A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day c13.s5: Section VI. Southern India
A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day c13.s5
- Language
- English
Contents
- c13.s5.t1 A. Stone — 82 parts
- c13.s5.t2 B. Bronzes and Brasses — 19 parts
Section VI. Southern India
A. Stone
c13.s5.t1.1
The arts of sculpture and decorative carving in stone continued to be practised in India to the south of the Narbadā under the patronage of many dynasties throughout the mediaeval period, and even to this day are cultivated with considerable success whenever encouragement on an adequate scale is offered. But, excepting certain Chola statuary of the eleventh century, which is pre-eminently excellent, the Southern figure sculpture does not often attain high quality. In quantity it is enormous, the gigantic temples and halls characteristic of the Dravidian kingdoms being commonly overloaded with sculptured ornament on every member. Mythological subjects from the Puranas and Tantras are the favourites, and the tendency is to treat the conceptions of a luxuriant mythology with exuberant fancy, insufficiently [Figure: Plate XLV. Durgā and Mahishāsura relief, Māmallapuram.
c13.s5.t1.2
restrained by good taste. The result too often is merely grotesque, and very few of the individual images can claim to be beautiful. Naturalistic representations are rare, and the general effect is bizarre, with a tinge of barbarism.
c13.s5.t1.3
The purely decorative designs carved on the twelfth-century Chalukya and Hoysala temples are unsurpassed, but the statuary of the same buildings is conventional and rarely of much merit.
c13.s5.t1.4
The illustrations following have been selected with the purpose of exhibiting the best specimens of Southern stone sculpture in all kinds from the seventh century to the present day.
c13.s5.t1.5
The series begins with the statuary and reliefs executed during the seventh century under the patronage of the Pallava dynasty of Kānchī (Conjeeveram). The next important group of works consists of the Chola sculpture of the eleventh century. From that we pass on to the ornate styles patronized by the Hoysala and Chalukya kings of the Deccan, chiefly in the twelfth century. Our attention will then be claimed by the sumptuous, semi-barbaric art of the Vijayanagar dynasty in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; which is succeeded by the lavish, but too often tasteless, decoration of the huge temples erected in the Tamil countries during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; and, in conclusion, a few words will be devoted to the clever modern eclectic sculpture executed to the command of the Mahārāja of Mysore. The bronzes and brasses are of sufficient importance to justify their discussion in a short separate section.
c13.s5.t1.6
During the seventh century the kings of the mysterious Pallava dynasty of Kānchī (Conjeeveram) succeeded in making themselves the dominant power in Southern India, overshadowing the ancient Chola, Chera, and Pāndya dynasties of the Tamil region, and, for a time, obscuring the glory of the powerful Chalukya sovereigns of the Deccan. The Pallava king named Mahendra-varman I (*cir.* 600-625 A.D.), a great builder, is responsible for many rock-cut temples in the North Arcot, South Arcot, Chingleput, and Trichinopoly Districts. The earliest *rathas*, or monolithic shrines, at Māmallapuram, or the Seven Pagodas, also probably should be ascribed to his reign. His son, Narasimha-varman I, surnamed Mahāmalla, the most mighty prince of his line, gave his name to Māmallapuram, and constructed, or rather caused to be excavated, some of the *rathas* at that place. The family taste for architecture survived in the descendants of Narasimha-varman, the so-called ‘Shore Temple’ at Māmallapuram and the early structural temples at Kānchī being ascribed partly to his great-grandson, Rājasimha, and partly to Rājasimha’s sons (*ante*, p. 36).
c13.s5.t1.7
The most notable remains of Pallava art are those dating from the seventh and eighth centuries at Māmallapuram, which include, besides the well-known *rathas*, numerous less familiar monuments, comprising temples, statues in the round, and gigantic sculptures in relief carved on the face of the rocks. Among the sculptures in the round mention may be made of a lion, seven feet in length, which is said to be well-proportioned and of a noble appearance.
c13.s5.t1.8
Several authors concur in the opinion that the most artistic of the reliefs is the great composition depicting the victory of the Good, represented by the goddess Durgā mounted on a lion, over evil personified in the buffalo-headed demon, Mahi-shāsura (Plate XLV). The scene undoubtedly is full of life and movement, and the goddess is a dignified figure. I am inclined to prefer this work to anything at Elūra, but the general effect is not pleasing.
c13.s5.t1.9
PLATE XLVI. Rock-sculpture, ‘Arjuna’s Penance’ (right side), at Māmallapur, Chingleput District. (Photo. 1156, A. S., Publ. in *J. I. A. I.*, vol. x, Pl. 85.)
