Thematic Area 1: New ways of looking at heritage Sub ... - Intbau

a part of the Universe giving expression to the ideals of its own eternal beauty andunchanging law [1].Therefore, for any architecture to be perfect, it had to satisfy parameters such as astrologicalobservations, principles of eternal beauty, laws of nature etc. as defined in the texts of thatage. This could have been done only with detailed project planning and execution. Theexistence of ancient monuments can be taken as an indication of presence ofmultidisciplinary and multilateral knowledge [2] base of design and managerial skills. Thearchitect (sthapati) was the central figure in the entire scenario and with his team of assistantsthe work was executed. For any architectural project, perfection in all aspects was the mostsought after goal.Documenting and Understanding Ancient Indian ArchitectureOne of the early pioneers of Indology, and the founder of the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengalwas Sir William Jones (1746-94) [3]. Archaeological and historical pursuits in India startedwith his efforts, who put together a group of antiquarians to form the Asiatick Society on 15 thJanuary 1784 in Calcutta (now Kolkata). The publication of a periodical journal named,Asiatic Researches was started in 1788, in the researches, surveys carried out by the societywere published to make the public aware of the antiquarian wealth of India [4].In the same decade, William Hodges, the first of the British professional landscape artists tovisit India, spent over three years in the country from 1780 to 1783 and painted amongstother subjects, the architectural heritage. [5] He published his reflections on the country'sarchitecture partly in the notes accompanying his series of aquatints, 'Select Views in India'(1785-88) and then more coherently in his 'Dissertation on the Prototypes of Architecture:Hindu, Moorish and Gothic of 1787'. This material was repeated and amplified in his volumeof memoirs, 'Travels in India' of 1793. In all his works, Hodges clearly perceived that Indianarchitecture had its own conventions, which were quite unknown to Europe. What his worklacked entirely was any reference to the Shilpa Shastras, the traditional and time-honouredtexts in which the local conventions relating to architecture were clearly explained [6]. TheArchaeological Survey of India has been involved in architectural surveys of monuments tilldate and has a very rich collection of architectural documentation [7].The research in this area can be classified into two categories, namely, Field work andTheoretical work. The above works can be classified as field work. In the theoretical researchfront, the first person who attempted to understand ancient Indian Architecture was Ram Raz[8] .Since 1812, Ram Raz collected ancient architectural treatises in Sanskrit and toiled todecipher their mysteries. The result was 'The Essay on the Architecture of the Hindus',posthumously published in London in 1834. Ram Raz's book was a path-breaking work in thefield of Hindu architecture. He was the first Indian scholar to study the principles of Hinduarchitecture as reflected in the ancient Hindu architectural treatises. His work was also quotedby Owen Jones [9] in chapter 13 ‘Hindoo Ornament’ of his book ‘Grammar of Ornament’.Another researcher in this area, Dr. P.K. Acharya [10], also selected the Manasara fortranslation and graphical transcription. His work is available in a number of volumes firstpublished from 1934 to 1946. The treatise ‘Samrangana Sutradhara’ was selected by Dr. D.N. Shukla [11] for his research on Indian architecture and published in 1960. TheMayamatam, another architectural text was translated by Dr. Bruno Dagens which was firstpublished in English in 1984 by I'Institut Francais d'Indologie, Pondicherry and BharatiaInstitute, New Delhi. The same work was then published in a bilingual edition in 1994 andcontains critically edited Sanskrit text which is an improvement over the earlier edition as itcontains explanatory footnotes, analytical table of contents and a comprehensive glossary[12].

