DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9541#0371
Chap. III.
SERINGHAM
347
were considered indispensable in temples of the first class. Generally
they had—or were intended to have—1000 columns; this one has
only 688, and only about one-half of these carry beams or a roof of
any sort. There can, however, be very little doubt that, had time
and money been available, it would have been completed to the
typical extent. As it is, it is probably owing to our management
of the revenues of the country that the requisite funds were not
forthcoming, and the buildings stopped probably within the limits of
the present century.
The general effect of such a design as this may be gathered from
the bird's-eye view (Woodcut ±\o. 194). As an artistic design, no-
thing can be worse. The gateways, irregularly spaced in a great
blank wall, lose half their dignity from their positions; and the
bathos of their decreasing in size and elaboration, as they approach
the sanctuary, is a mistake which nothing can redeem. We may
admire beauty of detail, and be astonished at the elaboration and
evidence of labour, if they are found in such a temple as this, but as
an architectural design it is altogether detestable.
Seringham.
The temple which has been most completely marred by this false
system of design is that at Seringham, which is certainly the largest,
and, if its principle of design could be reversed, would be one of the
finest temples in the south of India (AVoodcut No. 195, p. 349). Here
the central enclosure is quite as small and as insignificant as that at
Tiruvalur, and except that its dome is gilt has nothing to distinguish
it from an ordinary village temple. The next enclosure, however, is
more magnificent. It encloses the hall of 1000 columns, which measures
some 450 ft. by 130 ft. The number of columns is, I believe, sixteen
in front by sixty in depth, or 960 altogether ; but I do not feel
sure there is not some mistake in my observations, and that the
odd forty are to be found somewhere. They consequently are not
spaced more than 10 ft. apart from centre to centre; and as at one
end the hall is hardly over 10 ft. high, and iu the loftiest place only
15 ft. or 16 ft., and the pillars spaced nearly evenly over the floor,
it will be easily understood how little effect such a building really
produces. They are, however, each of a single block of granite, and
all carved more or less elaborately. A much finer portico stretches
across this court from gopura to gopura; the pillars in it are
much more widely spaced, and the central aisle is double that of
those on the sides, and crosses the portico in the centre, making
a transept; its height, too, is double that of the side aisles. It
is a pleasing and graceful architectural design; the other is only an
SERINGHAM
347
were considered indispensable in temples of the first class. Generally
they had—or were intended to have—1000 columns; this one has
only 688, and only about one-half of these carry beams or a roof of
any sort. There can, however, be very little doubt that, had time
and money been available, it would have been completed to the
typical extent. As it is, it is probably owing to our management
of the revenues of the country that the requisite funds were not
forthcoming, and the buildings stopped probably within the limits of
the present century.
The general effect of such a design as this may be gathered from
the bird's-eye view (Woodcut ±\o. 194). As an artistic design, no-
thing can be worse. The gateways, irregularly spaced in a great
blank wall, lose half their dignity from their positions; and the
bathos of their decreasing in size and elaboration, as they approach
the sanctuary, is a mistake which nothing can redeem. We may
admire beauty of detail, and be astonished at the elaboration and
evidence of labour, if they are found in such a temple as this, but as
an architectural design it is altogether detestable.
Seringham.
The temple which has been most completely marred by this false
system of design is that at Seringham, which is certainly the largest,
and, if its principle of design could be reversed, would be one of the
finest temples in the south of India (AVoodcut No. 195, p. 349). Here
the central enclosure is quite as small and as insignificant as that at
Tiruvalur, and except that its dome is gilt has nothing to distinguish
it from an ordinary village temple. The next enclosure, however, is
more magnificent. It encloses the hall of 1000 columns, which measures
some 450 ft. by 130 ft. The number of columns is, I believe, sixteen
in front by sixty in depth, or 960 altogether ; but I do not feel
sure there is not some mistake in my observations, and that the
odd forty are to be found somewhere. They consequently are not
spaced more than 10 ft. apart from centre to centre; and as at one
end the hall is hardly over 10 ft. high, and iu the loftiest place only
15 ft. or 16 ft., and the pillars spaced nearly evenly over the floor,
it will be easily understood how little effect such a building really
produces. They are, however, each of a single block of granite, and
all carved more or less elaborately. A much finer portico stretches
across this court from gopura to gopura; the pillars in it are
much more widely spaced, and the central aisle is double that of
those on the sides, and crosses the portico in the centre, making
a transept; its height, too, is double that of the side aisles. It
is a pleasing and graceful architectural design; the other is only an