VIáVARÍPA

[ Previous Page | Next Page ]

VAIKUÛÙHA-VIáVARÍPA Vol. I

There are three friezes of miniature figures, one above the other, completely filling the upper portion of the stele (Pl. 3). These are based upon a plain horizontal ridge¹⁴, or 'architrave', traversing the backslab on a level with the rim of ViÀ¸u's crown. The face of ViÀ¸u and his two upper side-heads (those of K£rma and Matsya) -- together with the parasol, shield, arrow hand, and axe -- are superimposed upon this ridge. The god thus appears to be standing in front of a decorated gateway. Only the slight curvature at the corners of the stele suggests that the upper portion with its friezes might in part be derived from the enlarged and populated nimbus of Vi¿var£pa invented at Mathura in the fifth century¹⁵; even the Kannauj Vi¿var£pa inheritance is merely a distant echo in the curiously architectural design of this image at Gwalior. Its more immediate source would appear to lie in the rectangular design of temple doorways.

The top of the lowest frieze is level with the "hip" in the outline of the stele (see Pl.3). It is overlapped by the top of the axe and by the remains of the parasol on the right and left respectively, and bisected by the crown of the god. The small lotus-disk which backs the crown exactly fills the centre section of this register.

To the left of the lotus is a row of eight standing male figures (Q) with human bodies and the heads of goats (these also appear in the lower lintel of the Bhusawar Vi¿var£pa at Bharatpur). They hold spears sloped upon their left shoulders, their right hands are raised in the abhayamudr¡ (Pl. 12). This octad of armed Goat-heads appears to represent the eight Vasus as reflexes of their leader, Naigameya Agni (ch¡gavaktra)¹⁶.

To the right of the lotus are eight other figures (R), among them six anthropomorphs which seem to be identical, standing in an ¡bha´ga posture, facing forward, with their right hands in abhaya-mudr¡ and their left hands lowered to rest upon indistinct objects. In the latter alone must lie their iconographical difference, but the objects themselves cannot now be distinguished. These six are all male, with long hair drawn upward and twisted in a coil. The remaining two figures, nearest the lotus, are: a head-and-shoulders bust which is represented on a scale much larger than the other seven, and, lastly, a standing female with a ja¶¡ hairstyle, her right hand raised palm upward as if supporting the band above and her left holding what appears to be a waterpot. Although these figures number eight, they may constitute a Navagraha series if the large bust represents R¡hu. Conceivably the lotus-disk behind ViÀ¸u`s crown, which is firmly within this register and at its centre, is to be seen as S£rya identified with ViÀ¸u, making up the ninth member of the ennead (and relating also to the goat-faced Vasus opposite as gods of light).

In the middle register¹⁷, the farthermost figure on the left side (S) is seated, cross-legged, facing forward, but all details are eroded. The corresponding figure on the right (T) is missing due to breakage. In the centre of this register is a single figure (U), standing in an ¡bha´ga posture, facing forward, its left hand lowered and right hand raised as if holding a v¢n¡, all other features being eroded.

Between this cental figure and the seated figures at the two extremities, there appear on each side four figures (V, W) sitting on various animal v¡hanas and facing the centre (Pls. 11 and 13). The last of each of these groups of four is lower than the remainder by the thickness of the base-band, as are the figures immediately above them in the third register: a device which allows for the curvature of the corners of the stele while retaining the required number of figures in the upper two friezes. All eight mounted figures and their mounts are indistinct due to their small size and erosion. Only the first on the left is to some extent clear. It has an elephant mount and is thus either Indra on Air¡vata if these figures are gods, or Indr¡¸¢ if they are the AÀ¶amat¤k¡s. If, as seems more likely, they are the Mother Goddesses, the central figure would be áiva (V¢rabhadra V¢¸¡dhara), unusually not leading the Mothers but at their centre, as in Yogin¢ grouping¹⁸.