Adam Hardy [13] researched the Temple Architecture of Karnata Dravida (NorthKarnataka). He has been interested in relationships between architectural history/ theory andpractice. He opines that architectural history may be approached through the eyes of adesigner, while architectural design can be informed by an understanding of principles andprocesses underlying traditional architectures. His work on temple architecture was publishedin 1995 [14]. A chronological listing of most of areas of research and researchers are given inTable 1. However, this list is not an all inclusive list of areas of research and researchers andtheir supporting organizations.Table 1 A Chronological List of Research in Indian Architecture and Allied areasS.No. Circa Work Persons1. 1780.. Architecture field work William Jones,and ArchaeologicalSurvey of India2. 1780.. Architecture field work through paintings William Hodges3. 1810.. Architectural theoretical work Ram Raz4. 1840.. History of Indian and Eastern Architecture James Fergusson5. 1890.. Architectural Documentation Bannister Fletcher6. 1905 Indian art, architecture, aesthetics Ananda Comarswamy7. 1920… Indian art, temple architecture Stella Kramrisch8. 1910.. The Ancient and Medieval Architecture of India E.B.Havell9. 1930.. Sculpture analysis and theory Alice Boner10. 1930.. Architectural translation and graphics P K Acharya11. 1940.. Indian Architecture documentation Percy Brown12. 1960.. Hindu Architecture treatise translation and D N Shuklaresearch13. 1960.. Architectural theory and analysis Madhusudan A Dhaky14. 1970.. Indian culture Kapila Vatsyayan15. 1980.. Architectural translation of Sanskrit Text Bruno Dagens16. 1990.. Architectural documentation with labeling and Adam Hardyanalysis17. 1990.. Architectural documentation and analysis Pierre PichardMayamatamAs per Dr. Bruno Dagens, a prominent expert on the Mayamatam and who has edited andtranslated the book, the body of Sanskrit literature dealing with architecture and iconographyis voluminous, even scattered and insufficiently surveyed and it is matched by a vernacularliterature, more scattered and less known. In the extensive and widely disseminated range ofworks in this area, the Mayamatam occupies a fairly well defined place. It is a generaltreatise, a vāstusāstra, written in Sanskrit but originating from Dravidian India, mostprobably the Tamil area; it is part of the Saivite āgamic literature without the connectionbeing underlined by any pronounced sectarianism and its drafting must have been doneduring the Chola period, at the time when the architecture it describes had reached the peakof its maturity. It can thus be assigned a chronological bracket which goes from the early 9 thcentury to the late 12 th century [15].The Mayamatam published by the ‘Indira Gandhi National Center for the Arts’ is in twovolumes with a total of 36 chapters and an appendix. Volume I has 22 chapters and theremaining are in volume II. It is a large text comprising of 3336 verses in all. The chapterscan be classified under areas of town planning, residential architecture, religious architecture,religious rituals, iconography, interior design, renovation work, vehicle design. The chapters

of architecture and planning are from 1 to 30 having 2626 verses. However, the parameterslisted above appear in more than one area in the volumes. For example, rituals are describedin chapter 4; Taking possession of site, chapter 8; Offerings, chapter 9; Village planning,chapter 12; The foundation deposit, chapter 18; Making of roof and completion of works,chapter 24; Gateways, chapter 27; Features of houses for the 4 classes, chapter 28; First entryinto house.It was decided to select this book since it is a well structured book, complete with exhaustiveexplanatory footnotes. An added advantage was that it had both the Sanskrit text and Englishtranslation on adjacent pages (Sanskrit on the left page and English on the right one) so thatthe words and their exact meanings could be easily identified.METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE:The process followed for the exploration of architecture as described in ‘Mayamatam’ isgiven in Table 2 below:Table 2: MethodologyStep 1 Studying a chapter; Reading the Sanskrit text and its English translation.Step 2 Tabulating the word to word meaning of the Sanskrit text and English translation.Step 3Step 4Step 5Step 6Step 7In this process, adding notes wherever an alternative interpretation is possible, orsome additional translation is to be done.Based on the understanding, cross referencing and library survey (ASIpublications, books by various authors), making first draft of the sketches on asquare grid sheet along-with comments. The interpretation is at two types, one issequential and other is an integration that is a figure made from informationpresent in different places in the text.Making final sketches on a square grid sheet along-with comments and crossreferences.Preparing CAD drawings and Three dimensional CAD models of each sketch.Presentation of data and findings in the form of sheets, models, tables, images,slides etc., depending on the purpose of the presentation.The exercise of tabulation has been very helpful in a more in-depth understanding of the textas every technical term has become clear. Doing this on a computer also helps in finding thesame word and its different interpretations depending on its context in the ślokā. Generalwords have not been translated and put into appropriate cells in many cases by me.Explanation of Process followed with the help of examples:Steps 1 to 3:In Mayamatam the chapter 13 is titled ‘The Socle’ (Upapitha). The Socle is a building partwhich is placed beneath the base (adhishthana) which acts as a supplementary base andmakes the building more high. The verses 6 to 8 describe a socle named ‘vedibhadra’ type 1.After studying and understanding the text, the word to word translation is tabulated. Thetabulation alongwith comments are shown in Table 3. In chapter 15 ‘Dimensions of Pillarsand Choice of Materials, in verse 29, the translation of one phrase in the ślokā offers analternative interpretation. The details of the verse and the alternative interpretation are shownin Table 4.

