Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

South Indian Bronzes: A Historical Survey of South Indian Sculpture with Iconographical Notes Based on Original Sources c6: Chapter I

South Indian Bronzes: A Historical Survey of South Indian Sculpture with Iconographical Notes Based on Original Sources c6

Language
English

Chapter I

c6.1

T HE art practices of the North of India offer some points of dissimilarity from those that have governed the art productions of Southern India. ‘That the Southern art is different from the North’¹ is apparent in the two systems of architecture and in the treatment of sculpture, which have prevailed in the North and the South.

c6.2

¹ Bhandarkar “*Early History of Deccan*.”

c6.3

The Dravidian people who have been in possession of the Deccan for centuries previous to the Christian era are supposed to be the representatives of the Pre-Aryan races who were in possession of the tract south of the Vindhya mountains before the Aryan migration and probably belonged to the Turanian group who occupied Southern and Eastern Persia in ancient times, and who either by sea or by land passed to the Western shores of India.² Whatever may be the origin of the Dravidian races it is beyond doubt that the two divisions of the country indicated by the Vindhya ranges were occupied by people essentially different in blood and temperament. This is also evidenced by the language and physical peculiarities of the two races and the literature and the character of their religious worship. Yet the civilization that we meet with in South India to-day is essentially Aryan in its general features and there is no record whatsoever, except now and then in minor social practices, mythological details and the non-Sanskrit Tamil literature, of the civilization which existed there before South India was Aryanised. The Tamil kingdoms of Chera, Chola and Pandya which existed as early as 1000 B.C. had attained a considerable degree of civilization independent of Aryan influences, and the genius of this Dravidian civilization and its literature was utterly distinct from that of Sanskrit. The Dravidian tribes were gradually brought to know and accept the Aryan civilization, (chiefly by the influence of Brahmin pilgrims or adventurers who travelled southward), and to adopt their religion, polity and arts. The first Aryan missionary to the South was the great sage Agastya whose advent to the South has added a new chapter to the history of Dravidian civilization, the customs, beliefs and institutions of which were either recast or adapted gradually on the model of the Aryans. "In the centuries of either side of 750 B.C. the Aryans began to penetrate into the *mahā kāntāra* (the great forests) round about the Vindhyās, the memory of which is preserved in the tradition regarding Agastya’s advent into the South. The forest is supposed to have extended up to Pampa Sarobar near modern Hampe. The advent of Agastya introduces reclamation of the jungles into arable land. Agastya is also the reputed author of the first Tamil Grammar. Whoever this Agastya was, *Rishi* or some one else by that name, he does for Tamil what Panini did for Sanskrit."

c6.4

² Mr. S. S. Bharathi, M.A., B.L., in a learned thesis entitled “Tamil Classics and Tamilagam” (Siddhanta Dipika, July 1913) has considered an ‘indigenous’ theory regarding the origins of the Tamils.

c6.5

It will be necessary to consider the exact influence which Agastya wielded over the Dravidian civilization of the south, as the south of India is very often referred to in various local works as "the land lit up by the glory of Agastya." Agastya himself is called, by way of eminence, the *Tamil Muni* or Tamilian Sage.

c6.6

The age of Agastya was in reality a new era in the history of Tamil literature and art. Before his time there was in the Tamil countries an alphabetic system and literature, but "he was the first probably to introduce a grammatical system founded on a Sanskrit prototype." At any rate it was during his sojourn to South India, that Sanskrit influence first began to be felt. "Northern religious and social institutions were introduced and the Brahmanical priesthood, and in its train the Buddhists, the Nigranthas and the Ajiwakas and other religious sects began to pour upon the South. It was then that literature exclusively Dravidian was replaced by Northern traditions and legends. The national literature was slowly modified, its legends transformed, its heroes amalgamated with, or lost in the personality of, those of the North, and its gods absorbed with a change of name into the Aryan Pantheon.” Thus the primitive Murugga was afterwards amalgamated and identified with Skanda; the temples of Pidāri and Ayyanār were only the forerunners of those of Siva and Pārvati. Saivaism under the form of the worship of Siva or Skanda, seems to have been originally the religion of the primitive tribes of South India long before the arrival of the Aryans. This process of gradual change and assimilation was a *fait accompli* before the second century A.D., for in Ptolemy and the Periplus of the Red Sea the most southern point of India is known by its Sanskrit name of Kumari.”¹

c6.7

¹ Ancient India by S. Krishna Swami Aiyanger, M.A., 1911, pages 5, 8 and 30.

