This article is a collection of some reflections on reading the book “In search of Vishwakarma- Mapping Indian Craft Histories” edited by Late Dr. Vijaya Ramaswamy from JNU. First published in 2019, it is a collection of 13 research papers by historians and subject matter experts from across several universities in the country. It offers a refreshingly balanced perspective on the lives of Vishwakarma craftsmen. Lot of the content is based on inscriptional evidence. My purpose here is to cherry pick some references from the book and present it here so that it offers a nuanced take on this matter which is quite different from the “exploiter-exploited” framework that is often used to describe our past.

R.N. Misra begins his paper on “Some Random Thoughts on Artists in the Early Middle Ages” with these lines:

“The early Middle Ages in Indian history is marked as a period of phenomenal growth of temple architecture and allied art activity that presuppose the existence of a group or community of artists exclusively engaged in such work. The monuments and sculptures surviving from that time period and the epigraphs concerning them indicate that building temples had become a broad socio-religious movement in which donors represented a cross-section of society from elites to commoners (including a cobbler on one instance)”

That caught me by surprise when I first read it. The popular narrative we have on cobblers/mochis/shoemakers is that they were at the bottom rung of the society. That they were exploited by those on top of the mythical pyramid. Broadly speaking there is an impression that they were poor.

It turns out that this reference to a cobbler building a temple is indeed true. There is factual inscriptional evidence to back this claim.

The Khalari stone inscription of 1451 CE records that Devapala, a mochi (shoemaker), the son of Sivadas, built a temple of Narayana along with a Mandapa.

How can a class that is exploited and suppressed build or donate to a temple? That too of Narayana? We are told Narayana isn’t a subaltern God? These topics need more discussion in public discourse. Unfortunately, there aren’t as many scholars in our times today indulging in a public space discussion with a free mind on this topic.

Elsewhere R.N. Misra also writes about the Konark temple building episode:

“The patron prince of the Konark Sun Temple is said to have granted 15 manas (a measure) of land by the side of the Konakana temple to each of the 224 stonemasons (pathuriyas) in order to establish a stone mason’s community, there”.

The popular narrative even here is to say that Kings gave lands to Brahmin priests. Not many scholars draw references to such instances. This reference above gives a better and more just picture of the past. Such literature is available around various other big temple building efforts as well Eg: Brihadeeshwara temple in Thanjavur.

Of course, nothing is perfect. One can still argue on whether the land was distributed in the right proportion, who held the higher share of land in that period and so on. There is no end to that line of thought. However, such content is still a lot better in terms of getting a saner picture of one’s past as compared to a strict pigeon holed “exploiter-exploited” narrative.

Elsewhere in the article R.N. Misra writes:

“In most artist families training in crafts was imparted with little gender discrimination. There is evidence indicating that the vadhus (daughter-in-law) were given such training and they possessed skills that enabled them to execute works with excellence. For instance, we know citrakara Sri Satana of the Jejakabhukti (Candala) region whose son and daughter-in-law respectively carved the famous eleventh century images of Bodhisatva and Tara from Mahoba”.

Again, these readings from inscriptional evidence help bust many a popular myth on how we perceive our past.

The professional growth of a particular master artist Palhana is also traced in the inscriptions from 1159 CE to 1178 CE. The same artist is referred to different professional titles in this period and this is seen as a proof that the artist could rise up in hierarchy as he grew in experience and expertise.

Writing about the status of artists as Sudras as seen in Dharmasastras, R.N. Misra writes thus:

“Certain disabilities imposed on artists - silpas were traditionally assigned to the sudras in the Dharmasastra - seem to have been dispensed with during this time (once temple building picked up i.e.,) as well. Instances are known of sutradharas, silpis, and rupakaras eulogized as the ‘knower of sastra’. An inscription refers to Chitaku as the ‘ocean of five sciences’ or ‘a perfect master of sciences’, ‘proficient in silpa sastras’; his younger brother Mandana is described as “sastra-japi”.

R.N. Misra also writes about the collaborative efforts between Brahmins and artists of that era

“Artists seem to have sometimes been linked to Brahmana priests for some guidance on religious requirements of the work at hand. For example, a metal image from Hatkoti (Himachal Pradesh) carries an inscription indicating that it was cast by an artist according to the prescriptions of a brahmana”.

Now before someone reads too much into this and starts accusing Brahminical hegemony, Misra comes back with a counter example that reveals a different story of self-sufficiency and independent decision making.

Baya Chakada is an Oriya manuscript that offers great detail on the temple building operations involved around the Konark Sun Temple. Citing this as a reference R.N. Misra writes as below.

“The text of Baya Chakada has it that when work was started at Konark for building the sun temple two camps were set up. One for the brahmanas and the other for the (sudra) craftsmen. One of these camps called Vedapura was settled with the Atreya brahmanas, who were experts in Silpa sastras. While the other camp, known as Rupasa, was settled with artists and craftsmen.  Functionally however the brahmins seemed to have only a marginal role and significance in the temple building for references to their activity is only made in connection with the performance of rituals. On the contrary the primacy of the artists is indicated by the quantum of the work they did and by the decisions that they took. For instance, at a certain time when a dispute arose on whether payment according to the contract should be made to a silpi for supplying three kanya figures, the decision about the conformity of these figures to the canon was taken by a council of artists without any reference to the brahmanas. The dispute having been resolved in favor of the silpi in this case he received the payment of six gold madhas for the three figures. The brahmanas figure nowhere in the entire episode as the dispute was resolved by the council of artisans”.

