Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day c8: Chapter II. The Hindu Styles of Architecture

A History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon, from the Earliest Times to the Present Day c8

Language
English

Chapter II. The Hindu Styles of Architecture

c8.2

THE imperial palace at Pātaliputra, the modern Patna, the capital of Chandragupta Maurya, the first emperor of India at the close of the fourth century before the Christian era, is described by Greek and Roman authors as excelling in splendour the royal residences of Susa and Ekbatana. Although no vestige of such a building, except, perhaps, some brick foundations, has survived, there is no reason to doubt the statements of the historians. Abundant evidence establishes the fact that Indian architects before the time of Asoka built their superstructures chiefly of timber, using brick almost exclusively for foundations and plinths. No deficiency in dignity or grandeur was involved by the use of the more perishable material; on the contrary, the employment of timber enables wide spaces to be roofed with ease which could not be spanned by masonry, especially when, as in India, the radiating arch was not ordinarily employed for structural purposes.¹

c8.3

¹ During the early centuries of the Christian era the Hindus knew the principle of the true arch, and occasionally built one with brick voussoirs set end to end, not face to face. The best example of such arches is seen in the temple at Bhītarīgāon in the Cawnpore District, possibly of Gupta, or even Kushān age, but other instances are known (Cunningham, *A. S. Rep.*, xi. 43). An arch so constructed was very weak. As a rule, Indian builders preferred the false or corbelled arch, constructed with horizontal courses of brick or stone gradually meeting at the top. They evidently disliked facing the difficulty caused by the thrust of the true arch which 'never sleeps'.

c8.4

Notwithstanding the superiority of timber in certain respects, Chandragupta's grandson, Asoka Maurya, evidently influenced by foreign example, preferred masonry. It is on record that during his reign of about forty-one years (273 to 232 B.C.) he replaced the wooden walls and buildings of his capital by permanent works in masonry, and caused hundreds of fine edifices in both brick and stone to be erected throughout the empire. So astonishing was his activity as a builder that people in after ages could not believe his constructions to be the work of human agency, and felt constrained to regard them as wrought by familiar spirits forced to obey the behests of the imperial magician. No building in India or Ceylon with any pretensions to be considered an example of architecture can be assigned certainly to a time earlier than that of Asoka, with whom the history of Indian architecture, as of the other arts, begins.

c8.5

After the death of Asoka the empire broke to pieces, but his Maurya descendants continued to rule the home provinces for about half a century, at the end of which (*circa* 184 B.C.) they were superseded by the Sunga kings who governed parts of Northern India for seventy-two years, until about 112 B.C. But the style of architecture, decoration, and sculpture which first assumed a permanent form under the patronage of Asoka continued in use up to about the close of the first century of the Christian era. Although Buddhism during that period, approximately extending from 273 B.C. to A.D. 100, was by no means the only religion in India, it enjoyed a dominant position as the result of the great Buddhist emperor's propaganda, and the extant remains of early monuments are almost all Buddhist. Very few buildings now identifiable can be ascribed to the reign of Asoka. The huge mass of solid brick masonry known as the great *stūpa* of Sānchī, with its plain stone railing, may be his work, and possibly some other similar structures may be as early, but everything else deserving the name of architecture as yet discovered seems to be later.

c8.6

FIG. 1. The great *stūpa*, Sānchī, as restored. (Photo., supplied by Prof. Macdonell.)

c8.7

The ancient civil buildings have all perished utterly, and the story of Indian architecture can be traced only by means of religious edifices. The characteristic Buddhist architectural compositions were *stūpas*, with their appurtenant railings and gateways, monasteries, and churches, the 'chaitya-halls' of Fergusson. The monasteries and churches include both rock-cut and structural examples. Isolated pillars also were frequently set up.

c8.8

*Stūpas*, or 'topes', the 'dāgabas' of Ceylon—solid cupolas of brick or stone masonry—were constructed either for the safe custody of relics hidden in a chamber near the base, or to mark a spot associated with an event sacred in Buddhist or Jain legend. Until a few years ago the *stūpa* was universally believed to be peculiarly Buddhist, but it is now matter of common knowledge that the ancient Jains built *stūpas* identical in form and accessories with those of the rival religion. However, no specimen of a Jain *stūpa* is now standing, and our attention may be confined to the Buddhist series.¹ The early examples were of a hemispherical form. The great *stūpa* of Sānchī as it appeared before restoration is shown in Plate I, and as repaired by the Archæological Survey in Fig. 1. As time went on the height of the dome was raised, and by a series of gradual modifications the ancient model was transformed into a lofty tower, and ultimately into the Chinese pagoda.

c8.9

¹ Jain *stūpas* are now represented by *samosaranas*, small structures in four diminishing tiers (*Hist. of Ind. and E. Archit.*, 2nd ed. (1910), vol. ii, p. 34 note). For an ancient example see *Jain Stūpa of Mathurā*, Pl. LXXXI, 1, back.

c8.10

Plate I. The great *stūpa*, Sānchi, east side, before restoration. (Photo. 2334, *I. O. List.*)

c8.11

The most ancient *stūpas* were very plain. They were often surrounded by a stone railing, which marked off a procession path for the use of worshippers and served as a defence against evil spirits.² The early examples of such railings, as at Sānchī, are perfectly unadorned copies of wooden post and rail fences. The bars

c8.12

² Parker, *Ancient Ceylon*, p. 270.

c8.13

[Figure: FIG. 2. (From *Bhilsa Topes*, Pl. IX, Fig. 1.)]

c8.14

of the railing were commonly, though not always, lenticular in section, inserted in the posts, as shown in Fig. 2.