Table 3: Tabulation and notes for ‘Vedibhadra’ SocleTable 4: Alternative interpretation to original translationSteps 4 and 5:The final sketch of socle ‘vedibhadra’ drawn on a square grid sheet is shown in Figure 1. Thevarious profiles of mouldings are designed after a study of photographs and drawings ofmonuments, Archaeological Survey of India publications and personal interpretation andinputs.

Figure 1: Final sketch of ‘vedibhadra’ socle.Steps 6 and 7:After the sketch, the drawing of the same socle is made on computer using CAD software.The names of the sub parts, that is, mouldings are added and the proportional dimensions arealso added as shown in Figure 2. A perspective view of the same is shown in Figure 3.Thus, in this way, the descriptions are taken up for graphic transcription and visualinterpretation. Though the Mayamatam has many areas like planning, interior design, vehicledesign material specifications, technical information etc., the scope of this study is limitedonly to architecture and the visual analysis limited to geometric and proportional analysis.Figure 2: CAD drawing showing section and elevation of ‘vedibhadra’ socle

Figure 3: View of ‘vedibhadra’ socleThe drawings thus prepared can be used to demonstrate the buildability and visual appeal ofthe Sanskrit verses.The above was an example of a drawing being made by referring a sequence of verses. Thefollowing is an example of a drawing of an architectural example being made by combinationof sequential interpretation and integration of information appearing at various places in thetext.Making of single storey temple Kesara:Description: (verse 19.33-34) The Kesara comprises a forepart in the middle of its façade.There are aediculae at the level of the roof, some at the corners and others and others in themiddle; there is a false dormer-window above the forepart. The attic and roof are circular orsquare; (the width and the projection of) the median forepart are respectively three and twofifths, three and two sixths or three and two sevenths ( the width of the building).Temple Kesara has been designed with the following cross references within the Mayamatamas given in table 5.Table 5: Characteristics of Kesara a single storey Templewidth As per v 19.1Height is Adbhuta mode that is 1:2 as per v 19.2Height base½ ht pillar as per v 14.15b,47Height pillar 2 ht base as per v 15.4Height entablature ½ ht pillar as per v 16.48Height roof 2 or 3 X attic height as per v 18.2Height atticHeight vedika2 or 1 X its stereobate height (vedika) as per v 18.2, or 2 X vedikaheight as per v 19.19b2 X freize (prati) of entablature height, 1 X prati height as per v16.51Height freize (prati) 1 module, or ½ , ¾ module as per v 16.29bNote: for all building parts and proportion mentioned above, only one dimension is chosen ofthe many dimensions prescribed in the above referred verses. The computer generated stagewise models of the temple Kesara are shown in Figures 4 to 12.

