Dvāra-śākhā: a Study in Evolution

Author(s): M. S. Mate
Source: East and West , March-June 1974, Vol. 24, No. 1/2 (March-June 1974), pp. 127-
135
Published by: Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO)

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/29755936

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Istituto Italiano per l'Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to East and West

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Dvara-sakha: a Study in Evolution

by M. S. Mate

Recent researches concerning the building art of ancient India tend to follow a par?
ticular direction. The emphasis now is either on close dating or on establishing corre?
lations and correspondences between the extant monuments and texts on v?stu-s?stras, the
ancient works on the science and the art of building. Both have their utility in the
study of the art history of this land but rather unwittingly they do tend to obscure the
beauty of the intrinsic evolution of various forms and motifs in Indian art. Among
the more characteristic of such features of the Indian temple, Buddhist, Hindu or Jaina,
is to be counted the doorframe, the dv?ra-s?kh?. A study in the evolution of this entrancing
component of the temple structure is presented here.
The dv?ra-s?kh? became one of the most outstanding decorative elements of the
Hindu-Jaina temples of the Early Mediaeval period. This position it continued to hold for
nearly a thousand years, practically till the end of the 18th century. Almost all frames
exhibit a high standard of workmanship, precision and finish. More often than not they
are objects of remarkable appearance. The vast range of religious monuments starting a
century or so before the beginning of the Christian Era, reveals a bewildering variety of
doorframes. It would not be an exaggeration to say that it is difficult, if not impossible,
to find two doorframes that are exactly alike. This diversity is however, more apparent
than real. If any two frames differ from each other, if any two appear to be worlds
apart, a closer scrutiny would instantly reveal that they have still retained a basic common
core, that there is a fundamental conceptual unity. This contradiction, if it can be called
one, is explained when one realizes that the authors of these masterpieces were following
common and similar if not identical ways of thinking, while at the same time drawing
on a vast repertory of artistic motifs. This would be valid not for one particular region or
for one particular period of time, but would apply to Indian art as a whole. The aim of
this study is to bring out those factors that have led to this unity within diversity.
The discussion begins with a description of a few typical doorframes. These have been
so selected as to represent both the terminal points of the two artistic traditions that are
so clearly discernible. It does not mean that there are no earlier specimens or that
there are no later ones. However, the earlier specimens are clearly in the formative stage
whereas the later ones are more or less fanciful elaborations of the same theme. Some
of them border on the baroque. Frames from such early monuments like the Siva temple

127

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
at Bhumara (*) belong to the former while those from the temples of the Later Cha
lukyan style as at Lakkundi (2) represent the latter. Either of these extremes have to
be excluded from the discussion at least at the .present stage. The Visnu or Das?vat?ra
temple at Deogarh (3) (Madhya Pradesh) has preserved an excellent dv?ra-s?kh?. This
monument has been assigned to the later Gupta period or the 6th century A.D. The
next one to be described is a frame from Temple Number One at Balsane (4) in Maha?
rashtra, belonging to the 11th century. Third comes a frame from Cave no. 6 at Ajanta (5)
(Maharashtra), dated about the third quarter of the 5th century. The last one is from
Temple no. 11 at Aihole (6) (Mysore). This monument has been placed, on stylistic
grounds, in the 9th or 10th century. As will soon be evident the first two belong to
the same category while the other two are of the same genus.
The dv?ra-s?kh? on the Visnu temple at Deogarh is one of the most typical, neatest
and best-executed frames from the early period (fig. 5). Although some features such as
the dentils or beam-ends reveal its proximity to timber construction, the structural and
decorative forms are essentially lithic. The entrance is a rectangular opening and has four
frames around it. Between each is a narrow dividing depression. The innermost frame bears
a highly intricate scroll that arises from stems held by kneeling dwarfs. Next to this, about
half as broad and projecting appreciably from it, is another frame also covered with a
scroll pattern that is quite different from the one on the inner frame. Outside this and
separated from it by a narrow sunken band is a frame as broad as the innermost one.
On either jamb are three mithuna figures alternating with those of seated dwarfs. The
lintel of this frame is covered with numerous figures of gandharvas proceeding to or float?
ing towards the centre-piece ? the lal?ta-bimba. This block spans all of the three frames
just described and has on it in bold relief a figure of Visnu seated on Sesa. The lower
quarter of these frames bears figures of male and female dv?rap?las (door-keepers or
attendants). Enframing this complex is a highly eloquent feature. On either side are
pilasters with a square base, chamfered midregions with a p?rnakalasa on the top. These
pilasters support a miniature replica of a barrel-vaulted roof from which project, at right
angles to it, five arms. They naturally present the gable-ends towards the onlooker. The
one in the centre and two at the extreme ends are larger than the remaining two. This
roof might conveniently be called an overdoor. The lower portions of the pilasters, i.e.
the carving on them, are interesting from a sculptural as well as an architectural point of
view. However, it is unnecessary to go into any greater detail beyond pointing out that there
are figures of female attendants on them. On either side of the overdoor (which is often