c8.15

In the time of the Sunga dynasty the *stūpas* and their appurtenances became more ornate. Sculpture was freely applied to every member of the railing—to the posts, rails, and coping. The standard example of such a sculptured railing of early date is that at Bharhut. Late in the second century of the Christian era, at Amarāvatī, the railing was transformed into a screen covered with stone pictures in comparatively low relief. The sculpture of such highly ornate rails will be discussed in subsequent chapters, and we shall see that various ornamental designs were applied also to the decoration of the *stūpas* themselves. The openings giving access to the procession path inside the railing were dignified by the erection of lofty gateways (*toraṇa*), copied from wooden models, and covered with a profusion of sculpture. The best examples of such gateways are those at Sānchī.

c8.16

*Stūpas*, not to speak of miniature votive models, varied greatly in size. The very ancient specimen at Piprāwā on the Nepalese frontier, which may possibly be earlier than Asoka, has a diameter of 116 feet at ground level, and stands only about 22 feet high. The diameter of the great Sānchī monument at the plinth is 121½ feet, the height about 77½ feet, and the stone railing is a massive structure 11 feet high. Several monuments in Northern India, some of which were ascribed to Asoka, are recorded to have attained a height of from 200 to 400 feet; and to this day the summit of the Jetawanārāma *dāgaba* in Ceylon towers 251 feet above the level of the ground.¹ The larger monuments afforded infinite scope to the decorative artist.

c8.17

¹ i.e. the Jetawana as ordinarily understood. Mr. Parker shows good reason for believing that the so-called Jetawana is really the Abhayagiri, which stood to the north of Anurādhapura, and that the true Jetawana is the building to the east of the Sela chaitya (*Ancient Ceylon*, p. 300). between the domed *stūpa* and somewhat similar Phoenician tombs, as at Amrith (Perrot and Chipiez, *Hist. de l'Art, Phénicie*, fig. 94, 95; *Ancient Ceylon*, p. 261). The late Dr. Bloch, who opened some of the tumuli near Nandangarh in the Champāran District, believed them to be royal tombs of the seventh or eighth century B.C. (*Ann. Rep. A. S., Eastern Circle*, 1908-9, p. 3).

c8.18

All writers on Indian architecture have assumed that the domical *stūpa* must be a development of the earthen sepulchral tumulus, the form of a tomb being naturally utilized for a structure frequently intended to conserve bodily relics. But this assumption fails to explain the facts. The natural shape assumed by an earthen tumulus is that of a cone or pyramid, and as a matter of fact the earthen tumuli in the Champāran District and the Egyptian stone pyramids are conical, whereas a *stūpa* is invariably domical. Moreover, many *stūpas*, including some of the most famous, had nothing to do with bodily relics, being simply enduring monuments marking sacred spots. The current assumption implies both that *stūpas* intended for the reception of relics preceded those designed merely as memorials commemorating religious events, and that the form of a sepulchral monument was transferred to a building which had nothing to do with sepulture. Neither of these propositions is entitled to acceptance without proof, and no proof is forthcoming.²

c8.19

² Like everybody else, I formerly accepted the current theory. Mr. Parker suggests a connexion

c8.20

The true explanation seems to be that the domical form of the masonry *stūpa* (probably built first in brick, not stone) is derived from the curved roof of bamboos built over a primitive circular hut-shrine constructed of perishable materials. Circular shrines with conical roofs still exist among the Todas, and such a structure, if fitted with a domical roof, would be a *stūpa*. The solid interior of the *stūpa* may or may not have been suggested by the tumulus. My argument applies only to the exterior domical form.

c8.21

Curved roofs, as Fergusson observed, while very rare in the rest of the world, are common in India. We have not only the dome of the *stūpa*, but the barrel roof of the ‘chaitya-hall’ or church, the Bengal cornice, and the curvilinear steeple of the ‘Indo-Aryan’ or Āryāvarta style of temple. Every form of curved roof used in India can, I venture to think, be explained by assuming its derivation from a prototype constructed with elastic bamboos. The late Mr. William Simpson, who successfully applied this explanation to the Bengal cornice, the barrel roof of the ‘chaitya-hall’, and the ‘Indo-Aryan’ steeple, truly remarked that the claims of bamboo to supply a theory of origins for Indian architecture had been insufficiently considered, but did not proceed to apply his theory to the case of the *stūpa*.¹ Fergusson's belief in the sepulchral descent of the domed *stūpa* alone prevented him from definitely recognizing the true origin of the external form. ‘If one can fancy,’ he wrote, ‘a circular chamber with a domical roof—not in stone, of course—as the original receptacle of the relic, we may imagine that the form was derived from this’; and he proceeds to cite from the Bharhut sculptures an instance of ‘just such a domical roof’.² In the Sāñchī reliefs (*post* Chap. III) we actually find a shrine with a domical roof represented on one pillar along with a *stūpa* of the same form.

c8.22

¹ W. Simpson, ‘Origin and Mutation in Indian and Eastern Architecture’; an admirable essay in *Trans. Roy. Institute of Brit. Architects*, vol. vii, N. S. (1891), 225-76, with numerous illustrations. Compare the stone circular domed shrines (*vihāra*) of the north-western frontier (Foucher, *L'Art bouddhique du Gandhāra*, p. 100; fig. 38-41).

c8.23

² *Hist. of Ind. and Eastern Architecture* (1910), p. 66. The suggestion has been made in Ceylon that the domical form was adopted as being the best fitted to resist weather and the damage caused by vegetation.

c8.24

Although monastic institutions were not peculiar to Buddhism, having been adopted earlier by both Jains and Brahmanical Hindus, the Buddhist Order (*sangha*), including both monks and nuns, attained (as pointed out in the Introduction) a height of power to which the monastic communities of the other religions never aspired; and, in consequence, the buildings dedicated to the use of the Order were frequently designed on a scale of the utmost magnificence. The essential feature in a monastery is the provision of residential cells, arranged usually round a courtyard or quadrangle. When such a quadrangle became multiple, with the addition of chapels, *stūpas*, refectories, halls, churches, storehouses, and other buildings, the greater monasteries covered an enormous area, and offered to the architect, sculptor, and painter endless opportunities for the display of art in every form. Although no very early monastery has survived in a condition at all complete, the ground-plans of many such establishments have been clearly traced, and near Peshāwar considerable remains of superstructures crowded with statuary have been disclosed. Recorded descriptions and extant remains amply attest the splendour of the more considerable monasteries, each of which was a centre of secular as well as of religious education, and also a school of art in which men were trained in all the crafts needed for the adornment of the holy places.

