DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.2371#0189
PART II.—INTRODUCTION. 167
influenced India in this respect. On the whole the explanation of
the phenomenon is probably the prosaic fact that the trap rocks which
overlie the country and form the hill sides everywhere in the "West are
exceptionally well suited for the purpose. They lie everywhere hori-
zontally. Are singularly uniform in their conformation, and have
alternating strata of harder and softer rocks which admit of caves
being interpolated between them with singular facility, and they are
everywhere impervious to moisture.
With such a material it is little wonder that once it was suggested,
the inhabitants of the Western Ghats early seized upon the idea of
erecting permanent quasi eternal temples for the practice of the rites
of their new religion, in substitution for the perishable wooden struc-
tures they had hitherto employed, and once the fashion was adopted
we ought not to be surprised it became so generally prevalent nor
that it continued in use so long.
At the same time it may be observed that under the circumstances
the amount of labour expended in excavating a rock-cut temple in so
suitable a material is probably less than would be required to erect a
similar building in quarried stone. If we take, for instance, even such
an elaborate temple as the Kailasa or Blura, it will be found that the
cubic contents of the temples left standing is about equal to the
amount of material quarried out of the pit in which it stands. It is
at the same time evident that it would be much less expensive to chip
and throw out to spoil this amount of material, than to quarry it
at a distance and carry it to the temple, and then hew it and raise
it to the place where it was wanted. The amount of carving and
ornament being, of course, the same in both cases. It is not so easy
to make a comparison in the case of a Ohaitya cave or a vihara, but
on the whole it is probable that excavating them in the rock would
generally prove cheaper than building them on the plain. If this is
so, it is evident that the quasi eternity of the one offered such advan-
tages in such a climate over any ephemeral structure they could
erect elsewhere, that we ought not to be surprised at its general
adoption. The proof that they exercised a wise discretion in doing
this, lies in the fact that though we have in the west of India nearly
a thousand roek-cut temples belonging to the Buddhist, Brahmanical,
and ^ama religions, we have only one or two structural examples
erected in the same region at the very end of the period of time to
wnich these caves belong.
influenced India in this respect. On the whole the explanation of
the phenomenon is probably the prosaic fact that the trap rocks which
overlie the country and form the hill sides everywhere in the "West are
exceptionally well suited for the purpose. They lie everywhere hori-
zontally. Are singularly uniform in their conformation, and have
alternating strata of harder and softer rocks which admit of caves
being interpolated between them with singular facility, and they are
everywhere impervious to moisture.
With such a material it is little wonder that once it was suggested,
the inhabitants of the Western Ghats early seized upon the idea of
erecting permanent quasi eternal temples for the practice of the rites
of their new religion, in substitution for the perishable wooden struc-
tures they had hitherto employed, and once the fashion was adopted
we ought not to be surprised it became so generally prevalent nor
that it continued in use so long.
At the same time it may be observed that under the circumstances
the amount of labour expended in excavating a rock-cut temple in so
suitable a material is probably less than would be required to erect a
similar building in quarried stone. If we take, for instance, even such
an elaborate temple as the Kailasa or Blura, it will be found that the
cubic contents of the temples left standing is about equal to the
amount of material quarried out of the pit in which it stands. It is
at the same time evident that it would be much less expensive to chip
and throw out to spoil this amount of material, than to quarry it
at a distance and carry it to the temple, and then hew it and raise
it to the place where it was wanted. The amount of carving and
ornament being, of course, the same in both cases. It is not so easy
to make a comparison in the case of a Ohaitya cave or a vihara, but
on the whole it is probable that excavating them in the rock would
generally prove cheaper than building them on the plain. If this is
so, it is evident that the quasi eternity of the one offered such advan-
tages in such a climate over any ephemeral structure they could
erect elsewhere, that we ought not to be surprised at its general
adoption. The proof that they exercised a wise discretion in doing
this, lies in the fact that though we have in the west of India nearly
a thousand roek-cut temples belonging to the Buddhist, Brahmanical,
and ^ama religions, we have only one or two structural examples
erected in the same region at the very end of the period of time to
wnich these caves belong.