C1) R.D. Banerji, The Temple of Siva at
Bhumara, (MASI, 16), Calcutta, 1924, pi. III.
(2) H. Cousens, The Ch?lukyan Architecture
of the Kanarese Districts, (New Imperial Series,
XLII), Calcutta, 1926, pi. LXVII.
(3) M.S. Vats, The Gupta Temple at Deo
garh, (MASI, 70), Delhi, 1952.
(4) H. Cousens, Mediaeval Temples of the
T)akhan, (New Imperial Series, XLVIII), Calcut?
ta, 1931, pp. 23-25.
(5) J. Fergus son, J. Burgess, The Cave Tem?
ples of India, London, 1880, p. 301.
(6) Cousens, Ch?lukyan Architecture cit.,
pp. 47-48.

128

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
but rather erroneously called lintel) are standing figures of Gang? and Yamun?. This entire
scheme is then girdled around with a heavy torus moulding on which a wreath of palmette
leaves is carved. Due to the peculiar location of the Gang? and Yamun? figures, the
whole scheme assumes the shape of the letter T. This torus moulding itself arises from
beautifully shaped pots carried by pot-bellied dwarfs. Above the frame is a row of beam
ends carved with kirtimukhas.

A highly evolved version of this type is seen at Balsane (fig. 6). In all there are
five frames. The lower third of all these is occupied by attendants, male and female. The
central figure is placed in a niche at the base of the pilaster and is a Saiva dv?rap?la.
On either side are female figures. Still below this belt is the threshold and its exten?
sions bearing sundry figures and designs. The frames proper are in the traditional form.
The innermost has a running scroll, then there is a depression; the second frame has a
rather unusual motif of a wreath arranged in half-circles within which are carved small
yaksa figures. The lintels of these two frames bear the same motifs as the jambs and the
central block is common to both. This has an image of Ganesa on it. The third frame,
the most projecting one, has pilasters with an overdoor on the top. The pilasters are
almost fully relieved from their matrix, they appear more like pillars than pilasters. They
are of the order common in this region, square lower part, chamfered midregion, p?rna
kdasu block in the centre, the upper tapering portion circular with the peculiar triangular
motifs superimposed. The capital is of the usual flaring outline. The entablature is much
more elaborate. The cyma-shaped overdoor has roof-shaped projections above which are
miniature replicas of the kuta and sola types of structures. In these are carved small
icons, purely decorative yaksa and yak ft figures, with vyalas and elephants finding a place
in the intervening spaces. The next two frames, those that recede from the pilasters, have a
diamond pattern and a vertically arranged row of vyalas. These figures are well carved,
though they sink into insignificance before the meticulously cut pilasters and overdoor.

In contemporary temples in almost all regions of northern India the same scheme
prevails. The only difference would be the degree of superimposed ornament. Frames from
Mount ?b? and other Jaina shrines (7) have a tendency to embellish the chief com?
ponents to such an extent that very often their true forms are obscured. It is this tend?
ency that has been referred to above as baroque. However, a closer examination enables
one to perceive that basically the same forms exist here also.

Next to be examined is the doorframe from the lower storey of Cave 6 at Ajant?
(fig. 1). The innermost frame has the usual scroll motif. At the base of this frame
is a small female figure. Next is a pilaster supported by a yaksa. It has a constricted
neck and a ktimbha type of capital. A flaring bracket surmounts it. Above this or rather
sitting on it is a makara from whose mouth emerges an arch. It is broadest at the apex.

(7) S. Kramrisch, The Art of India, 3rd ed., paratn?kara, Dhangadhra, 1939, pi. facing p. 108.
London, 1965, pis. 133-34; N.M. Somapura, Shil

129

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
A row of diamonds is the only decoration it bears. In the semi-circular space between
the innermost frame and this festoon-like arch are five figures, the central one being that
of a seated Buddha. A seven-headed cobra spreads its hood over the head of this figure.
The two frames outside the pilaster have a diaper pattern and vy?la row respectively. The
space above the arch, corresponding to the spandrel, has two motifs of ancient vintage,
the Gang? and Yamun? figures and the flying gandharvas.

