40 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[Febrdabt, 



preat choultrie or hall of a thousand columns; and in this form the 

 southern Hindoo tem|i!e may be said to be complete. In some 

 instances a fourth, fifth, sixth, and even a seventh inclosure is sub- 

 sequently added, and as each of these has a shrine with four gopu- 

 ras, as in the famous tem))le at Seringham, a temple may have as 

 many as twenty or twenty-three of these. Tliis however may he 

 said to be rather the exception than the rule; the temple being 

 complete with tliree courts and seven gopuras. There is however 

 anotlier form, when tiie temple is dedicated to Siva, of placing two 

 such as I have described side by side, one dedicated to tlie god 

 himself, tlie other to the goddess Prava his wife. This is the case at 

 Tinevelly and .Madura, in either of which instances there are only 

 eight gopuras, though had the design l)een carried out as if there 

 w ere two complete separate temples and three indosures, the num- 

 ber should have been thirteen, as there is only one temple common 

 to both. 



Tiie dimonsion.s of these buildings are very considerable; the 

 outer inclosure, when there are three, seldom being under 500 feet, 

 and ranging from that up to 1000, and even 1200 feet, the usual 

 dimensions being about 600 or 700 feet. Tiie gateways generally 

 are, or are intended to be, in proportion to the length of the wall 

 to which they are attached, thus the inner gateways are generally 

 smaller than the external ones, though not in any exact proportion. 

 lu the great temple at Seringham for instance, the inner gopura is 

 quite insignificant, while the outer four attached to the seventh 

 inclosure would, if completed, have been the most splendid in 

 India. Unfortunately they were commenced only in the beginning 

 of tlie last century, and our wars with the French, and the conse- 

 quent trriubles of the country, jiut a stop to their erection. The 

 principal one however is a nearly solid mass of granite, 150 feet 

 wide by 100 feet in depth, pierced by a gateway, of 21 ft. (i in. clear 

 v\ idth and about 15 feet in lieight, roofed with large slabs of gra- 

 nite, 23 or 24 feet in length; had a pyramid of the usual pro])or- 

 tion been added to this, it could scarcely have been less than 300 

 feet in height, which is more than double the usual size of such 

 erections. The materials also, which were used in these gateways, 

 are on the same scale, the door-posts being generally of one slab 

 of granite, 30 or 10 feet in length, and covered with the most 

 elaborate sculpture. The vimanas are seldom on the same scale as 

 the gopuras, and it is one of the principal defects of these build- 

 ings, that they want a central point of attraction round which the 

 subordinate ones are grouped. This arose in many instances from 

 n \illage temjile having become sacred, either from some supposed 

 miracle wrouglit by the god, or some accession of wealth to the 

 fouuilation — for there as here wealth works miracles — and instead 

 of pulling down and rebuilding the original edifice, inclosures and 

 gopuras were added to the utmost extent the means of the temple 

 would afford. 



Another cause was, the mysterious effects produced by the sanc- 

 tuary not being visible from the exterior: but when you are imme- 

 diately under the temple, or inside its walls, under its colonnades, 

 the defect is not perceived. AVhile, after passing under its gate- 

 ways and from one court to another, each more holy and splendid 

 than the last, the effect is certainly grand — when you behold before 

 you the holy of holies, shrouded from human eyes by its high 

 im]ienotrable walls, and can only peer through its colonnades into 

 tlie mysterious gloom that shrouds the deity himself. At a dis- 

 tance, however, the defect in an architectural point of view is very 

 striking; and though the number and size of the gateways tell 

 always witli striking effect, the mind is ever puzzled and unsatis- 

 fied by seeing them all facing different ways, and pointing towards 

 sometliing — and that something is wanting in every view. This, 

 however, is not always the case: at Tanjore, and generally in the 

 smaller temples, or those built on an original and uniform plan, 

 the viiuaua is the principal object, and the gopuras and mantapa 

 are all in proper subordination to it. 



Hefore leaving this part of my subject, it remains for me to 

 l)oint out some similarities with other styles, which have often 

 been insisted upon by others; and though 1 myself am not in- 

 clined to attach much weight to them, tiiey are still interesting, 

 and others may be inclined to take a different view of the matter 

 from tliat which I take of it. Tlie first is its presumed identity 

 with Egyptian architecture. In looking, for instance, at the plans 

 of the temples at Karnac or Edfou, we find two or three successive 

 inclosures of high dead walls surrounding the sanctuary. The 

 same and indeterminate number of predominant high massive pro- 

 pyla, which form the only object seen outside; while the sanctuary 

 is low and concealed by the high walls that surround it. The great 

 choultries, besides are both in position and apparently in use simi- 

 lar to the hypostyle halls of these temples; and the propyla are in 



both instances the great Iconostases, or image-bearing screens of 

 the temple. I may also add, that the same successive mode of 

 erection was, at least in some instances, followed in both cases. 



