Bhima and Purusamirukam in the Nayaka-period Sculpture of Tamiinadu CRISPIN BRANFOOT

As part of a wider study of architectural sculpture in Nayaka-period Tamiinadu, a group of sculptures at a number of temples in southern Tamiinadu have proved difficult to identify. They depict a lion-legged figure armed with a club, fighting another bearded, club-wielding man. Though locally identified today as depicting the fight between Bhima and Purusamirukam in the Malmblmrata, I had been unable to confirm my initial suspicion that this was a scene from a folk source, a Tamil regional telling of the pan-Indian Malmblmrata. Anna Dallapiccola and Anila Verghese's identification of similar sculptures of Bhima and Purusamrga (Tamil Purusamirukam) at the capital of the Vijayanagara empire at Hampi lends support to this conviction (this volume pp. 73-76).

The Nayaka period from the mid-16th to the early 18th century in the Tamil country was a very active period of temple construction, far more so than in any period since the decline of the Chola empire in the South at the end of the 13th century. The 14th century marked an important break between the period of Pallava, Pandyan and Chola rule, and the subsequent Vijayanagara rule over much of south India, in part because of the disruption caused by a series of invasions, and then direct rule, by Muslims from the north under the Madura Sultanate. The break up of the Vijayanagara empire from the mid-16th century onwards resulted in the fragmentation of power among several smaller kingdoms ruled by the Nayakas, after whom the period c.1550 to c.1730 is named. Far from being an era of stagnant late mediaeval culture at the tail end of the Vijayanagara empire, whose cultural vitality is now acknowledged, the Nayaka period is a dynamic cultural period in its own right. This is despite the apparent political and military weaknesses of the Nayaka rulers themselves. The appearance of new figures and genres of sculpture in the Nayaka period, such as representations of Bhima and Purusamirukam, are evidence of wider patterns of cultural change.

The four scenes depicting Bhima and Purusamrga at Vijayanagara are small reliefs on the flat surfaces of a column, vimana wall and mandapa plinth of temples, dated by Dallapiccola and Verghese to the 15th century. In Tamiinadu these two figures are depicted as major architectural sculptures, 1.5-2 metre high figures

attached to composite columns or piers in the open maiuiapas and corridors that are a distinctive feature of Nayaka-period temples in Tamiinadu. In southern Tamiinadu, these two figures are shown either on composite columns that face each other, or in several examples spreading around a single composite column. The iconography is consistent with both figures waving a club above their head, the difference being that Purusamirukam has the lower torso of a lion, very like the ubiquitous yah. Purusamirukam is bearded, whilst Bhima usually has only a moustache. The pair is found in six temples in southern Tamiinadu, the area with the

I. Minaksi-Sundaresvara temple. Madurai: 1000-column mandapa.

77

CRISPIN BRANFOOT

2. Minaksi-Sundaresvara temple, Madurai: Kilikkuttu mandapa.

3. Minaksi-Sundareivara temple, Madurai: inner north gopura.

greatest number, scale and variety of subject matter of architectural sculpture in the Nayaka-period. At three of these temples Bhima and Purusamirukam appear twice, at the other three only once. Therefore, nine examples of this mythic pair in major architectural sculpture in situ are presented here.

Two large architectural sculptures of Bhima and Purusamirukam are found in the substantially Nayaka-period Minaksf-Sundaresvara temple in Madurai. The 1000-column mandapa dated c.1572-95, in the northeast corner of the 3rd prakara, has two rows of figural composite column sculpture across the southern front, with further figural, yaU and plain composite columns lining the main central aisle, which leads northwards up a series of ascending levels to a low platform at the rear of the mandapa.' At the middle of the west side of this central aisle is a composite column with Purusamirukam waving a club above his head, while on the north side of the column is a smaller male figure waving a similar weapon (Fig. 1). The composite column opposite is similarly of another man holding a club above his head. Another pair of these figures is placed in the Kilikkuttu Mandapa, the open mandapa on the west side of the 'Golden Lily' tank (Porramaraikkulam) in front of the entrance to the two prakdras of the Minaksi shrine, that is dated c.1580-1610 (Fig. 2). They are placed directly opposite the entrance and face towards each other across the main axis leading directly from the Astasakti Mandapa in the outermost prakara wall, through the Citra Gopura, along the north side of the tank and in to the main shrine. Bhima is joined in this mandapa by large figures of the other four Pandavas - Arjuna, Nakula, Sahadeva and Yudhisthira -interspersed with ydlis, that frame the open rectangular space before the 2nd prdkdra's entrance. On a smaller scale is the high-relief scene of the pair alongside the gateway of the inner north gopura of the Sundaresvara temple's 2nd prakara, dated to the late 16th century (Fig. 3). High-relief figures up to 1.5 metres high on the wall surfaces of vimdnas and gopuras, rather than detachable images in niches, are a common feature in the Nayaka period: some of the finest examples are the women on the exterior of the Gopalakrsna temple built in the Ranganatha temple complex at Srirangam in c.1674.

