Author Archives: Vijay

300th post – Connection of West and East by Art – Poetryinstone becomes a Record of History – Kra Narasiah

300 … Its been a fascination journey of discovery and many joyous friendships therein. “poetryinstone” has been a labour of love and along the way have been touched, tutored, supported,helped by countless individuals – boys, youngsters, relatives, family, friends and Scholars. Yes, Scholars – many of whom shared their countless pearls of wisdom with a novice like me without any reservations, encouraging me to plough on – so far its been an eye opener and yet just a scratch on the surface !

Today, one such amazing individual – a scholar par excellence, a well wisher in the truest sense – Kadalodi Sri Narasiah Sir honors the site with an unique guest post.

What is your first response on seeing the images below?



Photos courtesy: Flickr: Pigalle

“Some of the better maintained Nayak temples in South India??” read on to know more about the remarkable tale of these stones and their journey. Why i request Sir to take this as a subject was it was this discussion that started our serious interaction, almost 6 years ago, in a egroup – he posted these lines:

” There is a temple called Madanagopalswami temple in Madurai which historically dates to 16th century. There in front of the temple now, is a road lined up with shops on either side. There was in this place a full fledged Mandapam with sculptures. This entire mandapam ……………………………..In the meantime this lady passed away and her family members, Susan Pepper Gibson, Mary Gibson Henry, and Henry C. Gibson , procured the material and presented the lot in memory of Adeline Pepper Gibson to the Art museum at Philadelphia. Now the whole lot is housed in Gallery No. 224, second floor of the museum re-erected as a mandapam”

Imagine him with an incredible array of accomplishments:

Profession: Retired Chief Mechanical Engineer of Vizag Port.
Former Consultant to the World Bank for the Emergency rehabilitation Programme of Kingdom of Cambodia.
Former ADB consultant, Visiting Faculty AMET University for MBA Programme. (Terminal Management and IMO related subjects)
Education: Marine engineering. I. N. S. Shivaji Naval Engineering College Lonavla
Writing: over 100 short stories in Tamil (9 as Muthirai kathai in Vikatan.)
3 collections of short stories published, first one for 6 years as non-detailed study for UGs in Madura College. Second won 2 awards. Third won TN State award.
Non fiction. Kadal Vazhi Vanikam a treatise on sea trade from 3rd century BC –won TN State award.
Madrasapattinam the story of Chennai from 1630 to 1947. Won TN State award and Chidambaram Meyyapan award
Sadharana Manithan Biography of Chitti Sundararajan.
Madras (Tracing the history of Madras from 1369) in ENGLISH
Overcoming Challenges the story of 125 years of the Port of Chennai with S Muthiah (English)
Author of the book on the history of Madurai (Aalavai)

……interacting with a novice blogger like me. But his dedication shone through as he remembered and immediately confirmed to this guest post. readon…

Photos courtesy: Flickr: Pigalle

For what is preserved in the Philadelphia Museum (USA) from the pieces picked up from the temple of Madanagopalaswamy in Madurai, we must thank William Norman Brown(1892-1975). He was the first curator of Indian Art in the Museum appointed in 1931. He established the first academic department of South Asian Studies in the United States in 1947, when he was serving as chair of Sanskrit at the University of Pensylvania.

Before going into this detail we must remember Stella Kramrisch, whose name I stumbled upon when researching for the Lettered Dialogue, as this lady seemed to have invited Mathuram Bhoothalingam (Krithika) to the US.

Stella Kramrisch (1896- 1993) an Austrian born art enthusiast, was originally trained as a ballet dancer. While in Vienna with her parents at very young age she came across a translation of Bhagavath Gita, and was highly impressed by it. That induced her to study Sanskrit and thus earned her doctorate in Anthropology and Indian philosophy. When she was invited to speak at Oxford, Rabindranath Tagore heard her and impressed by her knowledge invited her to join Shantinketan in Calcutta. This happened in 1922. From Shantiniketan, she went to Calcutta University as a professor of Indian Art and served there from 1924 to 1950. Director of Philadelphis Museum of Art, Fiske Kimball persuaded Dr. Stella Kramrisch to join the Museum and assume the curatorial position. Thus she was responsible for opening a new section for Oriental Art in the Museum. Kramrisch expanded the Museum’s holdings in Indian and Himalayan art. In addition to bequeathing her personal art collection to the Museum, Kramrisch also endowed the curatorial chair of the department to which she had devoted nearly 40 years of scholarship and service. (Darielle Mason was the first to receive the new independent appointment in 1997 and it was from her I received much information when I was researching for Madurai)

In 1931 the Museum appointed W. Norman Brown (1892-1975) as its first curator of Indian art. Brown, who established the first academic department of South Asian Studies in the United States in 1947, was at that time serving as chair of Sanskrit at the University of Pennsylvania. Brown held honorary degrees from the West Bengal Government Sanskrit College, the University of Madras, India, the University of Michigan, and the University of Pennsylvania. We learn a lot of his effort from The personal papers of Professor W. Norman Brown, that contain lecture notes, drafts and completed papers, and materials related to research, archeology, travel, and letters.

His small (88 pages) but highly valuable book his findings in Madurai is titled A pillared hall from a temple at Madura, India, and is published by the University of Pensylvania press 1940. In this book he narrates the way he went about to establish the place of origin of this art pieces found in Philadelphia.

government service.

11285

II
PILLARED HALL FROM A TEMPLE AT MADURA IN THE PHILADELPHIS MUSEUM OF ART
BY NORMAN BROWN
Printed at the University of Philadelphia Press 1940
PREFACE
The only Indian stone temple ensemble in America is the pillared Hall (mandapam) from Madura belonging to the Philadelphia Museum of Art and now installed in a gallery on the top floor of the south wing of eh main building at Fairmont. It consists of a number of monolithic pillars with corbels, Lion capitals and some ornamental frieze slabs, all apparently carved in the sixteenth century. These originally constituted part of the temple until at some unknown date they were defaced and the temple badly damaged or razed, possibly by a Mohammedan conqueror in the eighteenth century. No other museum anywhere can show such a large grouping of integrated architectural unit from a single building of India. The nearest approach in America is the small carved wooden room from a sixteenth century Jain sheine of Putan, Gujarat, in western India which is now set up in the Metropolitan Museum of Art New York. The unit in the Philadelphia Museum so rare outside of India illustrates so many aspects of India Architecture, sculpture and iconography that it has seemed worthy of description in a small monograph, especially since the dimension produces explanation of numerous points not heretofore treated in any publication.

