History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c18.s8: Temples at Kângrâ.
History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c18.s8
- Language
- English
Temples at Kângrâ.
v1.c18.s8.1
Though a little out of their place in the series, there are two small temples in one of the Himâlayan valleys which it may be expedient to describe here before leaving this part of the subject, as their peculiarities will assist us in understanding much that has just been said, or that will be presently advanced. Besides this, they do not exactly fit into any other series, but they can hardly be passed over, as they possess what is so rare in Indian temples—an ascertained date.
v1.c18.s8.2
The temples are situated in the village of Kîragrâma or Baijnâth, about 25 miles east of Kângrâ, and two inscriptions in the larger of the two principal shrines record that it was built by two brothers, Manyuka and Âhuka, wealthy merchants, under Lakshmanachandra lord of Kîragrâma, and apparently brother-in-law of Jayachchandra, king of Jâlandhara or Trigarta. The date is partly obliterated, but in all probability it was equivalent to A.D. 1204. This temple was dedicated to Siva-Vaidyanâtha, and consists of a mandap or hall, 20 ft. square inside, with four round pillars supporting the roof, and a shrine (*purî*) for the Linga, 8 ft. square—separated from the hall by a small antechamber.¹ Over all this temple measures 51 ft. by 31, and stands in a walled enclosure about 120 ft. long and 60 ft. wide at the east end, and 75 at the west. This contains some rooms for the priests with small temples along the north side. But in 1786 it underwent a thorough repair at the hands of Râja Sansârachandra II., which has obliterated many of its features; and to this repair it probably owes the porch with its four pillars in front; but with the exception of the balcony windows on each side, the walls were not, perhaps, materially meddled with. The roof and spire, however, were either rebuilt or so overlaid with plaster as to hide the original work. The woodcut (No. 165) shows only the pillars of the portico of the temple, with the Nandi kiosk in front and a small temple of Jamadagni beyond. This latter, though ruinous, is more interesting, because it has escaped the hand of the spoiler. As will be seen from the woodcut, it has all the features of a very old temple—great simplicity of outline, no repetitions of itself, and the whole surface of the upper part covered with that peculiar horse-shoe diaper which was so fashionable in those early days. It looks here as if it must be copied from some brick or terra-cotta construction; otherwise its repetition over a whole surface seems unaccountable. The amalaka stringcourses are subdued and in good taste, and the crowning ornament well proportioned.
v1.c18.s8.3
¹ The inscriptions are in the mandap, high up in the side walls, right and left from the entrance,—a most unusual position for such records. They are translated in ‘Epigraphia Indica,’ vol. i. pp. 97-118; vol. ii. p. 482; vol. v. App. p. 78, and ‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. xx. p. 154.
v1.c18.s8.4
There is little doubt that the sikhara of the larger temple was similarly adorned, but all its details are so completely obliterated by the coating of plaster it has received that it has lost its interest. The pillars, however, of its porch retain their forms up to their capitals, at least. The architraves, as may be seen from the woodcut, belong to the repair in 1786. The shafts of the pillars are plain cylinders, of very classical proportions, and the bases also show that they are only slightly removed from classical design. The square plinth, the two toruses, the cavetto or hollow moulding between, are all classical, but partially hidden by Hindû ornamentation, of great elegance, but unlike anything found afterwards. The capitals are, however, the most interesting parts, though their details are considerably obliterated by whitewash. They belong to what may be styled the Hindû-Corinthian order, though the principles on which they are designed is diametrically opposed to those of the classical order of the same name. The object of both—as is well known—is to convert a circular shaft into a square architrave-bearing capital in a graceful and pleasing manner. We all know the manner in which the Ionic and Corinthian capitals effect this; pleasingly, it is true, but not without effort and some little clumsiness, which it required all the skill and taste of classical architects to conquer. To effect this object, the Hindûs placed a vase on the top of their column, the bowl of which was about the same diameter as that of the pillar on which it was placed, or rather larger; but such an arrangement was weak, because the neck and base of the vase were necessarily smaller than the shaft of the pillar, and both were still circular. To remedy these defects, they designed a very beautiful class of foliaged ornament, which appears to grow out of the vase, on each of its four faces, and, falling downwards, strengthens the hollows of the neck and foot of the vase, so as to give them all the strength they require, and at the same time to convert the circular form of the shaft into the required square for the abacus of the capital. The Hindûs, of course, never had sufficient ability or constructive skill to enable them to produce so perfect a form as the Corinthian or Ionic capitals of the Greeks or Romans; but it is probable that if this form were taken up at the present day, a capital as beautiful as either of these might even now be produced. It is, indeed, almost the only suggestion that Indian architecture seems to offer for European use.
v1.c18.s8.5
165. Temples at Kîragrâma, Kângrâ District. (From a Photograph.)
v1.c18.s8.6
It is by no means clear when this form of capital was first introduced. It first appears, but timidly it must be confessed, in such Buddhist caves as were excavated after the end of the 2nd century:—as, for instance, in the Srî Yajna cave at Nâsik (Woodcut No. 105); in the courtyard of the Viswakarma, at Elûrâ (Woodcut No. 83); and in some of the later caves at Ajantâ—the twenty-fourth for instance. It is found at Eran (Woodcut No. 166), among some fragments that I believe to be of the age of the Guptas, about a.d. 400, and it is currently employed in the middle group of Hindû caves at Elûrâ, such as the Râvana-ka Khai, and other caves of that age, say about a.d. 600. It afterwards became frequent, almost universal, with the Jains, down to the time of the Muhammadan conquest. The following representation of one (Woodcut No. 167), from a half column of a temple in Orissa, shows it in a skeleton form, and therefore more suited to explain its construction than a fuller capital would do. On its introduction, the bell-shaped or Persepolitan capital seems to have gone out of fashion, and does not again appear in Indian art.
v1.c18.s8.7
To return from this digression: there can be no doubt that the temple of Vaidyanâtha is dedicated to Siva, not only from the presence of the bull in front of it, in a pavilion of the same architecture as the porch, but also because Ganesa appears among its integral sculptures. In the niche in the back
v1.c18.s8.8
166. Pillar in porch of a Temple at Eran, of the Gupta age.
v1.c18.s8.9
167. Capital of Half Column from a Temple in Orissa. (From a Lithograph.)
v1.c18.s8.10
however, is the base of what has been a marble image of Mahâvîra, with an inscription in two lines telling that it was consecrated in a.d. 1240. This base must have been transferred to the Siva temple after the destruction of the original Jaina shrine, and probably owes its preservation and that of a figure placed over it, to the ignorance of the priests of Vaidyanâtha.¹
v1.c18.s8.11
¹ ‘Epigraphia Indica,’ vol. i. pp. 98 and 118-119, and compare p. 120. On it was placed a sandstone figure of Sûrya—perhaps from the Siddhanâth temple. A similar transference has occurred at Kot Kângrâ, where an image of Pârswanâth was found in the porch of a small Hindu temple—*Ibid.* p. 120.
v1.c18.s8.12
The temple second in interest is that of Siddhanâth at the west end of the town. It consists of a four-pillared hall and a shrine, measuring 33 ft. by 20 ft. over all, and with a sikhara about 35 ft. in height. It faced to the east, and had doorways on each side of the shrine leading into a pradakshina or circumambulatory passage.² In a niche in the south wall there had been an inscription, long since illegible; but in the back or west wall was a figure of Sûrya; and the temple was most probably dedicated to the sun.
v1.c18.s8.13
² The drawings of this temple in Cunningham’s ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. v. plate 44 are not correct.