c8.25

The architectural style employed in the monastic buildings varied, of course, according to time and place. In Western India many monasteries were excavated in the solid rock, but in other parts of the country they were largely constructed of timber resting upon massive brick foundations. Our knowledge of ancient Indian art depends much on the study of the remains of the monasteries, both rock-cut and structural, and the extant examples of the early schools of painting occur almost exclusively in the rock-cut monasteries and their connected halls in the west.

c8.26

The church, or 'chaitya-hall' of Fergusson, was a form of architecture peculiar to Buddhism, not being suitable for the ritual of either Jains or orthodox Hindus. The best structural example still standing is that at Tēr, probably the ancient Tagara, in the Sholāpur District, Bombay, which has escaped destruction by being built into

c8.27

FIG. 3.

c8.28

FIG. 4. Façade of rock-cut church at Nāsik, *circa* B. C. 150. (From a photo.)

c8.29

a Brahmanical temple. It is a long chamber, constructed of brick, 26 feet in length and 12 in width on the inside, with walls 3½ feet thick, an apsidal end, and a wagon-vaulted ridge roof. The bricks, laid in mud cement, with exceedingly fine joints, are of huge size, measuring 17×9×3 inches.¹

c8.30

¹ *Ann. Rep. A. S. I.*, 1902–3, p. 197, pl. XXIX, with plan and front and side elevations.

c8.31

Four or five similar buildings have been traced in plan at other localities, but the superstructures have almost wholly disappeared, except in two cases. The ground-plan of one in the Godāvarī District is shown in Fig. 3.²

c8.32

² Other examples are known at Sānchī and three localities in the Guntūr and Krishna Kistna) Districts, Madras. The one at Chezarla in the latter District (*G. O. Madras, Public* 382, dated 30 April, 1889) has its barrel roof standing, like that at Tēr. The early *Progress Reports of the Madras Archaeological Survey*, it may be explained, were published in Government Orders.

c8.33

When side-aisles are added, the form of the Buddhist church becomes almost identical with that of the early Christian basilica, a *stūpa* or *dāgaba* usually taking the place assigned to the altar in the apse of the basilica. The celebrated cave at Kārli, between Bombay and Poona, is designed on that plan, consisting of a nave and side-aisles, terminating in an apse or semi-dome, round which the aisle is carried. The general form of the façade is that of the Nāsik rock-cut example of the second century B.C., but of course details vary according to date and locality. The most ancient example of such a façade is the Lomas Rishi Cave in the Barābar Hills near Gayā, dating from Asoka's time, about 257 B.C. (Fig. 5), which is an exact copy of wooden construction. The frieze of elephants is well carved. Many of the later façades are crowded with figures of Buddha and other sculptures.

c8.34

FIG. 5. Façade of Lomas Rishi Cave, Barābar Hills, Gayā. (Arch. S. photo., supplied by Prof. Macdonell.)

c8.35

Isolated pillars, or columns, usually associated with other buildings, and frequently surmounted by a human figure, animal sculpture, or sacred symbol, continued to be erected during many centuries by adherents of all the three leading Indian religions. The oldest are the monolithic pillars of Asoka, who set up at least thirty such monuments, of which many, more or less perfect, survive.¹ Ten of those known bear his inscriptions. The Lauriyā-Nandangarh monument, inscribed with the first six Pillar Edicts, and practically uninjured, is shown in Plate II. The shaft of polished sandstone, 32 feet 9½ inches in height, diminishes from a base diameter of 35½ inches to a diameter of only 22½ inches at the top—proportions which render it Plate II. Asoka inscribed Pillar at Lauriyā-Nandangarh.

c8.36

¹ See the author's paper on the subject in *Z. D. M. G.* for 1911.

c8.38

the most graceful of all the Asoka columns. The uninscribed pillar at Bakhirā in the Muzaffarpar District, in perfect preservation, and presumably of earlier date, is more massive, and consequently less elegant. The fabrication, conveyance, and erection of monoliths of such enormous size—the heaviest weighing about fifty tons—are proofs that the engineers and stone-cutters of Asoka's age were not inferior in skill and resource to those of any time or country. The sculpture on the Asoka pillars will be discussed in the next chapter.

c8.39

In Kanara the Jains erected many detached columns of remarkably pleasing design.

c8.40

FIG. 6. Jain column at Mūdabidri, S. Kanara. (Moor, *Hindu Pantheon* (1810), pl. 77.)

c8.41

A particularly elegant example, 52½ feet in height, which faces a Jain temple at Mūdabidri in South Kanara, not far from Mangalore, is shown in Fig. 6. The material is granite, and the design is of singular grace. The work may be assigned to the eleventh or twelfth century, but I do not know its exact date. About twenty of these pillars exist in the South Kanara District. As Mr. Walhouse truly remarks: 'The whole capital and canopy are a wonder of light, elegant, highly decorated stone-work; and nothing can surpass the stately grace of these beautiful pillars, whose proportions and adaptations to surrounding scenery are always perfect, and whose richness of decoration never offends.'¹ In the whole range of Indian art there is nothing, perhaps, equal to these Kanara pillars for good taste.

c8.42

¹ *Ind. Ant.* v. (1876), p. 39, with a good plate of a beautiful example at Yenūr.