The pieces constituting the pillared hall were originally acquired in Madura in 1912, by Adeline Pepper Gibson who died in France January 10, 1919, in the military service of the United States Base Hospital 38, American Expeditionary force at Nantes. They were presented to the Philadelphia Museum of Art in August 1919 in her memory by Mrs. J. Howard Gibson, Mrs. Norman Henry and Mr. Henry C. Gibson.

Shortly after the pieces were presented to the Museum, they were installed in Memorial Hall Fairmount Park, and the installation with a pageant called “The Building of The Temple” which was given daily on April 19, 20, 21 and 23, 1920. They remained in Memorial Hall until 1938 when it was possible to remove them to the India Gallery in the Fairmount building and commence to install them there with the aid of Federal Works Progress Administrative grant.

In 1934-35, aided by the late Mrs. Robert G. Logan, the Museum made it possible for me to examine the site from which the pieces had come. The mani purpose of my visit to Madura was to secure information that might assist in the future installation of the pieces at Fairmount. I went to Madura at the end of November and spent five days in intensive investigation, taking with me as interpreter and consultant Mr T. G. A. of the Government Museum Madras.who is mentioned frequently in the book. In the hope that additional pieces could be securd, Mr. J. Noraman Henry and Mr. Henry C. Gibson then generously gave a fund which they also graciously permitted to be drawn against the preparation of this book and for assistance in the final installation of the temple.

The main purpose of this work is to determine the site, date, and the significance of the elements comprising mandapams. To do so it has been necessary to develop some points in the history of Madura architecture showing that features described by Jowean Dubreil to the Madura period appear actually to have been known inn the latter part of the preceding period, that is the known one as Vijayanagara. In the iconography many types have received description which are without printed explanation anywhere.

A mirror point elsewhere has been to discuss the mandapam with enough attention to the back ground for a non-Indian visitor to the Museum to understand the meaning of the Indian terms employed and the cultural significance of the ensemble. To this end I have included the two very summary introductory chapters, which contain almost no new material and have throughout tried to treat the mythology with enough fullness to be intelligible.

The book has VI chapters.
I. The age of importance of Madura
II. South India temple architecture
III. The architectural units in the Mandapam. 16 simple columns 8’ 2” average height. 5 of one variety and others different; 14 compound columns 8’ 4” to 8’ 8” in height, 12 of one variety and one of different variety. 12 corbels; 12 lion capitals; 8 frieze slabs.When purchased in 1912, they were all lying in the compound of Madana Gopalswamy temple. When presented to the museum someone felt that the pieces do not belong to this temple but are from Perumal temple (Kudal Alagar Madura.)
Norman feels that the items might have come from other temples also. They may have been kept here.

The temple that helped us understand more about the Cholas – Esalam -Part 2

We come across many interesting things that pass by before our eyes without registering – until someone draws our attention to it ! Similarly today Shashwath is asking us to study the Veena or more closely the head of a Veena.

The Hindu article is titled Lion – headed legacy ! But is it a Lion??

It is definitely a Yazhi as this illustration marks it ( source the internet). Over to Shash for part 2 of Esalam n the Yazhi head of the Veena.

In the last part about this temple, I had merely left a hint about this wonderful Dakshinamurthy, and stopped with the layout of the temple and some of the other sculpture around it. Today, we will look at this Veenadhara.

Dakshinamurthy is Shiva acting as the supreme teacher – the guru of all gurus. T. A. Gopinatha Rao, who was himself the guru of all who study Indian iconography, has this to say about the Dakshinamurthy form:

“We have already stated that Shiva is a great master of yoga, music and dancing… As a teacher of Yoga, music and other sciences he is known by the name of Dakshinamurthy. (…) This aspect of Shiva is always invoked by students of science and arts.”

According to Gopinatha Rao, there are four aspects of Dakshinamurthy – the teacher of Yoga, of Vina, of Jnana and as an “expounder of other Shastras”, or Vyakhyanamurti. It is the last form that we see most commonly in temples, in the southern niche of the central Garbagriha. At Esalam, too, there’s a Vyakhyanamurti in this location.

Unfortunately, it’s broken, so somebody decided to install a modern one, hiding the original from view!

Veenadhara Dakshinamurthy is the teacher of music. This is not as common as the Vyakhyana, but it’s not a rare form either. There are several instances of this form – at Gangaikondacholapuram

An older version at Keezhaiyur

Standing versions at Kodumbalur and Lalgudi,

And at Esalam…

According to the Agamas, this form is identical to the Vyakhyana form, except for the Veena in his hands, the gourd resting on his right thigh. Essentially, matted locks with a band holding them together, the Datura flower, kapala and crescent moon, right leg hanging down and left leg bent and rested on the right thigh, and so on. The upper hands hold either an Aksharamala, a snake, fire, or a
deer – this is a teacher, after all, so he doesn’t hold any weapons.

As I described in my last post, the Veenadhara is up in the Vimana, above the Vyakhyana. Space is limited up there, so many of the usual attributes are missing – there is no tree, and I can barely make out a single devotee below him and to the right. The dwarf he’s stepping on seems either incomplete or badly worn out.

To me, it’s the face and the Veena that are the most intriguing.

You can just look at it for a while – I don’t have to explain too much!

He’s wearing a decorated band as a crown around his head, keeping the locks away from his face. There are the usual earrings and the moon on his right.