This is a fascinating tale. There isn’t a lot of content available on the internet for anyone interested to read more on such topics. For example, what else is there in Baya Chakada? Are there other such instances documented during several other such temple building efforts across the country? Who is researching these and who is trying to narrate these stories to the curious minds (young and old) of this generation?

Suffice to say, that the above narrative clearly shows the self-sufficiency and expertise of the artist community and in no way diminishes the role of Brahmins. Every community had its own sphere of influence in principle and this is a good testament to that fact.

On land rights enjoyed by artists, R.N. Misra writes as below:

“The Malkapuram inscription of Rudramba’s period (1261 CE) indicates that artists enjoyed the rights of the lands granted to them”.

On the compensation given to the artists, he writes as below:

“In the case of artists employed at the Rupasa camp during the construction of the Konark Sun Temple payment on the basis of contracts and wages were handed out to them in cash or in kind. The Baya Chakada records that artists and other workmen received different gifts when the camp was dispersed following the completion of the project. Accordingly, the Sutradhara received from the ruler three krosa of land extending from east to west in the Lankapada visaya as a life endowment with daksina. Another master artist Sadananda Pattanayaka received a gift of land in Sadanandapura. Goldsmiths got land for building their houses in Sanalapura where land was granted to 108 stonemasons also”.

These are real fact based narratives that need to be a part of our school books as a counter to the gloomy picture of the past that we today carry of injustice and oppression.

Here’s another line from Vijaya Ramaswamy’s work “Casting the Vishwakarma in Peninsular India” that emphasizes on an understanding of the underlying complexities of crafts before a perceiver/researcher/historian passes a judgement on one’s past.

“It would be erroneous to treat craftsmen as a monolithic unit despite their banding together as the Vishwakarma. The distinction between an artisan and a craftsman may seem fuzzy because of the shifting nature of their occupations but it is nevertheless important to make this distinction. Unless one is aware of the complex layers that underlay craft development in early medieval India, it is possible that one (a perceiver/researcher/historian) may impose one’s own teleological vision as an orientalist and imperial or do what the Marxist historians did by imaging the medieval craftsman as static immobile figure enmeshed within a honey-combed caste structure. One of the ways of breaking up this discourse is to look at the producers of craft objects as being distinct from the producers of purely utility commodities such as bricks which are unvarying in terms of the production process or appearance”.

“Inscription evidence clearly indicates that artisans and craftsmen represented two different kind of economies both of which existed parallel to each other. While the maker of ploughs would exist in the village community with relative physical immobility socio-economic security and comparatively static living standards, the metal craftsman benefiting from the temple economy and an expanding clientele would be more mobile and have greater opportunities for improving his income while at the same time facing greater economic risks. His risks would primarily arise from withdrawal of patronage or the decline of temple centers with the fall of dynasties”.

In another article titled “Who is Vishwakarma’s daughter? Divine Kinship and Goddess Randal Worship in a Gujarati Artisan Community”, Kirin Narayan writes about the importance of Vishwakarma’s daughter to some hereditary craftsmen communities. Particularly the reference here is to the Gujar sutar community of hereditary carpenters with ancestral roots in Kutch, Western Gujarat. This is a chapter in history that I was totally unaware of. It was great to discover this.

Another paper titled “Artists and the Early Art-Activity” by R.N. Misra documents the life and role of artists across various periods in history covering a long time span across centuries and sources across Vedas, Artha Sastra, Puranas etc (A 20 page article with 117 authoritative references!)

Two other papers in the book - “Artisans during the Sultanate Period” An Epigraphical study by Pushpa Prasad and “Mughal Artisans at Work and at Home” by Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi, capture the life and times of artists in the era of Islamic rulers.

Another section in the book titled “Southern perspectives on the Vishwakarma” carries four papers covering the four major states in South-

“The place of Kammala in the Agrarian Society of Tamil Nadu c.600-1600 CE” by Y Subbarayalu

“Community Networking of Panchanamuvaru: The Sculptors and Smiths of Precolonial Andhra” by I. Lakshmi

“Mobility and Identity: A study of Vishwakarma Panchalas of Karnataka” by Nagendra Rao

And

“Ainkudi Kammalar: Reflections on the Temple Craftsmen and Beyond from Medieval Keralam” by Anna Varghese.

In I. Lakshmi’s article cited above one finds a reference to the below on how the entire family participated in the craft:

“It is interesting to note that women participation in carving stone idols and building temples is attested by a few inscriptions dated to the twelfth century CE from Ganapesvaram in Krishna District, which refer to Kasachari Maguturi Mallikarjuna, his wife Veeramma, and their son Akkabattudu, who had participated in building the local Ganapesvara Mahadeva Temple”.

