Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c34: Chapter XXVII: Temples with Gabled or Multiple Roofs
Indian Architecture (Buddhist and Hindu Periods) c34
- Language
- English
Chapter XXVII: Temples with Gabled or Multiple Roofs
c34.2
AS in the case of most civilizations, the arts of India have evolved by means of a sequence of movements, one superseding the other, so that a cross-section of the whole would present a series of strata not unlike that of a geological formation. In the course of development most of these art strata have become obliterated by subsequent "deposits," but on the other hand in several instances these movements have been so persistent that portions are still visible, like an outcrop, as proof of their one-time prevalence. Such is a certain type of roof structure of a very distinctive character, which reveals itself in a variety of forms, and in widely different parts of the sub-continent. This roof is of the gabled or multiple order and appears to be a survival of a wooden type, which was apparently not uncommon in India towards the beginning of the Christian era. There are various references by Chinese pilgrims to towers and shrines several stories high which these adventurous travellers saw while in Buddhist India, and of which they brought back small copies for reproduction to the original scale in their own country. It is not unlikely therefore that, as with the distinctive Indian *torana* gateway, which became the *piu-lu* of China, so from these multiple roofed structures of Buddhist India was derived the many storied pagoda of the Far East.
c34.3
That a form of roof constructed on the laminated or "clinker-built" system of overlapping planks and possibly in tiers, was employed in early Indian building seems fairly clear; for something of the kind, reproduced in stone, appears in the roofs and sikharas of the temples in the Indo-Aryan style, specially noticeable in those of Orissa. Rathas, or temple cars, in parts of the country are still fashioned of timber in this manner, each horizontal section taking the form of a wooden frame, with blocks fitted between to keep each layer apart, as is still simulated in stone in the temple roof (Plate CXVIII, Fig. 6). In the architecture of certain parts of the Himalayas, as for instance in the countries of Nepal and Kashmir, reminiscences of the gabled and multiple type of structure still prevail, reproduced in wood, metal, tiles and stone. But it is significant that a somewhat similar manifestation of this Himalayan style of building also occurs in two distant and relatively remote localities in the south and west of the Indian peninsula. One of these developments is found in Kathiawar and repeats certain characteristics of the Kashmir type, while the other, which is as far south as in Malabar, appertains more to the Nepal style.
c34.4
The temples which appear to have an affinity to those of Kashmir, were produced in Kathiawar by an immigrant tribe known as Mers,¹ during the last half of the first millennium, and therefore contemporary with the Kashmir examples. Both the Mer and Kashmir temples are square in plan, with a central sanctuary, but the principal parallelism is in the formation of the roofs. In each type these are pyramidal in shape, and rise up into two tiers, the upper overhanging the lower, rather in the manner of the stories of a Chinese pagoda. Added to this in the Mer design, although the temples are Brahmanical, there are Buddhist chaitya arches in the form of dormer-windows projecting from the sloping portion, but these, in the Kashmir structure, are in the shape of pediments and trefoil arches. It is not therefore so much a resemblance in the actual elements making up these two types of temple formation that is remarkable, but it is in the principles underlying their construction that there is observable a distinct similarity of motive. (Plate CXVIII, Fig. 7 and 8). In view of their wide geographical separation, any direct contact between the two countries is improbable, what is more likely is that some mutual pattern of thought-mould evolved, which accounts for this approximation of forms, rather than any interchange of technical experience.
c34.5
¹ *Archaeological Survey of India*, Vol. XLV, Imperial Series, *Somanatha* by H Cousens.
c34.6
The temples in Kathiawar of this type are at Gop, Kadvar, and Bilesvara, while something of the same character may be seen in a temple at Visavada, and in the temple of Surya at Sutrapada. All are relatively small in size, measuring on an average forty feet across, while the period of their production appears to have been from the sixth to the eighth or ninth centuries. The temple at Gop is certainly the oldest, as it is presumed to be not later than the sixth century, and no doubt introduced the style into these parts. (Plate CXVIII, Fig. 8). It is considerably ruined, but it is not difficult to reconstruct its arrangements from the later but better preserved example at Bilesvara. On plan these structures consisted of a square central shrine, enclosed within a square covered court, the larger size of the latter producing a spacious aisle all round. This aisle was flat-roofed, and out of its centre rose a pyramidal structure covering the shrine and its cella. The chief claim of this type of temple to any architectural merit lies in the treatment of this pyramidal superstructure, which, particularly in the example at Gop, is a well shaped and convincing piece of work. In this instance the central feature rises well above the roof of the aisles, standing up high enough to be called a tower, and its pyramidal portion is in two tiers of square section surmounted by a substantial finial, or *amalasila*, which is circular in plan. On each side of the lower tier are two "chaitya-dormers," while the upper tier has only one, and it is the position, proportions, and general design of these ornamental arched projections that give this building much of its character. In the recess, or niche of each of these chaitya motifs, a figure or miniature altar is enshrined, in one on the western side a statuette of Ganesh is still identifiable, but the conception as a whole has a distinctly Buddhistic derivation. As this type of temple progressed it began to lose its apparently exotic nature, and to conform more to the indigenous Indo-Aryan style, although there is still much of the "vihara" influence in that at Bilesvara, perhaps of the eighth century. Later, the shrines at Visvada, and the Surya temple at Sutrapada, show how it was becoming merged into the conventional form of Brahmanical temple design. Finally, before the end of the first millennium, it has disappeared and seemingly has contributed nothing to the style of building which followed.