c6.8

¹ “Glimpses of Ancient Dravidians” by E. S. W. Senathi Raja, LL.B., in the *Tamilian Antiquary* No. 5, 1909, page 8. *The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea* by W. H. Scoff, 1912, page 46.

c6.9

A recent writer on other grounds has come to the conclusion “that the complete Aryanisation of the South must have taken place after the 6th century and before the 3rd century B.C.”²

c6.10

² “Brahman Immigration into Southern India” by A. Govindacharya Swami in the *Indian Antiquary*, October 1912, page 231, and July 1913, page 194.

c6.11

It is impossible in the present state of South Indian Archæology to suggest the date of Agastya with any degree of accuracy. Mr. Raja has suggested that “Aryan influences had partly penetrated into Southern India before the time of Buddha, and that the age of Agastya was anterior to that of Buddha. When Agastya composed his Grammar in Tamil, he and after him his successors incorporated into their treatises a chapter on *Porul* which formed the subject-matter of the literature of the poets and bards that preceded him. But as the state of the society portrayed in *Porul* describes the manners and customs of a people who had lived at a period anterior to the formation of the Pandyan kingdom itself, I think there is no impropriety in my dating it as early as 1000 B.C.”³

c6.12

³ *The Tamilian Antiquary*, No. 5, page 20.

c6.13

Some scholars⁴ have looked upon Agastya as a mythical personage and regard the legend of Agastya’s settlement in the South as historically worthless. Evidences are sufficient however which show that he actually lived in the South about the time of Rāma’s journey to the South. Rāma himself visited his hermitage as also that of his brothers, which was 2 *jojanas* from Panchabati (*vide* Rāmāyana, Aranya Kānda, II, 37). In Tanjore taluk, five miles north of Point Calimere, there is a small village called Agastya *palli* adjoining Vedaranniyam, ‘the forest of the Vedas’. This village is remarkable as possessing a temple dedicated to the sage Agastya. A grant of a *Bramha-deya* land given in the 16th year of the reign of king Parantaka, a Pandyan king (Birnarayan) begins with an account of the Pandya family which he describes “as praised personally by *Rishis* like Varadwaj and had the sage Agastya for its priest”². There is also a legendary account of Ugra Pandya son of Thathathakei having gone accompanied by a Chola and a Chera prince to seek assistance from the sage Agastya. Mr. V. Kanakasabhai Pillai in his work alludes to the existence in the second century A.D. of a practice of the Brahmans of Southern India to circum-bulate the Pothiya hill, a peak of the Tinnevelly ghats which was famous as the residence of the Vedic Sage Agastya; and he is still thought of as living there. Of his literary works, *Smriti Chandrikā*, *Agastya Sanhitā* and *Agastya Gitā* are well known. The work on *Silpasastra* attributed to him is perhaps the least known of his works. The *Agastiya Sakalādhikāra* has a special signification with reference to the art of South India, as suggesting the development of Dravidian art under Aryan influence. He seems to be the first author to systematise the practice of image-making in South India and the rules of proportions laid down in his work are practically the same as elaborated in the later works on South Indian sculpture, such as the *Kāsyapiya*, *Sāraswatiya*, *Anghsumānaveda-Kalpa*, etc., and are still followed by modern South Indian *Sthapathis* (sculptors). Agastya’s æsthetic leanings are very well indicated in the legendary account of the creation of his wife Lopa Mudrā, whose beauteous form he deduced and evolved from the many beauteous objects of nature, his wife being so named, as her beauty had vanquished or ‘caused to disappear’ (Sans. *Lopa*) all the other beauties of her time. Agastya’s work *Sakalādhikāra* (Lit., the authority or proficiency in image-making)⁴ exists in only one manuscript in the Tanjore Palace Estate Library being incorporated in the collection of leaves tabulated as *Silpakalādipikā* by Bendall in his catalogue. Except in the colophons there is nothing in the body of the eleven chapters of *Sakalādhikara* which indicates the authorship of the work. The matters dealt with in the book are as follows :—

c6.14

⁴ Burnell, *South Indian Palæography*, page 47.

c6.15

¹ Tanjore District Gazetteer, page 284.

c6.16

² Madras Govt. Epigraphist's Report, 1906-1907, page 164.

