two-side-temples opening into it. In the Chalukyan style only one door leads to the side temple from the Ardhamaṇḍapa but for all that the resemblance is striking. The star-shaped design of the Chalukyan style is noticed in a modified form in the sanctum of the temple of Govinda Deva at Brindaban, or in the ruined Vishnuvite temple in the Nurpur fort in the Kangra Valley. The ruined seats or "baithaks so commonly found in the Hoysala style are found in the above two temples of Upper India. We sometimes notice an octagonal ground plan of the temple by the simple contrivance of removing the four angles of the square, the fundamental type; a combination of an octagon with a square, or rectangle is also noticed as in the temple of Jugal Kishore at Brindaban. We find a nice combination of the square, cruciform and octagon in the elegant temple of Govinda Deva at Brindaban from which Fergusson very aptly remarks that "Even a European architect might borrow a few hints".

What has been said above applies to the astylar form. The columnar style has by an artistic arrangement and disposition of columns, particularly in the octagonal form, has expressed itself in various types derived from the octagon. We thus find an arrangement of 8, 12, 20, 36 and 56 pillars having an octagon of columns in the centre, the outline presenting a serrated appearance by right-angular projections. The whole of this complex form can, however, be inscribed in a square, the fundamental plan recognised in the Purāṇas or Śilpa Śāstras.

The plan of residential houses depended no doubt upon the circumstances of the owners themselves. The square form has however been prescribed above all; even in the Vastu-YagaTattvam, a canonical work of the fifteenth century by Raghunandana, the square form has been recommended.

Prasade tu chatuḥṣaṣṭhi revāsīti padam grke |

Chaturasrikṛte kṣetre chāṣṭadhā navadhā kṛte ||

A residential house has been divided in Rāja-Martaṇḍa into the sixteen following classes: (a) āyata, oblong ; (b) chaturasra,

square; (c) vṛtta, circular; (d) bhadrasana, rectangular with a rectangular or square courtyard similar to the Roman atrium; (e) chakra, discus-shaped; (f) viṣamabāhu, long with two unequal wings; (g) trkonaka, triangular; (h) sakaṭākṛta, cart-shaped; (i) danda, staff like, i.e. barrack like; (j) paṇavasthāna, quadrangular with two opposite concave sides; (k) bṛhanmukha, wide-fronted ; (1) muraja, like the musical instrument; (m) vyajana, fan-shaped ; (n) kurma, circular with projection like tortoise; (o) dhanuḥ, arched like a bow; (p) sürpa, horse-shoe shaped. Some more forms have been prescribed in Visvakarmaprākāsa. It may be interesting to note that Sir John Marshall in his excavations at Bhità near Allahabad has discovered the remains of a building of the bhadrasana class belonging to the fourth century before Christ, having a courtyard with twelve rooms disposed round it. It may also be remarked that this term is even now used by an inhabitant of Bengal to indicate a dwelling-house and I need hardly point out that a dwelling-house with a courtyard is a characteristic of Bengal though this architectural feature is fast disappearing in Calcutta being replaced by a massive block of buildings with side and back spaces or a building of the hill station type. It may in this connection be mentioned that the courtyard was a characteristic feature of buildings of the Romans out of which the Atrium Vestae, or the Hall of the Vestal Virgins, the house of Livia at Rome and the House of Pansa at Pompeii are the most interesting.

Having very briefly described the ground plan I would mention some important principles underlying the constructive peculiarities of Hindu Architecture. The statical equilibrium of Indian structures is due to the combined action of simple vertical action and re-action, one dead weight carrying another without the support of balance as would be the case in an arcual system where a weak element is introduced by the uncertain nature of the inclined thrust. The Hindus are found to span large spaces by lintels or architraves which are subjected to cross or transverse strain, calling into play the forces of tension and compression. I would accordingly call the Hindu

method of construction a tension-compressile system. This system has involved a waste of materials in many cases. A Hindu cannot, however, be invariably charged with being uneconomical in his design. On exposing the foundations of the structures of the Mauryan period at Bhītā at Allahabad it has been found that the foundation below the doorways has not been carried down so deep as in other portions, evidently keeping in view the less intensity of pressure on soil.

The Indian architects are accused, not without reason, of making their wall unnecessarily thick thus involving an unnecessary waste of materials. I have up till now been able to study carefully the walls of only a particular variety of Indian temples called the Pida Dewl, a cubical block surmounted by a pyramidal tower consisting of horizontal slabs of stone with their ends turned up. However uneconomical the architects might have been in their design, I have been struck with a relation subsisting between the thickness of walls and the height of the edifice in Orissa. I have been able to determine an equation expressing the relation with co-efficients ranging between certain limits.

