Every visitor to South India inevitably forms the perception that it is a region predominantly characterized by its multitude of temples. Similarly, North India was also abundant in temples. However, because to its relative lack of frequent foreign invasions, the region south of the Vindhyas was able to safeguard a significant number of its religious structures from deliberate destruction or intentional neglect. The historical context explains why the art of temple-building in the southern region developed more consistently, without being influenced by the dominant cultures from North India starting from the thirteenth century.

South India is adorned with numerous temples, a significant number of which are ancient and a few of which are in a state of decay. In addition to the well-known temple-towns, other villages and towns boast multiple temples, some of which are so ancient and revered that they have transformed into pilgrimage sites. The majority of the current temples are modest and unadorned, lacking significant artistic value. The truly exceptional ones are ancient monuments, with the oldest reaching back to the fourteenth century. In addition to their ancient origins and exceptional creative quality, these temples have undergone a lengthy evolutionary process that serves as a record of the history of South Indian culture.

When one visits the big temples, they are immediately impressed by the immense size and exceptional quality of the craftsmanship displayed in the pillars, figure sculptures, ceilings, towers, and walls adorned with friezes. We am astonished by the extraordinary level of patience that countless generations of artists have dedicated to their building, as well as the generous financial support that made them feasible. Underlying these architectural accomplishments is the Hindu inclination to prioritize religion and view it as the driving force and ultimate goal of all human endeavors.

The temple evolved into a visually pleasing representation of a fundamentally monotheistic faith. The purpose of the temple was to enable men to perceive and comprehend the symbolic representations of their beliefs. These beliefs exerted a significant influence and authority over individuals within the confines of their own conscience. However, the temple served a far more important role than any other institution as it symbolized the religion, philosophy, and ethics of the people. It served as a representation of ‘dharma’ for rulers, aristocrats, and commoners alike. Undertaking the building and upkeep of this project became a commendable action in both the present and future.

The eminent architects and artisans pursued self-expression by adhering to established conventions rather than pursuing novelty in their expression. They typically opted to maintain anonymity. Although we appreciate the grace and attractiveness of the temples in Mamallapuram (also known as Mahabalipuram), the impressive magnificence of the Tanjore vimana, and the Madurai gopurams, as well as the opulent and intricate carvings of the Belur and Halebid temples, our knowledge about the architects and craftsmen responsible for designing and sculpting these structures is limited. They did not perceive art as being apart from both secular and religious contexts. All forms of art were fundamentally religious and metaphorical.

Religion was essentially considered a word that meant the same thing as civilized existence. The temple’s architecture effectively expressed the profound desire for a “life of release” through its spatial design. The edifice was devoted to a deity that symbolized the Supreme Principle, which governed the world’s affairs and guided the spiritual longing. Due to this reason, the temple emerged as the focal point of all communal and societal activities. The edifice exerted a significant influence on its surroundings, both due to its strategic location and imposing size.

The temple’s sturdiness and heft provided a feeling of lastingness to other institutions that shared its primary purpose of preserving ancient values. Each settlement and town expanded in proximity to the temple, which served as the central focal point for all activities. The temple’s influence transcended the boundaries of religion and spirituality, playing a significant role in the village’s economy. The deity held a prominent position as a landowner, mostly due to regular contributions from monarchs, aristocrats, and ordinary worshippers. As a result, temples became sufficiently wealthy to occasionally operate as financial institutions, providing loans to impoverished farmers.