They
in turn fell from power and the empire of the Later Calukyas of Kalyani
was established. It was during the rule of this latter dynasty that temple
building in Karnataka again reached great heights. A large number of temples
remain which were built by the later Calukyas and they extend deep into
present-day Karnataka State.
The temple style of the Calukyas of Kalyani gave rise
to many variant styles usually associated with the patronage of specific
dynasties. This dynastic nomenclature is at times difficult to follow
since there are stylistic incursions into other kingdoms from time to
time and an accurate boundary line is often impossible to draw. At the
same time the association of one style with one dynasty is inaccurate
since, just as with the Early Calukyas of Badami, there were many options
open to the architect during the medieval epoch. The major out-growths
of the Later Calukya style are the temples built by the Hoysalas, primarily
in southern Karnataka State (in what was formerly the State of Mysore)
and the temples built by the Kakatiyas in what is now the northern part
of Andhra Pradesh.
It would be misleading to suggest that each of these three styles, the
Later Calukya, Hoysala and Kakatiya, were the same, and equally misleading
to suggest that they were totally different. In detail they have much
in common. Not only do they often use the same vocabulary of motifs, but
sometimes draw their craftsmen from the same areas, as proved by the epigraphic
over-all effect of the buildings. The conception of architectural space
and applied decoration differs greatly from one to the other. There are,
of course, temples which display overlapping styles and the divisions
between one dynastic preference and another are not always clear-cut,
but examples of temples built in mixed styles suggest a conflict of purpose,
the buildings merely approximate the feel of the other dynastic style.
|
It is often pointed out that among the variants of the Later Calukya style,
the Hoysala is the most ornate and exuberant. The Hoysala style displays
a heavier reliance on sculptural decoration, often in the form of large
figural sculptures which dominate the wall surfaces. All of the temples
built by the Hoysalas do not share this trait. In fact, very few of the
many (over 250) sites patronized by this dynasty are of the ornate variety.
The temples to be discussed below fall into this more exuberant category,
since these are the temples which illustrate the uniqueness of the Hoysala
vision. It is this unique style which we label Hoysala.
When considering the offshoots of the Later Calukya style, the temples
built in Andhra Pradesh by the Kakatiyas represent the other end of the
spectrum. Where the Hoysalas took the Later Calukya motifs and multiplied,
elaborated, and congealed them offering a Baroque variation, the Kakatiyas
simplified and mannered the motifs produce temples which may be considered
less exciting in detail but offer some of the most aesthetically pleasing
visual experiences in the Deccan.
One lasting contribution of the Hoysalas is its temple style known throughout
modern India for its ornate and exuberant decoration. The style of the
Hoysalas can be fully defined by comparisons with the other contemporary
styles of the area. The most distinct style which is highly related to
that of the Hoysalas is that of their distant neighbours, the Kakatiyas.
As can be seen from the illustrations of the temples built by these two
dynasties, they are composed of the same basic elements. The temples are
often three-shrines, of cruciform ground plan, raised on platforms and
have pillared halls composed of pillars which have been labeled “lathe-turned”
due to the very precise carving of the rounded surfaces of the shaft.
|
There
is, of course, a wide range of types within both dynastic groups of temples.
A chronological survey of the monuments does not necessarily give a stylistic
progression since every guild was not as progressive as others. On the
Hoysala side there is the chronological and stylistic development from
the Kesava temple at Belur (1117) to the Hoysalesvara temple at Halebid
(c. 1120-1182) to the Kesava temple at Somanathapur (1268), the three
most well-known examples of the style. But on the Kakatiya side the temples
at sites such as Hanamkonda (1163) and Palempet (1213) offer variants.
That of Palempet, although the most famous Kakatiya example, is highly
mannered. As seen from its wall articulation it is out of the mainstream
development of the style.
When considering the offshoots of the Later Calukya style, the temples
built in Andhra Pradesh by the Kakatiyas represent the other end of the
spectrum. Where the Hoysalas took the Later Calukya motifs and multiplied,
elaborated, and congealed them offering a Baroque variation, the Kakatiyas
simplified and mannered the motifs produce temples which may be considered
less exciting in detail but offer some of the most aesthetically pleasing
visual experiences in the Deccan.
One lasting contribution
of the Hoysalas is its temple style known throughout modern India for
its ornate and exuberant decoration. The style of the Hoysalas can be
fully defined by comparisons with the other contemporary styles of the
area. The most distinct style which is highly related to that of the Hoysalas
is that of their distant neighbours, the Kakatiyas. As can be seen from
the illustrations of the temples built by these two dynasties, they are
composed of the same basic elements. The temples are often three-shrines,
of cruciform ground plan, raised on platforms and have pillared halls
composed of pillars which have been labeled "lathe-turned" due to the
very precise carving of the rounded surfaces of the shaft.
