South Indian Bronzes: A Historical Survey of South Indian Sculpture with Iconographical Notes Based on Original Sources c7.28

c7.28

Of special importance were the gifts of images and lamps to the temples, for which the examples set by the royal princes were followed extensively by the rich merchants and also by all classes of the people high and low who vied with each other in bestowing these sacred gifts. The images which generally formed the subject of these pious gifts fall into three classes: (1) The ‘ceremonial images’, (*utsaba murtis*) being the various forms of the main-deity. Sometimes special temples were built by private citizens who set up gold, silver or bronze images for which the temples were constructed. (2) The images or quasi-portraits of the Saivaite canonized saints. The images of these saints are found nearly in every temple. The Tanjore temple contains many such images. In the great temple at Nanjangode near Mysore there is a complete series of images of all the Saivaite saints. (3) The images or memorial portraits of the donors of the gifts or builders of the temples. They are generally conventional in type and are figured in the worshipping posture and do not seem to be actual portraits. The Queen of the Chola King Gandharaditya had the figure of her husband carved in the temple of Tirunallamudaiyar. There are similar portraits of the Nayakka princes at Pudu-mandapa in Madura and also at Rameswaram. The metal portraits of Krishnaraya of Vijayanagar and his queens found near Tirupati in the North Arcot District are very well-known. The portrait of Venkatachalapati discovered in Tirumalai (plate LXXV), is perhaps the best of its kind hitherto known, except perhaps the Chandeswara in the Colombo Museum which can hardly be called a portrait. Some memorial portraits of King Kadavarkone and others in worshipping posture have been discovered at Tiruchen Kattangudi in the Tanjore District (plate LXXIII). In one of the inscriptions the Pallava King Gunabhara is described as having set up an image of himself in the rock-cut temple at Trichinopoly. However interesting these portraits may be for historical enquiries, most of them have very little value for artistic purposes except as illustrating the practice of setting up this class of images in the temples by the donors themselves or their relatives. The object of such installation must be found in eminently pious intention rather than in any desire for self-advertisement.