c13.s5.t1.10
A huge relief picture, covering a sheet of rock 96 feet in length and 43 in breadth, depicts incidents in the story of the Pāndava hero, Arjuna, as told in the *Mahābhārata* epic. The poet relates that the hero, in order to obtain the magic weapon needed for the overthrow of his enemies, made a pilgrimage to the inmost recesses of the
c13.s5.t1.11
FIG. 158. Sculpture of Pallava period (? 7th cent.) at Trichinopoly. (Photo. 87, A. S.)
c13.s5.t1.12
Himalayas, and there performed the most severe austerities until he wrung the desired boon from the reluctant gods. 'During the fourth month,' we are told, 'he did not eat at all, but completed his penance by standing on the tip of his great toe, the other leg being lifted from the ground, and his hands raised above his head.'
c13.s5.t1.13
This uncomfortable experience is clearly set forth in the relief, the right-hand half of which is reproduced in Plate XLVI. The old worshipper lower down is the Brahman Drona. Some life-like figures of elephants are under the proper left half of the relief, not reproduced here. The picture is designed for edification rather than as a work of art, and is therefore lacking in composition. It is much corroded by the sea air, and when allowance is made for that, some of the individual figures seem to possess a certain amount of aesthetic merit.¹
c13.s5.t1.14
¹ Hindus believe that the gods are powerless to resist the prayers of a penitent who performs exceptional acts of austerity. The correct name of the place is Māmalla-puram, 'the town of Mahāmalla,' or Narasimha-varman I. The forms Mahābalipur, Mahavellipore, &c., in common use are corruptions based on a false etymology. No modern scientific account of the ruins exists. The Madras Government issued in 1869 an atlas folio illustrated volume containing reprints of several old descriptions, and the same documents were also printed in octavo without the plates. A Hindu author in the book gives the mythological key to the various sculptures. The story of the penance is in *Mahābh*., *Vana parva*, Calcutta ed., p. 463. The whole relief is reproduced in Pl. I of the Madras compilation from a careful drawing made some years prior to 1828. The only trustworthy authority for the history is Mr. Venkayya's article 'The Pallavas' in *Ann. Rep. A. S., India*, 1906-7, pp. 217-43.
c13.s5.t1.15
Another and smaller relief of Pallava age at Trichinopoly (Fig. 158) seems to be of earlier date and is in a better style of art. This group, consisting of five large figures, in addition to the crouching dwarf on whose hand the central deity, apparently a form of Siva, rests his right foot, is symmetrically composed, due prominence being given to the god, who stands in a natural and easy attitude. He has four arms, but only two are prominent, and all the other figures are quite free from monstrosity. The kneeling worshippers are excellently modelled and pleasing in appearance. The style, in fact, is much more akin to that of the Gupta age in Northern India than to the sculpture commonly seen in the South, and is so restrained that I am disposed to refer the group to the earliest possible date, about the beginning of the seventh century, and to suggest that it *may* be the work of a northern artist.
c13.s5.t1.16
Two spirited bas-relief sculptures from Mysore territory, now in the Bangalore Museum, although too crude to rank as fine art, perhaps deserve passing mention. The first, on the Begūr stone, dating from about A.D. 934-8, gives a vivid picture of a battle between the force commanded by a chief mounted on an elephant and another led by a rival on horseback. The second, on the Ātakūr stone dated A.D. 949-50, commemorating a set fight between a mighty hound and a great boar in which both combatants were killed, represents an incident in the struggle, the hound having his teeth fixed in the boar's snout.² The design is better than the execution.
c13.s5.t1.17
² Fleet, 'Three Western Ganga Records in the Mysore Government Museum at Bangalore' (*Ep. Ind.*, vi, p. 40, with plates). A larger photograph of the Begūr stone in *Ep. Carnatica*, vol. xi, frontispiece.
c13.s5.t1.18
The Cholas, who succeeded the Pallavas as the paramount power in the South, may be said to have filled the principal places in the Tamil countries with their edifices, religious and secular, all richly sculptured. Rājarāja the Great (985-1018), the most famous king of a capable dynasty, extended his power over nearly the whole of the Madras Presidency, Ceylon, and a large part of Mysore, while his navy ranged as far as the Laccadive and Maldive islands. A king so powerful and wealthy naturally spent freely on building, and the world owes to him the temple at Tanjore, his capital, the best designed of all the great South Indian temples (*ante*, p. 38).