c34.7
The other group of temples, recalling the style that appertains to the country of Nepal is still more distant from the Himalayas, as it is situated in the coastal region of Malabar. Of these examples decidedly the most remarkable is located in the small seaport of Beypore, south of Calicut. Here is an ancient Siva temple, the Mahadeva Kovil, which in both design and construction appears to be a deliberate copy of a double roofed Nepalese temple of the late mediaeval period. (Plate CXVIII, Fig. 5).¹ As both types are over thirteen hundred miles apart, the one in a seaside town and the other in a remote valley in the Himalayas, the resemblance is difficult to explain. One theory is that a presumed anthropological connection existed between the Nayars of Malabar and the Newars of Nepal, while another accounts for the pagoda-like attribution by a contact with China by sea as proved by the Chinese type of fishing nets used on this coast.²
c34.8
¹ *The Story of the Stupa*, by A Longhurst, Colombo, 1936
c34.9
² *An Outline of Indian Temple Architecture*, by F. H. Gravely, Madras, 1936.
c34.10
Less like copies of the Newar shrines of Nepal, but still resembling the architecture of the Himalayas, is a series of temples in South Kanara, a tract of country on the western side of Mysore State. There are as many as sixteen examples of this style, all Jain temples and situated at Mudabidri, about twenty miles north-east of Mangalore, the earliest dating from the twelfth century, and the others at intervals during the following four centuries. Although built of stone masonry, these buildings are clearly copies of wooden construction, as may be seen in the shape and design of their verandahs which have pillars resembling chamfered logs of wood, sloping roofs imitating planks, and gables formed on the penthouse principle, with wide projecting eaves. And in the style of their architecture as displayed in the pyramidal roof of overhanging stories, supported by brackets and struts, they recall the types common in the mountains of the north, as well as to a lesser degree the stone temples of Kashmir. In the case of these Mudabidri temples some of the similarity to the Himalayan style may be accounted for by the builders in each region endeavouring in their construction to solve problems presented by the extreme changes of climate, in mitigating the effect of the fierce tropical sun alternating with heavy monsoon rains. Yet it is difficult to believe that the analogy between the two styles of building and methods of construction is due to both people reasoning alike
c34.11
One of the finest of the Mudabidri group is the temple of Chandranatha, which may have been built early in the fifteenth century. It is contained within a high walled enclosure having an entrance on the east, which opens immediately on to a fine free-standing pillar (*mana-stambha*) in front of the main doorway. The temple building consists of three halls, corresponding to mandapas, all combined and connected with the *vimana* containing the cella, in which is the divinity, or Tirthankar. It was the custom of two and sometimes three of these compartments to form the front portion of this class of temple, and, each of these to be designated by a name, in the Chandranatha example they are known as the Tirthankara, Gaddije, and Bhiradevi or Chitra mandapas. (Plate CXIX, Fig. 1).
c34.12
If the exteriors of these temples suggest a wooden origin, the interiors are obviously lithic, as the numerous pillars of the mandapas plainly testify. The Mudabidri type of pillar is a thickset solid production, in all some twelve feet in height, with the lower third consisting of a plain square prism, in marked contrast to the remainder of the shaft, which is circular in section and profusely moulded. As to the capital this is a composition of brackets and pendent lotus buds around a square abacus, the whole a most ornate conception. In their design these pillars are closely allied to what may be referred to as the Chalukyan order, as this prevailed at the time in the country of Mysore. They were produced also by the same technical process, the heavy rounded mouldings being obtained by turning the monolithic shaft in a large lathe. The pillars in the Bhiradevi mandapa of the Chandranatha temple are exceptionally elaborate, the shafts being moulded and chiselled into all kinds of fine patterns. Certain parts of these are undercut into detached lotus petals and miniature balustrades all executed with incredible precision, patience, and skill.
