ಈ ವಿಮರ್ಶೆಯಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯವು ಪೂರ್ಣವಾಗಿ ಲೇಖಕರದು.ಇತಿಹಾಸಕಾರರು ಗಮನಿಸಿ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಾಡಲು ಪ್ರಕಟಿಸಿದೆ.
A Passé on Somanathapura
Review of S. Settar’s Somanathapura (2nd edition),
Ruvari, Bangalore, 2012, pages xvi+172, price Rs. 250.
– Manu V. Devadevan
Somanathapura, an idyllic village on the banks of Kaveri in the Mysore district
of Karnataka, needs no introduction to students of art history in India. The
famous Kesava temple found here is one of the exquisite treasures of temple
architecture in the country and – save the Sun temple of Konark in Odisha – the
finest thirteenth century structure from the subcontinent in terms of grandeur and
workmanship. Of course, the Kesava cannot boast of a rich and checkered history
comparable to the great temples of Udupi, Melukote or Sringeri in Karnataka, or
to many living temples of considerable antiquity in other parts of peninsular India,
like the Padmanabha at Tiruvanantapuram in Kerala, the Jagannatha and the
Lingaraja in Odisha, Tirupati, Kalahasti and Simhachalam in Andhra Pradesh, and
Srirangam, Chidambaram, Palani and Suchindram in Tamilnadu. This in no way
undermines its importance, though. Somanathapura can any day be the subject of
a rich and rewarding study. The book under review is one such attempt by the
renowned art historian, S Settar. Sadly though, by no counts is this attempt a
successful one.
Although the book claims to be “an illustrated monograph”, it lacks some of
the basic prerequisites of a historical monograph. There are no references in it by
way of footnotes, endnotes or in-text citations, so it is not easy to verify how
authentic the facts are. There is no bibliography, and the two-page bibliographical
note (pp. 163-64) is far from satisfactory. Most chapters are too short and the
discussion abysmally terse to be scholarly. For instance, the third chapter on the
rise and fall of Somanathapura is all but 281 words long (pp. 41-42), the fifth
chapter on the founder of the temple, 325 words (pp. 46-47), the eleventh chapter
on a mythical sculptor, 270 (pp. 60-61), the fourteenth chapter on the time taken
to build the temple, 324 (pp. 78-79) and so on. The preface is longer than most
chapters (pp. 1-6). Articles in newspaper supplements tend to be more respectable
in terms of their length than many a chapter in this monograph. The book also
lacks uniformity of presentation, which a scholarly work warrants. At one place,
dates are mentioned as “1269-1279”, but elsewhere on the same page, we have it
in the more popular format, “1269-76” (p. 55). At one place, we have “Saivasthana”
followed in the next paragraph by “Saiva sthanas” without the hyphen and
with the suffix in italics (ibid). There is “Saiva” at one place with and “Saiva” in
the next sentence without diacritical marks (p. 52). The diacritical marks are not
2
uniform and oftentimes, incomplete. So, the book does not qualify to be called a
monograph, when looked at from the standpoint of form.
Moving on to the content, the work is equally pathetic. There is no argument,
no central thesis, only a pastiche of facts. The cumulative significance of these
facts in the making and unmaking of Somanathapura is nowhere taken up for
discussion. Some of these facts and suggestions are indeed interesting. The
possibility of the mythical sculptor Jakka or Jakkana being an archetype of Jakka
(Prakrit) or Yaksha (Sanskrit), the presiding deity of plastic arts, is one such
suggestion (pp. 60-61). The discussion on the likelihood of the master-sculptor
Mallitamma “offering models or literally laying down the rules of carving” points
to the author’s careful observations, comparisons and analyses (p. 77). The career
of Mallitamma engages the thoughtful reader in more ways than one (pp. 73-77).
These sidelights do not, however, substitute for the poor historical light, which the
author throws on Somanathapura. The sculptors found at Somanathapura point to
a marked departure in form and taste when compared to the sculptors of the
Badami Chalukya, Rashtrakuta or Kalyana Chalukya times. What were these
changes and what do they tell us about the mentality, which brought them forth?
Settar provides no answer (for he does not raise such crucial questions). How do
we contextualize the political and economic significance of Somanathapura at a
time when the Cholas and Pandyas were on the decline in the deep south and
ruling houses established by warlords from the frontiers – like the Hoysalas, the
Seunas and the Kakatiyas – held sway over much of Deccan? The study fails to
address this question too. Settar points to the difficulties in using expressions like
Hoysala temple, Hoysala style and so on (pp. 10-11), but he comes up with no
alternative scheme of classification. He remains faithful to dynastic labels
throughout the study.
Finally, readers of this “illustrated monograph” are advised not to consult the
illustrations to which the author invites our attention in the text so often. There is
no assurance that they will succeed in finding them. Take for example, the
reference to plates 10 and 11 as Mondusale temple (p. 26). Turn to plates 10 and
11, and what you find is a relief sculpture from the Kesava temple. Look for “the
porch or the railing…divided into three sections” (p. 91) on plate 38, and what
you will see there is a Yaksha with a huge belly. There is a carved ceiling on plate
43 and a navaranga on plate 44, but the text tells you that these are elephants (p.
105). On plate 45 is the Kesava temple and on plate 46, four Yakshas. The text
tries to persuade you that what you see in these plates are “525 horses” (p. 105).
And then, try to locate “the four-armed images” on plate 58, 59 and 61 (p. 112) or
the portraits of Vishnu on plates 57 and 65 (p. 110), and you will wake up to the
fact that there are only forty-seven plates in the book. Small wonder if readers feel
that the author has taken them for a ride.