Aihole has preserved a temple-complex as interesting as it is instructive. Temple no. 11

at this place has a doorframe that exhibits almost all the artistic and iconographic motifs
common in this region during the 10th and 11th centuries. The innermost frame is carved
with a scroll (fig. 7). Next are pilasters with constricted necks. Upon these stand ma
karas and from their mouths sprout forth scroll-cum-bud designs. These have shed their
semi-circular shape but still maintain a continuity of sorts. Practically contemporary or
slightly earlier is a tor ana from the same place. In front of the Galagan?th (8) temple
there is a free-standing torana that has a continuous scroll emerging from the gaping mouths
of makaras. This shows that the ancient motif still had its hold. That, however, is to
anticipate things. To return to Temple no. 11, outside the makara-beating pilasters is
a much taller pair of pilasters with typical kumbha and t?di members supporting an over?
door of the usual pattern. There is yet another frame outside this one, but it is devoid
of any ornament. In fact a large part of this jamb as well as the taller pilaster is covered
by the flowery tail of the makara. Standing on either side of the door, reaching nearly
two-thirds of its height are figures of Gang? and Yamun?. These figures are not inte?
grated into the scheme of the dv?ra-s?kh?. It may be pointed out here that the dv?rap?las
and attendants carved on Pallava (9) monuments are similarly free of any intrinsic relation
with the entrance or the doorframe. At the base and covering the space occupied by the
jambs and figures mentioned above is a flat space, on which are carved small figures of
attendants, an elephant and a p?rnaghata. Doorframes of the Chalukya (Kaly?ni) monu?
ments (10) follow the typical pattern described in Temple no. 11. Especially the presence
of the makara can be taken to be quite a distinctive feature of this region. It has to be
made clear at once that the use of makaras and festoons or scrolls is also seen in other
regions; to wit, in the Laksmana Temple at Khajur?ho (lx) there is a beautiful makar\a
torana in the portico. However, the use of this motif for doorframes does not seem to
be common to regions other than southern, especially the Kanarese regions.
Texts on architecture finalized in the 9th-10th centuries give detailed prescriptions
regarding the dv?ra-s?kh?s. Apart from laying down what type of s?kh? should be used
for which structure, they give complete descriptions of and a comprehensive terminology

(8) Cousens, Ch?lukyan Architecture cit.}
pi. XXIV.
(9) O.C. Gangoly, Art of the Pallavas, (Indian
Sculpture Series, II), Calcutta, 1957, pi. 12. It
also shows a doorframe of the makara-torana type.
(10) Cousens, Ch?lukyan Architecture cit.,
pi. LXVII; Id., Mediaeval Temples cit., pi.
XLVI.
{") E. Zannas, Khajuraho, The Hague, 1960,
p. 39.

130

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 1 Iii! m

Fig. 1 - Doorframe, lower storey, Cave | J\ t^-i^J _ | |)|) J

6, Ajant? (drawing by R. B. Sapre). jV^ ^ 1 " "~" " EA- ^

-i-^iiv ^_

mm^ #
Bi.

H II
e& I:
M LI
(V I Fig. 2 - Entrance, Ga
_jl .11_ N?sik (drawing by R. B. Sapre).

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
for the s?kh?s and their various components (12). Again, specific terms are mentioned
for s?kh?s with three, five or seven frames. A perusal of these prescriptions and nom?
enclature make it plain that they merely describe what was already in use and as such
have very little relevance to the problem of the various sources from which the typical
dv?ra-s?kh? originated. Not only that: the descriptions also make it clear that the orig?
ins had long ago been forgotten. There is a mention of the stambha-s?kh? (pillar-jamb)
but not of the overdoor supported by it. The pilasters and the overdoor are inseparable,
historically and structurally; but this fact has been lost sight of. As such the discussion
will have to be focused on the monuments themselves alone.
Both the above groups can now be analysed and their salient features noted. The
most necessary and elementary feature is a frame to hold the leaves of the door. It projects
slightly from the wall in which it is embedded. This frame is covered as a rule with
scroll patterns. The next frame is an enlargement of the first one and has designs that
enhance the effect of it. The pilasters and the overdoor or entablature supported by them
is the most instructive single feature in the fresent context. The makara and the festoon
motif is another distinctive feature. The two frames outside the pilasters usually have a
scroll and a series of prancing lions or vy?las, usually with riders astride. Mithuna fig?
ures, Gang? and Yamun? images and vrksis are common to all and are continuations of
earlier decorative practices.
It is proposed to show here that these elements, the most distinctive that form the
dv?ra-s?kh? of an Indian temple, have their origin in the following three things: a) a
very simple but common mode of decorating an entrance or for that matter any building on
a temporary basis; b) the tor anas or gateways commonly used in the Maurya-Sunga pe?
riods; c) the mukha-mandapas or porches that stood before practically every structure in
early times. Whatever changes occurred in these porches are more or less faithfully re?
flected in the s?kh?s.

