________________
MAY, 1915)
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE IN MYSORE
95
It would be tiresome to give further lists of forgotten names. Mr. Narasimhachar has enabled critics to differentiate between the workmanship of different artists by publishing, at my request, several plates of signed images in his last two Reports. Plate II of 1912-13 gives four examples of Mallitamma and Plate III gives three of his colleague Baichôja from Nuggehalli, while in the Report for 1913-14, we are given in Plate II two more images by Mallitamma II, and in Plate III, illustrations of the work of seven sculptors, namely Masanitamma, Nanjaya, Chaudeya, Baleya, Lohite, Yalamasaya, and Bamaya, all from Sömnathpur. At present, I do not feel sufficiently familiar with the style to attempt
liscrimination between the achievements of the several artists. At first sight, all seemn so be very much alike, but no doubt differences exist, which could be detected by an eye sufficiently trained.
The style of all is extraordinarily ornate, and most minute care has been bestowed on the crnaments and accessories of the figures. The partly conventionalized foliage is beautifully executed. I admire particularly a Lakshmi by Mallitamma II (Report, 1912-13, PL. II, 3); and a Para-vasudeva by Baichôja (ibid., Pl. III, 3), but the taste of other people might prefer different figures.
The kindness of Mr. Narasimhachar enables me to present two unpublished photographs illustrating the work at the Hoysalesvara temple of Halebid by four sculptors, viz., Rêvoja, Mâba, Mâchanna father of Mâba, and Masana son of Kavoja. The composition by Rêvoja, is supposed doubtfully to represent the fight between Bhima and Brihadratha. (See Plate II] The subjects of the other frieze [ See Plate III) are more certainly identified as : Central panel-Umâ and Mahêsvara, by Mâba son of Machanna ; Left panel-Brahmâ, Vishnu, Shanmukha, and Gaņeśa, by Masaņa, son of Kavoja; and Right panel-Siva dancing, by Mâba.
When I was studying the Report for 1910-11 (p. 8, para 19), a passage in the description of the sculptures of the Hoysalêsvara temple at Halebid, reading as-" to the left of the 6th niche, in the battle between Karna and Arjuna, a soldier using a telescope"struck me as being curious and needing explanation. In the Report for 1912-13 (p. 58, para. 132), Mr. Narasimhachar says that the sculpture may be taken as dating from about the middle of the twelfth century, and quotes my comment as follows:
"The telescope is a surprise. The principle of the instrument was known in Europe to Roger Bacon, who died about 1294, but the instrument was not in practical use until 1608, in Holland (Encycl. Brit., latest edition). You might follow out the hint given by the sculpture. Is there any mention of the subject in Sanskrit literature ?”
I have often examined the photograph and shown it to other people, without satisfactory result. At first sight it looks as if the man were really using a telescope, but I can hardly believe that such an instrument was used in India in the twelfth century. Moreover, what would be the need of it in a conflict where the parties were fighting in close contact? I think that the object which looks so like a telescope must really be intended for a club. (Every reader can judge for himself by examining Plate IV ].
It would be easy to write much more, but it is time to stop, and I conclude by noting that several passages in the Reports show that artists of considerable merit still exist in the Mysore State. The notice of the family of sculptors living at Dêvanhalli, the birth-place of Tippû Sulgân, is particularly interesting, because the members of the family use a Sanskrit treatise on their art entitled Sakaladhikara and are acquainted with other works on the subject (Report, 1913-14, p. 18). The title Sakaladhikara is not included in the list of treatises used by Mr. Gôpinatha Râo for his work on Iconography.