c6.17

³ Tamils 1800 years ago, 1904, page 21.

c6.18

⁴ Ram Raja in referring to this MSS. mistranslates the title as ‘the universal authority.’ According to the autobiography given in the Tamil work, “Agastya Jnyana” now in the Government Oriental Library, Madras, the sage was directed by Siva to compose various *Sastras* and he accordingly wrote 100,000 stanzas on Rasāyana (Alchemy), 200,000 on Medicine and 100,000 on divine wisdom. A list of 32 works is also ascribed to Agastya, one of which is Pujā vidhi (Rules of Worship) of 200 verses. Probably *Sakalādhikāra* formed portion of this work.

c6.19

Chapter I.—*Mānsangraha* (measurements). Chapter II.—*Uttamdastāla*. Chapter III.—*Madhyamdastāla*. Chapter IV.—*Adhamadastāla*. Chapter V.—*Pratimālakhan*a (Image-making). Chapter VI.—*Brisava Bāhan lakhana* Chapter VII.—*Nateswarabidhi*. Chapter VIII.—*Sodasa pratimālakhan*a (the sixteen forms of images). Chapter IX.—*Daru-Sangraha* (the collection of wood). Chapter X.—*Mritsanskāra* (the preparation of clay). Chapter XI.—*Barnasanskāra* (the preparation of colour).

c6.20

The manuscript itself is in very corrupt form, full of mistakes and gaps, but there is no doubt that it contains matters which represent the art practices of South Indian sculptors at or about the time when Agastya introduced the system of Aryan sculptors into South India. The descriptions or *lakhanas* of the sixteen forms of Siva given in this work as a sort of a guide to future artists show that Saivaism had already taken a definite shape with its rich and varied iconography which has suggested so many splendid subjects to the South Indian artists.

c6.21

Although the later development of South Indian art has drawn its inspiration from the Vaishnava philosophy and faith, at its inception, South Indian art as developed under the Aryan influence was entirely Saivaite in its character and inspiration. Many of the images of the Saivaite gods illustrated in this volume had assumed individual types at the time of Agastya, but the actual examples here reproduced mostly represent the artistic activity of the later Saiva revival during the Chola ascendancy, *viz.*, 984 to 1243 A.D.

c6.22

This great sage is specially associated with the princes of the Pandya kingdoms in the South, he being stated to have officiated both as minister and spiritual teacher to the founder of the Pandya principality, and the date of the earlier Pandya kings ought to suggest the approximate time when Agastya lived and composed his works. Ram Raja in his *Essay on the Architecture of the Hindus* says: "It (Sakalādhikāra) is generally believed to have been composed by Agastya under the auspices of the founder of the Pandya government, a circumstance which, if admitted, would give to this work a very high antiquity. It is, however, difficult to trace the exact period when the Pandya principality was originally established. Mr. Wilson in his prefatory remarks to his catalogue of the *Mackenzie Collection* places this event three or four centuries before the Christian era, although in another place he fixed the date of the civilization of the South of India ten centuries before Christ. As the Mahabharata which is believed to have been composed by Vyasa in the beginning of the *Kaliyug* makes mention of the Pandya and Chola governments, we must give them credit for a higher antiquity." Recent writers have assigned the eighth century B.C., as the probable date of Agastya's immigration to the South.

c6.23

The fact that there are no references in Agastya's work to Jain or Buddhist images or to the canonized Saivaite saints, *e.g.*, Sundarar, Appar, Manikkavacagar and others who lived in times later than the 2nd century A.D., seems to suggest that his work must have been composed in the pre-Buddhist periods probably before the 4th century B.C.

c6.24

The next name in the art-history of South India is that of the sage Kasyapa celebrated in the *purāṇas* and the other sacred writings of great antiquity. He was probably the successor to Agastya in his mission of the aryanisation of the Dravidian countries, and was perhaps the same person as the father of Kanāda the great Hindu philosopher and founder of the Vaisesika system. He is one of the seven Rishis who are said to have survived the great deluge and to have peopled the earth after that great event. Kasyapa is very well known in South India as the reputed author of the most elaborate handbook dealing with South Indian sculpture which is known as the *Kāsyapiya*. (Lit. 'appertaining to or written by Kasyapa'). This work has attained universal authority amongst all the sculptors of South India up to the present time and the young pupils are even now taught to learn by heart the verses given in this book regarding the rules of construction and measurements of images. The available manuscripts of this work are far more clear and accurate than those of the other works on *silpasāstra*. His original work comprised also matters relating to architecture and the cognate subjects.