Figure 4: Stage 1: BaseFigure 5: Stage 2: PillarsFigure 6: Stage 3: WallsFigure 7: Stage 4: HandrailFigure 8: Stage 5: EntablatureFigure 9: Stage 6: RoofFigure 10: Stage 7: Attic (Griva)Figure 11: Stage 8: Shikhara

Figure 12: Stage 9: Complete View with Kuta & KoshthaANALYSIS AND RESULTSThis research is in progress as a Ph. D. work by the author. The following is a presentation ofthe on-going analysis and results. These are subject to alterations, if any, as per inputs ofexperts and peers.Plan ProportionsThe plans of temples, houses, pavilions etc. were mostly square or rectangular. The lengthand widths were defined in cubits or in parts. The names and corresponding proportions oftotal Width: Length for Pavilions, Halls and Houses are given in Table 6 and proportions forpavilions are shown in Figure 13.Table 6a: Names of width to length proportions for Pavilions:S. No. Name W: L1. Chhanda W: (W+1 unit)2. Vikalpa W: (W+2 unit)3. Abhasa W: (W+3 unit)4. Jati W: (W+4 unit)Table 6b: Names of width to length proportions for Halls:S. No. Name W: L1. Chhanda W: (W+1 unit)2. Vikalpa W: (W+2 unit)3. Abhasa W: (W+3 unit)4. Jati W: (W+4 unit)Table 6c: Names of width to length proportions for Houses:S. No. Name W: L1. Jati W: (W+2 unit)2. Chhanda W: (W+4 unit)3. Vikalpa W: (W+6 unit)4. Abhasa W: (W+8 unit)

Figure 13: Width to Length ratios for PavilionsGrids in PlanThe plans of houses, pavilions and halls were divided into number of parts in width andlength thus creating a grid. These grids could be 5 X 5, 4 X 6 etc. These parts were made intoopen courts, verandah, gallery, rooms, etc. as per the prescription. An interesting feature ofthe grid for pavilions was that the distances were given as clear distance between pillars andnot the centre to centre distance.Figure 14: Divisions of pavilion ‘Mangala’

This peculiar grid demarcation was perhaps helpful in having the right proportion of the voidwith respect to the mass, which is not possible if centerline distances are given as then thewidth of the pillar would change the void proportion. An example of divisions of a paviliondescribed as ‘Mangala’ having 10 X 12 parts is shown in figure 14.Elevation ProportionsSimilarly the elevation was designed with certain Width to Height ratios. The names of thesefor temples and houses are given in Table 7 and Figure 15.Table 7a: Names of height to width proportions for Houses:S. No. Name W: H1. Shantika 1: 12. Paushtika 1: 1 ¼3. Jayada 1: 1 ½4. Dhanada 1: 1 ¾5. Adbhuta 1: 2Table 7b: Names of height* to width proportions for Temples (general):S. No. Name W: H1. Shantika 7: 102. Paushtika 6: 93. Jayada 5: 84. Adbhuta 4: 75. Sarvakarmika 3: 6Table 7c: Names of height* to width proportions for Single storeyed Temples:S. No. Name W: H1. Shantika 7: 102. Paushtika 1: 1 ½3. Jayada 1: 1 ¾4. Adbhuta 1: 2*The height is defined in two ways: including sthupi and excluding sthupi (v.11.20)Figure 15: Width to Height Ratios for Temples (general)

