DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9541#0482
458
NORTHERN OR INDO-ARYAN STYLE.
Book Yl
Bombay government has lately spent a good deal of money.1 It is,
however, in a very ruinous state, and even when perfect could never
have been equal to this one at Udaipur, and to many others on which
the money might have been better laid out. In it there is a slab
with an inscription, dated in the Saka year 782, or a.d. 8G0.2 It
is not quite clear, however, whether this inscription belongs to the
temple which we now see, or to an earlier one, fragments of which are
found built into the vimana of the present one. If the date of the
temple is that just quoted, as Dr. Bhau Daji would have us believe,
all that can be said is that it is utterly anomalous. If it is in a.d. 1070,
as another inscription he quotes found near the place might lead us to
infer,3 it accords with all else we know of the style.
One other illustration must complete what we now have to say
regarding these Indo-Aryan temples. It is one of the most modern of
the style, having been erected by Meera Baie, the wife of Khumbo
____ Rana of Chittore (a.d. 1418-1468). Khumbo was,
as is well known, devoted to the Jaina faith, having
I erected the temple at Sadri (Woodcut No. 133), and
E-Hil ^'"ar °f Victory (Woodcut No. 143); yet here
H | PXi we find him and his wife erecting in their capital
two temples dedicated to Vishnu. The king's temple,
^ ~J uiii'-b i- by, i> wry much smaller than this
**. . one, for which his wife gets credit. In plan, the
Diagram explanatory ' ... .
or the Plan or , only peculiarity is that the pradakshina, or pro-
Meera Haie's Temple, •' 1 J n • i ,
Chittore. cession-path round the cell, is here an open colonnade,
with four little pavilions at the four corners, and this
is repeated in the portico in the manner shown in the annexed diagram
(Woodcut No. 256).
The roof of the portico, in the form of a pyramid, is placed
diagonally as at Udaipur, while the tower itself is of so solid and
unbroken an outline, that it might at first sight be ascribed to a
much earlier date than the loth century (Woodcut No. 257). When,
however, it is closely looked at, we miss the frequent amalaka
bands and other ornamental features of earlier times, and the crown-
ing members are more unlike those of ancient temples. The curve,
too, of its outline is regular from base to summit, and consequently
feebler than that of the older examples; but taking it all in all, it
certainly is more like an ancient temple than any other of its age
I am acquainted with. It was a revival, the last expiring effort
of a style that was dying out, in that form at least.
1 A portion of the casts are in the
South Kensington Museum. Transcripts
from the drawings were published in the
' Indian Antiquary,' vol. iii. p. 316.
2 'Journal Bombay Branch of the
Royal Asiatic Society,' vol. ix. p. 219.
3 Ibid., vol. ix. p. 221.
NORTHERN OR INDO-ARYAN STYLE.
Book Yl
Bombay government has lately spent a good deal of money.1 It is,
however, in a very ruinous state, and even when perfect could never
have been equal to this one at Udaipur, and to many others on which
the money might have been better laid out. In it there is a slab
with an inscription, dated in the Saka year 782, or a.d. 8G0.2 It
is not quite clear, however, whether this inscription belongs to the
temple which we now see, or to an earlier one, fragments of which are
found built into the vimana of the present one. If the date of the
temple is that just quoted, as Dr. Bhau Daji would have us believe,
all that can be said is that it is utterly anomalous. If it is in a.d. 1070,
as another inscription he quotes found near the place might lead us to
infer,3 it accords with all else we know of the style.
One other illustration must complete what we now have to say
regarding these Indo-Aryan temples. It is one of the most modern of
the style, having been erected by Meera Baie, the wife of Khumbo
____ Rana of Chittore (a.d. 1418-1468). Khumbo was,
as is well known, devoted to the Jaina faith, having
I erected the temple at Sadri (Woodcut No. 133), and
E-Hil ^'"ar °f Victory (Woodcut No. 143); yet here
H | PXi we find him and his wife erecting in their capital
two temples dedicated to Vishnu. The king's temple,
^ ~J uiii'-b i- by, i> wry much smaller than this
**. . one, for which his wife gets credit. In plan, the
Diagram explanatory ' ... .
or the Plan or , only peculiarity is that the pradakshina, or pro-
Meera Haie's Temple, •' 1 J n • i ,
Chittore. cession-path round the cell, is here an open colonnade,
with four little pavilions at the four corners, and this
is repeated in the portico in the manner shown in the annexed diagram
(Woodcut No. 256).
The roof of the portico, in the form of a pyramid, is placed
diagonally as at Udaipur, while the tower itself is of so solid and
unbroken an outline, that it might at first sight be ascribed to a
much earlier date than the loth century (Woodcut No. 257). When,
however, it is closely looked at, we miss the frequent amalaka
bands and other ornamental features of earlier times, and the crown-
ing members are more unlike those of ancient temples. The curve,
too, of its outline is regular from base to summit, and consequently
feebler than that of the older examples; but taking it all in all, it
certainly is more like an ancient temple than any other of its age
I am acquainted with. It was a revival, the last expiring effort
of a style that was dying out, in that form at least.
1 A portion of the casts are in the
South Kensington Museum. Transcripts
from the drawings were published in the
' Indian Antiquary,' vol. iii. p. 316.
2 'Journal Bombay Branch of the
Royal Asiatic Society,' vol. ix. p. 219.
3 Ibid., vol. ix. p. 221.