c8.43

Excepting the Buddhist cave-temples and edifices discussed above, few buildings now existing in India or Ceylon can be positively dated earlier than the sixth century of the Christian era. The oldest Brahmanical temple known in India is one at Rāmnagar, the ancient Ahichhatra, in the Bareli District, Agra Provinces, which may be ascribed either to the first century before, or the first century after, Christ. It was dedicated to Siva, and was adorned with carved bricks and terra-cottas, said to represent incidents in the legend of Siva; but no detailed description of this notable discovery is on record, and it is impossible to make out what the temple was like.²

c8.44

² Führer, *Progr. Rep. Epigr. and Archit. Branches, N. W. P. and Oudh*, 1891–2, p. 2. The assignment of date is chiefly based on the find of so-called 'Mitra' coins in the lower terrace of the temple. When that report was written, Dr. Führer had not begun the career of forgery which resulted in his resignation. The deeply-incised patterns on the bricks of ancient buildings were cut in the clay before firing.

c8.45

The brick temple at Bhitargāon in the Cawnpore District, with an ‘Indo-Aryan’ curvilinear steeple, may possibly go back to the fourth century;¹ and certain minute shrines in the so-called ‘Gupta style’ may not be much later. But throughout India, except Buddhist remains, there is hardly anything standing which can be dated earlier than A.D. 550. No early examples of civil architecture exist, and after the date named Buddhist structures become scarce. The styles of Indian architecture from the sixth century to the present day, therefore, must be deduced from Brahmanical and Jain temples, and the numerous examples testifying to the skill and taste of Indo-Muhammadan builders. The Muhammadan styles will be dealt with in a later chapter; at present our concern is only with Jain and Brahmanical religious edifices.

c8.46

¹ Cunningham, *A. S. Rep.*, vol. xi, pp. 40–6, pl. XIV–XVII; Vogel, *Ann. Rep. A. S. Northern Circle*, 1907–8, p. 31.

c8.47

The variety of styles which may be distinguished depends, as already observed, not on differences of creed, but on date and locality. At Khajurāho, for instance, Jain and Brahmanical temples alike are built in the ‘Indo-Aryan’ style, and the building at Delhi, which Fergusson cites as a typical example of the ‘modern Jaina style’, is merely an ordinary specimen of late architecture in the ‘composite’ style usual since the eighteenth century.

c8.48

All authors who treat of Indian architecture notice, and are embarrassed by the fact, that each style when it first comes to our knowledge is full-grown and complete. The earliest specimens betray no signs of tentative effort, and in no case is it possible to trace the progressive evolution of a given style from rude beginnings. The extensive destruction of ancient monuments, especially those built of brick, no doubt supplies a partial, though not adequate, explanation. I am convinced that the more fundamental explanation is to be found in the assumption that all the Indian styles are derived from prototypes constructed in timber, bamboos, and other perishable materials. We have seen how easily the Indian curvilinear roofs and the *stūpa* railings can be accounted for in this way, and by the extension of the theory an adequate reason for the non-existence of the missing links in the chain of architectural evolution is supplied. In the essay previously cited, Mr. Simpson has quoted from the ancient work entitled the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa* (*S.B.E.*, vols. xii, xxvi) a long description of an early Brahmanical temple as constructed some five or six or seven hundred years before the Christian era. That temple consisted simply of two sheds, which were ‘merely formed of posts and beams, covered with reeds and mats, and could only be described as belonging to the “thatch period” in architecture’. From such an edifice to the temples of Mount Ābū and Tanjore the distance is great, but there seems to be little reason to doubt that the intervening stages were worked out for the most part by experiments with evanescent materials. Brick, the intermediate stage between the ‘thatch period’ and the ‘stone period’, offers such a ready prey to the spoiler that it may be reckoned as only ‘semi-permanent’ material.² Whatever be the validity of this theory, we must take the styles ready-made as we find them, and briefly consider their several peculiarities, so far as may be necessary for the intelligent appreciation of the ancillary fine arts, which form the main subject of this work.

c8.49

² ‘The earlier temples, I believe, were built wholly in brick. At Aunda we find a small one built almost entirely of that material, while the star-shaped plan and sharp crisp mouldings are maintained as well almost as if built in stone. Remains of some of these early brick temples are found in North Gūjarāt, and the foundations and platforms on which the older stone ones are erected are frequently constructed with a brick core. Brick was, without doubt, the prevalent building material before stone came into general use, and probably immediately succeeded the more primitive wooden structures whose [*sic*] forms are reproduced in many of the earliest caves' (Cousens, *Progr. Rep. A. S. W. I.*, 1894–5, p. 6). In some regions where stone was abundant the brick stage may not have intervened. For N. Gūjarāt see Burgess, vol. ix, *A. S. W. I.*, vol. xxxii of New Imperial Series.

c8.50

In an ordinary Hindu temple the essential part is the rectangular cell or shrine containing the image or symbol of the god, and such a plain cell constitutes the simplest form of temple. Dignity is gained by the addition of a high roof, which may grow into a steeple, by prefixing a porch, which may grow into a nave, and be further amplified by aisles, transepts, and subsidiary steeples, until an architectural composition of extreme complexity is evolved.

c8.51

FIG. 7. Sketch of processional car. (From a drawing by Mr. Simpson.)

c8.52

Another type, built frequently by Jains and occasionally by Brahmanists, is a modification of the monastery, the monks' cells round the quadrangle being replaced by niches enshrining images. The modifications of both ground-plan and superstructure are, indeed, endless.¹ All forms offer abundant opportunity for artistic decoration.

c8.53

¹ At Aihole, Bijapur District, Bombay, 'we have an unbroken sequence in the styles from the fifth to the fourteenth century—from the early cave to the latest mediaeval temple' (Cousens, *Progr. Rep. A. S. W. I.*, 1908–9, p. 35).