c13.s5.t1.19
His son and successor, Rājendra-Choladeva I, surnamed Gangaikonda (1018–35), continued and extended Rājarāja’s victories by sea and land. In memory of the subjugation of the Ganga territory in Mysore, or, as others say, to commemorate his march northwards as far as the Ganges, Rājendra built a new capital, Gangaikonda-Cholapuram, in the Trichinopoly District, and constructed there an enormous artificial lake with an embankment sixteen miles long. The principal temple, de-
c13.s5.t1.20
FIG. 159. Siva dancing; on north wall of great temple at Gangaikoṇḍa-Choḷapuram. (Photo. 40, Archaeological Survey.)
c13.s5.t1.21
signed on the noble model of the Tanjore temple, enshrined a huge monolithic lingam, thirty feet high, and the precincts of the city included a palace and many other notable buildings, now either vanished or in complete ruin. The sculptures in panels on the walls of the great temple are remarkable for their elegance and beauty, which may compare with the merits of the best sculpture in Java.¹
c13.s5.t1.22
¹ Rājendra-Choladeva I possessed a powerful fleet, by the aid of which he conquered Pegu. It is possible that he may have imported Javanese artists. In his time the Boro-Būdūr reliefs were nearly new, and their fame may have reached his ears. Or, again, the Javanese artists may have come from the Trichinopoly District.
c13.s5.t1.23
So far as I am aware, the three specimens now illustrated in Figs. 159, 160, 161 are the first to be published illustrating these beautiful reliefs. The image of Siva performing the Tāṇḍava dance (Fig. 159) should be compared with the bronze representations of the same subject as illustrated and explained in later sections of this chapter. The extra arms are so cleverly managed as to be hardly noticeable. The next illustration (Fig. 160) of Siva caressing Pārvatī is curious. In the third example (Fig. 161) the treatment of Siva's image reminds me of the best Javanese work, and I am not sure that it may not be superior to that. The whole figure, body, limbs, and head, is modelled with exceptional skill, and the expression of the face is pleasing. This group, in my judgement, is one of the
c13.s5.t1.24
FIG. 160. God and goddess (Siva and Pārvatī); on north wall of great temple at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Choḷapuram. (Photo. 43, A. S.)
c13.s5.t1.25
finest sculptures of any period extant in any part of India. Apparently a considerable volume might be devoted with advantage to the illustration of the sculptures at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Choḷapuram.¹ The simplicity and good taste of the architectural decoration deserve special notice.
c13.s5.t1.26
¹ The modern village (11° 12′ N., 79° 28′ E.) is known by the abbreviated name Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-puram. A summary account of the ruins will be found in *Imp. Gaz.* (1908), *s. v.* Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-puram. No full description has been published.
c13.s5.t1.27
The architecture and sculpture of the temple at Dārāsuram in the Tanjore District closely resemble those of the temple at Gangaikonda-Cholapuram, and must be of approximately the same age. The subject illustrated in Fig. 162 is labelled 'Rāvana's Penance' by the Archaeological Survey.
c13.s5.t1.28
The excessively exuberant, and yet fascinating, massed architectural sculpture of the Mysore temples built by the Hoysala kings in the twelfth century has been
c13.s5.t1.29
[Figure: FIG. 161. Siva and Pārvatī; on north wall of great temple at Gaṅgaikoṇḍa-Choḷapuram, Trichinopoly District. (Photo. No. 39, A. S.)]
c13.s5.t1.30
already illustrated sufficiently in Plate X (*ante*, p. 41). The artists who designed such enormous sheets of rich sculpture aimed at producing an imposing effect by the splendour of a mass of carvings of the highest complexity, rather than by inviting attention to individual figures. Nevertheless, the individual figures will bear examination in detail, the elephants especially being exquisitely true to nature. The gods and human figures are less satisfactory. As already observed (*ante*, p. 44), many of the larger statues of the Mysore temples are signed by the artists, but archaeological explorers and writers have been too busy with other matters to reproduce examples of such signed images; the numerous photographs prepared by the Survey being devoted to giving views of façades rather than studies of sculpture. I am therefore not in a position to illustrate the signed statues, or to distinguish the styles of individual artists.
c13.s5.t1.31
[Figure: FIG. 162. 'Rāvaṇa's Penance'; on temple at Dārāsuram, Tanjore District. (Photo. 20, A. S.)]