The doorframe was, in the beginning^ essentially a highly functional feature. As de?
picted in some of the Bh?rhut (13) sculptures, it was a frame and just that. The scrolls
decorating them are reminiscences of floral garlands or wreaths hung over the doorframe
on auspicious occasions, a practice still current. Such garlands are seen on the structures,
especially shrines represented in the sculptures on the railings of Bh?rhut (14). The geo?
metrical patterns may also have the same origin. This has to be termed, as is done above,
"temporary decoration" which in due course got converted into permanent ornament. But
then this was transformed in a different medium such as wood or stone and lost much
of its spontaneity.
The toranas best known since the Sunga times were those at Bh?rhut (15) and S?nci (16).

(12) Somapura, Op. cit., pp. 97-112. (14) Ibid., pis. L, LI.
(13) B.M. Barua, Bar hut: Aspects of Life and (15) Ibid., pi. XVI.
Culture, {Indian Research Institute Publications, (16) j. Marshall, A. Foucher, The Monu?
Fine Art Series, III), Calcutta, 1937. ments of S?nchi, Calcutta, 1944, I, pL XXL

132

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
These consisted of two upright posts across which were affixed two or three horizontal
beams at suitable intervals in the upper portion. Brackets or braces in animal or human
(vrksl) forms were universally employed and from S?ncI onwards the vertical posts came
to be carved with a number of small panels. The celebrated Gautamiputra Cave at N?
sik (1T), dated to the 1st century or first quarter of the 2nd century A.D., has around its
main entrance a faithful replica of this torana carved in low relief (fig. 2). Its iconogra
phic and sculptural details are important but of little consequence at the present stage.
But the jambs with so many panels of human figures on them, the vy?la braces and
perhaps the so-called "extended lintel" of a later date are direct borrowings from the torana.
Specimens of another type of free-standing torana, the makara-torana, have not survived.
However there is enough material to explain its composition: a garland or a festoon eman?
ating from the mouths of makaras squatting on top of pillars on either side. The
caves in the Khandagiri-Udaigiri hills of Orissa (ls) have preserved such makara-toranas
around some of their entrances. The lintels of the Bh?rhut tor anas have makaras at either
end, their tails describing the typical volutes (19). The motif survived as an independent
item and recurs again and again not only in sculpture but also in an architectural context.
But its appearance as an integral part of the doorframe is more common in the 9th-10th
century Chalukyan temples. In most cases the adoption of this torana motif has led to
the inevitable superimposition of two different types of frames upon each other. Instead of
one there are two sets of pilasters, one to support the makara and the other to support
the overdoor. In fact, it is a combination of two or three modes. First comes the one
described in (#) above, the next the makara-torana, a combination of these two being
noted in the Ajant? Cave 6 frame illustrated earlier. The doorframe of the Saiva Cave Temple
at Jogesvarl (20) (Maharashtra) dated to the first quarter of the 5th or to the 6th century,
also has this form. It is perhaps nearer the original makara-torana. The third component,
the most significant and universal, is the "compressed porch" motif as seen on the Aihole
monument. The various stages of transformation of this porch motif will be noted a
little later on. Here, before departing from the toranas, it would be necessary to point
out that the vertical row of prancing vy?las, with or without riders, which is found on
almost all mediaeval doorframes is a direct borrowing from the S?ncI toranas. The jambs
of the Western Gate (21) exhibit this motif in all its detail. Still closer to the doorframe
rows are the vy?las seen on either side of the yastts in the st?pa slabs from Amar?
vati (22).
To return to the porch motif, it has to be made clear at once that the pilasters
on either side and the overdoor above them are nothing else but a horizontally com

(17) For a good photograph, see J.L. Trabold, (19) Barua, op. cit.} pi. XIX.
? A Chronology of Indian Sculpture: The S?ta (20) For a good photograph, see M?rg, XX 2,
v?hana Chronology at N?sik ?, AAs, XXXII, 1970, March 1967, p. 52.
pp. 49 ff., pi. 9. (21) Bachhofer, op. cit., pi. 57.
(18) L. Bachhofer, Early Indian Sculpture, (22) lbid.t pi. 110.
New York, 1929, pi. 137.

