Leaning Temple of Benares
One of the temples located between Manikarnika and Scindia Ghats in Varanasi, also known as Kashi or Benares, Uttar Pradesh, is a magnificent marvel. The temple remains partially submerged in the river. According to the book "Varanasi Rediscovered," this temple is referred to as the Jalesvara temple.
Interestingly, accounts from travelers suggest that there were more than one leaning temple. The first drawing depicts one leaning tower, while the second shows two. It is likely that these towers may have fallen into the river due to the significant weight of the construction of Scindia Ghat in the mid-nineteenth century.
According to Robert Montgomery Martin, the foundation of the temple has worn away and several of the towers have fallen into the water. The foundation has been gradually undermined, causing the structure to sink into the river.
Bholanauth Chunder records that the leaning temple threatens to give way every moment, but it has remained in that posture for several years. The foundation ground has partly slipped down, and the river annually washes away its base, still it is spared as a standing miracle.
In "Ganga: A Journey Down the Ganges River," it is mentioned that the Shiva temple, known as Ratneshwar, actually collapsed in 1810 due to an earthquake that disrupted its supports.
Hobart Caunter writes in his 1834 book "The Oriental Annual, Or, Scenes in India" that one of the most extraordinary sights in Benares is a pagoda standing in the river with no connection to the shore. The whole foundation is submerged, and two of the towers have declined so much out of the perpendicular as to form an acute angle with the liquid plain beneath them. This pagoda is a pure specimen of ancient Hindoo architecture; it is of very great antiquity, and from its position now entirely deserted, for its floors are occupied by the waters of the Ganges.
No one appears to know when it was built, to whom it was dedicated, or why its foundations were laid upon the waters of the sacred river, unless it was on account of their sanctity. It is surprising how it has resisted the force of the current for so great a number of years, and that the dislocated towers should still stand, pointing, as it were, to their own approaching destruction, amid the constant percussion of the stream, which is uncommonly violent during the monsoons, and maintaining their apparently insecure position in spite of those periodical visitations, to the violence of which every part of the peninsula is more or less exposed.
It is believed that this temple was originally built on the riverbank, which provided a stable and secure foundation. However, due to the continuous pressure of the stream, the bank had given way all round the building, which, on account of the depth and solidity of the foundation, stood firm while the waters surrounded it, though the towers had been partially dislodged by the shock. Or it may be that even the foundation sank in some degree with the bank, thus projecting the two towers out of the direct perpendicular, and giving them the very extraordinary position which they now retain.
"Not more than fifty paces from the pond on the shore of the Ganges stands an uncommonly beautiful temple consisting of three towers, but the ground has given away under them; one is leaning to the right, the other to the left, and the third has almost sunk in the Ganges." - from Ida Pfeiffer's Voyage Round the World (1851).
George Hamlin Fitch (1913) also mentions a unique leaning temple near the water, indicating that its foundations were likely disturbed by a severe earthquake that destroyed several temples further down the river.
In Constance Gordon Cummings' 1876 book, From the Hebrides to the Himalayas, she describes a temple near the Scindia Ghat that stands in the river, leaning off plumb like the Tower of Pisa. Other buildings half a mile up the stream have also tilted at a similar angle. Cummings further notes that in old engravings, she has seen another leaning temple standing even deeper in the water, clearly in danger of falling, which it eventually did.
 |
| "City of Benares," Engraved by Thomas Sutherland, from Lieutenant-Colonel Forrest's 'A Picturesque Tour along the River Ganges and Jumna in India' (1824) |
Interestingly, accounts from travelers suggest that there were more than one leaning temple. The first drawing depicts one leaning tower, while the second shows two. It is likely that these towers may have fallen into the river due to the significant weight of the construction of Scindia Ghat in the mid-nineteenth century.
 |
| "Hindoo Temple - Benares," from Vol. 3 of 'The Indian empire' by Robert Montgomery Martin (1857) |
According to Robert Montgomery Martin, the foundation of the temple has worn away and several of the towers have fallen into the water. The foundation has been gradually undermined, causing the structure to sink into the river.
Bholanauth Chunder records that the leaning temple threatens to give way every moment, but it has remained in that posture for several years. The foundation ground has partly slipped down, and the river annually washes away its base, still it is spared as a standing miracle.
In "Ganga: A Journey Down the Ganges River," it is mentioned that the Shiva temple, known as Ratneshwar, actually collapsed in 1810 due to an earthquake that disrupted its supports.
Hobart Caunter writes in his 1834 book "The Oriental Annual, Or, Scenes in India" that one of the most extraordinary sights in Benares is a pagoda standing in the river with no connection to the shore. The whole foundation is submerged, and two of the towers have declined so much out of the perpendicular as to form an acute angle with the liquid plain beneath them. This pagoda is a pure specimen of ancient Hindoo architecture; it is of very great antiquity, and from its position now entirely deserted, for its floors are occupied by the waters of the Ganges.
No one appears to know when it was built, to whom it was dedicated, or why its foundations were laid upon the waters of the sacred river, unless it was on account of their sanctity. It is surprising how it has resisted the force of the current for so great a number of years, and that the dislocated towers should still stand, pointing, as it were, to their own approaching destruction, amid the constant percussion of the stream, which is uncommonly violent during the monsoons, and maintaining their apparently insecure position in spite of those periodical visitations, to the violence of which every part of the peninsula is more or less exposed.
It is believed that this temple was originally built on the riverbank, which provided a stable and secure foundation. However, due to the continuous pressure of the stream, the bank had given way all round the building, which, on account of the depth and solidity of the foundation, stood firm while the waters surrounded it, though the towers had been partially dislodged by the shock. Or it may be that even the foundation sank in some degree with the bank, thus projecting the two towers out of the direct perpendicular, and giving them the very extraordinary position which they now retain.
"Not more than fifty paces from the pond on the shore of the Ganges stands an uncommonly beautiful temple consisting of three towers, but the ground has given away under them; one is leaning to the right, the other to the left, and the third has almost sunk in the Ganges." - from Ida Pfeiffer's Voyage Round the World (1851).
George Hamlin Fitch (1913) also mentions a unique leaning temple near the water, indicating that its foundations were likely disturbed by a severe earthquake that destroyed several temples further down the river.
In Constance Gordon Cummings' 1876 book, From the Hebrides to the Himalayas, she describes a temple near the Scindia Ghat that stands in the river, leaning off plumb like the Tower of Pisa. Other buildings half a mile up the stream have also tilted at a similar angle. Cummings further notes that in old engravings, she has seen another leaning temple standing even deeper in the water, clearly in danger of falling, which it eventually did.
Comments