c13.s5.t1.32
The approximately contemporary temples erected in the Bellary District, Madras, under the patronage of the Chalukyan kings are remarkable for the unequalled richness and delicacy of their deeply undercut decorative carving (*ante*, p. 44, Fig. 16).
c13.s5.t1.33
The figure sculpture is far inferior, and, notwithstanding the perfection of its mechanical execution, is generally conventional in design and semi-barbarous in style.
c13.s5.t1.34
Perhaps the best example is that shown in Fig. 163, which, although it cannot be given high rank as fine art, is pleasing as a decorative design, and further interesting as including a late survival of the ancient Hellenistic Atlas motive so common in Gandhāra art.
c13.s5.t1.35
The scroll from the Hariharesvara temple in the same District is also an interesting survival of an ancient motive, fairly good in design (Fig. 164).
c13.s5.t1.36
The subjoined design from the Malikārjuna temple at Kuruvatti (Fig. 165) is a beautifully executed example of the *makara torana*, or 'dragon-arch' common in Ceylonese art. The perfect drawing of the curves is possible only for draughtsmen rigorously trained on the system explained by Dr. Coomaraswamy (*ante*, p. 167, Pl. XXXVII A).
c13.s5.t1.37
In the year 1336 two Hindu brothers established a principality with its capital at Vijayanagar on the Tungabhadra river (15° 20' N., 76° 28' E.), which rapidly developed into an empire comprising all Southern India beyond the Krishnā (Kistna). The state attained the height of its prosperity early in the sixteenth century during the reign of Krishna Deva Rāya, the contemporary of Henry VIII of England, and stoutly maintained the Hindu cause against the Muslim Sultans of the Deccan until 1565, when the hosts of the Rāya were utterly defeated by the combined forces of the Muhammadan princes, and the capital was taken. The victors devoted their energies for five months to the deliberate destruction of the city, heaping up bonfires round the principal monuments, and hacking and mutilating the graven images. They succeeded in converting one of the richest and most splendid capitals of Asia into the abode of wild beasts, which has remained desolate to this day, save for the huts of a tiny hamlet nestling amidst the ruins.
c13.s5.t1.38
[Figure: FIG. 163. Bracket figure over capital of east door of Malikārjuna temple, Kuruvatti, Bellary District. (Rea, *Chalukyan Architecture*, Pl. LXVIII, Fig. 2 = Photo. 1844, I. O. *List*.)]
c13.s5.t1.39
The actual site of the city covers an area of nine square miles, but the fortifications and outposts include a space far larger. In the days of its greatness the capital was filled with magnificent granite edifices erected by forced labour, and adorned in the most lavish manner with every form of decoration agreeable to the taste of a semi-barbaric court. The extant detailed accounts of the glories of Vijayanagar in the sixteenth century recall the familiar stories of the Aztec capital as it was seen by its Spanish conquerors, the administration of both courts combining unbridled luxury with ferocious cruelty.
c13.s5.t1.40
The semi-barbarism of the court is reflected in the forms of art. The giant monolithic Man-lion (Narasimha) statue, 22 feet high, and the huge Monkey-god Hanumān, although wrought with exquisite finish, are hideous inartistic monsters; and the sculpture generally, however perfect in mechanical execution, is lacking in beauty and refinement.
c13.s5.t1.41
[Figure: A. Part of relief sculpture; Hazāra Rāma temple, Vijayanagar.
c13.s5.t1.42
[Figure: B. Ditto.
c13.s5.t1.43
In the palace enclosure the most striking building is the temple known as Hazāra Rāmaswāmī, ‘the Thousand Lord Rāmas,’ used by the old kings as their Chapel Royal. The walls of the courtyard of this edifice are covered with bas-reliefs
c13.s5.t1.44
[Figure: FIG. 164. Scroll, Harihareśvara temple, Bellary District. (Rea, *Chalukyan Architecture*, Pl. CXIII, Fig. 2.)]
c13.s5.t1.45
[Figure: FIG. 165. *Makara toraṇa* (arch), Malikārjuna temple, Kuruvatti. (Rea, *Chalukyan Architecture*, Pl. LXII, Fig. 1.)]
c13.s5.t1.46
depicting scenes from the *Rāmāyana* epic, described by Mr. Rea as being ‘beautifully executed and carved with great life and spirit’. The specimens illustrated in Plate XLVII, figures A and B will show how far such praise is justified.¹
c13.s5.t1.47
¹ For the history see Sewell, *A Forgotten Empire (Vijayanagar), a Contribution to the History of India* (1900), a valuable and deeply interesting book. A photograph of the Man-lion faces p. 163. The Monkey-god forms the frontispiece to Meadows Taylor and Fergusson, *Architecture in Dharwar and Mysore* (atlas fol., 1866). The whole of the *Rāmāyana* reliefs is given in Plates LXVIII, LXIX of that work.
