History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c19.s15.1

v1.c19.s15.1

Although the temples at Vellor and at Pêrûr, near Koimbatur, can only rank among the second class as regards size, they possess porticos of extreme interest to architectural history, and are consequently worthy of more attention than has been bestowed upon them. That at Vellor, however, is unfortunately situated in the fort occupied by the British, and has consequently been utilised as a store. Walls have been built between its piers, and whitewash and fittings have reduced it to that condition which we think appropriate for the noblest works of art in India. Enough, however, still remains to enable us to see that the Kalyâna mantapam here, though not one of the most elegant, is one of the oldest porches in the south. As will be seen from the woodcut (No. 232), the Vyâlîs and rearing horsemen are clearly and sharply cut, and far from being so extravagant as they sometimes are. The great cornice, too, with its double flexures and its little trellis-work of supports, is not only very elegant in form, but one of those marvels of patient industry, such as are to be found hardly anywhere else. There are many such cornices, however, in the south: one at Avadaiyâr-kôvil, in Tanjor district, is deeper and more elaborate than even this one. The outer facing there is said to be only about an inch in thickness, and its network of supports is more elaborate and more delicate than those at Vellor, though it is difficult to understand how either was ever executed in so hard a material. The traditions of the place assign the erection of the Vellor mantapam variously to the year 1350, and according to other accounts to about 1485. The bracket shafts (Woodcut No. 233) are similar but even more elegant than those in Pârvatî's porch at Chidambaram; but they are—some of them at least—attached to the pier by very elegant open-work, such as is found in Pratâpa Rudra's temple at Worangal (Woodcut No. 252), or in the windows at Halebîd. As both these examples are earlier than 1300, it might seem that this one was so also, but it is difficult to feel certain when comparing buildings so distant in locality, and belonging to different styles of art.