The top register¹⁹ consists of eight figures (X), all apparently identical, which sit facing forward with both hands raised to shoulder level holding indistinct objects (P1.13). Two additional figures (Y, Z) at the extremities are depressed to allow for the narrowing caused by the curve of the stele. The degree of erosion is worse in this than in the other registers and so no iconographical distinctions can be seen. In view of the raised position of their hands, however, it may be that the ten figures in this top register were intended to be counted with the two at the extremities of the middle register in a curve to represent the (dv¡da¿s) Ëditya²⁰ (SYXZT).

In brief, the grouping of figures in the three registers is as follows. The lowest level contains two groups of eight; the middle, two groups of four separated by a single figure in the centre and flanked by a single figure at each end; and the top level has a single group of ten and two flanking figures lower down which may be counted together as a group of twelve.

R

L

I

1 (Z)---------8(X)---------1 (Y) ten of 12 Ëdityas

II

1 (T)----4(W)---1(U )---4(V )---1(S ) AÀ¶am¡t¤k¡s with áiva-and two Ëdityas

III

-----8(R) ----- o ------- -S (Q)----- Nava-grahas and A˦a-Vasus

The lower left group of eight and the upper group of ten are groups of identical or near-identical figures; the lower right group of eight and the two groups of four in the middle level contain more individual figures.

As is the case with the majority of ViÀ¸u images of the kind which I term Vi¿var£pa, the textual source is not the eleventh Adhy¡ya of the Bhagavadg¢t¡, which applies clearly only to the fifth-century Mathura fragments and to the ninth-century²¹ Nepalese version at Changu-Narayan. Neither are there any known ¿¡stra texts which prescribe the icon in this form. A direct correspondence between iconographical content and a literary structure, such as exists between the Western Indian Vi¿var£pas from Samalaji and the paµcalakÀa¸as of a Pur¡¸a text is not in evidence here. Interpretation must therefore depend on internal and comparative evidence, in the sculpture itself and in other related pieces, with reference to well known scriptures which can be considered to have existed at the time this icon was produced, probably in the tenth century.

On internal evidence alone, it is apparent that the main figure was intended to represent ViÀ¸u incorporating all or most of the avat¡ras. Four are seen as profile heads emerging from behind the face of ViÀ¸u: Matsya and K£rma above NarasiÆha and Var¡ha, a combination which first occurs in Vi¿var£pa iconography at Deogarh in the eighth century.

V¡mana and Bh¡rgava (Para¿u-) R¡ma are then represented by the parasol and axe held in the uppermost left and right hands. The bow and arrow, which appear next along with the (sword and) shield, refer to D¡¿arathi R¡ma, whose independent crowned form is placed on the right extremity of the plinth. The plough that was in the third right hand from the top would have identified the ViÀ¸u figure with Balar¡ma SarikarÀa¸a. Despite the loss of three arms on the right, this remaining assemblage of attributes, signifying the incorporation of eight incarnations, is sufficient to indicate the intention behind the iconography of the main figure.

In the Western Indian iconography of seventh-century Samalaji, the incarnations were manifested laterally like branches from Vi¿var£pa. From the eighth century in the North, the main Vi¿var£pa iconographic tradition at first had not shown the well known incarnations apart from the first four animal forms, as at Deogarh; and then had represented them separately clustered about the axis of gods rising from ViÀ¸u, as at Kannauj and subsequently throughout the North. Here at Suhania in the tenth century, possible in continuation of this centripetal tendency, the god is made to embody them.

ViÀ¸u stands on the enlarged pericarp area (kar¸ik¡) of a blossoming eight-petal lotus, which is symbolically Meru, the place of Brahman, centre and axis of the universe.

The other lotus, of six petals, placed behind his crown, is contextualised by the eight anthropomorphic Navagrahas, making it a representation of the sun and further identifying ViÀ¸u as S£rya-Nar¡ya¸a. As supporter of the Grahas, ViÀ¸u is moreover the pole-star Dhruva, and as Lord of the Vasus he is also Indra as V¡sava. Being the axial source of áiva as V¢¸¡dhara V¢rabhadra, ViÀ¸u is then at the centre of the M¡t¤k¡s and commands their escort, áiva`s son Ga¸e¿a who withstood the anger of ViÀ¸u as Bh¡rgava R¡ma, as well as Hanum¡n. ally of the second R¡ma. Finally, in conjunction with the figures of the uppermost frieze, ViÀ¸u is the chief Ëditya.

