75. Cave No. 2, at Ajunta.
(From a Plan by the Author.) Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.
The next step after the introduction of four pillars to support the roof, as in cave No. 11 at Ajunta ([Woodcut No. 74]), was to introduce twelve pillars to support the roof, there being no intermediate number which would divide by four, and admit of an opening in the centre of every side. This arrangement is shown in the woodcut (No. [75]), representing the plan of the cave No. 2 at Ajunta. Before this stage of cave architecture had been reached, the worship had degenerated considerably from its original purity; and these caves always possess a sanctuary containing an image of Buddha. There are frequently, besides this, as in the instance under consideration, two side chapels, like those in Catholic churches, containing images of subordinate saints, sometimes male, sometimes female.
76. Cave at Bagh.
(From a Plan, by Captain Dangerfield, in the ‘Transactions of the Bombay Literary Society.’) Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.
The next and most extensive arrangement of these square monastery-caves is that in which twenty pillars are placed in the floor, so as to support the roof, six on each side, counting the corner pillars twice. There are several of these large caves at Ajunta and elsewhere; and one at Bagh, on the Tapty, represented in the last woodcut (No. [76]), has, besides the ordinary complement, four additional pillars in the centre; these were introduced evidently in consequence of the rock not being sufficiently homogeneous and perfect to support itself without this additional precaution.
These—which might be classed, according to the terms used in Greek architecture, as astyle, when having no pillars; distyle, when with two pillars in each face; tetrastyle, with four; and hexastyle with six—form the leading and most characteristic division of these excavations, and with slight modification are to be found in all the modern series.
The forms, however, of many are so various and so abnormal, that it would require a far more extended classification to enable us to describe and include them all. In many instances the great depth of the cave which this square arrangement required was felt to be inconvenient; and a more oblong form was adopted, as in the Durbar cave at Salsette ([Woodcut No. 77]), where, besides, the sanctuary is projected forward, and assists, with the pillars, to support the roof. In some examples this is carried even further, and the sanctuary, standing boldly forward to the centre of the hall, forms in reality the only support. This, however, is a late arrangement, and must be considered more as an economical than an architectural improvement. Indeed by it the dignity and beauty of the whole composition are almost entirely destroyed.