Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c19: Book III. Dravidian Style.

History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c19

Language
English

Contents

Book III. Dravidian Style.

v1.c19.2

INTRODUCTORY.

v1.c19.3

THE limits within which the Dravidian style of architecture prevailed in India are not difficult to define or understand. Practically they are those of the Madras Presidency, or, to speak more correctly, they are identical with the spread of the people speaking Tamil, or the cognate tongues. Dr. Caldwell, in his ‘Grammar,’ estimated these, in 1874, at forty-five or forty-six millions,¹ but he includes among them a number of tribes, such as the Tudas and Gonds, who, it is true, speak dialects closely allied to the Tamil tongues, but unless we know their history, language is only a poor test of race, and in this instance architecture does not come to our aid. And, so far as we at present know, these tribes are in too rude a state to have any architecture of their own in a sufficiently advanced state for our purposes. Putting them aside, therefore, for the present, we still have, according to the census of 1901, over fifty-two millions of people speaking Tamil, Telugu, Kanarese, and Malayâlam,² whom we have no reason for doubting are practically of the same race, and who, in so far as they are Hindûs—not Jains, but followers of Siva and Vishnu—practise one style of architecture, and that known as the Dravidian. On the east coast the boundaries of the

v1.c19.4

¹ ‘Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Languages,’ London, 2nd edition, 1875, p. 42.

v1.c19.5

² This total includes the Madras Presidency, Mysore, Travankor, part of the Bombay Presidency and Haidarâbâd. In the last named there are 5,148,000 Telugu people and 1,562,000 Kanarese. The totals in each language are:—

v1.c19.6

| Tamil . . . | 16,299,000 |
| Malayâlam . | 5,278,000 |
| Telugu . . . | 20,409,000 |
| Kanarese . . | 10,234,000 |
| | 52,220,000 |

v1.c19.7

style extend as far north as the mouth of the Krishnâ, and it penetrates sporadically and irregularly into the Nizâm's territories, but chiefly through the Telugu speaking districts.

v1.c19.8

On the west coast its natural boundary northwards is the Krishnâ to the Dhârwar district, and thence south-east, past Vijayanagar and to the east of Sravana-Belgola and north of Mysore city westwards to the coast. Much of the Kanarese country lies to the north and west of this, and a large part of the Telugu area is to the north of it; but, of course, examples of the style are to be found beyond this line, and of other styles within it. (At Elûrâ in latitude 20° N. we have it, but this is most probably due to the Râshtrakûta kings having employed architects from their capital of Mâlkhed, 200 miles to the south.) It took no permanent root there, however, while the reflex wave brought the northern styles into Mysore or other southern countries, where their presence was as little to be expected as that of the Dravidian so far north.

v1.c19.9

Although considerable progress has lately been made in the right direction, no satisfactory solution has yet been arrived at of the problem of the origin of the Dravidians. So far as history is concerned, in such glimmerings of tradition as we possess, at the earliest time at which we find any mention of them the most civilised and important of their communities occupied the extreme southern point of the peninsula.¹ North of them all was forest, but between the Christian Era and the Muhammadan invasion we find the jungle gradually disappearing, and the southern races pushing northwards, till, in the 14th century, they were checked and driven back by the Moslim.

v1.c19.10

¹ See H. H. Wilson's historical sketch in the '*Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society*,' vol. iii. (1836), p. 199 *et seqq.*

v1.c19.11

Till we know more about the origin of these Dravidian races, however, it seems expedient for the present to assume that the Tamil-speaking races are practically aboriginal. As far back as their traditions reach, we find the Drâvida Desa, or southern part of India, divided into kingdoms or states, of which three are frequently mentioned—the Pândyas, the Cholas, and the Cheras,² forming a little triarchy of powers, not often interfered with by the other nations of the peninsula, nor interfering with those beyond their limits. During the greater part of their existence their relations of war and peace have been chiefly among themselves, and they have grown up a separate people, as unlike the rest of the world as can well be conceived.

v1.c19.12

² In Asoka's second edict reference is made to Chola, Pândya, Satiyaputra, Keralaputra and Ceylon; and, as Kerala is well known as the name of the Chera country, we have here mention of all three states together with 'Satiyaputra,' which may possibly be that of the Sâtakarnis of Banavâsi. The Asoka inscriptions discovered in 1892 in Mysore are indicative of the wide influence of that emperor.

v1.c19.13

Of the three the most southern was the Pândya kingdom, which occupied the extreme south of the peninsula from Cape Comorin to the Vellâr river¹ in the Pudukottai state on the east coast, and to Achchankovil Pass² on the west, including the southern part of Travankor. It seems to have been of sufficient importance about the time of the Christian Era to have attracted the special attention of Greek and Roman geographers and merchants. How much earlier it became a state, or had a regular succession of rulers, we know not,³ but it seems to have attained to some consistency as early as five or six centuries before the Christian Era, for we find its princes referred to in the earliest Singhalese traditions of the 'Mahâwansa.'⁴ Their early capital was probably Korkai or Kolkai, at the mouth of the Tâmraparnî close to Kâyal, and known to the early geographers as the seat of the pearl fishery; but the Pândya princes, at an early date, either removed to Madurâ, or possibly they had another capital there. This continued to be the seat of government of the later rulers of the country from some time in the 12th century till its absorption in the middle of the 18th.

v1.c19.14

¹ It falls into Palks Strait in 10° 8′ N. latitude.

v1.c19.15

² In N. latitude 9° 6′.

v1.c19.16

³ See Bishop Caldwell's 'Political and General History of the District of Tinnevelly' (Madras, 1881); and 'Indian Antiquary,' vol. xxii. (1893), pp. 57ffg.