The Suhania sculpture (with its approximate contemporary from Bhusawar at Bharatpur) is of particular interest because it represents one of the very last versions of ViÀ¸u Vi¿var£pa²² to be made before the full sculptural tradition died out²³. Flanked by the symbols of V¡mana and Balar¡ma, the fifth and sixth incarnations; worshipped by Hanuman; accompanied by R¡ma and Ga¸e¿a; and displaying in his most prominent hands the bow and arrow and the axe and shield, the central devotional identity of incarnate ViÀ¸u in this cosmic form is not only V¡sudeva K¤À¸a, who is here identical with the infinite ViÀ¸u, but the kÀatriya and br¡hma¸a R¡mas, D¡¿arathi R¡ma and Bh¡rgava R¡ma²⁴, the sixth and seventh avat¡ras. In This emphasis on the incarnatory nature of the god and on the integration of the two dominent var¸as, the Suhania icon perpetuates, in the person of the god, the meaning of the external rakÀ¡vl¢ of heads enclosing the divided nimbus of the eight-century Deogarh Vi¿var£pa²⁵, in which the six-armed central figure is identified with K¤À¸a alone and the universe with his Goloka.

The capacity of Vi¿var£pa to reconcile oppositional powers was one of the essential elements in his character in the Vedic SaÆhit¡s (where he paid for it with his life), in the Mah¡bh¡rata (where it is the cause of his triumph), and in the Pur¡¸as (where both versions are recorded)²⁶, and it is to be seen in the iconography of his sculptures. In this, the Suhania icon is no exception, but the iconographical method of depicting it shows a continuously developing creativity, in response to religious pressures, even in the final phase²⁷ of the sculptural tradition. What these religious pressures may have been, will be suggested below.

One of the besetting problems in Vi¿var£pa research is the difficulty of tracing the original temples for whose iconographical programmes the sculpture were designed. No such sculptural context has so far been discovered for any known Vi¿var£pa image with the exception of the Vaiku¸¶ha at Khajuraho, which is the main sanctum icon of the LakÀma¸a temple.

As noted above (Section 1) the Gwalior sculpture was reported by M. B. Garde to have been brought to the Gujari Mahal from Suhania, which is modern Sihoniyam, ancient SiÆhap¡¸¢ya in the former Tonwarghar District, now included in Morena District, Madhya Pradesh. The well known Suhania temple²⁸, which is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India with a Monument Attendant in residence at the site, is still a place of active worship. It is a áiva temple with a li´ga in the sanctum and a pronounced á¡kta influence in the lconography, particularly at the western end of the plinth beneath the vim¡na. Though many are damaged and some missing, the sculptures that remain are of excellent artistic quality, leaving one in no doubt as to the religious affiliation of the temple, and there is no reason for supposing that the ViÀ¸u Vi¿var£pa now in Gwalior was part of its iconography.

On an artificial mound at the outskirts of the village, however, stands a walled enclosure containing temples for the Mother Goddess (M¡t¡j¢) and Hanum¡n. Inside the gateway²⁹ (made of stray architectural members) stands a square temple, now crowned by a domed superstructure, facing west; this is the M¡t¡ k¡ mandir. Also within the enclosure and equally bereft of a ¿ikhara, there stands adjacent to it on the south a second square temple of similar size, facing east, with a Hanum¡n shrine built into it south wall.

The ground plans of the two adjacent temples appear to have been greatly enlarged by reinforcement from the original, the vim¡na walls and roofs in both cases having been almost totally rebuilt or built-over. The rear (east) wall of the M¡t¡ temple seems to have been only partly retained, as is a short section of the north wall which is preserved in a pillared recess in the depths of the later construction. These no doubt original walls consists of massive monolithic slabs shallowly carved with architectural shrines in groups of three, interrupted by square pilasters with foliate patterning on the shaft between stylised pot-and-foliage bases and capitals. Above them runs a heavy square cornice carved with square-pointed lotus designs, defined by excised squares against a running set of horizontally stepped parallel lines, developed from the vara¸·ik¡ mouldings of Gupta-period temples. The high base mouldings are made of long plain sabs with occasional rectangular frames containing a diamond shaped lotus design and triangular half-lotuses.