“Likewise, the Macherla epigraph dated 1111 CE, mentions that all the family members of Silpi Kacharya Tippoju were experts in carving Shiva lingas and other idols, construction of beautiful temples, and had the knowledge of using various varieties of tools skifully”. 

Lakshmi further writes-

“From the twelfth century onwards, we get references to land grants being made, even when a tank was built. In Warangal, we find an inscription dated 1112 CE, from Medapalli on a pillar on the tank bund. It is composed in three languages - Kannada, Sanskrit and Telugu. The Telugu part records a gift of two marturs of land to the kase (architect) Parvatoju. The gift here is made in the context of construction of a tank along with the temple of Acheswara and Vishnudeva”.

“A record of the year 1104 CE from Valiveru, Tenali Taluk, Guntur district, registers the gift of land to a silpi/kase, who build the Svayambhudeva temple at Valiveru. The kase, as the inscription states, also made repairs to the temple from time to time. This enables us to understand their continued presence in temple maintenance. We hear of another such gift in 1257 CE to the artisans who built a mandapa if the temple of Svayambhudeva at Edavalli, Narasaraopet Taluk, Guntur district”.

“Apart from the ruling community, we find an instance of a village community making grants to the Artisans. An inscription from the same taluk as earlier, the date of which is missing, states that the villagers granted a piece of land to an akkasala Kamoju”.

Lakshmi also cites a Nadindla epigraph dated 1141 CE that refers to one Nukandi, who has the title of “Karmabharana” i.e., ornament among the blacksmiths, and who, on account of his valour and bravery, was appointed as military general in the court of Kulottunga Gonka, the Velanati king. Blacksmiths were very important functionaries as they were the makers of the armoury. They must have been close to the rulers.

The growing economic status of the artisans is further attested by the epigraphs where we notice them moving from receiving gifts to making grants. An epigraph of 1300 CE from Nadigudem states that Agasala Devoju made a gift of a palmyra grove to the temple of Mallikarjuna Mahalinga of Taduvaya.

Lakshmi also notes, these professions were also open to other professional groups, as temple-building created more opportunities for skilled people and was lucrative too. A unique inscription from Varikunta in Cuddapah district dated 1529 CE refers to a silpi by the name Tippana Boya, belonging to the Boya (tribal) community, who built the local temple for a lump sum contract of 20 rukas. This inscription also reveals that artisans other than those in the Viswakarma kula could also participate in the temple-building and that temple works were assigned on contract basis.

Concluding the article Lakshmi mentions:

“There was a gradual decline in the condition of the Panchananamuvaru from the eighteenth century due to the exploitative economic policies of the British, mechanisation and so on. Thus, their assertions of higher status from the eighteenth century is the result of the neglect they suffered in the society. Their life in independent India is also pathetic as they are in poverty and are in the list of the backward classes. They might be using this listing for benefits, but they seem to be suffering a conflict, as culturally they feel superior to the other classes, being historically education community with traditional knowledge”.

(Note: Panchananamuvaru is a term used to capture the collective of Vishwakarma castes in Telugu)

It was a joy to discover and learn from the readings in this book. It was extremely important for concerned Hindus of the current era to indulge in multiple narratives on their past. Otherwise as a people we would risk falling into the danger of following a single narrative i.e., that of exploiter-exploited.

This is not to say our past was picture perfect. No society is ever perfect all the time. However, any functional society will have its own corrective mechanisms. Consider an example here again involving inscriptional evidence and Vishwakarmas.

“This story comes from an inscription that belongs to Kanaganapalle in Anantapur from the 16th century. The state (king and other such state actors) imposed a tax on the Vishwakarmas. As a mark of protest against the increased tax on their work the members of the five vishwakarma castes across 32 nearby villages revolted against the state. They abandoned the villages enmasse and went to the neighborhood villages in the Chittoor district. As the Vishwakarmas left the villages there was a dearth of talent. No personnel were available to work on various household, agricultural and temple construction related equipment and tasks. The villagers then complained. Hearing these complaints and sensing trouble the Reddys and Karanams (decision makers on taxation) went back to the Vishwakarma caste people and promised them that their taxes will be reduced and apologized for the inconvenience caused. The Vishwakarmas then returned back to their original villages”.

So goes the story from the Kanaganapalle inscription. There are several such stories seen in inscriptions across the country. Any normal functional society will have these occasional squirmishes. So, the aim of this article here is not to paint a “land of milk and honey” picture of the past. The emphasis is just on the fact that it wasn’t all dark, gloomy and black either.

The popular picture that is painted by generations of scholars and academics by means of atrocity literature of various forms is that the Hindu society was some form a weird society where a Brahmin priest was sitting on a chair at the top with a King as a pet dog in his lap and whipping everyone underneath and treating them as a bonded labour. There is nothing to feel proud of the past of this land they say and it is only a picture of shame and guilt that they leave us with. It is that picture of the past that is being contested here and readings like this definitely help.

Link to purchase the book: https://www.amazon.in/Search-Vishwakarma-Vijaya-Ramaswamy/dp/9352908392

Image source: Exotica India Art