On his shoulders, you can see the cords of the necklaces hanging down. A yagnopavita completes the ensemble There are details here that you can’t really see from the ground. And I’m sure that if we were to get a shot from above, we’d see a tiger belt, too! That dedication to detail – even detail that nobody would actually go up there and see – is what distinguishes our ancient sculptors.

Now, look at the Veena – The gourd is a bit rough on the bottom right, but it’s definitely resting on the right thigh. It’s projecting out a bit outside to the right (something the Agamas prescribe), and the bottom hand is strumming it.

What I really liked was the other side – the head of the instrument is straight, unlike the modern Veena (which is bent downwards) and carved in the form of a Yazhi’s head.

The date of this Dakshinamurthy is quite certain – Rajendra Chola left enough inscriptional evidence to go by. This temple is probably co-equal with Gangaikondacholapuram (probably, because we don’t know GKC’s date). Look at the one from there:

Very similar to the one at Esalam! Gourd’s at the bottom right, Yazhi-head to top left. But now, look at the others that I’d posted earlier:

These are older ones – both Early Chola, from Aditya’s time, maybe a hundred or more years before Esalam and GKC. And here are some older Veena players – Kanchi Kailasanatha:

Narasamangala, in Karnataka

These all seem to be inverted – the gourd is at the top! In an earlier Poetry in Stone post on the similar Veenadhari Ardhanari, we saw similar top-resonating Veenas.

Was the Veena itself originally only with a top-resonator? If so, when was the bottom resonator introduced? If both forms existed since ancient times, why did the sculptors of Rajendra’s time alone start using the bottom-resonator instead of the traditional top resonating Veena?

Maybe answering this, we will understand the evolution of music in medieval India a bit better. Sculpture and music converge, and Dakshinamurthy is still teaching us!

Now, another taste of things to come! Remember that we talked about how details of this icon couldn’t be seen from the ground? How did I manage to take those shots, then?

It turns out that, since this temple was under a mound of sand, the ground level of the surrounding village is higher now than when it was built. Walking around the outside of the shrine, you can climb a small stone, and be at eye-level with the Dakshinamurthy.

When we went around to do this, we found two of the guardian deities of the village – the grama devatas. These are both extremely ancient. I will take them up later.

Who are these two lil ones?

The internet is a definite boon for armchair researchers like me !! Quite often we do stumble on some unique puzzles in our quest to decipher the work of the ancients. One such task was to recreate the lost paintings of the Kanchi Kailasanatha temple.

We ran into quite a difficulty when we had to make out the minor forms especially the two figures found below the divine couple.

We wanted to be as true as possible to the original – but it was interesting to note that these two ganas – a male and a female dwarfs were in the scene at the first instance.

Possibly the first instance of a lady dwarf gana – an assistant to Parvati maybe?

Their iconographic significance was soon lost or so we thought, until Arvind shared this album of his capture of the beauties of Lalgudi

Though our main pursuit was in the narrative panels in the miniatures, there was one particular relief – dimly lit which had vague familiarity in it.

It was a relief of the divine parents albiet sans the skanda seated in the familiar posture – with a kneeling devotee on the right, two more on the top right and two more top left. Can you spot any attributes to assign them as Brahma n vishnu? Not clear. But the familiarity scene was played out at the bottom of the throne.

it would be difficult to date this panel as it does not fall in the early chola 9th-10th C CE scheme of narrative story boards. However, it is interesting that the sculptor chose to sculpt this dwarf couple in the same layout and postures.

Sivapuram Somaskanda – the untold story

The title of this post should raise a few eye brows – for the popular topic should be Sivapuram Nataraja – but no, it is no typo. What you are going to see today is the untold story of the “other” bronzes from the same temple. It is the dark side of what is considered to be a landmark judgement – of returning antiquities.

The case of the famed Sivapuram Nataraja is too easy to google – the jist is this….


1951: The Nataraja along with 5 other bronzes were found during renovation works carried out in the Sivapuram temple . and as per the Indian Treasure Trove act they were given to the temple ( ownership vested with the State).

“In 1951 Annamuthu Padayatchi of Sivapuram, Thanjavur unearthed 6 idols viz., Natarajar, Thirugnanasambandar, Somaskandar, Pillaiar and two Amman from his field.”

The Collector of Thanjavur, handed over the 6 idols to the temple authorities of Sri Sivagurunathasamy Temple of Sivapuram as per G.O.Ms.No. 2987/Revenue Department dated 29.10.1953.

1954-56: The Nataraja was sent for restoration to a local Stapathy ( afflicted by Bronze disease?). They were masterfully faked and originals stolen then.

The trustees of the temple wanted to repair the idols and this work was entrusted to Ramasamy Sthapathy of Kumbakonam in the year June 1954. In the year 1956 Thilakar of Kuttalam and his brother Doss induced Ramasamy Sthapathy to part with the original Natarajar and 5 other idols and to substitute the same with fake idols. Thilakar dispatched the original Natarajar idol to Lance Dane of Bombay, an Art Collector, arranged by Doss who kept the idol for 10 years

1963: an important clue and event – which we will see later.

1965: Mr Douglas Barret of the British Museum visits the temple. He denounces it as a fake and records it in his book. He also reveals that the original was with a dealer in Bombay.

Dr.Douglass Barret of British museum, in his book on ‘South Indian Bronze’ mentioned that the Natarajar idol in Sivapuram was a fake one and the original was with a private Art Collector. Tr.P.R.Srinivasan (curator of the Museum) alerted the Director of Museum and the Government of TamilNadu. An enquiry conducted on this resulted in registration of a case in Natchiarkoil
P.S.Cr.No.109/69 U/S 406 IPC. The Crime Branch C.I.D took up the investigation.

1967: The Nataraja idol came into the possession of Boman Behram, a Bombay collector of art, who sold it to Ben Heller, a New York art dealer.