c13.s5.t1.48
One of the most notable of the ruins is the temple of Vishnu under the name of Viṭṭhalaswāmī, begun early in the sixteenth century, and still unfinished when the city fell in 1565, never to rise again. The great hall in front of the shrine
c13.s5.t1.49
‘rests on a richly sculptured basement, and its roof is supported by huge masses of granite, 15 feet high, each consisting of a central pillar surrounded by detached shafts, figures mounted on demons, and other ornament, all cut from a single block of stone. These are surmounted by an elaborate and equally massive cornice; and the whole is carved with a boldness and expression of power nowhere surpassed in the buildings of its class, showing the extreme limit in florid magnificence to which the style advanced. This beautiful building has been grievously injured by the destroyers of the city. Several of the carved pillars have been attacked with such fury that they are hardly more than shapeless blocks of stone, and a large portion of the centre has been destroyed utterly.’ (*Imp. Gaz.*)
c13.s5.t1.50
The sculptures on the walls of the throne are also commended, but no illustrations of the works referred to have been published.
c13.s5.t1.51
FIG. 166. Part of jamb of N. *gopura*, Tārpatri temple, Anantapur District. (*Photo. 2505, I. O. List.*)
c13.s5.t1.52
The best examples of the Vijayanagar style are to be found, perhaps, not at the capital, but at Tārpatri (Tāḍpatri), Anantapur District, Madras, in *gopuras* (gateways) erected during the sixteenth century by a prince subordinate to the kings of Vijayanagar. Fergusson, who devoted two full-page plates to the illustration of the Tārpatri greenstone sculptures, judged them to be ‘on the whole, perhaps, in better taste than anything else in this style’. One specimen may be offered (Fig. 166).¹ The old motive of the woman standing under the tree is treated in a novel manner with great skill. A new temple at Tārpatri is adorned with elaboration equal to that of the old one; but, although the decorative carving is good, the figure sculpture is grotesque and contemptible. The work has been fully illustrated by Mr. Rea in his book, *Stone Carving and Inlaying in Southern India.*
c13.s5.t1.53
¹ The Workmans consider the two unfinished *gopuras*, or gateways, to be the finest in India from an artistic point of view. The one at the entrance of the temple is fast going to pieces. ‘The scroll-work is varied and executed in the best manner, and the animal figures, particularly those of the elephants and monkeys, are admirable. The sides have highly decorated niches supported by graceful plantain columns’ (*Through Town and Jungle*, p. 115). A plate of the ‘river *gopura*’ and *choultri* faces p. 116.
c13.s5.t1.54
The Margasahayar temple at Virinchipuram in the North Arcot District, 7½ miles to the west of Vellore, is believed to have been erected late in the fifteenth century, while the district was included in the dominions of Vijayanagar. One of the columns offers a good example of the *yālī*, or conventional rampant lion, an effective, bold form of decoration very fashionable and characteristic of the country in both S. India and Ceylon during mediaeval times. The lion, about 5½ feet in height, is designed and executed with spirit (Fig. 167).
c13.s5.t1.55
The statue of a goddess on the entrance of the temple of Venkata-ramana-svāmī at the famous fortress of Jinjī (Gingee) in the South Arcot District, probably built during the time of the Vijayanagar rule a little before or after A. D. 1500, is of special interest as proving, like the Tārpatri figures, the persistence of a very ancient motive, common in Gandhāra and Mathurā art (*ante*, p. 117, Fig. 67). This late southern example preserves all the essentials of the design—the female figure, the crossed legs, the raised right arm, and the left arm twined round the stem, but it is needless to point out how the treatment at Jinjī differs from that in vogue at Peshāwar some fourteen centuries earlier (Fig. 168).
c13.s5.t1.56
FIG. 167. *Yāli*, or rampant lion, in Vijayanagar style, at Virinchipuram. (From A. S. drawing.)
c13.s5.t1.57
FIG. 168. Female figure at Jinjī (Gingee), S. Arcot, *cir.* A.D. 1500. (From A. S. drawing.)
