which provides the smaller spire, as well as what at first sight appears to be the main entrance. It is these two supplementary shrines which have converted the Shore temple into a double towered monument, unconventional in its grouping, and a little difficult to comprehend.
c23.37
While it is quite clear that the central buildings comprising the Shore temple are a development of the monolithic rathas of the previous phase, specifically from that of the Dharmaraja ratha, the difference in treatment between the two types of the temple is considerable. The change in technique from the rock-cut to the structural partly accounts for this, and the interval separating the execution of the two productions, although not great, would also have some effect. And there was, of course, a new ruler on the throne, whose personal predilections may have had some influence. But even these factors, significant though they may be, can hardly account for the difference not only in temper and in trend, but in the forms as well, which appear in this first structural example of the Pallava period In principle the monolithic Dharmaraja ratha and the Shore temple are the same, there is the square lower story, and the pyramidal tower in diminishing tiers above in both conceptions, but there is another and original ideal motivating the design of the Shore temple, particularly noticeable in the shape of the tower. This is shown in the obvious desire of the builders to rid themselves of the vihara incubus, and to devise a building more architecturally rational, in a word to shake off the shackles of its prototype and give effect to their own rising genius.
c23.38
And so we see in the composition of the Shore temple, more rhythm and more buoyancy than in the monolithic rathas, a lightness and a soaring quality that was however not entirely due to the more tractable technique. But there is also another important component in the structural example, which although relatively a matter of detail, was destined to give not a little of its character to the later Pallava art This is the appearance in the architectural scheme of a very pronounced type of pilaster, a rampant lion in prominent relief, and which finds a place wherever such a structural form with an ornamental support is required. In the Shore temple this heraldic lion, erect and holding up a Dravidian capital, projects from every angle, and is also introduced at intervals around the lower part of the entire building As the style progressed this leogriff motif became more frequent and more characteristic so that it may be generally regarded as the identifying symbol of the Pallava style. As in the case of numerous motifs in Indian art, the origin of this rampant lion pilaster is a mystery, it suddenly appears in the temple design without any marked prefigurement, save for one small representation of it on the unfinished ratha of Valaiyankuttai of the previous reign in the shape of an insignificant bracket. It is strange that from such a rudimentary detail much of the character of the Narasimha architecture should have developed.
c23.39
There was however considerably more in the formation of the Shore temple than the central buildings described above, as these were surrounded by an outer rectangular enclosure containing many interesting features. (Plate LXIII, Fig 2) In the first place it seems evident that portions of the ground plan of the enclosure consisted of a system of shallow cisterns, which could be flooded on occasion, so that it resolves itself into a type of water temple. Some of the conduits and receptacles may still be traced, and it is clear that they constituted an essential part of the lay-out. The water to feed this system was brought by a canal and conveyed by sluices throughout the building, any overflow being carried down a rocky cascade in the rear of the shrine and into the sea. The surrounding wall was an imposing structure, its parapet and coping crowned by figures of kneeling bulls, while at close intervals all round the exterior projected boldly carved lion pilasters; on the western side admission was obtained through a richly ornamented doorway. This doorway was the main entrance and led into a corridor one side of which was formed by the inner face of the enclosure wall, the other by a large rectangular building, probably an outer mandapa, but only the foundations remain. Halfway along each of the long sides of the corridor, there was a pillared arcade containing an altar, possibly provided for Nāga worship, as all the courts and passages around could be filled with water. A feature of this corridor was a series of carved panels on the side walls, each containing a figure-subject illustrating some striking mythological episode—a picture gallery in stone.