v1.c19.17

⁴ Vijaya sends to the Pândya king for his daughter. — 'Mahâwansa,' ch. vii. And the second and fourth Sinhalese princes are named Pându-vâsa and Pândukâbhaya, as being of Pândya descent.

v1.c19.18

During the long period of their rule, the Pândyas had several epochs of great brilliancy and power, followed by long intervening periods of depression owing to frequent invasions from their neighbours the Chola kings of Trichinopoly. The 1st century, and afterwards the 5th or 6th, seem to have been those in which they especially distinguished themselves. The large number of gold, silver and copper coins, chiefly of the Roman emperors from Augustus to Nero, that have been found at different places in the region, indicate a considerable commerce with the West at that age. We have lists of kings, but how far mythical we know not, the times at which any of them lived being quite unknown before the 9th or 10th century, and such as have been approximately ascertained between the 9th and 13th century are those mentioned in Chola inscriptions. If buildings of the first ten or twelve centuries exist, which is by no means improbable, they are still unknown to us, and must remain so till the full results of the Archæological Surveys are adequately published. In the early ages of their history the Pândya kings are believed to have been Buddhists, but one of them, perhaps in the 12th century, became a Saiva, and persecuted the heterodox sect mercilessly.

v1.c19.19

The Muhammadans, led by Malik Kâfûr, conquered Madurâ in 1311, and for about half a century they held the country, till dispossessed by a new line of Pândya princes, who were probably more or less under the supremacy of Vijayanagar. About 1525, however, the Nâyyaks—officers of Vijayanagar—usurped supreme power at Madurâ, and ruled there till 1736. By far the most distinguished prince of the Nâyyak dynasty was Tirumalai Nâyyak, who ruled from 1623 till 1659. This prince adorned the capital city of Madurâ with many splendid edifices, some of which have been drawn by Daniell and others. What more ancient remains there are will not be known till they have been carefully and scientifically surveyed, and the results published.

v1.c19.20

The Chola kingdom extended northward from the border of the Pândya country and the valley of the Kâverî and Kolerûn rivers, whose banks seem always to have been its principal seat, to the Pâlâr river or nearly to Madras, all along the eastern coast, called after them Cholamandalam or Coromandel. Westwards their kingdom extended into Mysore, but the boundaries varied at different periods, and, after the fall of the Pallavas of Kânchî, they advanced northwards to the limits of the Eastern Chalukyas of Vengi. The date of the origin of their kingdom is not known, but the mention of Chola as a state in the Asoka edicts is proof of its antiquity. Their early capital was Uraiyûr, now a suburb of Trichinopoly. The earliest princes of the dynasty, whose position we can assign, belong to the 9th century, but it is only with Râjarâja I., who became king in 983, that any connected chronology commences. Their epoch of greatest glory was between the 10th and 12th centuries, when they seem to have conquered not only their neighbours the Pallavas, Pândyas and Cheras, but even to have surpassed the bounds of the triarchy, and carried their arms into Ceylon, and to have maintained an equal struggle with the Chalukyas in the north. Their capital during this period was at Kânchî, now Conjivaram, which they had wrested from the Pallavas. By the middle of the 13th century, however, their power had waned, and they sank step by step, first under the Muhammadans, from whom it passed to the Nâyyaks of Madurâ, and then to the Marâthas.

v1.c19.21

The Cheras occupied the country northward of the Pândya kingdom, and westward of the Chola, stretching along the west or Malabar coast to Honâwar: whether they ever occupied any considerable portion of Mysore or of Koimbatur is not so certain. The capital was Karûr or Vanji, probably adjacent to Cranganor in the Cochin state.¹ Tradition assigns to the state a series of kings styled Perumâl, who seem to have been elective, and are mentioned as Pândyas and Cholas, but the list ended with Cherumân Perumâl, in the 9th century, who is said to have become a Moslim. No Chera inscriptions have as yet come to light to help us to unravel their history, and the territory was probably divided into principalities, whose main defence was the mountain range, separating their country from their eastern neighbours.

v1.c19.22

¹ Ptolemy (‘Geographia,’ vii. 86) mentions Karoura as the capital of Kêrobothras, probably intended for Kêrapûtran, ‘King of Chera.’—‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. xxxi., pp. 343-344; Logan’s ‘*Malabar*,’ vol. i. pp. 252, 253.

v1.c19.23

But however this may be, the old Chera region is best defined by its architecture, for the style of Hindû temple, Jaina basti, and Moslim mosque, is distinctly one throughout the country from the north of Kanara to the south of Travankor. Jainism probably penetrated into the country at an early date, and till late in the 16th century the Tuluva râjas were Jains, whilst the colossal statues at Kârkala and Vênûr in South Kanara and at Sravan-Belgola in Mysore, with the bastis at Mûdabidri, Bhatkal and elsewhere testify to their zeal. On the other hand, the Malayâlis are snake worshippers to the present day; in their gardens the Hindûs usually provide a "Nâga-kotta" or snake shrine.²

v1.c19.24

² *Ante*, p. 43, note 3.