c13.s5.t1.58
The palace of the Udaiyār-pālaiyam zemindār in the Trichinopoly District contains some good figure and decorative sculpture associated with Indo-Muhammadan architecture, and evidently not older than the seventeenth century. It is executed in a rather soft stone. My attention was drawn to the sculptures by the remarks of Mr. J. P. Bedford, I.C.S., who made a communication to the Archaeological Survey and wrote:—
c13.s5.t1.59
‘One of the big halls is in general design something after the fashion of Tirumal Nāik’s famous hall in Madura; but the spandrels of the arches are one mass of carving of birds, flowers, &c., showing extraordinary fancy and spirit, while the arches themselves are worked out in the most exquisite tracery, with a niche above each column containing some god or saint. Above the level of the spandrels is a deep colonnade running round the whole hall, corresponding to the clerestory of an English cathedral—also a mass of spirited carving in relief. The effect of the whole is, so far as the writer’s experience goes, absolutely unique so far as an Indian building is concerned; but it is very suggestive of Northern European Gothic, say the porches of Chartres Cathedral.’¹
c13.s5.t1.60
¹ *Ann. Progr. Rep. A. S. Madras and Coorg*, 1604–5, p. 44.
c13.s5.t1.61
Photographs, kindly supplied by Mr. Young, I.C.S., Magistrate and Collector of Trichinopoly, hardly support Mr. Bedford’s enthusiastic praise, although the general effect of the work is doubtless pleasing. A specimen is shown in Fig. 169. The style is totally different from that usual in the South. Inquiry has failed to elicit any information about the history of the sculptures or the identity of the artists. Possibly the eminent skill possessed by the sculptors of Gangaikonda-Chōlapuram in the eleventh century may have been transmitted to descendants in the seventeenth century in at least some degree. Udaiyār-pālaiyam is not very far from Gangaikonda-Chōlapuram.
c13.s5.t1.62
The numerous gigantic temples of Southern India in the Dravidian style, erected from the sixteenth century to the present day, with their appurtenant corridors and 'halls of 1000 columns', are covered with sculpture, mostly of a fantastic and *outré* character. The most famous princely builder was Tirumalla (Trimul) Nāik, who ruled at Madura from 1621 to 1657. His celebrated pillared hall, or 'choultrie', at
c13.s5.t1.63
[Figure: FIG. 169. Sculptures in hall of Udaiyār-pālaiyam palace. (Photo., supplied by Collector of Trichinopoly.)]
c13.s5.t1.64
that city is 333 feet long and 105 feet wide, with four ranges of columns, all different, and all most elaborately sculptured.
c13.s5.t1.65
'The façade of this hall,' Fergusson observes, 'like that of almost all the great halls in the south of India, is adorned either with *yālis*—monsters of the lion type trampling on an elephant—or, even more generally, by a group consisting of a warrior sitting on a rearing horse, whose feet are supported on the shields of foot-soldiers, sometimes slaying men, sometimes tigers. These groups are found literally in hundreds in Southern India, and, as works exhibiting difficulties overcome by patient labour, they are unrivalled, so far as I know, by anything found elsewhere.
c13.s5.t1.66
'As works of art they are the most barbarous, it may be said the most vulgar, to be found in India, and do more to shake one's faith in the civilization of the people who produced them than anything they did in any other department of art. Where these monstrosities are not introduced, the pillars of entrances are only enriched a little more than those of the interior, when the ornamentation is in better taste, and generally quite sufficiently rich for its purpose.’ ¹
c13.s5.t1.67
¹ *Hist. of Ind. and E. Archit.* (1899), p. 363; ed. 1910, vol. i, p. 389.
c13.s5.t1.68
A good example of such a rampant horse, copied from a bronze casting of a sculpture on the Madura ‘choultry’, is reproduced in Fig. 177, *post*, p. 240.
c13.s5.t1.69
Fergusson’s criticism fails to give the Southern sculptors due credit for their power of expressing vigorous movement, and, in my judgement, is too harsh. Such
c13.s5.t1.70
FIG. 170. Siva supplicating; Tirumal Nāik’s choultry, at Madura. (Photo. 1902, I. O. *List*.)
c13.s5.t1.71
FIG. 171. Woman and baby; Great Temple, Madura District. (Photo. 1922, I. O. *List*.)
c13.s5.t1.72
figures appear to be unknown elsewhere, and it is not apparent how they became so much favoured in the Tamil country. Fergusson probably was right in his suggestion that the rampant horses, *yālis*, and heavy cornices with double curvature, characteristic of the Dravidian temples in the South, were derived from primitive terra-cotta forms.