c23.40
Not long after the erection of the Shore temple at Mamallapuram, another Siva temple the Kailasanatha was begun at Conjeeveram, the capital seat of the Pallavas, situated forty-five miles south-west of Madras. Conjeeveram, in the early centuries of the Christian era, was a place of considerable importance, probably the leading city of the Carnatic if not of Southern India. As the home of Dharmapala, the great commentator, a contemporary of the famous Buddhaghosa of the fifth century, it appears to have been a centre of intellectual life, while its fine series of temples are proof of its religious activity extending over a long period. For here may be studied the Dravidian style of temple architecture from its genesis under the Pallavas beginning in the 6th century to its culmination at Vijayanagar as late as the 15th and 16th centuries, a period of a thousand years of development. The temple of Ekambaranatha illustrates in one or other of its compartments every feature of this evolution, while a study of the Kailasanatha should form the basis of any investigation of the Dravidian building art. Dealing first therefore with the latter example, the main shrine of this structure was built during the reign of Rajasimha, so that its approximate date is A.D. 700, although the actual completion of the temple as a whole was undertaken by his son Mahendravarman III, but, with the exception of a few additions to the east end of the enclosure, it is all as originally conceived. The scheme resolves itself into three separate parts, consisting of a sanctuary with its pyramidal tower, a pillared hall or mandapa, the whole contained within a rectangular courtyard enclosed by a high and substantial wall composed of cells. At a much later date, probably in the fourteenth century, the two isolated buildings, the sanctuary and the mandapa, were joined together by a spacious intermediate hall or antarala, to accord with the ceremonial of the time This mediaeval addition has robbed the main structure of some of its architectural appearance, and it is better to visualize it without such an intervening compartment as shown in Plate LXIII, Fig. 1. It will be seen from the drawing that the main building is the tall sanctuary at the eastern end of the enclosure, and that in principle it conforms to the monolithic prototype of the Dharmaraja ratha. But there are certain elaborations, particularly in the supplementary shrines attached to and projecting from its three free sides, which aid considerably its effective presentation.
c23.41
Every aspect of this temple is replete with informative features, as it illustrates in all its parts the trends of the style. The cells comprising the interior of the enclosing wall, the design of the wall with its parapet of cupolas, the sturdy, primitive shape of the mandapa pillars, the constant repetition of the rampant lion pilaster, these, and the composition of the building as a whole, make the grey pile of the Kailasanatha a most fascinating study. Yet undoubtedly its most interesting portion is the pyramidal tower or sikhara for it is in the distinctive treatment of this feature that the development of the Dravidian style may be best observed. From the somewhat compressed forms of the monolithic rathas to the more loosely-knit elements of the Shore temple, we now arrive at a further effort to present the sikhara in a suitable architectural form, well-proportioned, substantial, yet at the same time rhythmic in its mass and elegant in its outlines Such was evidently the aim of its designers, and within certain limits some of these desired conditions have been fulfilled. There is still however occasion for more refinement in the shape of this tower, for although it marks another stage of evolution, it obviously falls short of that perfected maturity which was subsequently achieved.
c23.42
Apart from the main structure of this temple there are certain arrangements in connexion with the entrance to the courtyard which are noteworthy. This part appears to have been produced under the direction of Mahendravarman III, and evidently marks a deviation from the original plan. In place of what should have been the main gateway, a large subsidiary chapel has been introduced, complete with cella, vestibule and stairway approach, the actual doorways into the courtyard being relegated to openings on either side. Although a place of worship, the Mahendravarmanesvara shrine is built in such a manner, as, with its accompaniments, to suggest the beginnings of the gopuram, or entrance pylon. That the masons were by this time realizing the importance of selection in the matter of their building materials is shown by the fact that in the Kailasanatha, while the foundations of the temple are of granite, the upper portions are of sandstone, thus providing a hard and firm sub-structure to carry its weight and a more plastic substance for the sculpture. Unfortunately at a somewhat distant date repairs to the latter became necessary, when these were effected rather ruthlessly by means of concrete.
