History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c19.s4.1

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