c6.25

¹ Messrs. Bhandarkar and Krishna Swami Aiyangar.

c6.26

But the portion of his work generally known as *Anghsumān Veda Kalpa* is more widely known and followed and deals exclusively with sculpture. At any rate, of all the existing manuscripts the *Kāsyapiya* deals very exhaustively with image-making and affords the most invaluable guide to the study of South Indian sculpture. The manuscript which has been utilised in the present work is from the Government Oriental Library, Madras, and is practically the same as *Angshumān Veda Kalpa* in the collection of the Tanjore-Palace Estate Library. Both the Madras and Tanjore manuscripts are incomplete. It does not appear to be a recension of the same manuscript referred to by Ram Raja in his *Essay*.

c6.27

Next to Kasyapa we come across the name of Maya as Maya. associated with South Indian art. He has also more or less a mythical halo about him, but there are various works on art attributed to him which chiefly deal with architecture. There is no doubt, however, that he established a new system of temple-construction of his own which was probably the origin of the Dravidian School of architecture. His principal work is known as *Mayamata* or principles or opinion of Maya. The existing manuscripts attributed to him and the legendary account of his life which we glean from the Rāmāyana leaves no doubt that his activities were confined to the South and the works supposed to be written by him are specially associated with South Indian art. The works attributed to him are now known and referred to under the following names :—(a) *Mayamata* or *Mayamata Bāstu Sāstra*; (b) *Maya Silpa*; (c) *Maya silpa satikā* (d) *Silpa sāstra Bidhānam*. Of these the last work which is in five chapters is supposed to be a portion of the original *Mayamata* and deals exclusively with construction of images. The other works chiefly deal with the architecture of temples, etc. In the *purānas*, Maya, sometimes also called Maya Dānaba, is described as the son of Diti, the mother of the *Daityas* or Demons, the other sister, Aditi being the mother of the gods; and Maya is reputed to be the architect and craftsman of the *Daityas*, just as Visva-Karmā was the architect of the gods. Ram Raja considers that he is the same person as the author or the compiler of the Surya Siddhanta. Of his many artistic exploits the Mahabharata mentions a splendid palace erected by him for the residence of the five sons of Pandu, a poetical description of which occupies a whole chapter of that great epic. In the Rāmāyaṇa he is also described as having built a palace of art for himself to beguile the tedium of the absence of his wife Homa. His daughter Mandodari was married by him to Ravāṇa. In the *Kathā Saritsāgar* he is described as an *Asura* or a non-Aryan who subsequently became a convert to Aryan civilization; by so doing he incurred the displeasure of his former clan and to protect himself from the onslaughts of the latter he built for himself an invulnerable castle in the Vindhya hills¹. It is very difficult to ascertain with any degree of accuracy the time when Maya lived or the date of the works attributed to him. Having regard to the nature of their contents they seem to be later than the works attributed to Agastya. Maya's source of knowledge of the *silpaśāstras*, the science of the arts, is stated in a legendary account given in the Rāmāyaṇa (Kiskindya kanda, 51 Sarga) to have been derived from Sukrāchārya through the grace of Bramhā. At any rate he was a later exponent of the arts than his Aryan predecessors Agastya and Kasyapa.

c6.28

¹ Portions of this work have been translated by Rev. J. F. Kearns in the *Indian Antiquary*, Vol. V, Page 230.

c6.29

¹ In the *Kathā Saritsāgar* we also find that he was well versed in the mechanical sciences of which he seems to have been the pioneer inventor.

c6.30

Nagnajit.