Doss who kept the idol for 10 years and sold it to Bomman Beharan of Bombay who in turn sold it to Menu Narang. Benn Haller of New York bought it for 6 Lakhs rupees in 1969 and sold it to Norton Simon Foundation for USD .9 Lakhs

1973: Ben Heller sold the idol to the Norton Simon Foundation for a reported $ 900,000.5

1973: The Metropolitan Museum of Art (MET) in New York began planning an exhibition of the Norton Simon Foundation’s Indian art collection. Through the publicity surrounding the show, the Indian Government learned about the statue’s presence in the United States. This was the first time that the Indian Government had traced the object since its theft. Consequently, the Indian Government wrote a letter of protest to the MET and, with the help of the United States Department of State, blocked the show’s opening.
1973: The Nataraja idol was shipped to the British Museum for further restoration.

1973: The Indian Government filed suit in Los Angeles (the domicile of the Norton Simon Foundation) and New York (the domicile of Ben Heller) seeking restitution.Furthermore, it exercised political pressure on the Government of the United Kingdom, consequentially leading to Scotland Yard impounding the statue. The Norton Simon Foundation refused to return the Nataraja idol by asserting that India had no rights or title to it.

1975: India voluntarily interrupted the litigation for a set one-year period in a hope to facilitate an out-of-court settlement.

1976: The Norton Simon Foundation and the Government of India settled the case out-of-court by way of a mediated agreement.

The official Indian versions are the one’s in bold including below

A special party arrested Lance Dane, Thilakar, Doss, Ramasamy Sthapathy. Tr. S. Krishnaraj, the then D.I.G, CB-CID, TamilNadu visited United States and gathered evidence as to smuggling of the Idol. The Scotland Yard found that the Natarajar was sent to Mrs.Anna Plowden of London by Norton Simon Foundation for repairs as the idol developed corrosion and impounded it.

The Government of India filed a civil suit against the Norton Simon Foundation in England, New York and Los Angles claiming the Natarajar Idol. Thiru.K.K.Rajasekaran Nair, I.P.S, I.G.P (Crime), Madras sent a letter to the Government of TamilNadu to request the Ministry of External Affairs to get the Idol back. Dr.M.S.Nagaraja Rao, Director-General, Archaeological Survey of
India, NewDelhi got the Idol from the Indian Embassy, Washington and now the Idol is in the safe vault of Kabaleeswarar Temple, Mylapore, Chennai. All accused arrested and convicted.

There is no information about the remaining idols

This is where it gets interesting – what happened to the remaining 5 bronzes?

“ “In 1951 Annamuthu Padayatchi of Sivapuram, Thanjavur unearthed 6 idols viz., Natarajar, Thirugnanasambandar, Somaskandar, Pillaiar and two Amman from his field.””

Remember the year 1963. This was the year when Sri. P. R. Srinivasan brought out his magnificent volume – Bronzes of South India – P.R. Srinivasan (F.E. 1963, L.R. 1994)


Fortunately he had taken photos of not only the Nataraja but also the Somaskandar. He also clearly notes the location as “under worship in the Sivapuram temple”

Now things get interesting as there is this exhibit in flickr dated dec 20th 2008. pertaining to an exhibit in the Norton Simon Museum.

The plate giving the provenance is “interesting”

Even to a lay man the comparison is obvious.

The Museum’s site also features the same bronze but without the plate

Now a little more help from google reveals interesting additions to the same Museum’s collection in the year 1972 ans 1973

Saint Samabandar :

Parvathi

Ganesha

“In 1951 Annamuthu Padayatchi of Sivapuram, Thanjavur unearthed 6 idols viz., Natarajar, Thirugnanasambandar, Somaskandar, Pillaiar and two Amman from his field.”

The information of the case are from the website of the State = which ends as “All accused arrested and convicted. There is no information about the remaining idols “

What exactly were the terms of the out of Court settlement reached? That too with someone who quote:

Simon’s comments on the Nataraja published in The New York Times: “Hell, yes, it was smuggled,” he was quoted as saying. “I spent between $15 and $16 million in the last two years on Asian art, and most of it was smuggled.”

Did the Dancing Lord leave behind his consort, son and devotee behind !!!!

Note to audiences: Antiquities, Global auction houses and Museums are a tricky subject and it is easy to brand them – but it is important for all concerned to take in the sentiments involved. The objective of this post is not to slander but to bring to light the truth. As noticed above the sums involved are huge but these are our ancestral treasures – embodiments of God. The condition of the hundreds of bronzes in the State godowns in our own country cry for attention – the threat to them make their return to their abodes risky as well – it is time for the best brains to get together and think of a solution.

Ref:

https://plone.unige.ch/art-adr/cases-affaires/nataraja-idol-2013-india-and-norton-simon-foundation-1/case-note-2013-nataraja-idol-2013-india-and-norton-simon-foundation/view

http://www.forbes.com/2004/05/25/cx_0525conn.html|Forbes

http://www.tneow.gov.in/IDOL/judgement.html

The temple that helped us understand more about the Cholas – Esalam -Part 1

Youngsters like Shashwath make us believe that the message of heritage and conservation will be taken to the Gen neXt and beyond. Today he takes us on a tour to Esalam via his guest post.

On a late January morning, a small group of us started on a trip down one of the most historical roads in the south, to find one of the most important places in Chola history.

When we met that morning, Arvind told us about this cluster of four temples within about 5 km of each other, and within a day’s journey from the city. When I got to know that one of the places on the list was Esalam, it was too much to resist. I didn’t know what to expect, except that it is a full stone temple, including the vimanam (which is rare enough), and that there was the “most beautiful Veenadhara Dakshinamurthy” ever. More on the temple itself shortly, but first, I must try to why I was so excited to see Esalam.

Often, it’s not the primary temple endowed by a ruler that tells us the most about them. In Gangaikondacholapuram, there is hardly anything that tells us anything about his builder, Rajendra I. Unlike his father, the “Chola who captured the Ganga” is something of an enigma, since the first available inscription at the temple he built is from the reign of his second son, Virarajendra. Who was he? What were his motivations? Who influenced him? Tough questions…

One of the places that help us piece together some of these answers is Esalam. It was here that a copper plate grant made by him was found, along with several wonderful bronzes.