v1.c19.25

A fourth dynasty, already mentioned, appears at an early date in the history of the Dekhan; the Pallavas³ possibly rose to power on the decay of the Andhra power in the third century, and they seem to have secured much of the Chola country, probably before the 5th. About A.D. 400 Samudragupta, among other princes, claimed to have overthrown Vishnugopa of Kânchî, who was doubtless a Pallava king, and recent epigraphical research has now brought to light details respecting this dynasty which ruled the country called Drâvida from their capital at Kânchî, now Conjivaram. In the 7th century they were at war with the Chalukyas of Bâdâmi, and Narasimhavarman I. claimed to have destroyed Bâdâmi during the reign of the Chalukya king Pulikesin II. (A.D. 609-642), whilst his father Mahendravarman had, at an earlier date, defeated the same king near Kânchî when he invaded Drâvida.¹ Probably about this period the Pallavas extended their rule over the Bellâri district and parts of Mysore; but in the following century we learn that Vikramâditya II., the Chalukya king, about 740, defeated Nandivarman Pallava and entered Kânchî, bestowing gifts on the shrine of Râjasimhesvara—now the Kailâsanâtha temple—built by Narasimhavarman II. A century later they were attacked by the Râshtrakûtas, and their power seems to have been broken, and they gradually succumbed to the Cholas, who re-asserted their power in the 10th century.

v1.c19.26

³ The ‘Mahâbhârata,’ ‘Vishnu Purâna,’ and ‘Varâha Mihira’ (in the 6th century), frequently mention the Pahlavas among the tribes in the north-west, and some scholars have tried to identify them with the Pallavas, who were in the south-east of India as early as the 2nd century, but the similarity of names alone will hardly justify the assumption of identity.

v1.c19.27

¹ Hultzsch, ‘South Indian Inscriptions,’ vol. iii. pp. 340ffg.; and Fleet, ‘Bombay Gazetteer,’ vol. i. pt. ii. pp. 316ffg.

v1.c19.28

Parântaka or Vîranârâyana (*cir.* A.D. 907-946) advanced the Chola power and boasts of taking Madurâ from the Pândya king and the invasion of Ceylon,² as also of gilding the “Golden Hall” at Chidambaram, the then famed temple of his race. His son Râjâditya was killed in battle by the Râshtrakûta king Krishna III., and a period of civil war followed till 985, when Râjarâja secured the throne and carried his conquests as far as Kalinga on the north, to Kollam or Quilon on the west, and to Ceylon in the south.³ Though a Saiva, we have a long copperplate grant of the 21st year of his reign granting a village to a Buddhist temple at Negapattam built by a king of Katâha—apparently in the eastern peninsula⁴; but his great architectural monument was the Tanjor temple. For a century after Râjarâja I. the Cholas maintained the commanding position he had gained for his dynasty, but from the time of Vikrama Chola (1118-1135), their power gradually waned, and after this the rise of the Ballâlas in Mysore, and the revival of the Pândyas in the south, seem to have checked them to such an extent that they never regained their previous position.

v1.c19.29

² The ‘Mahâwansa’ seems to place this invasion in the time of Udaya III., A.D. 964-972; but the flight of the Pându king from Madurâ to Ceylon is mentioned under Kâsyapa IV., A.D. 929-939, ‘Mahâwansa,’ chh. lii., liii.

v1.c19.30

³ ‘Mahâwansa,’ ch. lv.

v1.c19.31

⁴ *Ante*, p. 206.

v1.c19.32

Although, politically, these states always remained distinct, and generally antagonistic, the people belonged to the same race. Their architecture is different from any other found in India, but united in itself, and has gone through a process of gradual change from the earliest times at which we become acquainted with it, until we lose sight of it altogether in the last century. This change is invariably for the worse, the earlier specimens being in all instances the most perfect, and the degree of degradation forming, as mentioned above, a tolerably exact chronometric scale, by which we may measure the age of the buildings.

v1.c19.33

Buddhism does not seem to have ever gained such a footing among the Dravidian races generally as it did in northern and western India; yet, in the 7th century, when Hiuen Tsiang visited Kânchîpuram, most probably when Narasimhavarman I. was the Pallava sovereign, he reckoned "some hundred of sanghârâmas with ten thousand priests" in the Drâvida country, all belonging to the Sthavira school of the Mahâyâna, with eighty Hindû temples and many Jaina heretics.¹ In Malakûta or the Pândya country he reports from hearsay that the monasteries were mostly ruinous, whilst Jains were numerous; and for the Chola province, which he probably passed through, he makes a like statement. Like their temples at Negapattarn, Buddhist monasteries would mostly be of brick, and when the sect disappeared, whether from persecution—as tradition asserts—or through absorption into Vaishnava or other sects, their buildings would be pulled down or altered for other purposes.

v1.c19.34

¹ Beal, ‘Buddhist Records,’ vol. ii. p. 229.

v1.c19.35

The Jaina religion long continued to flourish at Conjivaram and in Mysore; but, though influential from their intelligence, the Jains never formed more than a small numerical fraction of the people among whom they were located.

v1.c19.36

The Hindû religion, which was probably always supreme in the Dravidian districts, now commonly designated the Brahmanical, is divided into the worshippers of Siva and Vishnu, which are quite distinct and almost antagonistic; but both are so overloaded with absurd fables and monstrous superstitions that it is very difficult to ascertain what they really are or ever were. Nor are we yet in a position to speak confidently of their origin.

v1.c19.37

Both these religions have borrowed an immense amount of nomenclature from the more abstract religions of the Aryan races, and both profess to venerate the Vedas and other scriptures in the Sanskrit language. Indeed it is all but impossible that the intellectual superiority of that race should not make itself felt on the inferior tribes, but it is most important always to bear in mind that the Sanskrit-speaking Aryan was a stranger in India. It cannot indeed be too often repeated that all that is intellectually great in that country—all, indeed, which is written—belongs to them; but all that is built—all, indeed, which is artistic—belongs to other races, who were either aboriginal or immigrated into India at earlier or subsequent periods, and from other sources than those which supplied the Aryan stock.

