294 V. A. Smith — Observations on some Chandel Antiquities. [No. 4, 



The arguments above given in favour of a possible late date for the 

 Ganthai temple appear to us not to be undeserving of consideration, but 

 we rely mainly on the evidence afforded by tbe construction of the building 

 itself, in support of the conclusion at which we bave arrived that the 

 temple in question is a comparatively late re-arrangement of the materials 

 of earlier buildings, some of which may possibly be as old as the whole 

 edifice has been supposed to be. There appears to be no good evidence 

 to show to which religion the building belonged, but, as all the immediate 

 surroundings are Jain, it may, in tbe absence of proof to tbe contrary, be 

 assigned to the professors of that faith. 



The name of Ganthai would appear to be derived from the bells 

 sculptured on the columns as supposed by Dr. Fergusson, and the villagers 

 also gave this reason for the name. As stated by General Cunning- 

 ham, the only portions now standing are the four pillars of the porch, the 

 carved entrance, the four pillars of the inner mandap or hall, some pilasters 

 of granite which were built into the surrounding wall, and some portions 

 of the roof. 



The plan of the existing portion is shown on Plate XVII, and the 

 dotted lines show the probable shape of the temple when complete. 



This rectangular form we derive from the existing temple of Jinanath 

 and are confirmed in our supposition by the plan of the Jain temple re- 

 presented in Plate XLV of Burgess, Arch. Survey of Western India, 1874. 

 The Ganthai must therefore have been intended to be a large temple, 

 larger than even Jinanath, which is the largest of the Jain temples. Assum- 

 ing the building to have ever been completed and then allowed to fall into 

 ruin, the mass of debris must have been very great, much greater than 

 could easily have been removed, but the present remains consist of the 

 columns and portions of the roof stated above and absolutely nothing else. 

 There is no trace whatever of the sanctum, which must, if it ever 

 existed, have been very massive and crowned by a huge steeple. Nothing, 

 except the pilasters above mentioned, remains of the thick side walls, which 

 would necessarily have been constructed, and it is not likely that the stones 

 of the sanctum, side walls and spire could have so completely disappeared, 

 if they were ever there. 



From this we are inclined to think that the present building is an 

 unfinished portion of what was intended to have been a very large temple, 

 but which was never completed, and which, as we now proceed to show, 

 was itself a reconstruction. We are led to believe this, not only from the 

 disappearance of the materials of the wanting portion, but also from what 

 is now standing having been put together in a clumsy and unsystematic 

 manner. The outer pilasters are so irregular that it is evident that they 