As Dr. Nagaswamy (who translated the plate) describes the find, “On the 11th of August 1987, the inhabitants of Eslam a village near Villupuram, in South Arcot district, Tamilnadu, stuck upon a group of bronzes, temple utensils and a copper plate charter, within the temple premises of Tiru Ramanathesvara temple of the village, while carrying out renovation work to the temple.” The content of this copper plate is interesting and important, and Dr. Nagaswamy details it in the link above. Just some highlights before we go on: this grant details the creation of a new Devadana to support the temple, dedicated to Shiva in the form of Ramisvara, or Ramaanathesvara. What is most important about this place, and this record, is that this is no ordinary temple. It was built and endowed by Rajendra for his own Guru, the high priest of the Tanjore temple (and quite possibly, the temple at Cholapuram also), Sarvasiva Panditar. Hence, this is a royal temple – built by the strongest of the Cholas, as a gift to his preceptor. As such, some of the best craftsmen in the land would have been called on to work on it, and it shows!

Approaching the temple from the front, it doesn’t really look like much – a miniature modern gopuram greets you in all its garish oil-painted glory.

It’s when you go in, that you see a beautiful Chola temple.

The first thing we notice is this huge, bulbous dome of the Vimanam, almost Mid-Eastern in proportions, and the wonderful Balipeedam, with miniatures on all sides.


A stone-work window, with designs and dancing girls on the “bars” covers the front of the temple

and the entrance is off to the left side

The walls of the temple are covered in inscriptions

Around the temple are the Goshtas: Vinayaka, Dakshinamurthy, Vishnu, Brahma and Durga.




More in part 2 of this post

Iconography of an early Siva Lingam – Gudimallam

It was in the December of 2009 when me and Arvind set out on an interesting road trip – one of the uncharted sites we visited was the ruined Muchukunda temple ( very near to the Moovar Koil complex). Nestled midst lush green farms amidst an idyllic village setting, wading through about half a feet of slush we arrived at a pillared mandapa which was devoid of any sculptures. The assortment of pillars suggested that someone had attempted a complex puzzle assembling the structure from what appeared to be a mix and match of many different game pieces – they did not match. The Sanctum was dark and damp, rodent infested and the camera flash repeatedly failed to provide the illumination required to focus. In such uncomfortable settings on a empty stomach a chance click lit up the side of the Artha Mandapa. The seemingly heavy pillar rested on an innocuous looking sand bag miraculous showed up on the camera display.

We ventured closer and tortured the camera a few more times to get a clear shot in the near dark and there he was in all his glory. A Shiva Linga of truly massive proportions.

We had just met with a master Stapathy Sri Umapathy Acharya and in all my amateurish ignorance had asked him ” Which form would he consider the most difficult to sculpt” and prompt came the unexpected reply = ” Shiva Linga”. He went on to mention that he had conducted a two day session just on the Iconography of the Shiva Linga recently. I felt he was pulling my leg at that time. what was so difficult in sculpting something as simple as a Linga ! It has taken me almost 4 years to muster the courage and conviction to do a post on this ” simple” form.

For starters it is the most controversial of subjects in Hindu Iconography and being very much the amateur i am treading a precarious line here, but then what is so special about this form that has seen its spread across the nook and corner of not only India but deep into South East Asia – in central Vietnam, into Cambodia – and that too as early as the 6th and 7th Centuries ? Cannot believe it… Standing a full 4 feet tall, holding the pride of place among exhibits, the massive stone pillar is an awe inspiring site. On closer scrutiny, it is not any stone pillar but a Shiva linga and this is no Indian Museum – this is at the Museum of Vietnamese History, Hochi Minh city, Vietnam and is a local find. Fu Nan period, 6th C CE.

This isn’t some Vietnamese version of the Shiva Linga, rather one that has been perfectly sculpted as stipulated in the Agamas or the Iconographic canons. The main stem of the Linga seen here is paired with its pedestal called the Avudai to make up the Lingam you see in all our temples. Further, the main stem of the Linga is made up of three distinct parts – the bottom most being square shaped denoting the Brahma Bagam, the middle being octagonal – Vishnu Bagam and the topmost cylindrical being the Rudra Bagam. When matched with the Avudai which is circular at the base and oval on top, with a hole bored through it middle to receive the stem, the Brahma Bagam would be below the Avudai, the Vishnu Bagam within it and the Rudra Bagam would be visible on top. The actual dimensions, proportions and further intricacies like inscribing the lines of the Brahma sutras are subjects of serious study but it is worthy to note that in the Vietnamese Linga, there is a face sculpted just above the Vishnu Bagam. Such are called Mukha Lingams though the Indian variants have more pronounced features.

For those who are already feeling heady it is worthy to point out that one of the world’s oldest Shiva Linga is found in Gudimallam, situated about 21 kms from the more famous Kalahasti temple near Tirupathi. Dated to between 2nd C BCE and 1st C BCE, this imposing Linga measures an exact 5 feet in height and has one of most interesting sculptures carved on it.

For the keen observers it would immediately strike that this could also be on the earliest apsidal shrine as well ( though not as old as the Linga though!)

I am taking the liberty of posting some early photos from the ASI review 1973-74 – to show how the lower portion of the Linga could have been hidden by the rather crudely fashioned late day Yoni – which incidentally could have given rise to the version that the figure sculpted is Parasurama ( and a local legend forming to substantiate the story as well)

It is however not right to completely discredit the local legends since the two armed figure, holds a Ram/Goat by its hind legs with his right hand, holds a curiously shaped pitcher with his left hand and has an Axe slung over his left shoulder.