Further south within the Nellaiyappar temple complex at Tirunelveli are two further examples, both dated to the mid-17th century.2 One pair is located in the Subramanya shrine on the west side of the Nellaiyappar's outermost 3rd prdkdra, on separate composite columns, and the other around a single composite column in the Cankili Mandapa, the north-south mandapa that links the Nellaiyappar temple with the adjoining goddess temple to the south, dedicated to Kantimati Ambal. At the nearby Venkatacalapati temple at Krishnapuram, firmly dated between 1563 and 1578,

78 South Asian Studies 18

BHIMA AND PURUSAMIRUKAM IN THE NAYAKA-PERIOD SCULPTURE OF TAMILNADU

4. Venkatacalapati temple, Krishnapuram.

there is a fine depiction of this myth."' It spreads around a single composite column on the south side of the corridor leading from the entrance to the inner of two prakdras towards the main shrine, alongside other composite column sculptures of Rati, Virabhadra and yalis (Fig. 4). An additional figure, similar to that of Bhlma, features on the inner, left side of the column, identified by Natarajan and Kasinathan as Dharma.4

In another cluster of three temples to the south of Tirunelveli, on the way south to Kanyakumari, at the southernmost tip of India, are a further four examples of composite column sculptures of Purusarnirukam and Bhlma. Two examples of the pair spread around a single composite column in each of the open mandapas before the entrance to both the Siva and adjacent Amman shrine in the 17th-century Satyavagisvara temple at Kalakkad. They appear on separate composite columns at the entrance to the south-facing festival mandapa in the third prakara of the largely 17th-century Vanamamalai Perumaj temple at Nanguneri. Finally, they are placed in the same location in the Nayaka-period, south-facing festival mandapa in the second prakara of the Nampirayar temple at Tirukkurunkudi, alongside many other figural

5. Nampiraya temple.Tirukkurunkudi.

composite column sculptures including Garuda, Hanuman, Narasimha, royal portraits and a kuratti (Fig. 5).

A further example is to be found in the only museum collection of Nayaka-period composite column sculpture, the Philadelphia Museum of Art's re­assembled mandapa from Madurai. These columns were purchased in Madurai in 1912 and entered the museum in 1919. Though found in the Madana Gopalaswami temple, they were probably originally from the Kutal Alakar temple, dated c.1550, and placed directly in front of the Kutal Alakar's goddess shrine dedicated to Maturavalli tdydr? In his 1940 publication of this mandapa, Norman Brown confused Purusarnirukam with the similarly lion-legged Vyaghrapada, who with Patanjali witnessed the dance of Nataraja at Chidambaram. Though the right arm is broken and the club unclear, the Philadelphia sculpture is clearly not of Vyaghrapada, but of the very similar sculptures of Purusarnirukam seen in the contemporary mandapas mentioned above. Within the reconstructed mandapa is also an image of Bhlma waving a club, though again the right arm is damaged. That the lion-legged figure and