c23.43
About a decade later, the temple of Vaikuntha Perumal, also at Conjeeveram, was built, and here the Pallava style of architecture is seen in its most mature form. This temple is slightly larger and more spacious in its proportions than the previous example, and instead of the principal parts such as the cloisters, portico, and sanctuary, being separate buildings, they are amalgamated into one architectural whole, as may be seen in Plate LXIV. Square in plan, having a side of nearly 90 feet, the eastern or front portion is carried forward 28 feet to provide for an entrance portico The exterior of this formation presents what might have been a high and somewhat uncompromising outer wall, but its surfaces have been so enriched with semi-structural and ornamental motifs that it blends admirably with the sikhara towering above the whole composition but actually rising from the shrine within. Inside the outer wall are the cloisters, consisting of a colonnade of lion pillars, with a passage for processions continued right round the building between this and the central structure The central edifice is in two parts, the sanctuary and its portico, but these are so combined as to form this portion into one building. The portico, or what corresponds to the mandapa, is interiorly a square compartment 21½ feet side, having a transverse aisle of eight pillars, and it leads by means of a vestibule to the cella, a rectangular chamber over which rises the pyramidal vimana tower This vimana is square in plan, externally having a side of 47 feet, and its tower rises to a height of 60 feet from the ground. It is in four stories, each with a passage round its exterior, a cella in the centre, and a corridor encircling two of these for circumambulation. Although there is not in the Vaikunta temple the living freshness and ingenuousness of the Kailasanatha, yet it has many commendable features, for it displays an economy in the disposal of its parts together with a skilful marshalling of the main elements so as to produce a unity of conception, which has resulted in a building having considerable architectural merit.
c23.44
The last phase of the second group of buildings executed during the Pallava regime marks the end of the productions of this dynasty. It represents the works prepared during the rule of Nandivarman and his successors, and depicts the mode in practice in these parts during the ninth century. No buildings of any note were erected at this time, but there are a few small temples which show the direction of the movement. The principal examples are six in number as follows:—two temples at Conjeeveram, the Muktesvara and Matangesvara; the Vadamallisvara temple at Orgadam near Chingleput; the temple of Virattanesvara at Tiruttani near Arkonam; and the Parasuramesvara temple at Gudimallam near Renigunta railway junction. The fact that all the temples are of small size, and are mere reproductions of the previous manifestations are proofs that the might of this one-time powerful dynasty was declining. Its end began with its defeat by the Western Chalukyans in the middle of the eighth century. Among the examples of this late development, the older are the two temples at Conjeeveram, and are simply copies to a smaller scale of the style which prevailed in the previous reign, except that the building is entered through a two pillared portico which forms the facade The four remaining temples of the group, which appear to have been executed somewhat later, indicate that at this date another prototype found favour, as they are all based on the apsidal example represented by the Sahadeva ratha at Mamallapuram. All these buildings, by their lack of virility connote the diminishing power of the dynasty, and towards the end of the tenth century, production practically ceased. But even if the art appears to have died, it passed by no means into oblivion. Such a movement, although perhaps it has left no large works of genius, was at the same time remarkable for the spirit and vigour of its performance. These qualities had a far-reaching effect. For to the Pallavas is the credit of having kept burning brightly the torch, which, kindled by the Buddhists in the early centuries of the Christian era as seen at Amaravati, was bequeathed to these Simhavishnu “lion” kings Later, its flame glowed with renewed brilliance in the hands of the Cholas and subsequent rulers in Southern India, as their architectural undertakings eloquently testify. But perhaps its most potent influence was that which it transmitted beyond the seas, to the countries of Indonesia, where its effulgence, reflected in the vast monuments of those civilizations, shone with even greater splendour than in the land of its origin.
c23.45
Jouveau-Dubreuil, G, *Archaeologie du Sud de L'Inde*, Paris, 1914. ,, ,, *Dravidian Architecture*, Madras, 1917. ,, ,, *The Pallavas*, Pondicheri, 1907. Longhurst, A.H., *Pallava Architecture* (Memoir of the Archaeological Survey of India, No. 17) Simla, 1924. Rea, A, *Pallava Architecture* (Archaeological Survey of India), Madras, 1909.