c13.s5.t1.73
The Southern sculpture, remarkable, as already observed, for its enormous quantity, fantastic character, often degenerating into the grotesque, and marvellous elaboration, rarely, if ever, exhibits the higher qualities of art. The sculptures being designed to be viewed in the mass, not as individual works, reproductions of a few separate figures cannot do full justice either to the sculptors' intention or to the general effect. But, subject to that caution, a few specimens may be cited to give some idea of the style. The best of this class of work dates from the seventeenth
c13.s5.t1.74
FIG. 172. *Asura* (demon) and monkeys; Rāmeśvaram temple, Madura District. (Photo. 2599, I. O. *List*.)
c13.s5.t1.75
FIG. 173. Female carrying male deity; entrance corridor, Rāmeśvaram temple. (Photo. 2301, I. O. *List*.)
c13.s5.t1.76
century, while the most recent is the worst; indeed, modern figure sculpture, as a rule, hardly deserves to be called the work of artists. An exception, however, must be made in favour of certain Mysore figures, to be noticed presently.
c13.s5.t1.77
Examples of seventeenth and eighteenth century sculpture might be multiplied indefinitely. Selected specimens from buildings in the Madura District will suffice as typical illustrations.
c13.s5.t1.78
One of the best images among the crowd at Tirumal Nāik's choultry (1623-45) is that of Siva in an unusual attitude as a supplicant to some other deity (Fig. 170).
c13.s5.t1.79
The effigy of the woman holding a doll-like baby, from the Great Temple at Madura, is welcome as introducing a rare touch of human sentiment (Fig. 171), but is far inferior to the treatment of a similar subject at Purī (*ante*, Fig. 137). The blotchy appearance of the photograph is due to the whitewash or paint with which the statue has been smeared.
c13.s5.t1.80
The sculptures from the Rāmesvaram temple are somewhat later, dating from the close of the seventeenth or the beginning of the eighteenth century. The hideous figure of the demon with monkeys (Fig. 172) is a good example of the morbid cleverness with which the sculptors of the period treated repulsive subjects. The image of the female carrying a male deity on her back (Fig. 173) is characteristically grotesque. It too has been smudged with paint or whitewash. The modelling of the woman is not destitute of merit.
c13.s5.t1.81
The capabilities of modern sculptors in the South are best proved by the decorations of the new palace in the town of Mysore executed to the order of H.H. the Mahārāja and described and illustrated by Mr. A. Rea. Skill is not confined to the members of any one caste, and the Mahārāja has been willing to employ capable men from any district. The material used is sometimes soapstone and sometimes stone of considerable hardness. The soapstone is employed in fairly large masses, a clever figure of Vishnu, for instance, being two feet in height. The drapery of that figure looks as if it had been imitated from photographs of Gandhāra work. The style throughout is frankly eclectic and imitative, and it is obvious that the artists have studied models of various periods and schools. One decorative motive is admittedly borrowed from a picture by Ravi Varma (see Chapter IX), and the more direct influence of modern European art can be clearly traced. A relief representing the marriage of Rukmini looks as if it had been suggested by study of photographs of the Boro-Būdūr bas-reliefs. Some of the female figures are very pretty. Artistically, the best things are certain decorative soapstone panels wrought with floral and other designs, thoroughly Indian in character and of first-rate quality.¹
c13.s5.t1.82
¹ A. Rea, *Monograph on Stone Carving and Inlaying in Southern India*, with thirty-one plates; Madras Government Press, 1906; quarto in paper covers. The half-tone blocks cannot be reproduced. Some of the best objects are shown in Pl. XXIV–XXVI.
B. Bronzes and Brasses
c13.s5.t2.1
The bronzes and brasses of Southern India, although not equal in value or interest to the large finds recently made in Ceylon, and probably of Indian origin, are yet sufficiently numerous and important to deserve brief separate examination and illustration.² The better specimens seem to range in date from the twelfth to the eighteenth century. No good modern metal work in either Southern India or Ceylon has come to my notice.
c13.s5.t2.2
² At the Indian Section of the Festival of Empire (1911) Lord Ampthill exhibited several fine large bronzes, including a Dancing Siva, from the Tinnevelly District, Madras, which are almost identical with the Polonnāruwa specimens.
c13.s5.t2.4
PLATE XLVIII. Brass portrait images of Krishnarāya of Vijayanagar (A.D. 1510–29) and his Queens; in the Śrī Nivāsa Perumal temple on the hill of Tirumalai near Tirupati, N. Arcot District. (Photo. No. 570, *Progr. Rep. A. S. Madras and Coorg*, 1903–4.)