c6.31

The next exponent of South Indian art that we meet with has at least some historical association. This is Nagnajit, the author of some works on *silpaśāstra*. He is quoted in *Brihat Sanhitā* in the chapter dealing with *Pratimā Lak-hana* (vide Chapter 58, sloka 4, *Brihat Sanhitā*, edited by H. Kern, 1865, *Bibliotheca Indica*). None of his works appear to have survived. But from the above quotation in the *Brihat Sanhitā* it appears that he was in some way associated with the Drāvida, that is to say, the South Indian system of image-making, and gives the length of the face as practised in the South as 14 *angulas* as opposed to 12 *angulas* current in other parts of India². Some have supposed that he was the author of works on architecture but the reference in the chapter of *Brihat Sanhitā* where he is twice quoted seems to suggest that he was an authority on image-making³. His works must have survived up to the time when *Brihat Sanhitā* was compiled. He must have lived therefore some time before 404 A.D., the date assigned to Barāha Mihira. As an authority on *painting and image-making* Nagnajit is also mentioned in *Chitralaksana* one of the Essays embodied in the great Tibetan canonical work, the Tanjur. He seems to have personified a school of art connected with the cult of Siva¹. In the *Matsyapurāna* (ch. 252, sloka 2), Nagnajit is named as one of the eighteen authorities who expounded the principles of architecture. Nagnajit is no more than a mere name in South Indian art. And although he may be supposed to have lived in periods later than Agastya, Kasyapa or Maya there is no system or artistic tradition specially attributed to him and none of the living hereditary artists of South India from whom enquiries were made can offer any information regarding his contributions to South Indian art.

c6.32

² It must be pointed out, however, that according to the existing canons the length of the face in the longest measure current in South Indian manuscripts, viz., the *Uttam das tāla*, does not exceed 13½ angulas.

c6.33

³ Dr. H. Kern after quoting a commentator on *Brihat Sanhitā* suggests that "Nagnajit is the reputed author of a work on the art of painting" (*Vide* Journal Royal Asiatic Society, 1873, New series, Volume VI, page 59).

c6.34

¹ *Ostasiatische Zeitschrift*, Berlin, January-March 1914, page 483.

c6.35

The most authentic informations regarding the South Indian Schools are those referred to in Tārānath's interesting sketch of Indian art-history which is supposed to have been written in 1608 A.D. "Wherever Buddhism prevailed", says Tārānath, "Skilful religious artists were found, while wherever the Mlechchas (Muhammadans) ruled they disappeared. Where again the Tirthya doctrines (Orthodox Hinduism) prevailed, unskilful artists came to the front. Although in Pakam (Burma) and the Southern countries the making of images is still going on, no specimen of their works appear to have reached Tibet. In the South three artists have had many followers: Jaya, Parajaya, and Bijaya." Tārānath does not give any estimate whatsoever of the character of the artistic performances in the South nor is there any indication as to whether the three artists named were his contemporaries. But considering that their reputations as leaders of the Schools of image-making in the South reached Tibet about 1600 A.D., it is possible that these South Indian masters lived about a century or two before, say, about the 13th century. This assigns them to the period of Saivaite figure sculpture which flourished under the lavish patronage of the Chola kings from the tenth to the thirteenth century. I have been unable to discover any actual examples of sculpture which could be attributed to Jaya, Parajaya, or Bijaya, but close enquiries and research among the innumerable old bronze figures in the South Indian temples might lead to the identification of works of any of these artists. Many of the older examples illustrated in this volume probably represent the styles which these very artists might have founded. Some of the oldest living *Sthapathis* in Tanjore and Kumbakonam still remember the names of these artists but they are unable to identify any actual specimens of their works.

c6.36

Jaya, Parajaya, and Bijaya.

