History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c25.s7: Dhârwâr
History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c25.s7
- Language
- English
Dhârwâr
v2.c25.s7.1
IF the province of Orissa is interesting from the completeness and uniformity of its style of Indo-Aryan architecture, that of Dhârwâr, or, more correctly speaking of Mahârâshtra, is almost equally so from exactly the opposite conditions. In the western province, the Dravidian style struggles with the northern for supremacy during all the earlier stages of their growth, and the mode in which the one influenced the other will be one of the most interesting and instructive lessons we can learn from their study, when the materials are available for a thorough investigation of the architectural history of this province. In magnificence, however, the western can never pretend to rival the eastern province. There are more and far finer buildings in the one city of Bhuvaneswar alone than in all the cities of Mahârâshtra put together, and the extreme elaboration of their details gives the Orissan examples a superiority that the western temples cannot pretend to rival.
v2.c25.s7.2
Among the oldest and most characteristic of the Dhârwâr temples is that of Pâpanâtha, at Pattadakal. As will be seen from the plan of this temple given above (Woodcut No. 182, vol. i., page 322), the cell, with its tower, has not the same predominating importance which it always had in Orissa; and instead of a mere vestibule it has a four-pillared porch, which would in itself be sufficient to form a complete temple on the eastern side of India. Beyond this, however, is the great porch, Mandapa, or Jagamohan—square, as usual, but here it possesses sixteen pillars, in four groups, instead of the astylar arrangements so common in the east. It is, in fact, a copy, with very slight alterations, of the plan of the great Saiva temple at the same place (Woodcut No. 204), or the Kailâs at Elûrâ (Woodcut No. 199). These, with others, form a group of early temples wholly Dravidian in style, but having no affinity, except in plan, with the temple of Pâpanâtha, which is as essentially Indo-Aryan in its architectural arrangements. This, in fact, may be looked upon as the characteristic difference between the styles of Dhârwâr and Orissa. The western style, from its proximity to the Dravidian and admixture with it, in fact, used pillars freely and with effect whenever wanted; while their use in Orissa is almost unknown in the best ages of the style, and their introduction, as it took place there, showed only too clearly the necessity that had arisen in the decay of the style, to supply with foreign forms the want of originality of invention.
v2.c25.s7.3
323. View of Temple of Pâpanâtha at Pattadakal. (From a Photograph.)
v2.c25.s7.4
The external effect of the building may be judged of from the above woodcut (No. 323). The outline of the tower is not unlike that of the Parasurâmeswar temple at Bhuvaneswar, with which it was probably contemporary—*cir.* A.D. 700—
v2.c25.s7.6
but the central belt is more pronounced, and always apparently was on the west side of India. It will also be observed in this tower that every third course has on the angle a form which has been described as an amalaka in speaking of the crowning members of northern temples. Here it looks as if the two intermediate courses simulated roofs, or a roof in two storeys, and then this crowning member was introduced, and the same thing repeated over and over again till the requisite height was obtained. In the Parasurâmeswar there are three intermediate courses (Woodcut No. 312); in the great tower at Bhuvaneswar, five; and in the more modern temples they disappear from the angles, but are supplied by the miniature temple-forms applied to the sides. In the temple at Bodh-Gayâ the same form occurs (Woodcut No. 19) on the angle of each storey; but there it looks more like the capital of a pillar, which, in fact, I believe to be its real original. But from whatever form derived, this repetition on the angles is in the best possible taste; the eye is led upwards by it, and is prepared for the crowning member, which is thus no longer isolated and alone, but a part of a complete design.
v2.c25.s7.7
The frequency of the repetition of this ornament is, so far as is now known, no bad test of the age of a temple. If an example were found where every alternate course was an amalaka, it probably would be older than any temple we have yet known. It would then represent a series of roofs, five, seven, or nine storeys, built over one another. It had, however, passed into conventionalities before we meet with it.
v2.c25.s7.8
To the north-west of Aihole is a Saiva cave-temple,¹ and near it on the north-west is an old temple with a porch on four plain square pillars, the mandap built of massive stones, with a sloping roof, a pradakshina round the shrine, and, from the figure of Kârttikeya on the roof of the entrance porch and of Garuda on the lintel of the shrine door, it was evidently dedicated to Vishnu (Plate XXIII.) It is known as the temple of Huchchhîmallîgudi, and appears to be of quite as early a date as any at Bhuvaneswar or elsewhere. The Sikhara is relatively small, and if we compare this temple with that of Parasurameswar (Woodcut No. 312), we observe that the latter is much more developed in style than the former. Unfortunately we have no direct record of its construction, the only indication of its date is an inscription on the north side of the west front, recording a grant for oil made in the thirteenth year of the Chalukya King Vijayâditya, that is in 718 a.d.;² but the temple was clearly then established, we know not how long previously, though we may fairly assume that it had been erected at least as early as, if not before, the reign of Vikramâditya (655 to 680 A.D.). Indeed, comparing it with the temple of Pâpanâtha at Pattadakal (Woodcut No. 323) we are at once struck by the more ancient style of the features of this, and would be quite prepared, on fair evidence, to ascribe it to the beginning of the 7th century or soon after.
v2.c25.s7.9
¹ 'Archæological Survey of Western India,' vol. i.; 'Report on Belgâm and Kaladgi,' pp. 38-40.
v2.c25.s7.10
² 'Indian Antiquary,' vol. viii. p. 284.
v2.c25.s7.11
When the drawings made by the Archæological Survey of the temples of this district¹ are completely published, they will, no doubt, throw immense light on the early history of this style.¹ As the case now stands, however, the principal interest centres in the caves of Bâdâmi, which being the only Brahmanical caves known that have a positive date upon them, they give us a fixed point from which to reason in respect of other series such as we never had before.
v2.c25.s7.12
¹ The works as yet published on this subject are the ‘Architecture in Dhârwâr and Mysore,’ fol., 100 plates, Murray, 1866; Burgess’s ‘Archæological Report on the Belgâm and Kaladgi Districts,’ 1874; and Rea’s ‘Chalukyan Architecture,’ 1896.