c13.s5.t2.5
Exceptional interest attaches to the brass images reproduced in Plate XLVIII, which are certified by inscriptions on the shoulders to be portraits, apparently contemporary, of Krishnarāya, the famous king of Vijayanagar in the early years of the sixteenth century, and two of his queens. They stand inside a temple on the sacred hill of Tirumalai or Upper Tirupati, and were photographed by a high-caste Hindu, no European or Musalman being permitted to enter any temple on the hill. The town of Tirupati is famous for the skill of its workers in brass.¹ The images, although
c13.s5.t2.6
¹ *Imp. Gaz.*, s.v. Tirumala; *Annual Report, A. S., India*, 1902–3, p. 227; citing Hultzsch (*Progr. Report*, 1903, in *Madras G. O. Public*, Nos. 655, 656, dated July 24, 1903). Dr. Hultzsch's recommendation to have the images photographed by a high-caste Hindu was carried out by the Survey in the following year, but no description of the statues was recorded. They are called 'statues', and presumably are life-size.
c13.s5.t2.7
FIG. 174. Siva Naṭarāja; from Tanjore District, preserved in local treasury.) (Photo. 1555, A. S.)
c13.s5.t2.8
formal in design and defective in expression, seem to be executed with great delicacy. Well-authenticated portrait statues are rare in India. Mr. Walhouse mentions the existence of a life-size brass image of the Jain Tīrthankara Sāntīsvara, 'erect and enshrined in burnished silver and brass work variegated with red ornaments', just outside the colossus enclosure at Yēnūr in South Kanara.²
c13.s5.t2.9
² *Ind. Ant.*, v. 38.
c13.s5.t2.10
The Tanjore Dancing Siva is considered by the Superintendent of the Central Museum, Madras, to be quite equal in artistic merit to the museum specimen previously published by Dr. Coomaraswamy and Mr. Havell. It differs in various details from the other examples of the type, and especially in the absence of the long braids of hair whirling in the dance. The explanation of the symbolism and criticism of the artistic qualities of the various representations of the dancing god will be more conveniently deferred until we discuss the Ceylonese examples. This Tanjore image (Fig. 174), although described as 'copper', probably is bronze. Its age is uncertain.
c13.s5.t2.11
The image of Pārvatī, from a private collection, represented in Fig. 175, is not very dissimilar in style from the Polonnāruwa bronzes (*post*, Sec. 7 B of this chapter),
c13.s5.t2.12
FIG. 175. Pārvatī; property of W. A. Beardsell, Esq., Madras; about 20 inches high. (Photo. from Central Museum, Madras.)
c13.s5.t2.13
FIG. 176. Bronze statuette, 11½″ high, of Rāmachandra bearded: No. 43–'87, Ind. Sec., V. and A. Museum.
c13.s5.t2.14
and may, perhaps, date from about the same period, the twelfth century. It is well modelled, and the hands, as usual, are specially good.
c13.s5.t2.15
The South Kensington statuette of Rāmachandra (Fig. 176) is a good example of the better class bronzes of later date, perhaps eighteenth-century work.
c13.s5.t2.16
The smaller image of the four-armed Siva Vīrabhadra, six or seven inches high, excluding the pedestal, clad in armour and equipped with weapons, in Case 20 of Room IV, British Museum, belongs to the same class.
c13.s5.t2.17
A noticeable item in the Payne Knight collection in the British Museum (Room IV, Case 11) is a circular bronze about 7 inches high, looking like the plinth of a *stūpa*, with vigorous relief figures of Krishna and other deities, besides wellexecuted decorative motives. Notwithstanding its apparently Buddhist form, it does not appear to be early work, and must have been intended for use in Brahmanical worship.
c13.s5.t2.18
The South Kensington casting of the plunging horse and other sculptures on the famous 'choultry' at Madura (Fig. 177), already mentioned (*ante*, p. 234), is of
c13.s5.t2.19
FIG. 177. Bronze cast; copy of sculpture on Choultry of Tirumal Nāik (17th cent.), at Madura; the casting may be of 18th cent.: No. 639-’75, Ind. Sec., V. and A. Museum.
c13.s5.t2.20
interest as being both a fine piece of work in bronze, and also a miniature reproduction of a characteristic type of South Indian sculpture in stone. More or less similar horses are to be seen on many of the great temples, and although never anatomically correct, are designed with such spirit and vigour that they are often impressive and effective. In this case European influence may be suspected; the rider looks like a Western knight.