c34.13
In the neighbourhood of Mudabidri is a series of monuments which in style, character, and intention are even more unusual than the temples. They are tombs of the priests, and are a form of sepulchre practically unique in India, for Buddhist, Jain or Hindu rarely included any kind of mausoleum in their usage. In this instance however it appears to have been a local custom to erect a cenotaph in memory of the temple incumbent, although they bear no inscriptions or other means of identification. The style of these monuments is that of a pagoda-like pyramid rising up into several diminishing stories, each story defined by a projecting cornice, the whole being crowned by a finial. (Plate CXVIII, Fig. 4). There are several of these cenotaphs all grouped together, some of the larger are in as many as eight stories and mounting up to nearly thirty feet in height, but although of original design they possess little that is artistically distinctive.
c34.14
Another group of temples in the Kanara country, rather more to the north, is in the town of Bhatkal and although constructed of stone, their exteriors are most astonishingly wooden in appearance.³ They are all built on the double penthouse principle, with expansive stone roofs in imitation of laminated or overlapping planks. No sikhara or tower of any kind rises above these roofs to distinguish them as religious buildings, but in front there is usually an elegant stambha or free-standing pillar forming part of the temple design. Even more expressive of a timber derivation than the roofs, is the system of stone screens which close in the sides of the structure, and are in horizontal slats, like Venetian blinds, or Indian *jil-mils*. That the construction of these temples is a frank copy of the domestic architecture of the locality, imitated in the laterite for permanence, is shown by the thatched houses of the people being of the same character with battens of palm stems for the screens. In this instance too, the style has been forced on the people by the conditions of the climate the driving rain on the one hand, and the hot humid atmosphere on the other, necessitating protection from the former and ventilation for the latter. (Plate CXIX).
c34.15
³ *Chalukyan Architecture*, by Henry Cousens, Archaeological Survey of India, Vol. XLII, p. 134, Calcutta, 1926
c34.16
Although the outward form of these temples at Bhatkal is of a purely practical nature, the innate desire of the Indian Udaipur, Gwalior Udayaswara Temple, 11th century.
c34.17
Fig 1
c34.18
Fig 2
c34.19
[Figure: Fig 1 Udaipur, Udayasvara Temple. Vedi pillar in interior; 11th century]
c34.20
[Figure: Fig 2 Torana at Rewah Central India; c 11th century.]
c34.21
[Figure: Fig 1 Gyraspur, Gwalior “Ath Khumba” (Eight Pillars) , 9th century A D]
c34.22
[Figure: Fig 2 Gyraspur, Gwalior Mala De Temple , Pillars in Main Hall , 10th century A D.]
c34.23
[Figure: DETAILS OF A GUJARATI TEMPLE DIVISIONS AND MOULDINGS OF PRASADA OR SABHA MANDAPA SHRINE SHIKARA CHHAJU MANDO- VARA JANGHA MANCHI KEVALA KALASA KUMBHA KHARA GAJATHARA PITHA GRAHAPATI KANI JADAMBA BHATA SIRA KAKSHASANA ASINOT VEDI RAJASENA GAJATHARA SCALE OF FEET DIVISIONS OF A PILLAR SIRA TEKI SIRA BHARANI STAMBHA KEVALA KUMBHI SCALE OF FEET PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF SURYA AT MODHERA PRASADA GUDHA-MANDAPA SABHA- MANDAPA for ornamentation was not to be denied, for there is no inconsiderable amount of sculpture on those parts of the walls which permit of plastic decoration, and the standing column in front is invariably a graceful conception, as for instance that in the Ketapai Narayana temple of this group. But the interiors provided a better opportunity for embellishment, as they are all designed on the usual system of two conjoined compartments, a pillared hall in front and an enclosed sanctuary in the rear. There were accordingly considerable surfaces available for decorative carving, as may be seen on the walls and coffered ceiling. It was however on the pillars that the sculptors chiefly expended their skill and ingenuity, and these are as artistically treated with mouldings and figures in relief as are many other buildings of a much more pretentious character. As these temples plainly prove even in such remote localities it was part of the sociological system to maintain within the community a group of craftsmen of experience and ability.
c34.24
Brown, Percy, *Picturesque Nepal*, London, 1912. Longhurst, A. H., *The Story of the Stupa*, Colombo, 1936.