79

CRISPIN BRANFOOT

the man waving a club are connected is clear from the above examples, where the figures are placed around a single composite column, or are placed opposite. This suggests that the Philadelphia mandapa has been incorrectly reconstructed, for it is more likely that the composite columns with Purusamirukam and BhTma would have been placed opposite, rather than on the same side of the mandapa's aisle. Similar pairings of figural sculptures in Nayaka-period corridors or mandapas include Nataraja and Kali and the aforementioned Vyaghrapada and Patanjali. Two moments in the mythic narrative may also be shown in pairs of figural composite column sculptures, such as Narasimha grabbing Hiranyakasipu on one side, and tearing his intestines out in the opposite composite column. A good example of this is seen in the early 17th-century kalydna mandapa at Alagarkoyil. In mandapas such as the 1000-column mandapa at Madurai, the presence of a club-wielding man alongside the figure of Purusamirukam, and on the composite column opposite, may then represent the same figure twice, rather than two separate figures.

Priests and local informants in Tamilnadu today were adamant that Purusamirukam and Bhima are present in the Mahabharata. The absence of these figures from the Sanskrit Mahabharata suggested a local Tamil telling of this pan-Indian epic. A striking feature of composite column sculptures in southern Tamilnadu is the great numbers of figures locally identified as from the Mahabharata. The Mahabharata is not new to 16th-century Tamilnadu. References to the epic are made in early Tamil texts of the 4th to 6th centuries, the Cankam literature and the Cilappatikaram. In the mid-9th century a Tamil version was composed by Peruntevanar, only a portion of which survives. An inscription of 1210 from Tiruvalankatu refers to an officer of Kulottunka III translating "the Pdratam into sweet Tamil" producing a Saiva version. The finest of all Tamil versions, the Villiparatam, was composed by a Vaisnava brahmin, Villiputturar (or Villiputtur Alvar) in c.1400.6 In a similar manner to the Tamil tellings of the Ramayana, these texts express a distinct regional, Tamil understanding of the Mahabharata that incorporate folk themes. While the Mahabharata itself may not be new to Nayaka-period Tamilnadu, depicting the main figures from the epic in major sculpture certainly is. It is difficult to identify some of the figures, such as those currently identified as Arjuna or Kama, for they are all shown as warriors, usually with a sword or bow, with or without a beard or moustache. Bhima, however, is clearly identified by the distinctive use of a club, for which he is well known in the Mahabharata.

Anna Dallapiccola and Anila Verghese's article in this volume confirms that the myth of Bhima and Purusamirukam comes from a regional, south Indian

telling of the epic Mahabharata. The four narrative reliefs they have identified at Vijayanagara illustrate an episode in the Kannada version of the Mahabharata, Kumaravyasa's 15th-century Kannada Bhdrata. In the Kannada myth, Bhima has invited Purusamirukam to the royal consecration ceremony of Yudhisthira. Purusamirukam agrees to attend but chases Bhima all the way, threatening to kill him. Bhima narrowly manages to elude his pursuer only by dropping three hairs, that miraculously produce a thousand lihgas each. Purus amirukam, as a great Saiva devotee, pauses to worship each lihga. Bhima is caught, however, as he reaches the threshold of the sacrificial hall, but is declared safe by Krsna because his head was inside the hall. In the Vijayanagara scenes, Bhima is running away with his distinctive club, pursued by Purusamirukam holding an arati and a bell before a lihga.

Whilst there are similarities between this Kannada version and the Tamil sculptures outlined above, the latter are clearly different, depicting not so much a chase but a fight, with both participants waving clubs above their heads. In modern Tamilnadu these figures are known to be of Bhima and Purusamirukam, but the related explanatory myth is less well known. Tamil priests in Madurai suggested two meanings: first, that Purusamirukam was sent by Visnu to disrupt a sacrifice in the Ramayana (no mention was made of Bhima); second, that Purusamirukam inhabited a forest within which he terrorised the inhabitants, killing and eating them. He was only able to do this within the confines of the forest. Meeting Bhima in the forest, Purusamirukam chased the club-wielding hero to the edge of the forest where Bhima thought he would be safe. Purusamirukam caught up with him when Bhima had one foot outside forest and declared himself safe, but Purusamirukam rejected this, the dispute being resolved by Dharma. There is a similar pattern of motifs: the circumscribed power of a deity challenged on the threshold of a forest or building, like the demon Hiranyasipu defeated by Narasimha, and the chase of Bhima by Purusamirukam. A clearer understanding of these Tamil sculptures may be gained through a closer study of the whole composite column, as the small relief figures on the sides occasionally relate to the main figure attached to the front. This is not, however, the case in the KiUkkuttu Mandapa example (Fig. 2).