There is, of course,
a wide range of types within both dynastic groups of temples. A chronological
survey of the monuments does not necessarily give a stylistic progression
since every guild was not as progressive as others. On the Hoysala side
there is the chronological and stylistic development from the Kesava temple
at Belur (1117) to the Hoysalesvara temple at Halebid (c. 1120-1182) to
the Kesava temple at Somanathapur (1268), the three most well-known examples
of the style. But on the Kakatiya side the temples at sites such as Hanamkonda
(1163) and Palempet (1213) offer variants. That of Palempet, although
the most famous Kakatiya example, is highly mannered. As seen from its
wall articulation it is out of the mainstream development of the style.
A comparison of the architectural and sculptural differences between the
art of the Hoysalas and the Kakatiyas involves a comparison of many factors
including: A) the plan of the temple itself; B) its setting within a compound
space; and, C) the treatment of the wall surface and the structural articulation
of the wall.
As would be expected
from the elaborate wall treatment of Hoysala temples, the iconography
is quite diversified Iconographic types that are common to the Dravidian
area are rarely found in the Hoysala region. Just as the Hoysala borrowed
architectural details from the north, which often confuses the definite
dravida character of the architecture of the medieval Karnataka, much
of their iconography has affinities with northern and Deccani usage. Within
the Srivaisnava iconography of the region the twenty-four murtis of Visnu
as well as the dasavatara are universally found. When the avatara group
is placed on the torana (arch behind the image) of a shrine figure the
Buddha is placed in the ninth position, but he is never found as a large
figure on the temple walls. Krsna, the usual eighth avatara, is found
in many forms on the walls: Quelling Kaliya the snake demon, Lifting Mt.
Govardhana, and Venugopala (fluting) are all extremely common depictions.
The Saivite iconography
is less diversified but in some ways more complex. Many of the images
appear to refer to sectarian practices and beliefs of the period, and
it is often difficult to identify specific images with absolute certainty.The
Tamil Bhiksatanamurti, Bhairava, Kankalamurti, Lingodbhavamurti, and Daksinamurti
are not found, while a very distinctive Bhairava form (more accurately
labeled Brahmasirascedakamurti, Siva with the severed head of Brahma)
was extremely popular. This figure is often accompanied by a nude female
figure which I have identified elsewhere as Brahmahatya, a personification
of the sin of Brahmanicide. They appear to be part of the iconography
of some Saiva sect in the area, possibly the Kapalikas, and are found
at a number of later Calukya and Kakatiya sites as well.
There are few sites which display peculiar images which strikingly illustrate
the differences between the Hoysala iconography and that of their neighbours
to the south. One such temple is the Isvara temple at Nagalapura (Tumkur
District) of the mid 12th century where a number of Siva images hold the
stag and axe in the manner of many Tamil images. The stag is totally absent
from the iconography of other Hoysala sites and the axe is not common
to Hoysala Sivas unless he has a great number of arms. At the same time
the shape of the axe is a Tamil one, implying that the images, although
in general stance and decorative detail Hoysala, reflect an iconographic
migration from the Tamil districts of the empire.
There are a great number of other iconographical details
on these temples other than the large figural bands. Every inch of the
temple is carved with detail including the small narrative panels on the
jagati (a half wall which screens the lower part of pillared halls and
entrances) and miles of freizes around the entire base. Perhaps the most
interesting details are found in the narrative freize, an intrinsic part
of the temple. Stories from the Mahabharata, the Ramayana, and the Bhagavata
Purana are told in intimate detail. An illiterate visitor to the site
accompanied by a well-versed guide can learn many tales out of the folklore
of the faith.
The Hoysala artist was at heart an architect and it is
his architecture that displays his genius. There is a great variety of
temple plans, and it is this planning which illustrates the principle
intent of the style. It is true that in the 13th century the trikutacala
(three-celled temple) became the desired Vaisnava type, but even within
the limited form there are many alternative solutions. Within the full
range of the style the sculpture is always subservient to this plan.
The main desire was to create a logical and readable
unit. The temple must be a solid living form. With so many details covering
the entire edifice there was very rigid control over the elements added.
These are highly organized temples with iconographic and decorative features
subtly balanced with each other. The artist is after all a craftsman who
must follow the scheme laid out before him. This is evident in the shift
form Belur to Halebid where the whole temple takes on a more encrusted
and compressed appearance and the true Hoysala type evolves.
The Kesava temple at Somanathapura is probably the best
known temple of the period and it is also a brilliant example of temple
planning. It is a trikutacala and each cell has its own vestibule which
is in turn connected to a single navaranga
|