Scholars however are unanimous in the view that it is indeed Shiva ( the Parasu ofcourse being his choice of weapon) and shown standing on a rather grotesque Rakshasa, who is shown as kneeling down and supporting the weight with both his hands on his knees. His face is nowhere near the cute muyalakans we see in the Nataraja form – his ears are pointed like those of a bat and his cheeks marked with deep lines but he has a shrek like smirk with both rows of teeth exposed. His head dress and ornaments however, are sculpted in style.

An important start book for students of Hindu Iconography is Sri Gopinath Rao’s Elements of Hindu Iconography and am using some of his illustrations to further analyse this rare form – especially the ornamentation and designs.

It is important to notice that this early Linga is definitely a representation of a Phallus.

The shaft is seven sided which needs to studied as well.

The unique way in which the ram /Goat is held by its hind legs show that it is definitely a quarry brought back from a hunt and not the later day antelope being petted/fed. What is more interesting is though the lower torso is clothed – you can clear see the waist cloth ( not skin curiously again), the male organ is visible as well. The popular assumption being the garment being a thin cloth. What is important otherwise is the fact that the representation is not shown as Urdhva ( am sure some of you would have to google for it!).

This raises lot more fundamental questions – The most popular reason attributed to lack of pre 5th -6th C CE Hindu Icons is that stone was earlier associated with funerary stuff and hence they were made of wood or sudhai ( limestone mix). How come we have such an advanced stone sculpture predating the accepted timeline by over 800 years. The quality of workmanship, the detail, the ornamentation etc are far too advanced to state that this is a one off freak.

The features of the central figure is unique and the first impression is the feeling that its origin could not be from South India !

Am sure lot of questions will be raised in your comments….

Photo Credits: Mr Wasantha Fernando, Mr Gaman Palem, ASI Review 1973 -74 and Elements of Hindu Icongraphy – Sri Gopinath Rao.

An amazing early Chola Miniature – Punjai

It is not often you get a chance to witness an early Chola gem in its pristine form – throw in a few miniatures and your trip is made. Such is their allure that quite often, much like school children making a dash for the candy man – we do a dash – as soon as we are through the main entrance doors, we run around to the side to see if there are any of these ( left !). Imagine our glee as we rushed into Punjai with similar anticipation.

The panels in the base are easier to spot as they have a clear boundary and also depict scenes from the epics – however, there are good chances that a few miniatures on these odd pillars are missed to be spotted.

As any accomplished artist or art critic – the most difficult forms to depict are forms that depict action – movement. Imagine the skill that is required to depict dance and music – in stone, in relief?

The artist manages to use every inch of space to suggest the mood – these ganas are not much bigger than a nail head and yet you can sense the feel of gaiety – of their gay exuberance.

The beauty of this depiction is in the grace of form and complexity of pose.

Thanks to acclaimed artist Muralidharan alagar for masterfully sketching this miniature so that we can fully appreciate its grace.

The class of the sculptor is revealed in how the weight of the drum pulls on the players neck via a sling and how she balances it on his thigh ! and to do so at this miniscule scale is mind blowing.

Coming to the dancer – imagine having to depict a dancer, but not a frontal pose but depict her from behind ! To show the folds of her garments, the ornamentation and to do it in stone that is less than the width of a car key..

A true masterclass miniature from the early half of the 10th Century dancing for a thousand years and still managing to hold its grace !

Alignment of Kosta devatas in a late Pallava Vishnu shrine – Thiruvidanthai

It was a chance trip to try and fill an ” empty” evening in an otherwise crowded calender that landed us in Thiruvidanthai. It was peak holiday season and we were surprised to see the rather light traffic on the scenic ECR – though a few overzealous drivers made a mockery of the 40 km/hr speed limit boards and there was no sign of any enforcement let alone for some divine ones – in a few shattered glass sherds every 200 mtrs !! A leisurely stroll of 45 min led us to the now familiar stretch of casuraina groves that lead straight to the famed beaches of the ECR ( some had acquired some really fancy names plus notorious media coverage as well!) told us to slow down and look for the right turn into the temple town – made famous by the Super Star ( much before he had catapulted the Temple town of Tiruvanamalai into glitzy heights !).

The temple came up immediately and we were surprised to find it desereted. Not even a Maxicab, no Mahindra van , no Tempo’s or even an SUV. It must have been a great relief to the flower vendors to see us drive up – you could actually see her eyes light up on seeing me get off alone ( my better half being away), thinking that she could surely sell me two garlands – why two?? Read on to learn more. Better than to try and explain to her that i was here to see just the sculptures of this beautiful Pallava period, i just shook my head and walked on. A iconographically poor later Nayaka mandapa and entrance Gopura led us down a dimly lit main shrine. My eyes lit up on seeing the main deity albeit at quite a distance – its easy to make out the sheer Pallava metrics and an amazing Varaha reminded of our sheer penance to see the Adivarahar in Mallai. Even before the priests started their mantras, came the educative – no photography caution and if needed buy the copy of the painting outside. I am sure you can google it anway. !! He is ofcourse made of Sudhai ( not stone) and 100% Pallava period ( 8th C CE).

We, having feasted enough on his beauty it was time for the Sthala purana – sure to keep the coffers ringing by sending droves of unmarried hopefuls to this sanctum. Friends have sworn by his power and the boys n girls keen to keep their single status refusing to even step into the village’s boundary even ! such was his prowess, that we had a few of the applicants finally arrive – each were given strict instructions on what to do with the garland – you got to go around the temple wearing one and keep the other vacant and God will do the rest – legend has it that in this very place to please a devotee rishi he married each of his 365 daughters – for every day of the year – so he is called Nithya Kalnayana perumal. So we had a 25 odd boy and a few 20 odd girls do the rigmarole of the dual garland ritual !

So much for all the loose talk, back to basics – it is always rare to a see a Pallava Vaishnavite shrine and was hoping to seek some clues on the arrangement of the Koshta devatas – and praying no modern intrusions at that. With great trepidation steeped out for the first Kosta – not expecting to see – who else but the Elephant trunked one.

He did not look modern at all, the slightly elongated trunk and the attributes were stately – yet clearly of a later style than the early Ganesha’s found in the shore temple or even in the Kanchi Kailasanatha.