v1.c19.38

There does not seem to be any essential difference either in plan or form between the Saiva and Vaishnava temples in the south of India. It is only by observing the images or emblems worshipped, or by reading the stories represented in the numerous sculptures with which a temple is adorned, that we find out the god to whom it is dedicated. Whoever he may be, the temples consist almost invariably of the four following parts, arranged in various manners, as afterwards to be explained, but differing in themselves only according to the age in which they were executed:—

v1.c19.39

1. The principal part, the actual temple itself, is called the *Vimâna*.¹ It is always square in plan, and surmounted by a pyramidal roof of one or more storeys; and it contains the cell in which the image of the god or his emblem is placed.

v1.c19.40

¹ *Vimâna* is generally used to designate "a chariot" or vehicle of the gods, a moving palace; hence it includes the shrine and spire.

v1.c19.41

2. The porches or *Mantapams*,² which always cover and precede the door leading to the cell.

v1.c19.42

² In Sanskrit—*Mandapa*, a pavilion or open porch, thence a hall, and a temple.

v1.c19.43

3. Gate-pyramids, *Gopurams*,³ which are the principal features in the quadrangular enclosures that surround the more notable temples.

v1.c19.44

³ *Gopura* means a town gate, hence an entrance, applied to the lofty towers over the entries to southern temples. The later style of gopurams dates from the 16th century, and do not properly belong to the original Dravidian temples. They were probably intended for purposes of defence against invasion and plunder.

v1.c19.45

4. Pillared halls or *Chaultris*—properly *Châwadîs*⁴—used for various purposes, and which are the invariable accompaniments of these temples.

v1.c19.46

⁴ *Châwatî* or *Châwadî* is a public lodging place, a shelter for travellers.

v1.c19.47

Besides these, a temple always contains tanks or wells for water—to be used either for sacred purposes or the convenience of the priests—dwellings for all the various grades of the priesthood are attached to it, and numerous other buildings for state or convenience.

v1.c19.48

HINDÛ CONSTRUCTION.

v1.c19.49

CONTENTS. Arches—Domes—Plans—Sikharas.

Arches.

v1.c19.s1.1

BEFORE proceeding to describe the arrangements of Hindû or Jaina temples, it may add to the clearness of what follows on the various styles if we first explain the peculiar modes of constructing arches and domes which they invariably employed.

v1.c19.s1.2

As remarked above, although we cannot assert that the Buddhists never employed a true arch, this at least is certain—that, except in the roofs of one or two small chaityas recently discovered, no structural example has been found in India, and that all the arched or circular forms found in the caves are without exception copies of wooden forms, and nowhere even simulate stone construction. With the Hindûs and Jains the case is different: they use stone arches and stone domes which are not copied from wooden forms at all; but these are invariably horizontal arches, never formed or intended to be formed with radiating voussoirs.

v1.c19.s1.3

It has been explained, in speaking of Pelasgic art,¹ how prevalent these forms were in ancient Greece and Asia Minor, and how long they continued to be employed even after the principles of the true arch were perfectly understood. In India, however, the adherence to this form of construction is even more remarkable. As the Hindûs quaintly express it, "an arch never sleeps"; and it is true that a radiating arch does contain in itself a *vis viva* which is always tending to thrust its haunches outwards, and goes far to insure the ultimate destruction of every building where it is employed: while the horizontal forms employed by the Hindûs are in stable equilibrium, and, unless disturbed by violence, might remain so for ever.

v1.c19.s1.4

¹ Fergusson's 'Ancient and Mediæval Architecture' (3rd ed.), vol. i. pp. 243 *et seqq.*

v1.c19.s1.5

There can be no doubt that the Hindûs carried their horror of an arch to an excess which frequently led them to worse faults on the other side. In city walls for instance, where there is a superabundant abutment on either hand to counteract any thrust, the horizontal principle is entirely misplaced. If we take, for instance, one of the city gates at Vijayanagar (Woodcut No. 168), we cannot help perceiving that with much smaller stones

v1.c19.s1.6

168. View of City Gateway, Vijayanagar. (From a Photograph.)

v1.c19.s1.7

and less trouble a far more stable construction could have been obtained, so long as the wall on either hand remained entire. What the Hindû feared was that if the wall were shattered, as we now find it, the arch would have fallen, though the horizontal layers still remain in their places.

v1.c19.s1.8

Instead of a continuous bracket like that shown in the last example, a more usual form, in modern times at least, is that of several detached brackets placed a little distance apart the one from the other. When used in moderation this is the more pleasing form of the two, and in southern India it is generally used with great success. In the north they are liable to exaggerate it, as in the gateway from Jhinjhuwâdâ in Gujarât (Woodcut No. 169, p. 312), when it becomes unpleasing, though singularly characteristic of the style.¹

v1.c19.s1.9

¹ Other examples of the same style may be seen in the gateways of Dabhoi.—Burgess and Cousens, 'The Antiquities of Dabhoi in Gujarât,' plates 10, 13, and 16.

v1.c19.s1.10

It is this horizontal or bracket mode of construction that is the formative principle of the Dravidian or Southern style of Hindû architecture, every form and every ornament depending almost wholly upon it. In the north, however, another development of the same principle is found in the horizontal dome, which is scarcely known in the south, but which has given a new character to the style, and, as one of its most beautiful features, demands a somewhat detailed explanation.

v1.c19.s1.11

169. Gateway, Jhinjhuwâdâ. (From Kinloch Forbes' Râs Mâlâ.)

Domes.

v1.c19.s2.1

It is to be regretted that, while so much has been written on the history of the pointed arch, so little should have been said regarding the history of domes: the one being a mere constructive peculiarity that might very well have been dispensed with; the other being the noblest feature in the styles in which it prevails, and perhaps the most important acquisition with which science has enriched the art of architecture.