These certainly are strong points of similarity, and at first sight 

 almost conclusive. But on a closer examination they are over- 

 powered by the extreme dissimilarity of design and principle ; by 

 the total absence of hieroglyphics, or hieroglyphic expressions, in 

 the Indian examples; and by the utter dissimilarity in every de- 

 tail between a style so exuberant in strength as tlie Egyptian, and 

 one so tending to frailty as the Indian. Still, the difference may 

 only be such as e.xists between the Norman and florid Gothic styles, 

 whose connection no one doubts. It is easier, however, to point 

 out similarities than dissonances, and there are some points in 

 which all masonry styles must resemble one another. It is only 

 by weighing fairly the two styles by one, and by an accurate know- 

 ledge of both, that any one can he able to arrive at a just conclu- 

 sion on the subject. I have myself been so staggered at times by 

 the points of resemblance, that I have been inclined to accede to 

 the general opinion; but on the whole I fear it must be considered 

 in the present state of the question, as too hasty a generalisation. 



The similarity that exists between these temjiles of the south of 

 India, and that at Jerusalem, as described by Josephus, is even 

 more striking and puzzling than that just pointed out; but as it 

 would require large drawings, and more space than I can here 

 afford, to make this intelligible, I will not insist here on what may 

 be after all merely accidental. 



It only remains that I should in conclusion say a few words on 

 the general architectural effects of the examples I have been de- 

 scribing. I cannot of course ask you to admire them, nor to 

 agree with me in my estimation of them, for I am aware that to 

 you they must seem both strange and uncouth, if not positively 

 ugly. So at least they appeared to me when I first became ac- 

 quainted with them, and it was only after I was thoroughly accus- 

 tomed to their form, familiar with their details, and more than 

 this, thoroughly understood the motives and meaning of every 

 part, that I could see either beauty or design in them. Nor do I 

 think this ought to surprise any one, who recollects how short a 

 time ago it is since every man of taste thought it necessary to 

 characterise the Gothic style as a barbarous jumble of ill-connected 

 incongruities, which our fathers— not even our forefathers — 

 mutilated without mercy, and thought it the greatest merit to 

 hide and obliterate whenever an opportunity occurred. By de- 

 grees we came to understand the style, and by deej) study of it 

 found out that pinnacles, buttresses, banded shafts, and other 

 jieculiarities, which so far from being mere barbarous caprices, 

 were motived elenients of construction; and when once we were 

 familiar with the details and understood the construction, all was 

 beauty and order, where only deformity and caprice seemed to 

 exist. So it is with these Indian styles; a man must be familiar 

 with the climate and the people where they are found, must under- 

 stand their manners and religion, and must familiarise himself 

 with all the peculiai-ities of the building, before he can either 

 appreciate or admire them. Once, however, he is educated to 

 this, I think he can scarcely fail to perceive beauty, rising some- 

 times to sublimity, in the immense colonnades, and in the massive 

 propyla and spacious courts of these temples, all of which are 

 constructed on well-defined principles, and all consequently pro- 

 ducing the effect the architect designed they should produce on 

 the spectator. 



I have learnt to admire these styles in their own country, and 

 do admire them in many respects: hut I should be sorry if any 

 one should interpret this expression of admiration on my part as 

 if I were recommending them as models to be transplanted to this 

 country, or as containing anything that could be successfully imi- 

 tated here. On the contrary, the lesson which the study of these 

 exotic styles seems to me to teach, is diametrically opposed to this, 

 and goes to show that every age and every climate has its own 

 appropriate style, beautiful and appropriate when so used, but 

 absurd and incongruous when either transplanted to another 

 climate, or copied in another age. 



Another lesson, which a very slight study of these styles would 

 convey, is the knowledge of the infinity of forms into which stone 

 may be wrought for building purposes. For nearly two centuries 

 all Europe believed that the Roman forms were the only ones 

 capable of producing architectural beauty, and consequently, from 

 the Reformation till the beginning of this century, no other details 

 were used, though their incongruity was frequently ludicrous. 

 Stuart and Revett, and their followers, taught us that we had been 

 copying a corruption, and we in consequence found out that pure 

 Greek details were the only ones worthy of notice. We have now 