Need to find a typical early Pallava Kosta Ganesha sculpture to compare as comparing with the already debated Vallam Ganesha would be difficult to yield clear answers.

What period is this deity from and did it find its place in the original scheme of things? References in texts are vague with Vakratunda being referred with placement to the left of the door guardians position for varaha shrines. One thing is for sure – the huge Nama on his forehead and naming him as Tumbikkai Alwar did happen quite a while later but we will visit the rest of the Kosta sculptures to attempt to see if we can fix the date before placing more of our arguments.

As we moved on our ambulatory path – the next Kosta was occupied by Sathyan. This is where it gets interesting, completely new placement of Kosta figures – with forms of vishnu occupying the niches and my pulse raced on seeing the prayoga Chakra and classic pallava lines in the sculpture.

The next niche was occupied by Achyutan. There seem to be some very subtle differences in the styling and ornamentation with the major one being the chakra turned to the side and no longer in prayoga mode !

The next niche we found Aniruddan and back to classic prayoga chakra !

The last niche would usually be Vishnu Durgai and here we have Vaishnavi – unfortunately did not have the necessary permissions to check more – especially the feet / where bull head there or not. But once again clear depiction of Prayoga chakra is found.

So it is very clear that it is most likely that the Kosta sculptures are Pallava and could be later additions ( when the stone work came around the main sanctum) – but is definitely not post 10 th C CE – iconographically they cannot be later than say 900 – 920 CE. There are two kostas on each side and one in the back –

Ganesha , Sathyan
Achyutan
Aniruddhan, Vaishnavi.

So it is quite likely that in the Pallava period or in the interim phase between the Pallava Chola transition – in this particular temple Ganesha was included as one of the Kosta devatas – it is covered in Vaishnava iconography and hence should have been left as such. That later day trials and tribulations have forced him to sport an “acceptable” name and “signs” to again acceptance or maintain his place in the scheme of things is something that mature minds have to work on !!

A cave with many questions – Parankundram, Part 1

Not all mysteries in archeology need an Indiana Jones or a Lara Croft to make it reveal its secrets, however, if ever there was one that would even baffle them, it is the wonder that stands forgotten in the glory of the famed Murugan temple in Tirupparankundram. That the famed shrine itself is a cave temple is not common knowledge, however there exists another cave at the foothills of the same hill but a little further away to the left as you drive around it.

The main cave face.

The first and foremost is the date assignable to the original excavation. The rather plain bulky set of two pillars and pilasters (half pillars) combined with the lack of any artistic fluting on their corbels help us to assign an early 8th C CE date to the cave.
It is very rare to see reliefs on the outer wall of excavated caves as usually we get to so only door guardians. However, in this cave there are many niches into which deep relief sculptures have been carved. We will visit them in the second part of this post as we need to move to the inside – to view some very intricate sculptures, whose superior iconography seem to suggest a 12th C CE to 13th C CE date.

The popular reasoning is that this was an extant Jaina cave which was later converted. Let us look at the shrine that has been cut into the left wall as we enter the cave. Inside this beautifully framed shrine is a relief sculpture of the androgynous from of Shiva as Ardhanari gracefully leaning on his bull mount.

The four armed sculpture has clear demarcation of the Shiva and Sakti portions, with him wearing a thigh length garment while hers is a sari to the knee.

Ardhanari in the Sanctum

For all its grace and form, there are many aberrations in the form. Firstly we do not get to see relief sculptures of this form in any contemporary sites. Secondly it is quite plain that its size is too small for this sanctum’s proportions. The height of the pedestal is more suitable for a seated figure and not a standing figure. The the placement of the bull is also strange. A study of the evolution of the ardhanari form clearly shows the difficulty the sculptor has in balancing the male and female body proportions.

Such early examples are the forms in the Dharmaraja ratha and the Agasteshwara temple in Perungudi. While the Sama banga profile of the Dharamaraja sculpture lacks aesthetic appeal, the problems of the larger male proportions are evident in the Agasteshwara sculpture.

Ardhanari – Dharmaraja Ratha


Ardhanari – Agastheswara

The sculptors hence bring the Rishabava Vahana and let the form lean on its head to provide the counter balance. This is seen in the later day Chola sculptures including this stunning beauty from Vriddachalam and also seems to be the accepted norm as far as Elephanta.

Ardhanari – Vriddachalam

Ardhanari – Elephanta

The problem now with the Parankundam sculpture is the bull is positioned on the opposite side ie. Not on the male side but is on the female side and hence doesn’t lend the necessary balance to the composition. These are not consistent with the the amount of planning that is needed to complete a rock cut cave shrine.

Things seem to further go wrong as we explore the rather crude attempt to shape the pedestal below, but the most crucial aspect of the puzzle rests in the totally unconnected curly patterns on the top.


At first glance it would be easy to dismiss them as a tree etc but then only the Daksinamurthy form is shown with a tree canopy on top. This is where we need to explore the Jaina aspects. Take a look at these images.

We shall explore more such in part 2….

Photo Courtesy: Mr. Udayan, Mr. Arvind Venkatraman , the hindu archives.
http://www.hindu.com/2003/05/22/stories/2003052203230500.htm
http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/06/stories/2006020602410200.htm
http://www.herenow4u.net/index.php?id=76895

Tracking the evolution of the lingothbava form

The most common request from enthusiasts pertains to dating sculptures. Fortunately dating stone sculpture is easier as most of them are found insitu and in larger quantity and readily available for study. Quite often we do get foundation inscriptions that allow us to precisely date them. The same cannot be said about bronzes though, as the ones under worship are not open to study for obvious reasons and the ones in museums are far removed from their original settings. We shall take up the study of stone sculptures of a single form – the Lingothbhava, for it’s the most common and easy to spot – found in most temples on the circumambulatory right behind the main sanctum – ie usually the sanctum faces east, the western side kosta will feature the Lingothbava. We shall pick six distinct examples and try to trace the form’s evolution from Pallava through early Chola and later Chola periods.