The Hindus are always characterised by an aversion to an arch which never sleeps as they say. They were not found to use it as a constructive element even though they were acquainted with its principle and use. That they knew the use of the arch will be seen by a reference to the Arthasästra of Kautilya. The roof of the low level chamber formed of lancet arches or the vaulted staircase at Takhti-Bahi are all based on the method of corbelling. The arches or domes that we come across in old structures are invariably horizontal and not radiating and composed of wedge-shaped voussoirs tending to converge to a point. The conditions of equilibrium or stability in case of a radiating arch are complex owing to the uncertain nature and intensity of the several stresses called into play; the architects of old days, anxious as they were for ensuring the permanence of their structures, discarded this architectural element as a source of weakness and instability. The high

sikhara or spire of the Indian style is an outcome of a constructive necessity inspired by the method of roofing spaces by means of projecting corners of masonry called corbelling, till the open space is sufficiently reduced so that it might be covered by a piece of stone slab. This may be effected in various ways. The angles of the square may be spanned by triangular blocks and the process may be continued till a square opening is left on the top which may be covered by a stone slab. This method of spanning the corners of a square is the logical precursor of the octagonal dome supported on eight or twelve columns so nicely elaborated by the Jains and resorted to by the followers of Islam in constructing their mausolea and mosques

in later years.

From the constructive point of view I do not find any difference between the Hindu style and that practised by the Jains. Whether in Guzerat or Rajputana, Mysore or Kanara, the Jaina style is essentially Brahmaṇical in character, form and method of construction; even the same insignificant details, both architectural and sculptural, are noticeable examples of both the classes. In Southern India the similarity is greater than in Northern India where the Indian kings or chiefs are found to be patrons of both Brāhmaṇism and Jainism. The inscriptions of Kulatunga Chola, the great Chola King, and Kṛṣṇa Deva Mahārāya, the great king of Vijayanagar, are inscribed on the torus of the Upapiṭham of the verandah separating the Ardhamaṇḍapa from the Mahamaṇḍapa of the temple of Vardhamāna Svāmi in the village called Tiruparuti Kundaram near Conjeeveram on the other side of the Vegavati. The inscriptions of these two very kings are noticed in the Vishnuvite temple of Varadaraja at Conjeeveram. Even scenes from the Srimat-Vāgavatam are depicted in paint on the ceiling of the Mabāmaṇḍapa of the Jaina temple.

We find here the Fame South Indian arrangement of Garbha Griha (sanctum), Antarāla (central chamber), Ardhamaṇḍapa (ante-chamber) and Mahāmaṇḍapa. We find the same type of Prākāra Maṇḍapas or circumambient cells which

are noticeable in even the earliest examples of the Pallava style down to those of the Vijayanagar type.

The temples of Santiśvara and Pārsvanatheśvara at Halebid in Mysore, though in a bad state of preservation, bear a close resemblance to any Hindu temple of the Hoysala Ballala kings Though devoid of elaboration of ornamental sculpture on the exterior, these Jaina temples have the characteristic Hoysala pillars, inclined parapets, highly carved ceiling pendants, technically called Bhubanesvari in Mysore, pierced screen flanking the doorway, etc. as are noticeable in the Saiva temples of Hoysaleśvara or Kedareśvaru at Halebid, the Vishnuvite temple of Channa Kesava at Belur, the Saivite temple of Brahmnesvara at Kikkeri, thirty-two miles northwest of Seringapatam, and also at the Vishnuvite temple of Persana Channa Kesava at Somnathpur in the district of Mysore. If we look at the Jaina temple at Lakkundi in the district of Dharwar we cannot declare it to be a Jaina temple at all unless we are so told. It is a mixture of the Pallava and the Chalukyan styles belonging to the tenth or eleventh century. We thus find a uniformity in the Jaina-Brāhmaṇical architec tural traditions of Southern India, though some divergence is noticeable in Upper India; still there is a harmony existing indicating their common origin, a direct descent from the same parent stock.

It is very interesting to note that the form of the Buddhist chaitya hall was appropriated by the Dravidians professing both the Brahmanic and Jaina faiths in constructing a peculiar type of temple which is technically called Ekanāsá. This type is not, however, usually met with, and want of knowledge of technics bas led many authorities on Indian Architecture including Dr. Burgess to believe that these very structures were originally Buddhist chaitya halls subsequently appropriated for a different form of worship. The Śaiva temple of Kapotcsvara at Chezarla in the Krishna district has been erroneously taken by Burgess and Rea to be an old Buddha chaitya subsequently appropriated for Brahmanical worship.