133

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Fig. 3 - Conjectural restoration, Lo?
masa Rsi Cave, Bihar (drawing by
R. B. Sapre).

pressed porch. If a porch, complete in all its aspects, was not erected, its replica sub?
stituted it more as a concession to tradition than out of any real need, at least in the earlier
stages. It appears that since the earliest times this false porch was a popular device. So com?
mon had it become as a motif in the Hinay?na period itself that its original form had been
forgotten even then. In the absence of any structural examples one has to resort to the
rock-cut monuments for this early phase. The caves at Khandagiri-Udaigiri (23) (Orissa),
Nadsur (24) and Pitalkhor? (25) (Maharashtra) have pilasters with a caitya-torana framing a
rectangular door. This caitya-torana and the pilasters are not frames in the strict sense of
the term, they are representations of a porch. The form of this porch can be understood
with the help of the Lomasa Rsi Gumph? in the Bar?bar Hills of Bihar (fig. 3). The so
called fagade of this cave is not the fagade proper. This is realized when the plan of
the cave is examined. It has two parts, a circular shrine (?) and in front of it a rec?
tangular hall (26). The latter has a barrel-vaulted roof. The entrance is in one of the
longer sides of this hall. Thus the arch-shaped gable-end seen on the "facade" is not the
gable-end of the cave itself, it is that of the roof of the portico. The Lomasa Rsi facade as
seen today is the front side of a porch that used to be erected in front of structural monu?
ments. It projected, somewhat in the fashion of dormer windows, at right angles to the
longer side. The representations of the various structures in the Bh?rhut (27) sculptures
or the plan of the caitya at Bairat (28) (Rajasthan) lend credence to this view. The method
followed in the construction of the porch was the same as that of the main structure
and hence it is that the sloping pillars and the vaulted roof occur.

(23) Ibid., pis. 156-58. (26) A. Cunningham, Archaeological Survey of

India Reports, I, Simla, 1871, p. 47.
(24) H. Zimmer, The Art of Indian Asia,
(27) Barua, op. cit., pi. XXII, 17d.
(Bollingen Series, XXXIX), New York, 1955, II, (28) Archaeological Remains, Monuments and
pi. 44a. Museums, (Archaeological Survey of India), New
(25) IA, 1957-58, pi. LXXVI. Delhi, 1964, I, p. 91.

134

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Fig. 4 - Porch, front view, Cave 19,
Ajant? (drawing by R. B. Sapre).

In due course of time, a porch of yet another sort, with a flat roof but curved or
cyma sides^ came into vogue. The best preserved specimen belongs to Cave 19 at Ajant?
(figs. 4, 8). Two pillars and two pilasters support a roof made up of two horizontal
"tiers". The pillars are multi-faceted, bear cushion capitals and flaring brackets. The roof
? or the two tiers ? have a cyma outline and small caitya-windcyw motifs are carved on
their faces. In between the tiers is a flat band with figure sculpture on it. It is this
porch that became the prototype of the earliest Mah?y?na doorframes. The chronological
difference between the two, the functional and the ornamental, must not have been too
great, although the former must have come into existence before the latter. In due course,
the antarala and the mandapa obscured the true nature of the porch or made it redundant
and it was reduced to the pilaster-overdoor motif.
To sum up, floral garlands, wreaths of leaves, and such other rudimentary modes of
decoration practised by the ancients and transformed into sculpture, traditional motifs
such as the makaras, vy?las, vrksis and the structural motifs derived from the tor anas and
porches together resulted in the mature dv?ra-s?kh?. Elaboration and addition of detail
bring about variety which is superficial and hardly ever touches the core of the scheme once
finalized somewhere around the 3rd century A.D.

135

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 A fA

lot
(. y i0 A

60 :3

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
yy tr ?& ravj > - ^^^^^^^^^FX^^^^F^'rif^*?T*7 - Doorframe, Temple
?????^?^p?^ 11, Aihole (Courtesy, Ar
' X K * " chaeological Survey of In

Fig. 8 - Facade, Cave 19, Ajant?.

This content downloaded from

14.139.98.164 on Wed, 08 Nov 2023 01:55:00 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms