Mentors Comments:
Discuss the salient features of the temple architecture in the Himalayas.
Giving examples, highlight the influences of different styles on this architecture.
Answer:
A unique form of temple architecture developed in the Himalayan hills of Kumaon, Garhwal, Himachal and Kashmir. Some of the famous temples of this architecture type are those in Panderthan in Kashmir, Champwat and Jageshwar in Kumaon, Kedarnath in Garhwal and sculptures in Chamba temples.
Salient features of Himalayan temples are:
The temples, especially in Kashmir, are made of wood.
They have pitched roofs. Roof is peaked and slants slowly outwards to bear snowfall.
They often take the shape of a pagoda.
Metal images are of yellow colour, made of an alloy of zinc and copper.
Temples are dedicated to both Buddhism and Hinduism.
They are moderately carved.
Himalayan temple architecture is a confluence of multiple styles, such as:
Kashmir’s proximity to prominent Gandhara sites such as Taxila and Peshawar, lent it strong Gandhara influence.
This style began to mix with Sarnath, Mathura, Gujarat and Bengal styles of Gupta and Post-Gupta traditions because Hindu and Buddhist monks travelled between the hills and the rest of India.
In several temples Garbhagriha and Shikhara are made in Rekha-prasad style.
Temple at Pnadrethan is built between a water tank, a style followed in Gujarat.
Sculptures at Chamba show an amalgamation of local traditions with post Gupta tradition.
Many temples in Kumaon are classic examples of Nagara architecture.
Thus, the temple architecture in hills has influence of different styles, yet holding few features, which make it unique.
Comments
8 responses to “What are the salient features of temple architecture in the Himalayas? Explain with adequate examples in light of various elements that influenced this architectural style.(250 words)”
Q1
Not checked
Hi Sourav
The answer is very good.
But presentation needs improvement.
Do not discuss the whole main body through flowchart.
Flowcharts should have economy of their own. If the points are lengthy or numerous, then flowchart makes sense. But when the depth of the issue is not that deep, then you should stick to the conventional form of bullet points.
Points in the main body (in flowcharts) are very good and detailed.
Overall nice answer.
But minus marks for weak presentation.
Payment ID MOJO9611300N14575632
Hi Pranab
Good answer.
You have covered all the points.
Answer is informative and discussion decent.
Q1
Q1 please review
Hi Avani
The balance of the answer is weak.
While the depth in the 1st part is good, but discussion in the 2nd part needs more content and explanation.
Direction is OK.