v1.c19.s2.2

The so-called Treasuries of Mycenæ and Orchomenos, as well as the chambers in Etruscan tombs, prove that as early as ten or twelve centuries before Christ the Pelasgic races had learned the art of roofing circular chambers with stone vaults, not constructed, as we construct them, with radiating vaults, on the principle of the common arch, but by successive layers of stones converging to a point, and closed by one large stone at the apex.

v1.c19.s2.3

Whoever invented the true or radiating arch, the Romans were the first who applied it as a regular and essential architectural feature, and who at the same time introduced its complement, the radiating dome, into architectural construction;

v1.c19.s2.4

at what period it is not now known. The earliest example, the Pantheon, is also the finest and largest; but we have lost entirely the innumerable steps by which the architects must have slowly progressed to so daring an experiment.

v1.c19.s2.5

There is, however, a vast difference between these two classes of domes, which it is necessary to bear in mind in order to understand what follows.

v1.c19.s2.6

The Roman arch and Roman dome are always constructed (Woodcut No. 170) on the principle of voussoirs, or truncated wedges, radiating from a centre. This enabled the Romans to cover much larger spaces with their domes than perhaps was possible on the horizontal principle; but it involved the inconvenience of great lateral thrusts, continually tending to split the dome and tear the building in pieces, and requiring immense and massive abutments to counteract their destructive energy.

v1.c19.s2.7

170. Radiating Arch.

v1.c19.s2.8

171. Horizontal Arch.

v1.c19.s2.9

The Indian or horizontal dome never can be made circular in section, except when used on the smallest scale, but almost always takes a form more or less pointed (Woodcut No. 171). From the time of the building of the Treasury of Mycenæ¹ to the birth of Christ, we have a tolerably complete series of arches and vaults constructed on this principle, but few domes properly so called. After the Christian Era the first example is found in a singular tomb at Mylassa,² near Halicarnassus in Caria,³ where the dome exhibits all the peculiarities of construction found in the Jaina temples of India. After this we almost lose the thread of its history till the form reappears in porches like those of the 11th century on Mount Âbû, where it is a perfectly established architectural feature, that must have been practised long before it could be used as we find it in that building. Whether we shall ever be able to recover the lost links in this chain is more than doubtful, but it would be deeply interesting to the history of art if it could be done. In the meantime, there is no difficulty in explaining the constructive steps by which the object is now attained in India. These may also throw some light on the history of the invention, though this is not, of course, capable of direct proof.

v1.c19.s2.10

¹ ‘History of Ancient and Mediæval Architecture,’ vol. i. p. 243.

v1.c19.s2.11

² *Ibid.* p. 371; and *ante*, p. 209.

v1.c19.s2.12

³ Fully illustrated in vol. ii. of the Dilettanti Society’s ‘Antiquities of Ionia.’

v1.c19.s2.13

The simplest mode of roofing a small square space supported by four pillars is merely to run an architrave or stone beam from each pillar, and cover the intermediate opening by a plain stone slab. Unless, however, slabs of great dimensions are available, this mode of construction has a limit very soon arrived at. The next step therefore is to reduce the extent of the central space to be covered by cutting off its corners; this is done by

v1.c19.s2.14

172. Diagram of Roofing.

v1.c19.s2.15

triangular stones placed in each angle of the square, as in Woodcut No. 172, thus employing five stones instead of one. By this means, the size of the central stone remaining the same, the side of the square space so roofed is increased in the ratio of ten to seven, the actual area being doubled. The next step in the process (Woodcut No. 173) is by employing three tiers and nine stones, instead of two tiers and five stones, which quadruples the area roofed. Thus, if the central stone is 4 ft., by the second process the space roofed will be about 5 ft. 8 in.; by the third 8 ft. square; by a fourth process (Woodcut No. 174)—with four tiers and thirteen stones

v1.c19.s2.16

173. Diagrams of Roofing. 174.

v1.c19.s2.17

—the extent roofed may be 9 ft. or 10 ft., always assuming the central stone to remain 4 ft. square. All these forms are still currently used in India, but with four pillars the process is seldom carried further than this; with another tier, however, and eight pillars (as shown in Woodcut No. 175), it may be carried a step further—exactly the extent to which it is carried in the tomb at Mylassa above referred to. In this, however, as in all instances of octagonal domes in this style, instead of the octagonal form being left as such, there are always four external pillars at the angles, so that the square shape is retained, with twelve pillars, of which the eight internal pillars may be taken as mere insertions to support the long architrave between the four angular pillars.

v1.c19.s2.18

175. Diagram of Roofing.

v1.c19.s2.19

It is evident that here again we come to a limit beyond which we cannot progress without using large and long stones. This was sometimes met by cutting off the angles of the octagon, and making the lower course of sixteen sides. When this has been done an awkwardness arises in getting back to the square form. This was escaped from, in all the instances I am acquainted with, by adopting circular courses for all above that with sixteen sides. In many instances the lower course with sixteen sides is altogether omitted, and the circles placed immediately

v1.c19.s2.20

[Figure: 176. Diagram of Indian Construction. B. Form of bracket capital in the angle of an octagonal dome.]

v1.c19.s2.21

on the octagon, as in the temple of Vimala at Âbû (Woodcut No. 284, vol. ii. p. 39). It is difficult to say how far this system might be carried constructively without danger of weakness. The Indian domes seldom exceed 30 ft. in diameter, but this may have arisen more from the difficulty of getting architraves above 12 ft. or 13 ft. in length to support the sides, than from any inability to construct domes of larger diameter in themselves. This last difficulty was to some extent got over by a system of bracketing, by which more than half the bearing of the architrave was thrown on the capital of the column, as shown in Woodcut No. 176. Of course this method might have been carried to any extent, so that a very short architrave would suffice for a large dome; but whether this could be done with elegance is another matter. The Indians seem to have thought not; at least, as far so I know, they never carried it to any extent. Instead of bracketing, however, they sometimes used struts, as shown in Woodcut No. 176, but it is questionable whether that could ever be made a really serviceable constructive expedient in stone architecture.