In their scale and prominent location within these southern Tamil temples, largely built in the Nayaka period, this group of sculptures indicate the artistic vitality of the period. They are also one element in the exchange of architectural forms and sculptural subject matter between the imperial centre of the Vijayanagara empire in the Deccan and the peripheral territories of Tamilnadu. In Nayaka-period Tamilnadu, some elements of temple architecture and sculpture derive directly from

80 South Asian Studies 18

BHIMA AND PURUSAMIRUKAM ΓΝ THE NAYAKA-PERIOD SCULPTURE OF TAMILNADU

the Deccan. Others , such as the composi te co lumn, have a Tamil or igin bu t were t ransformed th rough their adop t ion and deve lopmen t a t the Deccan capital at Vijayanagara before r e tu rn ing to Tamilnadu. Fur ther forms or subjects, such as the fight be tween Bhima and Pu rusami rukam, are par t of a b roader South Indian mythic tradit ion given a distinct regional emphas is .

NOTES

1. Taylor (1835 volume II, p. 116); Devakunjari (1979, p. 243), presents further evidence for the construction of this mandapa in the reign of Krishna Virappa Nayaka.

2. For the dates of these structures, see Umamahesvari (1990, p. 91).

3. Epigraphia Indica IX (1907-8, pp. 328-341) for five copper plates in Sanskrit dated 1567/8 describing the construction of the temple by Krishnappa Nayaka of Madurai (1564-72) and the grant of villages and land to the temple by the Vijayanagara king Sadashivaraya. Two inscriptions (Madras Reports on Epigraphy 16-17 of 1912) on either side of the entrance to the main shrine of the temple are dated 1563/4 and 1577/8. There is no reason to suggest that this temple was not built entirely between c.1563 and 1578. George Michell's suggestion that the sculptures in this temple, and similar ones at Tirukkurunkudi and Tenkasi, date to the earlv 18th century places them one hundred and fifty vears too late. Cf. Michell (1995, pp. 186-9) and Michell (2000, p. 184).

4. Natarajan and Kasinathan (1992), pp. 35-39. 5. Brown (1940) and Branfoot (2000). 6. On the Mahabharata in Tamil, see Hiltebeitel (1988, pp. 13-

150; Shulman (1985, pp. 13-14); Thompson (1960); Zvelibil (1995, pp. 395-6).

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

Branfoot, Crispin, 2000, "Approaching the Temple in Nayaka-period Madurai: The Kutal Alakar temple" in Artibus Asiae LXno.2, pp. 197-221.

Brown, W. Norman, 1940, A Pillared Hall from a Temple at Madura, India in the Philadelphia Museum of Art Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Devakunjari, D., 1979, Madurai through the ages: Yrom the. earliest times to 1801 AD, Society for Archaeological, Historical and Epigraphical Research, Madras.

Hiltebeitel, Alf, 1988, Tlie Cult ofDraupadi 1 - Mythologies: From Gingee to Kuruksetra, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.

Michell, George, 1995, Art and Architecture in Southern India: Vijayanagara and the successor states, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Michell, George, 2000, Hindu Art and Architecture, London: Thames & Hudson.

Natarajan, Avvai and Natana Kasinathan, 1992, Art Panorama of Tamils, State Department of Archaeology, Madras.

Shulman, David, 1985, The King and the Clown in South Indian Myth and Poetry, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Taylor, William, 1835, Oriental Historical Manuscripts in tlie Tamil Language, 2 volumes, Madras.

Thompson, M.S.H., 1960, "The Mahahharata in Tamil" in journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, pp. 115-123.

Umamahesvari, P.P., 1990, Nellaiyappar Koyil, Saiva Siddhanta Publications Ltd, Madras.

Zvelibil, Kamil, 1995, Lexicon of Tamil Literature, EJ. Brill, Leiden.