c8.54

In the crowd of varieties two leading styles of temple architecture—the Northern or Indo-Aryan of Fergusson, and the Southern or Dravidian—may be readily distinguished.² If it be possible to amend the nomenclature so long established by Fergusson's authority, it would be preferable to give territorial names to all styles, calling the Indo-Aryan style that of Āryāvarta or Hindustan, the great plain between the Himalayas and the Narbadā.³ The term Dravidian is free from objection, Drāvida being the ancient name of peninsular India.

c8.55

² This classification does not apply to Ceylon.

c8.56

³ The term Indo-Aryan implies a disputable theory.

c8.57

The Āryāvarta, or Indo-Aryan style, examples of which to the south of the Narbadā are rare, is characterized by the bulging steeple with curvilinear vertical ribs, placed over the sanctuary, and frequently reproduced on other parts of the building. Miniature repetitions of the form are often used with good effect as decorations of the steeples themselves. Mr. Simpson proved, as already observed (*ante*, p. 18), that this type of roof is derived from the bamboo framework used to cover processional cars (Fig. 7).

c8.58

The best early examples are found at Bhuvanesvar in the Purī District, Orissa, where the temples, numbering several hundreds, illustrate the history of the style from the ninth or tenth to the thirteenth century. The earliest specimens have steeples comparatively low and squat, but pleasing to an eye which has become

c8.59

[Figure: FIG. 8. Mukteśvara temple, Bhuvanesvar, Orissa. (Photo. 280 *a*, I. M. *List*.)]

c8.60

accustomed to the strange design. The porch is a walled chamber with a low, massive roof, and internal pillars are wholly wanting. The combination of vertical and horizontal lines is skilfully arranged so as to give dignity to buildings of moderate height. This early astylar form of temple is best illustrated by the Muktesvara shrine, which Fergusson called 'the gem of Orissan art' (Fig. 8).

c8.61

A second, and later, variety of the style is adequately represented by the Great Temple, which has a high steeple tower, with sides vertical for the most part, and curving only near the top. The roof of the porch has considerable elevation, and in many details the design differs from that of the earlier variety. Sculptures of remarkable merit, which will be illustrated in a later chapter, are introduced in panels on the basement and elsewhere (Plate III).

c8.62

The third, or 'decorated', variety of the Bhuvanesvar style, in which columns become prominent, dates from the twelfth or thirteenth century. The most charming example is the Rājarānī temple. Some exquisite details of this building are illustrated in Fig. 9.

c8.63

The most renowned achievement of the vigorous Orissan school of architects is the temple of the Sun at Konārak (*vulgo* 'Kanaruc') on the coast, known to sailors as the Black Pagoda, in order to distinguish it from the White Pagoda, or temple of Jagannāth at Purī. The remains of the main steeple, never completed, which had been overwhelmed long ago by the drifting sand, have been lately exposed by excavation. The porch, which stands practically perfect, is covered by a beautifully designed

c8.64

[Figure: FIG. 9. Details of Rājarānī temple, Bhuvanesvar. (Photo. 299 a, I. M. *List*.)]

c8.65

pyramidal roof, justly praised by Fergusson, and described by the Workmans as the most perfectly proportioned structure which they had seen in the course of years of study devoted to Indian temples. The temple, when in better condition than it now is, was admired enthusiastically by Abūl Fazl, the minister and historian of Akbar in the sixteenth century. Considering its exceptional excellence, it is strangely late in date, having been built by King Narasimha, who reigned between A.D. 1240 and 1280, a time when high-class work was not often produced. A large book might be devoted to the description and illustration of this building and its sculptures, which [Figure: PLATE III. Āryāvarta style, Great Temple, Bhuvanesvar.

c8.66

will be illustrated by select examples in Chapter VII.¹ Plate IV, from a photo-graph kindly supplied by the Director-General of the Archaeological Survey, shows the recently excavated remains of the steeple, as well as the porch, seen from the north-west.

c8.67

¹ Koṇārak = *Koṇa* + *arka*, i. e. the sun (*arka*) of Koṇakoṇa, the name of the place. The date, which Fergusson hesitated to accept, has been definitely settled by copper-plate inscriptions. See *Ann. Rep. A. S., India*, 1902–3, pp. 46–50; ibid., 1903–4, pp. 46–8; *Progr. Rep. E. Circle*, 1908–9, p. 18. I agree with Dr. Burgess in thinking that mistakes were made in the work done by the Archaeological Survey at Koṇārak.

c8.68

The Bhuvanesvar group of temples stands first in importance among the examples of the Āryāvarta style by reason of the immense number of buildings, usually in fairly good condition, and their variety, which marks the stages in the history of the style for at least three centuries. The group next in importance, situated at Khajurāho in the Chhatarpur State, Bundelkhand, although far inferior in both numbers and variety, includes some admirable buildings designed on a grand scale and richly adorned with sculpture. The temples, in more or less satisfactory preservation, numbering between twenty and thirty, were all erected by order of the Chandēl kings within a century before and after A.D. 1000. They are built of hard gneiss, an intractable material, unfavourable to the application of the exuberant ornament dear to Indian taste. Many of the details are executed in sandstone, which offers greater facilities to the sculptor. Several of the domes, constructed in the Indian manner with horizontal overlapping courses of stone, are remarkable achievements, the largest being 22 feet in diameter. The cusps hanging from the centre of some of the domes are beautiful, although, of course, not so elaborately carved as the similar works executed in more manageable marble at Mount Ābū. Plate V gives a good notion of one of the best of the Khajurāho temples, which I had the pleasure of inspecting more than thirty years ago. The steeple is nearly 100 feet high.