Elevation Sub-DivisionsThe elevation was sub-divided into the Socle (up-peetha) (optional), Base (peetha), Pillars(stambha), Entablature (prastara), Attic (greeva), Roof (shikhara), and Finial (sthhupi). Theheights of these levels were in proportion to each other. For example for a two storey temple,the total height is divided into 28 parts comprising of a Base of 3 parts, first storey of 6 parts,entablature of first storey of 3 parts, second storey of 5 parts, entablature of second storey of2 parts, stereobate of attic of 1 part, Attic of 2 parts, Shikhara of 4 ½ parts and finial of 1 ½parts. Figure 16 shows these subdivisions for a two storey temple in Sarvakarmika mode.Figure 16: Vertical proportions of two storied Temple in Sarvakarmika (1:2) modeBuilding elementsThe building elements like pillars could be designed with a number of interdependentdimensions and proportions. The bottom diameter of a pillar could be 1/10 to 1/8 of itsheight; the top diameter equaled 11/12 to 5/6 of bottom diameter (Refer Figure 17). Thus, theproportional relation of the pillar with other building components was maintained and in thisway the entire building was a set of inter-related dimensions.Figure 17: Ratios of Pillar Height, bottom diameter and top diameter

NumbersApart from the proportions, the numbers of various building elements was also consideredimportant in the design of buildings. For humans, odd numbers were prescribed whereas forGods the numbers could be both even and odd. The texts prescribe a number of dimensions,proportions etc. For example, the number of foreparts or porches (bhadra) in a pavilion couldbe from one to four (Refer Figure 18).Figure 18: Numbers of foreparts in a pavilionCONCLUSIONAncient Indian architecture has well defined series of proportions for plan, elevation andbuilding elements. Proportions are prescribed for micro, meso and macro levels which aretime tested and are still appreciated in this age.This is mainly due to the nature of the Mayamatam text itself and of its subject which allowsthe specialist to give an interpretation, whether it be personal or guided by the fashions of thetime and place. The phenomenon is only possible because inspite of their doctrinairecharacter this treatise and others of the same group, leave to architects the right to originalityin the exercise of their art; in other words, the tradition is a guide more than it is a restraint[16].REFERENCES1 Coomaraswamy, A. K. (1985), - ‘Chapter 1, Aims of Indian Art’, pg 11, in Fundamentalsof Indian Art-vol.1, The Historical Research Documentation Programme, Jaipur.2. Chhaya, H D (1998), - ‘Vedic Spirit in Architecture’, Architecture + Design, pp 21-253. www.kamat.com/kalranga/people/pioneers/w-jones.htm. retrieved August 24, 20044. http://asi.nic.in/index2.asp?sublinkid=28, retrieved November 2, 20065. www.kamat.com/database/content/landscapes/william_hodges.htm, retrieved November 2,2006)6. www.newstodaynet.com/2005sud/05dec/ss8.htm, retrieved August 23, 20067. http://asi.nic.in/index2.asp?sublinkid=29, November 2, 20068. www.newstodaynet.com/2005sud/05dec/ss8.htm, August 23, 2006

9. http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/DLDecArts.GramOrnJones, Retrieved August 23,200610. Acharya, P. K., (1934), - Architecture of Manasara, Illustrations of Architectural andSculptural objects. (Manasara series vol V), Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, New Delhi.11. Shukla, D. N., (1960), Vastu-Shastra Vol. 1, Hindu Science of Architecture, MunshiramManoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 11005512. Dagens, Bruno, (1994), - Mayamatam, Vols. I & II, Indira Gandhi National Centre for theArts, New Delhi & Motilal Banarasidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.13. www.cardiff.ac.uk/archi/school/staff/hardya.html, retrieved August 24, 200614. Hardy, Adam, (1995), Indian Temple Architecture: Form and Transformation, , IndiraGandhi National Centre for the Arts, New Delhi-110001 & Abhinav Publications, New Delhi15. Dagens, Bruno, (1994), - Introduction, pg lxiiii, in Mayamatam, Vols. I & II, IndiraGandhi National Centre for the Arts, New Delhi & Motllal Banarasidass Publishers Pvt. Ltd.New Delhi.16 ibid, - Introduction, pg ciACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe author is thankful to the following for their contributions in this research work:• Prof. H. D. Chhaya, (Ex. HOD Department of Architectural Conservation, School ofPlanning and Architecture, New Delhi).• Akash Trust, Pondicherry• Rishabh Software, Vadodara• Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India.