Within the small relief shrines on the older north wall section are carved Such figures as V¡mana and K¤À¸a Govardhanadhara; whereas on the east wall, which I take to be partly reconstructed from sections of a somewhat later S£rya temple (the broken lintel lies abandoned behind the ViÀ¸u shrine), the sun god occupies the central shrine in both groups of three, flanked apparently by aspects of áiva, now with apsarases in the intervening spaces.

The confusion is partly resolved by the doorway of this shrine, which has a large ViÀ¸u on Garu·a at the centre of the lintel; this and the great preponderance of VaiÀ¸ava fragments both within and outside the compound suggest that a ViÀ¸u or S£rya-N¡r¡ya¸a cult has always been dominant on the mound and that the earlier north wall sections of the Mata ka mandir probably represent one of the original shrines.

Surprisingly little evidence of fallen ¡malaka stones was found at the site, and none large enough to have crowned a high tower, which further suggests that the temple may have belonged to the flat-roofed class of shrine which existed side by side with northern ¿ikhara types throughout the region. Such small shrines were built largely of upright slabs and clearly either fell or were dismantled with ease, which could in part explain the architectural muddle of the M¡t¡ temple. Stylistically the sculpture on the preserved stretches of wall appears to be regional work several centuries earlier than the Kakanvat¢-ma¶ha, which represents early eleventh-century architecture dictated by the taste of a Candella-contemporary dynasty ruling from Gwalior.

At the extremities of the lintel on the doorframe of the ViÀ¸u shrine, Brahm¡ and ViÀ¸u are carved. They are nimbate and seated on pedestals which form plain capitals for the jambs. Between these corner figures and the central ViÀ¸u on Garu·a runs a Navagraha frieze consisting of eight standing figures and the R¡hu bust. Above this, a higher frieze represents a group of flying crown-bearers and musicians. The jambs are divided vertically and horizontally into three, the centre and outer panels containing mithunas; at the base appear N¡gas and the river goddesses with attendants. A lotus is represented at the middle of the threshold, flanked by fighting elephants and lions.

The áiva shrine doorway, slightly later in conception and style, has áiva on the bull at the centre of the lintel beneath two flying garland and crown bearers (similar to those which previously appeared above ViÀ¸u On the earlier doorframe), with Brahm¡ and ViÀ¸u at the ends seated within miniature temples having low ¿ikharas and large ¡malakas. The Navagrahas again form a connecting frieze (in a different sequence, possibly related to the date of building) but above them, between the crown bearers and the temple towers, sit the eight goat-headed Vasus. Single dancing figures appear in the three panels on each jamb, flanked by leogryphs. At the base, each river goddess stands between pillars in her own shrine with N¡gas beside the entrance and attendants to either side. The centre of the threshold is again by a lotus flanked on both sides by a lion-and-elephant combat.

Insofar as it possible to reconstruct an original layout, the most recent configuration on the Suhania mound seems therefore to have consisted of an east-facing áiva Sharine -- possibly built over the site of a S£rya temple in the tenth century and clearly representing the introduction of áaivism, which was to culminate in the erection of the Kakanvat¢-ma¶ha -- beside an earlier west-facing ViÀ¸u one. Though it cannot be proved, it is tempting to think that the Gwalior Vi¿var£pa was made for the older, west-facing ViÀ¸u shrine.

A combination of features from both doorways could have provided the model for the remarkable populated framework of that image. Indeed, there is scarcely another credible source for it. Though differently conceived, the model for the surround of the Candella Vi¿var£pa in the LakÀma¸a temple at Khajuraho is also architectural, and indirect influence is to be expected, the Kacchav¡has being mainly feudatory to the Candella.