v1.c19.s2.22

The great advantage to be derived from the mode of constructing domes just described was the power it gave of placing them on pillars without having anything to fear from the lateral thrust of the vault. The Romans never even attempted this, but always, so to speak, brought their vaults down to the ground, or at least could only erect them on great cylinders, which confined the space on every side. The Byzantine architects cut away a great deal of the substructure, but nevertheless could never get rid of the great heavy piers they were forced to employ to support their domes; and in all ages were forced to use either heavy abutments externally, or to crowd their interiors with masses of masonry, so as in a great measure to sacrifice either the external effect or the internal convenience of their buildings to the constructive exigencies of their domes. This in India never was the case; all the pressure was vertical, and to ensure stability it only required sufficient strength in the support to bear the downward pressure of the mass—an advantage the importance of which is not easily over-estimated.

v1.c19.s2.23

One of the consequences of this mode of construction was, that all the decoration of the Indian domes was horizontal, or, in other words, the ornaments were ranged in concentric rings, one above the other, instead of being disposed in vertical ribs, as in Roman or Gothic vaults.¹ This arrangement allows of far more variety without any offence to good taste, and practically has rendered some of the Indian domes the most exquisite specimens of elaborate roofing that can anywhere be seen. Another consequence of this mode of construction was the employment of pendants from the centres of the domes, which are used to an extent that would have surprised even the Tudor architects of our own country. With them, however, the pendant was an architectural *tour de force*, requiring great constructive ingenuity and large masses to counterbalance it, and is always tending to destroy the building it ornaments; while the Indian pendant, on the contrary, only adds its own weight to that of the dome, and has no other prejudicial tendency. Its forms, too, generally have a lightness and elegance never even imagined in Gothic art; it hangs from the centre of a dome more like a lustre of crystal drops than a solid mass of marble or of stone.

v1.c19.s2.24

¹ The tendency of the Indian construction, however, was to make the section of the dome nearly conical as each course or ring of stone, after the first two or three, had about the same amount of projection inwards.

v1.c19.s2.25

As before remarked, the eight pillars that support the dome are almost never left by themselves, the base being made square by the addition of four others at the angles. There are many small buildings so constructed with only twelve pillars, as shown in the annexed diagram (No. 177), but two more are oftener added on each face, making twenty altogether, as shown on the upper side of the annexed diagram (No 178); or four on each face, making twenty-eight; or again, two in front of these four, or six on each face, so as to make thirty-six; and the same system of aggregation is carried on till the number of pillars reaches fifty-six (Woodcut No. 179), which is the largest number I ever saw surrounding one dome; but any number of these domes may surround one temple, or central dome, and the number consequently be multiplied almost *ad infinitum*. When so great a number of pillars is introduced as in the last instance, it is usual to make the outmost compartment on each face square, and surmount it with a smaller dome. This is occasionally though rarely done even with the smallest number.

v1.c19.s2.26

[Figure: 177. Diagram of the arrangement of the pillars of a Jaina Dome.]

v1.c19.s2.27

[Figure: 178. Diagram Plan of Jaina Porch.]

v1.c19.s2.28

The first result of this arrangement is, that the Hindûs obtained singularly varied outline in plan, producing the happiest effects of light and shade with every change in the sun's position. Another result was, that by the accentuation of the salient and re-entering angles, they produced those stronglymarked vertical lines which give such an appearance of height to Gothic designs. To accomplish this, however, the Western architects were obliged to employ buttresses, pinnacles, and other constructive expedients. The Hindûs obtained it by a new disposition of the plan without anywhere interrupting the composition. This form of outline also expresses the internal arrangements of the porch better than could be done by the simpler outline of either a square or circle, such as is usually employed in Europe. Its greatest merit, however, is, that the length of the greater aisles is exactly proportioned to their relative width as compared with that of the subordinate aisles. The entrance being in the angle, the great aisle forms the diagonal, and is consequently in the ratio of 10 to 7, as compared to what it would be if the entrance were in the centre of the side, where we usually place it. From the introduction of the octagonal dome in the centre the same proportion (correctly 1000 to 707) prevails between the central and side aisles, and this again is perhaps the most pleasing that has yet been introduced anywhere. In Gothic churches the principal aisles are generally twice as wide as the side ones, but they are also twice as high, which restores the proportion. Here, where the height of all is the same, or, nearly so, this gradation just suffices to give variety, and to mark the relative importance of the parts, without the one overpowering the other: and neither has the appearance of being too broad nor too narrow.

v1.c19.s2.29

179. Diagram of Jaina Porch.

v1.c19.s2.30

It is, of course, difficult for those who have never seen a building of the class just described to judge of the effect of these arrangements; and they have seldom been practised in Europe. There is, however, one building in which they have accidentally been employed to a considerable extent, and which owes its whole beauty to the manner in which it follows the arrangement above described. That building is Sir Christopher Wren's church of St. Stephens, Walbrook. Internally its principal feature is a dome supported on eight pillars, with four more in the angles, and two principal aisles crossing the building at right angles, with smaller square compartments on each side. This church is the great architect's masterpiece, but it would have been greatly improved had its resemblance to a Hindû porch been more complete. The necessity of confining the dome and aisles within four walls greatly injures the effect as compared with the Indian examples. Even the Indian plan of roofing, explained above, might be used in such a building with much less expense and less constructive danger than a Gothic vault of the same extent.

