Page:History of Indian and Eastern Architecture Vol 2.djvu/129

 CHAP. II. GREAT TEMPLE AT BHUVANESWAR. 101 pleasing to the European eye ; but when once the eye is accustomed to it, it has a singularly solemn and pleasing aspect. It is a solid, and would be a plain square tower, but for the slight curve at the top, which takes off the hardness of the outline and introduces pleasingly the circular crowning object (Woodcut No. 315). As compared with that at Tanjor (Wood- cut No. 213), it certainly is by far the finer design of the two. In plan the southern example is the larger, being 82 ft. square. This one is only about 66 ft. l from angle to angle, though it is 75 ft. across the central projection. Their height is nearly the same, both of them being over 180 ft, but the upper part of the northern tower is so much more solid, that the cubic contents of the two are probably not very different. Besides, however, greater beauty in form, the northern example excels the other immeasurably in the fact that it is wholly in stone from the base to the apex, and what, unfortunately, no woodcut can show every inch of the surface is covered with carving in the most elaborate manner. It is not only the divisions of the courses, the roll-mouldings on the angles, or the breaks on the face of the tower : these are sufficient to relieve its flatness, and with any other people they would be deemed sufficient ; but every individual stone in the tower has a pattern carved upon it, not so as to break its outline, but sufficient to relieve any idea of monotony. It is, perhaps, not an exaggeration to say that if it would take a sum say a lakh of rupees or pounds to erect such a building as this, it would take three lakhs to carve it as this one is carved. Whether such an outlay is judicious or not, is another question. Most people would be of opinion that a building four times as large would produce a greater and more imposing architectural effect ; but this is not the way a Hindu ever looked at the matter. Infinite labour bestowed on every detail was the mode in which he thought he could render his 1 This and the dimensions in plan | internal dimension is reduced to 40 ft. generally are taken from a table in Babu j with the larger external one of 65 ft. Rajendralal's ' Antiquities of Orissa,' vol. | The Bhoga-mandapa is said in the text i. p. 41. I am afraid they are only round numbers, but they suffice for comparison. They are certainly incorrect. In the table the tower is described as 66 ft. by 60, while all the photographs prove that it is undoubtedly square. In the plan (vol. ii. pi. 48) the sides are represented as 66 by 54 ft. from angle to angle, and the (p. 72) to be 56 ft. square ; by scale it is 63 by 70. The Nata-mandir is said to be 52 ft. square, and scales 58 by 61. The Jagamohan in the text is said to measure 65 ft. by 45 ; on the plan it measures 70 by 50. Making these and other adjust- ments from the plan, it reduces the total length to about 210 ft., instead of the internal dimensions are given in the table I 290 of the plan. This is confirmed by as 42 square. In the plan they are 44 by Mr Atkinson's plan (pi. xxviii.). In like 46, and approach so nearly to the exterior, manner the temple of Bhagavati (pi. that if the tower had been built, as repre- xlviii.) is represented as 160 ft. in length, sented in his plan, it would not have ! while Mr. Atkinson makes it only IIO. Stood for an hour. In figure 314 the * Archaeology in India,' pp. 49, 50,