The modifications to the Suhania doorways in the framework of the Kacchav¡ha Vi¿var£pa now at Gwalior are chiefly two, consisting firstly of the depopulation of the jambs, which basically become supports for the arms and hand-held attributes of the multiple god, but also the place of his secondary devotees Hanum¡n and Ga¸e¿a, as identificatory doorway figures; and secondly the curvature at the top, resulting in an arching representation of the twelve Adityas and the displacement of the lower figures at the extremities. Even the threshold lotus has been preserved on the base, rooted in the Earth Goddess and flanked by aquatic N¡gas, as the support of ViÀ¸u. The river goddesses and dv¡rap¡las are transformed into R¡ma, S¢t¡ and the ¡yudhapuruÀaÀ. ViÀ¸u seems to fold the temple redefining it.

In brief, this Vi¿var£pa image appears to have been created by the builders of the áiva shrine, itself a forerunner of the much greater Kakanvati-matha later erected two miles away, to honour the older ViÀ¸u cult which originally dominated the mound. In combining in its design elements from the doorways both of the already existing ViÀ¸u shrine and of the áiva shrine which they erected beside it, and by integrating Ga¸e¿a with the iconography of ViÀ¸u, the sculptors perhaps sought to reconcile the two cults in this image of Vi¿var£pa, whose mythological ambivalence and ability to combine opposed powers would have been well known.

In its conception and design, the Gwalior Vi¿var£pa, contemporary with the 10th-century áiva shrine on the Suhania mound but created for the older ViÀ¸u sanctuary belonging to the place, uniquely epitomises the intimacy of the relationship betweeb iconography and architecture in the Indian tradition.

BANERJEA, J.N. 1956². The Development of Hindu Iconography. Calcutta.

DAGENS, B. 1985-86. "Les aspets techniques de l`iconographie selon les Agama sivaltes". Indologica Taurinensia XIII (Proceedings of the sixth World Sanskrit Conference, Philadelphia 1984), 29-41 Torino.

HARLE, J.C. 1986. The Art and Architecture of the Indian Subcontinent (The Pelican History of Art). Harmondsworth.

HOPKINS, E.W. 1915. Epic Mythology (Grundriss der indoarischen Philologie und Altertumskunde - 1II.l.b). Strasbourg and Berlin.

MAXWELL, T.S. 1973. "Transformational Aspects of Hindu Myths and Iconology: Vi¿var£pa". Art and Archaeology Research Papers 4, 59-79. London.

MAXWELL, T.S. 1975. "The Deogarh Vi¿var£pa: A Structural Analysis". Art and Archaeology Research Papers 8, 8-23. London.

MAXWELL, T.S. 1988. Vi¿var£pa. New Delhi.

MAXWELL, T.S. submitted 1988. "The Vi¿var£pa Sculpture in the Trilokanstha Temple at Mandi". Contributed to the Festshcrift for Douglas Barrett. In press, London.

SHAH, P. (ed.) 1958. ViÀ¸udharmottara-pur¡¸a -- Third Khanda. Gaekwad`s, Oriental Series CXXX). Baroda.

VARMA, K.M. 1983. Myth of the so called "Tribhanja" as a "pose" or the natre and number of Bhangas, Prodder, Santiniketan 1983.

Plate I:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh State Museum. From Suhania, M.P. Stone, 87cm x 59cm x 16cm. 10th century. General view.

Plate 2:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Side view of stele.

Plate 3:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Upper part of stele.

Plate 4:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Upper right attributes.

Plate 5:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Upper left attributes.

Plate 6:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Right plinth figures.

Plate 7:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Left plinth figures.

Plate 8:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Central plinth group.

Plate 9:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Hanum¡n.

Plate 10:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Ga¸e¿a.

Plate 11:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Top of stele, right.

Plate 12:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Top of stele, left.

Plate 13:

Vi¿var£pa ViÀ¸u. Gwalior. Top of stele, centre.

(All photographs by the author)

[ Previous Page | Next Page ]

 Report Volumes  | VIáVARÍPA Multimedia Project

[ Home | Search  | Contact Us |  Index ]

[ Sutradhara | International Dialogue Unit | Multimedia Development ]