ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE

Why Tamil Nadu’s temples are falling into decay, despite no shortage of donations

A Unesco report confirms what temple architects have feared for years.

For more than 20 years, temples have been the mainstay of architect SB Kalyanasundaram’s business. Carrying on his family’s traditional profession, his firm has built over 50 temples in Tamil Nadu, and restored several more that had fallen into decay.

“Temple architecture is a field of knowledge on its own,” said Kalyanasundaram. “There are various texts, or sastras, that teach the principles of temple architecture, right from whether the site is suited for temple construction, which direction the idol should face, to how tall the temple gopuram should be. Only after studying this can a temple be constructed accurately.”

Modern-day courses at government colleges in Mammallapuram and Kanchipuram try to do the same job as ancient sastras – instructing students in traditional architecture, sculpting and painting. But rarely does that classroom know-how translate into practice. When temple donors, or even the government, wish to restore ancient structures, they often do not look to the sastras or to the graduates – instead, they employ regular building contractors and construction workers.

“This results in poor workmanship in many of our historic temples,” Kalyanasundaram said.

This isn’t a complaint of Kalyanasundaram alone or of temple architects like him – a fact-finding mission by Unesco, the United Nations’ cultural organisation, reviewed the nature and quality of temple renovation in Tamil Nadu, and concluded in July that poor conservation work had damaged some of the state’s most historic shrines.

“The quality of conservation works at the temples assessed during the mission varied to a large extent with some good examples, some mediocre works and some truly shocking scenes of demolition and massacre of historic temples,” the report said.

Poor conservation

The fact-finding team visited 10 prominent temples in Tamil Nadu in May and June, including the Meenakshi Amman temple in Madurai. Nowhere was conservation norms for documenting, assessing and carrying out heritage work followed systematically: “There is no empanelment of experts…or qualified heritage work contractors for such specialised works, said the report.”

Part of the blame was directed by the fact-finders at the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable Endowments Department, the government agency that administers the majority of the thousands of small and big temples in the state. Conserving these many structures is an onerous task – one which the department does not have qualified experts for.

The Unesco team discovered temples where walls had been cleaned by “water-washing and sand-blasting”. “These practices were banned by the Madras High Court in the early 2000s since it erodes the inscriptions on the walls,” said Vijay Kumar of the India Pride Project, a group that works to return stolen artefacts to India.

A sculpture at Nageshwaran temple in Kumbakonam before and after water-blasting. Credit: India Pride Project
A sculpture at Nageshwaran temple in Kumbakonam before and after water-blasting. Credit: India Pride Project

At sites where restoration had been attempted, the Unesco team found no attempt at consulting the Agama and Shilpa sastras, Sanskrit texts with prescriptions for temple construction, down to the measurements and proportions of different parts of the structure.

In Meenakshi Amman temple, the south and east corridors of the Potramarai had been demolished and reconstructed. This “is against the principles of Agama sastras where it is clearly recommended that the old stone material needs to be used and reused until it has lived its life,” said the report. “The same is also true with regards to conservation principles followed as per National Culture Policy of ASI [Archaeological Survey of India] and International ICOMOS Charters.”

Traditional profession

Trained and established temple architects, or sthapathis as they are known, are not surprised by the Unesco report. It was a long time coming. Earlier, only those well-versed in the field of traditional architecture, either through education or through family business, could affix the appellation sthapathi to their name. “But now even a local mason or sculptor calls himself a sthapathi,” said M Palanisamy, who owns a temple architecture firm.

Traditionally, temple architecture was the domain of the Vishwakarma caste group, who were believed to be descendants of the Hindu architect god, Vishwakarma. The community, predominantly based in Thanjavur district, produced several well-known architects, including the late Padma Bhushan awardee Ganapathy sthapathy. But then, two things happened. Many members of the community moved away from temple architecture, and with colleges offering courses in the field, members of other caste groups adopted the occupation, said Palanisamy.

King Dasarath and his queens, after and before water-blasting at the Kumbakonam temple. Credit: India Pride Project
King Dasarath and his queens, after and before water-blasting at the Kumbakonam temple. Credit: India Pride Project

Today, established firms like that of Palanisamy’s and Kalyanasundaram’s receive contracts from wealthy temple donors who are willing to spend anything to restore old temples, or build a new one. “We give them our estimate, and if they agree, we can do a very thorough job,” said Palanisamy.

In the end, the dereliction, the poor restoration all comes down to money, said the architects. The government gives a small fixed budget for restoration, much of which lines the pockets of local contractors and temple officials, they said. Even when large donations are given by devotees, a small percentage is set aside for renovations – which are often destructive.

“They do sloppy work and destroy our tradition,” said Palanisamy. “If the government used the advice of knowledgeable sthapathis, such a Unesco report would never exist.”

Stone sculpture of a council of ministers, at Nageshwaran temple in Kumbakonam, after and before water-blasting. Credit: India Pride Project
Stone sculpture of a council of ministers, at Nageshwaran temple in Kumbakonam, after and before water-blasting. Credit: India Pride Project
Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.