c8.69

Northern India is full of examples of the style, ancient, mediaeval, and modern, mostly in stone, but occasionally in brick. The oldest brick specimen in preservation sufficiently good to allow of the recognition of the style is that at Bhītargāon in the Cawnpore District (*ante*, p. 23), now believed to be of early date, possibly of the fourth century. Another well-preserved ancient brick temple, referred doubtfully to the eighth century, stands at Kōnch in S. Bihār.² There is reason to believe (as already observed, *ante*, p. 23) that the transition from wooden to stone architecture was often made through brick, and that the scarcity of old brick buildings is due to the facility with which the material could be utilized for other constructions. The decorations of brick buildings were carried out in terra-cotta and carved, not merely stamped, bricks. Such bricks of good design are often seen built into later structures. The art of carving brick appears to be extinct.

c8.70

² Cunningham described and illustrated both temples: Bhītargāon, *A. S. Rep.*, vol. xi, pp. 40–4, Pl. XIV–XVII; and Kōnch, ibid., vol. viii, p. 54, Pl. VI; vol. xvi, pp. 50–58, Pl. XVI–XVIII. But the Bhītargāon temple is now believed to be older than he supposed it to be.

c8.71

The Bengal variety is characterized by the use of the bent cornice, obviously copied from the bamboo eaves of an ordinary Bengal hut, and by a peculiar arrangement of the curvilinear steeples; one lofty steeple placed over the centre being surrounded by four, eight, or sixteen smaller towers of the same form. Figure 10 illustrates a seventeen-towered temple in the Dinājpur District. Some of the details are Muhammadan. Fergusson has described a large similar temple at Kāntonagar in the same District, finished in 1722, and decorated with applied terra-cottas of slight artistic merit. This variety of the Āryāvarta style is peculiar to Bengal.¹ The only example recorded outside that province is one at Bilhari, Central Provinces, built to the order of a Bengālī immigrant.

c8.72

¹ Manmohan Chakravarti, 'Bengali Temples and their General Characteristics' (*J. A. S. B.*, vol. v, New Ser. (1909)).

c8.73

Plate IV. Temple of the Sun, Konārak, Orissa, as excavated. (Arch. S. photo.)

c8.74

In the modern temples of Northern India the tendency is to reduce the curvature of the steeple, and to make the form approximate to that of an English slender spire. The effect is sometimes pleasing, but lacking in the massive dignity of the best designs at Bhuvanesvar and Khajurāho. The contemptible sculptured and painted decorations of the modern buildings testify plainly to the general lack of artistic feeling.

c8.75

FIG. 10. Temple in Bengali style, Dīnājpur.

c8.76

Numerous recent buildings, sacred and secular, combine the Muhammadan dome with the Bengālī cornice, omitting the steeple. Such buildings are erected freely by Hindus for purely Hindu purposes, as, for instance, the elegant mausoleum built at Benares to the memory of the lately deceased saint, Swāmi Bhāskaranand, which looks like a Muslim building. An example will be illustrated in Chapter XII.

c8.77

Hardly anything remains standing of the larger temples, which must have been erected in many places during the rule of the great Gupta monarchs of the fourth and fifth centuries. The surviving buildings of that time are chiefly tiny shrines resembling the cave temples, and situated in out-of-the-way places. Cunningham treated those little edifices as examples of the 'Gupta style', and enumerated seven characteristics of that style, namely, (1) flat roofs, without steeples of any kind; (2) prolongation of the head of the doorway beyond the jambs; (3) statues of the personified Ganges and Jumna guarding the entrance; (4) pillars with a massive square capital, surmounted by two lions back to back, often with a tree between them; (5) bosses over the capitals, and peculiar friezes; (6) continuation of the architrave of the portico as a moulding round the building; and (7) deviation of the plan from the cardinal points. A characteristic example exists at Tigawā in the Jabalpur District, Central Provinces, but is hardly worth illustration.¹

c8.78

¹ Cunningham, *A. S. Rep.*, ix. 42; photo. 1440, I. M. *List*. The temple is a rectangular cell approached by a four-pillared portico with all the characteristics described.

c8.80

A beautiful variation of the Āryāvarta or Indo-Aryan style, found in Rājputāna and Gūjarāt, is characterized by a free use of columns carved with all imaginable richness, strut brackets, and exquisite marble ceilings with cusped pendants, at least equal to the best Tudor work of the kind. By an unfortunate error Fergusson described this Western or Gūjarātī style as the 'Jain style'. In reality it has no concern with any special kind of religion, and is Jain merely because Jains were numerous and wealthy in Western India long ago as they are still. When power passed into Muslim hands the so-called Jain style, that is to say the local style, was applied with the necessary modifications to the needs of Muhammadan worship (*post*, Chap. XII).

c8.81

Two temples at Mount Ābū, built wholly of white marble, are famous as unsurpassed models of this wonderful style. The earlier, dedicated to Ādināth, was built by a minister or governor named Vimala in A. D. 1031; the later was consecrated by Tejpāl two centuries afterwards, in A. D. 1230. Notwithstanding the considerable difference in age both temples are similar in style. I give illustrations showing half of the ceiling in Vimala Sāha's temple (Plate VI) and some of the columns in the upper hall of Tejpāl's temple (Plate VII). It is needless to comment on the beauty and delicacy of the carving and the richness of the design in both cases.

c8.82

It would be easy to fill many pages with more or less similar specimens of work of cloying richness to be found in Rājputāna and Gūjarāt, but the two choice illustrations selected must suffice. I am tempted, however, to add an unpublished photograph (Plate VIII) of a charming temple of the Sun at Osia in the Jodhpur State, Rājputāna, lately brought to notice by Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar, and treated in a much simpler fashion. Osia possesses no less than twelve large ancient temples, some Jain and some Brahmanical, and all, apparently, dating from the eighth century. The residents of the town show their appreciation of these works of art by using them as public latrines.²

c8.83

² *Progr. Rep. A. S. W. I.*, 1906-7, p. 36.