c6.37

Brahman immigration to the South

c6.38

When Agastya led the first Brahman immigration to the Dravida countries he did not do so merely as a missionary or advocate of Aryan art. His object was to introduce into South India and to transport bodily the Aryan system of thoughts and culture in all its branches and to envelope and overlap the Dravidian civilization which had already attained a high degree of development quite independent of Aryan influence. The shrines and places of pilgrimages were localised and sanctified following their prototypes in the North; the rivers Godavery and Kauvery were clothed with the same spiritual efficacies as the Ganges and the other sacred rivers in Upper India. The existing popular lore and the religious ideas of the Dravidian races were adapted and woven into a new body of *paurānic* literature with special local associations; and, lastly, the primitive Dravidian gods which had then become subjects of worship were adopted and admitted into the new pantheon clothed in an Aryan dress and changed under a new name. In this way many of the female deities formerly associated with the earlier forms of worship were accepted as consorts or *sakti* of the various Aryan Gods. So we find that in many of the Southern temples the original deities are associated with a consort who has no counterpart in the North Aryan pantheon. Thus *Kārtikeya* or *Subramannya* has two wives, one of whom is the original *Deb jāni* and the other is the *Balliramayee* who is never mentioned in the northern *purānas*. So the names of *Minākshi* and *Siva-Kāma-Sundary* as consorts of Siva are never heard of in North India. Those that could not be accepted as in any way related to, or associated with, the North Aryan deities were tolerated as *grāma devatās* or village deities and have been all along venerated and worshipped under their old Tamil names side by side with the orthodox image-worship prevailing in the main temples. In this process of adoption and amalgamation the question of preserving and perpetuating the identity and integrity of the Aryan deities in their new association and strange environment was of supreme importance to the Aryan iconographer. One may well understand the necessity of securing the permanence of the forms and conceptions of the deities which have been done possibly by Agastya and his followers in the various *dhyāna mantras* or contemplative verses descriptive of the images, and these *dhyānas* have become indispensable chapters in all the handbooks for image-making current in South India. The canons and rules given as to the construction of images are considered as a sort of commentary giving the *lakhana* or precipe as to how the deities conceived in the contemplative verse are to be translated and ‘bodied forth’ in the shape of images, the object of the canons being to prevent a degeneration in form and type of the original conceptions of these deities in the hands of Dravidian artists, brought up, as they were, in a system of thought alien and in some sense antagonistic to those introduced by Agastya and his followers. It is impossible to say if the system and the canons of image-making which Agastya introduced in South India were identical with those prevailing in North India at the time. It is quite possible that various modifications and adaptations had to be made in the canons of the *silpasastras* to suit local conditions and types. But from most of the examples which we to-day meet with in the South, we find that in their general technique and convention they recall the best traditions of the North Indian style which seems to have been adopted in South Indian images in connection with the most important temples and shrines. There is no doubt, however, that all that represented the best in the religious art of North India was introduced in South India by Agastya and his followers and has become imbedded in and has remained as part of the art practices of the South.

c6.39

I have elsewhere considered a School of South Indian sculpture which seems to strike a note alien to the artistic traditions of North India and which I have provisionally called Dravidian as distinguished from the other Schools of South Indian sculpture¹. Dr. Coomaraswamy has referred to this peculiarity as “the demoniac element which sometimes appears in South Indian art.” The examples with which we are concerned here disclose an unique chapter in Indian art which the Dravidian genius has contributed mostly under the influence of Saivaism. They represent the continuation and a later stylistic development of the earlier schools to which we owe the masterpieces at Ellora and at Māmallapuram². In later times another stream of colonists flowed into South India which gave rise to a revival of Brahmanism which had established itself in pre-historic times under the leadership of Agastya and others. This later movement was principally a Vaishnavite emigration. “Early in the eighth century the Bhāgabata Sampradāyins, worshippers of Krishna, migrated to the South and peopled the Telugu, Kannada and Tamil Kingdoms. In the ninth and tenth centuries their number increased when the Mahomedan incursions became frequent. It was these that brought into the South the renaissance literature of the North, the product of more recent times, made during the times of King Bhoja of Dhara and the Guptas of Ujjain and Pataliputra and Harshavardhana of Kanauj. The earlier emigrants had brought but the *Mimansa*, the epics, and the *Sutras*. It is the latter that brought logic, grammar, and *belles-lettres* in general and gave an impetus to learning in the South. The tenth and eleventh centuries formed the Augustan period of Dravidian literature. The chief impetus for this magnificent activity was given by the new-coming Aryan settlers. So much did Raj Raj the powerful Chola King at *Kanchi* recognise the value of these new-comers that he defended them against the attacks of his aunt Kunda Avvai who remonstrated with him for showing favour to the culture of the North in preference to his own Tamil'." The influence of these latter colonists furnished the impetus for the literature as well as the art of South India. The last time that the South had turned for inspiration to the North was during the ascendency of the Nayakka princes and latterly of the Maharatta princes of Tanjore who took a great part in South India in the development of the Sanskrit literature. Indeed the voluminous collection of Sanskrit manuscripts on all branches now stored in the Tanjore palace, a portion of which was undoubtedly collected from the northern part of India, was the outcome of their interest in and patronage of the Sanskrit as distinguished from the Tamil culture and civilization.

c6.40

¹ Dravidian Sculpture, in *The Modern Review*, 1912.

c6.41

² The other forms of the name of this place is Mavalivaram and Mahavallipuram.

c6.42

¹ A. Govindacharya Swamin, "Brahman Immigration into South India," *Indian Antiquary*, July 1913, Volume XLII, page 196.

Linked texts (14)