Plans.

v1.c19.s3.1

Till the discovery of the small Buddhist chaitya halls at Têr and Chezarla and elsewhere, already described (p. 126), there was only one temple in India which gave us any hint of how the plans of such halls were related to those of Hindû and Jaina temples. Fortunately, however, its evidence is so distinct that there could be very little doubt about the matter. The temple in question is situated in the village of Aihole, in Bijâpûr district, in western India, not far from the place where the original capital of the Chalukyan sovereigns was situated, and near the caves of Bâdâmi on the one hand and the temples of Pattadakal on the other. Its date is uncertain to some extent, since an inscription on its outer gateway recording a grant to the temple, during the reign of Vikramâditya-Satyâsraya, is undated;¹ and there were two Chalukya kings of this name—one ruling between A.D. 655 and 680, and the other between 733 and 746. But the grant was to a temple already established, and even if made in the 8th century the fane might well be of fifty or eighty years earlier date, as its architecture would indicate. It is thus not only one of the oldest structural temples known to exist in western India, but in fact one of the only three yet discovered that can with any certainty be said to have been erected before the beginning of the 8th century.

v1.c19.s3.2

¹ 'Indian Antiquary,' vol. viii. pp. 285-286; and 'Archæological Survey of Western India,' vol. i. pp. 40 *et seqq.*

v1.c19.s3.3

This temple, as the sculptures testify, was dedicated to Vishnu—the special divinity of the Chalukyas; but the words carved in Kanarese on the basement—“the holy Jaina temple”—seems to indicate that at one time it had been claimed or appropriated by the Jains, and this, with some misconception as to the character of the sculptures, has led to the mistake of its being supposed that it was originally Jaina. Its original dedication is fortunately, however, of very little importance for our present purposes. The age when this temple was erected was the age of toleration in India. The Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsiang has left us a most vivid description of a great quinquennial festival, at which he was present at Allahâbâd in A.D. 643, at which the great King Silâditya presided, and distributed alms and honours, on alternate days, to Buddhists, Brahmans, and heretics of all classes, who were assembled there in tens of thousands, and seem to have felt no jealousy of each other, or rivalry that led, at least, to any disturbance.¹ It was on the eve of a disruption that led to the most violent contests, but up to that time we have no reason to believe that they did not all use similar edifices for their religious purposes, with only such slight modifications as their different formulæ may have required (Woodcut No. 180).

v1.c19.s3.4

¹ Hiouen Thsang, 'Mémoires sur les Contrées Orientales,' tome i. pp. 253 *et seqq.*; or Beal, 'Buddhist Records,' vol. i. pp. 214 *et seqq.*

v1.c19.s3.5

[Figure: 180. Old Temple at Aihole. (From a Plan by J. Burgess.) Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.]

v1.c19.s3.6

Be this as it may, any one who will compare the plan of the chaitya at Sânchî (Woodcut No. 47), which is certainly Buddhist, with that of this temple at Aihole, which is Vaishnava, can hardly fail to perceive how nearly identical they must have been when complete. In both instances, it will be observed, the apse is solid, and it appears that this always was the case in structural free-standing chaityas. At least, in all the rock-cut examples, so far as is known, the pillars round the apse are different from those that separate the nave from the aisles; they never have capitals or bases, and are mere plain makeshifts. From the nature of their situation in the rock, light could not be admitted to the aisle behind the apse from the outside, but must be borrowed from the front, and a solid apse was consequently inadmissible; but in free-standing examples, as at Aihole, it was easy to introduce windows there or anywhere. Another change was necessary when, from an apse sheltering a relic-shrine, it became a cell containing an image of a god; a door was then indispensable, and also a thickening of the wall when it was necessary it should bear a tower or sikhara to mark the position of the cella on the outside. Omitting the verandah, the other changes introduced between the erection of these two examples are only such as were required to adapt the points of support in the temple to carry a heavy stone roof, instead of the light wooden superstructure of the primitive Buddhist chaitya (Woodcut No. 181).

v1.c19.s3.7

It may be a question, and one not easy to settle in the present state of our knowledge, whether the Buddhist chaityas had or had not verandahs, like the Aihole example. The rockcut examples naturally give us no information on this subject, but the presumption certainly is, looking at their extreme appropriateness in that climate, that they had this appendage, sometimes at least, though not perhaps usually.

v1.c19.s3.8

If from this temple at Aihole we pass to the neighbouring

v1.c19.s3.9

181. Temple at Aihole. (From a Photograph.)

v1.c19.s3.10

Saiva one of Pâpanâtha at Pattadakal, built probably not very much later, we find that we have passed the boundary line that separates the ancient from the mediæval architecture of India, in so far at least as plans are concerned (Woodcut No. 182). The circular forms of the Buddhists have entirely disappeared, and the cell has become the base of a square tower, as it remained ever afterwards. The nave of the chaitya has become a well defined mandapa or porch in front of, but distinct from, the cell, and these two features in an infinite variety of forms, and with various subordinate adjuncts, are the essential elements of the plans of the Jaina and Hindû temples of all the subsequent ages.

v1.c19.s3.11

182. Plan of Pâpanâtha Temple at Pattadakal. Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.

v1.c19.s3.12

The procession-path round the cell—called pradakshina—as that round the apse, remained for some centuries as a common but not a universal feature. The verandah disappeared. Round a windowless cell it was useless, and the pillared porches contained in themselves all the elements of shelter or of shadow that were required.

