Structural Temples of Gujarat

SR No.: 006728
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kantilal F Sompura
Publisher: Gujarat University Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1968
Total Pages: 868
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 31 MB

Page 83

38
The Structural Temples of Gujarat was carried upward in the form of a pyramidal tower. The other notable feature of this temple is the arrangement of its portico. Instead of only one of these, as usual in the front of the entrance to the sanctum, there are four of them, one projecting from each side of the central structure each with the flat roof supported on a row of four pillars, with the wider intercolumination in the middle.29 The brick temple at Bhitargoan is also of the same style and belong to 6th century A. D.
A rectangular shrine with an apsidal rear-end and a barrel-vaulted roof showing a gable-end of the caitya-window design was considered to be a peculiar type of Gupta style. The two striking brick temples at Ter (Hydrabad) near sholapur and Kapoteśvara temple at Chezralā in Krishna-district and temples consisting of a hollow cylandrical brick structure with enclosing circular wall represented by a unique example of Maniyāra Matha at Rājgir in Patna District; eventhough conveying slight different features from that of general architectural conception of the Gupta temples, fall under this group. 30 (v) The Final Phase of Cave Temples. (7th & 9th cent. A.D.)
The final manifestation of cave temples in India was the rock-cut temples, confined to three localities; (1) Elora (2) the islands of Elephanta and Salsette near Bombay and (3) the development under the Pallava Kingdom in south India. These rock-cut groups are Brahmanical and Jain and are excavated between the 7th and 9th centuries.31
(a) Elora caves cosist of such sixteen examples which fall into four groups. The first group was planned on the lines of a Buddhist cave-monestery consisting of a pillared portico with a cella beyond and is represented by the Daśāvatāra cave (early 7th cent.) which claims the distinction of being the only two 29. IABH, P. F. 60-61; Conjectural Restoration on plt. xxxiii, Fig. 6 opp. p. 54. 30. A. I. pp. 95–96 31. IABH p. p. 86