c8.84

The Dravidian or Southern style is sharply distinguished from that of Āryāvarta by its straight-lined tower divided into stories by horizontal bands, and surmounted by either a barrel-roofed ridge or a small dome. The central shrine, except in the earliest examples, is invariably surrounded by an immense walled quadrangle, usually [Figure: PLATE VI. Part of ceiling of Temple of Vimalasāha, Mt. Ābū, A.D. 1031.

c8.85

[Figure: Plate VII. Pillars of upper hall of Tejpāl's Temple, Mt. Ābū, A.D. 1230.

c8.86

[Figure: PLATE VIII. Temple of the Sun at Osia, Jodhpur State, Rājputāna. (Photo. 2825, A. S. W. I.)]

c8.87

including numerous subsidiary temples, tanks, and sculptured halls or cloisters. The quadrangle is entered by lofty gateways (*gopuram*), which ordinarily overtop the central shrine, and so spoil the effect of the architectural composition. But the great temple of Tanjore, its smaller replica at Gangaikondapuram, and some of the earlier temples at Conjeeveram (Kānchī) are designed on correct principles, with the central mass dominating the composition. Sometimes there are several quadrangles, one within the other.

c8.88

[Figure: FIG. 11. Gaṇeśa (Ganēsh) Ratha, Māmallapuram. (Photo. 1953, I. M. *List*.)]

c8.89

The history of the style begins in the seventh century with the Dharmarāja Ratha, the earliest of the rock-cut *rathas* at Māmallapuram, thirty-five miles south of Madras, commonly known as the Seven Pagodas, which were excavated in the reign of Narasimha-varman, surnamed Mahāmalla, the Pallava king who defeated Pulakesin II Chalukya in A. D. 642. All the Seven Pagodas are the work of one Pallava king or another during the seventh century. I give an illustration of the Ganesa Ratha (*cir.* A. D. 680), with a ridge roof (Fig. 11). Some of the others are crowned by domes.

c8.90

The next stage in the development of the style is marked by the structural temples at Conjeeveram (Kānchī), the Pallava capital, which became known only a few years ago, and have been recently described in detail by Mr. A. Rea. Six temples of the Pallava period exist in or close to the town.¹ Inscriptions prove that the two principal edifices, the Kailāsanātha and the Vaikuntha-Perumāl, were erected by the sons of King Rājasimha, great-grandson of Narasimha-varman. The Muktesvara temple of about the same date, say A. D. 700 to A. D. 750, with a domical roof, is a typical example. Mr. Rea is mistaken in believing the structural temples to antedate the rock-cut examples.²

c8.91

¹ Rea, *Pallava Architecture*, 4to, Madras, 1909, being vol. xxxiv of *Archaeol. S. Rep., India*, New Imp. Series, and vol. xi of the Southern India Series.

c8.92

² The correct history is given by Mr. Venkayya in 'The Pallavas' (*Ann. Rep. A. S., India*, 1906–7, pp. 226–35), and Dr. Hultzsch (*Ep. Ind.*, vol. x, pp. 1–14).

c8.93

Further development was effected under the patronage of the powerful Chola kings, Rājarāja and his son Rājendra (985 to 1035), the builders respectively of the Great Temple at Tanjore and its fellow at Gangaikondapuram in the Trichinopoly District. A representative illustration of the Chola buildings is afforded by the relatively small temple of Subrāhmaṇya or Kārtikeya at Tanjore, nearly contemporary with the Great Temple, and considered by Fergusson to be ‘as exquisite a piece of decorative architecture as is to be found in the south of India’ (Plate IX).

c8.95

The gigantic South-Indian temples, with vast quadrangular enclosures and lofty *gopurams* overtopping the central shrine, extend in date from the seventeenth century

c8.96

FIG. 12. Mukteśvara Temple, Kānchī, from the south-west. (Rea, *Pallava Architecture*, Pl. XVIII.)

c8.97

to the present day. Fergusson states that he was personally acquainted with ‘upwards of thirty great Dravidian temples, or groups of temples, any one of which must have cost as much to build as an English cathedral—some a great deal more’. Several such edifices, at Ramesvaram, Tinnevelly, Madura, and other places, are described in his book. The buildings at Madura are of special interest because they can be dated closely, having been erected by Tirumal Nāik, a local chieftain, who reigned from 1623 to 1659. Fig. 13 gives a general view of the Madura temple, a typical example. The corridors or cloisters connected with such temples are of wonderfully large dimensions—those of Rāmesvaram, for instance, aggregating nearly 4,000 feet in length—and are filled with weird, fantastic sculpture. The sculpture will be illustrated in due course in a later chapter. The architecture, which resembles that of the earlier temples in its general lines, need not be further discussed for the purposes of this work. The most marvellous of all Dravidian temples is the well-known rock-cut Kailās temple at Elūra, excavated from a hill-side by a Rāshtrakūta king in the eighth century. Some of the sculptures will be noticed subsequently.

c8.98

.FIG. 13. Madura Temple, general view. (A. S. photo., supplied by Prof. Macdonell.)

c8.99

The immense ruins of the city of Vijayanagar, dating from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, now represented by Hampi and other villages in the Bellary District, Madras, present numerous examples of a special local variety of Dravidian architecture. There is room for only one illustration (Fig. 15).

c8.100

The style intermediate in both locality and character between the Northern and Southern styles is that which received from Fergusson the inappropriate name of Chalukyan. It is true that the Chalukya clan supplied one of the leading royal families of the Deccan from the middle of the sixth to the middle of the eighth century, and again from A. D. 973 to the Muhammadan conquest, but the typical examples of the style are the work of Hoysala, not Chalukya kings; and, if a dynastic designation be given, the style should be named Hoysala rather than Chalukya. Territorial designations are, however, preferable to dynastic, and if it be practicable to modify Fergusson's established nomenclature, the style may be better described either as that of the Deccan, or that of Mysore, in which province the finest specimens occur, at Halebīd, the ancient capital, Belūr, and many other localities less known to fame.