Sikharas.

v1.c19.s4.1

There is one other peculiarity common to both Hindû and Jaina architecture in the north of India that requires notice, before proceeding to describe particular examples. It is the form of the towers or spires called Sikharas or Vimânas, which invariably surmount the cells in which the images are placed. It is probably correct to assert that the images of the Tîrthankaras are invariably placed in oblong or square cells, and those of Hindû deities in square—generally cubical cells, of no great dimension, and that these cells receive their light from the doorway only. It seems also an invariable rule that the presence and position of the cell should be indicated externally by a tower or spire, and that these towers, though square or nearly so in plan, should have a curvilinear outline in elevation. If the tower at Bodh-Gayâ (*ante*, p. 78) retains unaltered the original form given to it when erected about the 5th or 6th century, this dictum would not apply to Buddhist architecture. As it is, however, the only Buddhist sikhara yet discovered it is hardly fair to draw any decided inference from one single example, while with Jaina or Hindû towers I know of no exception. Take, for instance, the tower represented in the following woodcut (No. 183), which purports to be an elevation of the celebrated Black Pagoda at Kanârak in Orissa, and may be looked upon as a typical example of the style, and of which it may be considered of a fair medium example. The upper part of the tower, to some extent, overhangs its base. It bends inward towards the summit, and is surmounted by what is called an Amalaka—a massive circular coping stone which supports a vase called *amritakalasa* or *amritakaraka*, *i.e.* "dew vessel."¹ Its peculiar corrugated form occurs frequently in old examples as a sort of blocking course dividing the sikharas horizontally into numerous small compartments, and it seems as if what is used there in a straight-lined form was employed as a circular ornament at the summit. It is a very beautiful architectural device, and was, as far as I can see, adopted only because it was so, and contrasted brilliantly with the flat ornaments with which it was employed. At present

v1.c19.s4.2

¹ The "âmalaka" has been popularly supposed to be derived from *âmalaka*—the *Phyllanthus emblica*, *Emblica officinalis* or *Emblica myrobalan*; but, though an article of Hindû materia medica, it is so insignificant a berry that it could hardly be thought of as an architectural model. May it not be from *amala*—"pure," "spotless"? Amalasilâ—"pure stone," is applied to this crowning member.—Beal, 'Buddhist Records,' vol. ii pp. 136-137; Foucher, 'L'Art Gréco-Bouddhique du Gandhâra,' tome i. p. 96*n*.

v1.c19.s4.3

183. Restored Elevation of the Sun-temple at Kanârak. (From a Drawing by the Author.) No Scale.

v1.c19.s4.4

we do not seem to be in a position to explain its origin, or that of a great many other details that are frequently met with in Hindû architecture.

v1.c19.s4.5

Whatever its origin, this amalaka is generally surmounted by a flat dome of reverse curvature, in the centre of which stands the *kalasa*, *karka*, or pinnacle, in the form of a vase, generally of very beautiful and graceful design.

v1.c19.s4.6

The great and at first sight puzzling question is, from what original is this curious combination of forms derived? It is like nothing found anywhere out of India, and like no utilitarian form in India, that we now know of. It cannot be derived from the dome-like forms of the topes. They are circular both in plan and elevation. The Sikharas are straight-lined in plan, and their section is never a segment of a circle; it is not derived from any many-storeyed buildings, as the sikharas or vimânas of the Dravidian architecture of the south of India, which seem certainly to have been copied from the many storeyed vihâras of the Buddhists, and we cannot fancy any class of domestic building which could have formed a model out of which they could have been elaborated. One curious thing we do know, which is that all the ancient roofs in India, whether represented in the bas-reliefs or copied in the caves, were invariably curvilinear—generally circular or rather ogee—having a ridge added externally to throw off the rain from that weakest part; but nothing on any bas-relief or painting gives us a hint of any building like these sikharas.

v1.c19.s4.7

184. Diagram Plan and Section of the Temple at Kanârak, designed to explain the construction of Hindû Temples.

v1.c19.s4.8

Another curious and perplexing circumstance regarding the sikharas is that when we first meet them, at Bhuvaneswar, for instance, on the Bay of Bengal, or at Pattadakal in the 7th century, near the west coast of India, the style is complete and settled in all its parts. There was no hesitation then, nor has there been any since. During the twelve or thirteen centuries that have elapsed since the erection of these earliest known examples, they have gone on becoming more and more attenuated, till they are almost as pointed as Gothic spires, and their degree of attenuation is no bad test of their age; but they never changed in any essential feature of the design. All the parts found in the oldest examples are retained in the most recent, and are easily recognisable in the buildings of the present time.

v1.c19.s4.9

The one hypothesis that occurs to me as sufficient to account for this peculiarity is to assume that it was a constructive necessity. If we take for instance an assumed section of the diagram (Woodcut No. 184, p. 324), it will be seen how easily a very tall pointed horizontal arch, like that of the Treasury at Mycenæ referred to above, p. 312, would fit its external form. In that case we might assume that the tower at Bodh-Gayâ took a straight-lined form like the doorway at Missolonghi and the 'Gate of Lions' at Mycenæ, while the Hindûs took the more graceful curvilinear shape, which certainly was more common in remote classical antiquity,¹ and as it is found in Persia may have reached India at a remote period.

v1.c19.s4.10

¹ See Woodcuts Nos. 102, 114, 124, 126, 129, 172, 177 and 178 of vol. i. of the author's 'History of Ancient and Mediæval Architecture,' 3rd edn.; and for the Missolonghi doorway and Mycenæ Gate of Lyons,—*Ibid.*, Nos. 130 and 131 on p. 247.

First 111 of 451 passages. Read on

Linked texts (37)