1866.] Buddhist Monasteries and Temples. 81 



must consequently date from the same epoch. It would be desirable, 

 if the consent of the Mohammedans could be obtained, to remove the 

 external wall by which these cloisters have become almost completely 

 hidden, in order to ascertain what is their extent and ^Jfcidition. 



This series of cloisters formed the lowermost story of a large 

 Buddhist monastery, which once enclosed the entire space occupied 

 by the terrace, and rose to the height of probably two or three stories 

 above it. On the southern side stood the chief chaitya or temple, 

 which, on the suppression of Buddhism, passed into the hands of the 

 advocates of another religion, who transformed it according to their 

 own tastes. The mosque on this side is altogether composed of the 

 remains of an ancient temple of large dimensions, and of very 

 elaborate workmanship. The high pillars, moreover, on its northern 

 face have been abstracted from the same spacious building. These 

 remains are partly Hindu, and it is unquestionable that the edifice 

 which was destroyed in order to make way for the mosque, was an 

 old temple of Bisheshwar. An excellent ground plan of this temple, 

 prepared from a minute examination of the existing remains, was 

 drawn by Mr. James Prinsep, and published by him in his " Views 

 of Benares." These remains, however, are only partially Hindu. 

 Some portions, judging from the elaborate ornamentation of certain 

 details which it was the custom of the Buddhist architects to leave 

 plain, seem to be of Jain origin, and to have been appropriated by 

 the builders of the Hindu temple. If this supposition be correct, 

 the mosque with its terrace exhibits a singular architectural ano- 

 maly, and presents us with no less than four styles, namely Bud- 

 dhist, Jain, Hindu and Mohammedan. Indeed it would not be 

 wrong to add a fifth style, for the square terrace pillars with their 

 cruciform capitals are so simple in structure, that, compared with the 

 highly carved and decorated pillars of mediaeval and later Buddhist 

 history, they belong to another style, which may be called early 

 Buddhist or Hindu, according to which of these two ancient religious 

 communities is supposed to have invented it. It is not our object to 

 discuss the interesting and also important topic, who were the first 

 Indian sculptors and builders of permanent works, yet it is one which 

 must one day, when materials have been sufficiently accumulated, 

 which they have not been at present, be thoroughly investigated, 