Kanchi Kailasanathar – Rajasimha Pallava (700-728CE)


The first one is a typical later Pallava creation ( meaning they have moved on from excavations to structural temples) from the Kailasanthar temple. It is important to notice the ornamentation, especially how the thick sacred thread – the Yagnopavitha passes over the right hand, a very unique Pallava feature. Shiva’s body is a bit stocky but there is no body builder like chest muscles. The pillar of light has not yet taken the form of a linga and the emergence of Shiva is almost like a geometrical rhombus shape. The importance given to the Trishul and its unique shape, the beautiful crescent of the moon and the thin slightly longer upper body of Vishnu and Brahma on the sides as compared to the lower body etc are all pointers. With experience you will get to notice the round shape of the face, thick set nose and the not too muscular chest giving them an almost young adult profile. Notice the Thorana on top of the sculpture as well. Where is this sculpture found in the shrine ? is an interesting question to readers…

Thirumayam – Satyagiri Shiva Cave.

Around the same time or even slightly earlier in Pudukkottai – this wonderful site which has been variously credited to Pallava ( Mahendra) – Pandya and Mutharaiya origins is this masterpiece.

The Lingothbhava murthy is simple yet stunning. If you notice there are flames emanating from the side of the pillar and they have been sculpted in a natural manner burning upward. Shiva is portrayed with only two hands and stands in Sama Bhanga, his left hand is held in Kati Hasta on is hip, while the right hand is graceful in Varada Hasta – the boon bestowing pose. The pillar has a perfect oval cleft revealing Shiva.

The sculptor has masterfully used the depth of the panel to show the right hand’s bend at the elbow giving it a very natural grace. The face of Shiva is radiates calm, the thick set nose and lips lifelike, while his tresses are stylistically bundled up over his head to form the Jata Bhandam. Iconographical texts state that the height of this must be one face length above the hairline and they have been followed perfectly here. The ornamentation is very simple, the most prominent being the rather thick Udara Bandana – the belt that is worn above the belly button. The lower garment though worn ornately, has no ornamental gem set strings and lacks the lion face belt buckle – simha mukha clasp.

The most interesting aspect to note in this masterpiece are the Yagnopavitha,the sacred thread is thick and single stranded and goes over the right elbow is the classic Pallava Nivitta fashion, and the very natural torso – not the bulging chest of a body builder, but a slender beauty of an ascetic. The shoulders and arms however are portrayed with great strength and muscle volume. The iconographical features and minimalistic ornamentation would give this sculpture a late 7th C CE – early 8th C CE date and the presence of fragmentary yet famous Pallava granta inscriptions affirm the same. But it is a great mystery as to why the sculptor did not depict Vishnu and Brahma – either as a boar and swan nor their forms outside !!

Pullamangai – Parantaka Chola I ( 907 – 955 CE)

It is a tough toss up between the next stage in the progression as we step into the 10th C CE between Punjai Nalthunai Eswaram and Pullamangai – Brahmapureeswarar.

The Chola revival spurs temple building all over Tamil Nadu and the artists expressed themselves to the fullest extent in the early stages. We move on to Pullamangai – assigned to Paranatka I

Though the face of Shiva has been damaged, there are no greater stone sculptures than the Brahma and Vishnu on the sides of this magnificent Ligothbhavar. A span of two centuries and you can see that all the extra trimmings have been minimalized, with the central pillar of fire taking center stage, with Brahma shown flying to see the top and Vishnu as the boar burrowing underneath. The top of the pillar of fire is not seen and it has not yet become like a linga – the fire is shown emanating from the cleft.


They are also sculpted on both the sides and their size is (only slightly) smaller than Shiva’s proportions. Shiva is shown with only two pairs of hands, the sacred thread falls straight over the hip and the attributes of the axe and deer are becoming more symbolic and smaller in size but still within the frame inside the pillar whose rather straight edges of the Pallava are now becoming more rounded. The important feature to notice is the very normal depiction of the body, thin waists and chest, with the face getting more naturally roundish oval – Ofcourse the cleft is larger now and more of shiva’s legs are visible but the body form is still slender.

Punjai around 955 CE

Though epigraphy dates Punjai to around Aditya II period ( 965-969 CE) the sculptural style indicates a date closer to first quarter of the 10th C CE – to Parantaka I.

The sculpture itself is crowned by a stunning thorana and we find the Boar ( vishnu – Varaha) and Swan ( Brahma) present. However, forms of Vishnu and Brahma are conspicuous by their absence on the two sides. The Linga is perfectly formed on top with a band of interwoven flowers near the top. The sculptor continues the tradition of flames emanating from the cleft.

The difference between the Pallava n Pallava transition period form of Shiva to the early Chola is very dramatic.- the more filled out chest and the almost circular / round face are clear to see. The Simhamuka belt clasp is very prominent !

Tanjore Brihadeshwara – Sri Raja Raja Chola ( 985 -1014 CE)


Another century and the emphasis totally shift to Shiva while Brahma and Vishnu are shown in very low relief and much smaller proportion. The difference to note is also in the iconography of the pillar of fire, now depicted almost like that of a Linga. The difference in the shape of Shiva’s face and torso is also visible, with the chest broadening and filling out, as compared to the waist.

Tribuvanam – Kulottunga Chola III( 1178 -1218CE)


Another century has passed we come to the last great Chola ruler Kulottunga’s temple in Tribuvanam. The art has become rigid, the pillar of fire is almost a linga now – with the height of the pillar vs Shiva is almost nil – ie there is no blank space in the pillar anymore and Shiva emerging from a perfectly formed oval opening occupies most of the pillar area. Brahma and Vishnu are portrayed slightly larger but overall we can see a drop in creative aesthetics and a certain conformational adherence to rigid standards in the sculpting.

thanks: Ashok, Arvind, Saurabh, Shashwath, Satheesh and Shriram