c8.101

[Figure: FIG. 14. Somnāthpur triple, stellate temple, Mysore, A. D. 1268. (Photo. supplied by Prof. Macdonell. See *Ann. Rep. A. S., Mysore*, 1909–10, p. 9.)]

c8.102

The style, whatever name be bestowed upon it, is characterized by a richly carved base or plinth, supporting the temple, which is polygonal, star-shaped in plan, and roofed by a low pyramidal tower, surmounted by a vase-like ornament. The temple of Vishnu in the village of Nuggēhalli, in the Tiplūr Taluk, Mysore, as shown in Plate X, from an unpublished photograph, gives a good notion of this extraordinarily ornate style. The stellate plan appears clearly in the view of the Somnāthpur temple (Fig. 14). The Belūr temple is known to have been erected in A.D. 1117 by a Hoysala king named Bettiga, converted from Jainism to faith in Vishnu. The more magnificent temples at Halebīd, the Hoysalesvara and Kedāresvara, are somewhat later in date, and necessarily must have been under construction for many years.

c8.103

[Figure: PLATE X. Deccan style; temple, Nuggēhalli, Mysore, A. D. 1249. (Photo. A. S. Mysore.)]

c8.104

Not long ago the disintegrating action of the roots of a banyan tree unfortunately reduced the Kedāresvara to a heap of ruins.¹

c8.105

¹ The principal temples in this style range in date between A. D. 1117 and 1268 (Rice, *Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions*, Constable, 1909, p. 194). See Workman, *Through Town and Jungle* (1904), ch. v, with many excellent illustrations.

c8.106

Plate XI, showing a small portion of the sculptures on the eastern end of the Hoysalesvara temple, will give the reader a faint notion of ‘one of the most marvellous exhibitions of human labour to be found even in the patient East’. The architectural framework, it will be observed, is used mainly as a background for the display of an

c8.107

[Figure: FIG. 15. The Council Hall, Vijayanagar. (Photo. supplied by Prof. Macdonell.)]

c8.108

infinity of superb decoration, which leaves no space uncovered and gives the eye no rest.

c8.109

‘The building,’ Fergusson writes, ‘stands on a terrace ranging from 5 to 6 feet in height, and paved with large slabs. On this stands a frieze of elephants, following all the sinuosities of the plan and extending to some 710 feet in length, and containing not less than two thousand elephants, most of them with riders and trappings, sculptured as only an Oriental can represent the wisest of brutes. Above these is a frieze of *śārdūlas*, or conventional lions—the emblems of the Hoysala Ballālas who built the temple.² Then comes a scroll of infinite beauty and variety of design; over this a frieze of horsemen and another scroll ; over which is a bas-relief of scenes from the *Rāmāyaṇa*, representing the conquest of Ceylon and all the varied incidents of that epic. This, like the other, is about 700 feet long. (The frieze of the Parthenon is less than 550 feet.) Then some celestial beasts and celestial birds, and all along the east front a frieze of groups from human life, and then a cornice, with a rail, divided into panels, each containing two figures [only a single figure in the part photographed]. Over this are windows of pierced slabs, like those of Belūr, though not so rich or varied.’

c8.110

² The lions are there, not as the emblem of the Hoysala kings, but as part of the canonical scheme of decoration—elephants, lions, horses, men.

c8.111

PLATE XI. Hoysaleśvara Temple, Halebīd; sculptures on east end. (*Photo. 155c, I. O. List.*)

c8.112

The Hoysalesvara and several other buildings of its class are twin temples consisting of two distinct shrines set side by side and joined together. The beautiful building at Somnāthpur (*ante*, Fig. 14) is a triple temple. A special feature of interest in these Mysore temples is the record of the names of the Kanarese artists, who executed individual statues. At Belūr there are twelve such signatures, and at the Hoysalesvara fourteen, all different. Eight signatures on the Somnāthpur temple have been noted, among them that of Mallitamma, who executed forty images.¹

c8.113

¹ In *Epigraphia Carnatica*, vol. v, Part I, pp. xxxvi, xxxviii, Mr. Rice describes and illustrates several temples. See also *Ann. Rep. Archaeol. S., Mysore*, 1909–10, para. 25.

c8.114

Certain temples near the Tungabhadrā river situated in the western part of the Ballāri (Bellary) District, Madras, wedged in between Mysore territory on the south and the Nizam’s Dominions on the north, form the subject of an excellent monograph by Mr. Rea, entitled *Chalukyan Architecture*. The title is so far justified that the buildings were erected to the order of Chalukya kings in the twelfth century. But the style is a modification of the Dravidian or Southern, not of the Deccan or Mysore style called Chalukyan by Mr. Fergusson. The plans are rectangular, not star-shaped, and the towers are distinctly Dravidian in design. The buildings, as Mr. Rea correctly observes, ‘exhibit a preponderance of Dravidian forms. They might best be described as an embodiment of Chalukyan details engrafted on a Dravidian building.’ Although the statues, individually regarded, are not of high merit, and present much of the grotesqueness of commonplace Hindu sculpture, the ornament, considered as a whole, is superb. It is impossible, we are assured, to describe the exquisite finish of the greenstone or hornblende pillars, or to exaggerate the marvellous intricacy and artistic finish of the decoration in even the minutest details. The ornament is generally completely undercut, and is sometimes attached to the solid masonry by the most slender of stalks, producing the effect of an incrustation of foliage on the wall. Both the intricate geometrical patterns of the ceilings and the foliated work covering every other part of the building exhibit the greatest possible exuberance of varied forms boldly designed and executed with consummate mastery of technical details. No chased work in gold or silver could possibly be finer, and the patterns to this day are copied by goldsmiths, who take casts and moulds from them, although unable to reproduce the sharpness and finish of the originals.

First 110 of 184 passages. Read on

Linked texts (44)