Why in the News
Restoration work at the old site of the Saptakoteshwar temple on Divar island in Goa has uncovered relics dated between the fourteenth and the sixteenth centuries.
What was recovered, and where?
- A guardian motif: A Kirtimukh motif is among the finds, and its presence marks a formal temple entrance rather than an open air shrine.
- A structural element: A carved capital of a temple pillar was also recovered, which is the load bearing head of a column and part of a built temple rather than a portable object.
- The find spot: Both were recovered along the old pathway running between Koti Tirth and Madhavachi Talli.
- The dating: The relics and remains have been dated to between the fourteenth and the sixteenth centuries.
Why do the finds change the reading of the site?
- Distribution carries the argument: The elements sit along a pathway, so it is their placement rather than the value of any single object that supports the inference.
- A complex rather than a shrine: Architectural members of this kind, found together, indicate a temple complex rather than one isolated structure.
- A sacred corridor: The alignment links the site’s water body with its associated structures into a processional route.
- The extent is revised: The understood extent of the island’s pre Portuguese temple landscape is now larger than the surviving remains indicated.
Why does Saptakoteshwar matter in Goa’s religious history?
- A principal Shaiva site: Saptakoteshwar is counted among Goa’s principal Shaiva sites and its deity is a form of Shiva.
- Kadamba patronage: The Kadamba rulers of Goa held Saptakoteshwar as their tutelary deity, and the name appears on their coinage.
- Displacement in the Portuguese period: The Divar temple was destroyed in the sixteenth century, and the deity was moved off the island to Narve in Bicholim, which lay outside Portuguese control at the time.
- A later rebuilding: The temple at Narve was rebuilt in 1668 by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, and worship has continued at that site since.
Challenges to protecting incidental archaeological finds
- Restoration is not excavation: Material surfacing during repair work is lifted without the layer by layer record that dates it and relates it to what lies around it. Eg. The Divar elements were recovered along a pathway during restoration rather than from a documented trench.
The Fix: Require a licensed archaeologist to supervise any ground disturbance at a historic temple site, with layer wise recording completed before material is moved. - Most sites carry no legal protection: Statutory protection attaches only to monuments notified under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 or a State equivalent, and everything else depends on local custody. Eg. The Archaeological Survey of India protects roughly 3,700 monuments, a small fraction of the country’s stock of historic sites.
The Fix: Notify a newly evidenced site under the State protection list as soon as dated material is recovered, rather than waiting for an excavation to conclude. - A living temple changes faster than it is recorded: A site in continuous worship is repaired and rebuilt by its own community, which removes earlier fabric in the process. Eg. Cement plaster and modern tiling at working shrines routinely cover older stone members.
The Fix: Complete measured drawings and photographic documentation of a living temple before any restoration grant is released. - Conservation capacity is thin: Trained conservators, epigraphists and conservation architects are few relative to the number of sites needing attention. Eg. State archaeology departments in the smaller States operate with a handful of technical posts.
The Fix: Fund State conservation units jointly with university archaeology departments so field documentation has standing capacity behind it.
Conclusion
The value of these finds lies less in the objects than in the boundary they redraw around a site long assumed to end at its surviving shrine. Whether that reading holds depends on a systematic survey along the corridor rather than on further chance recovery during repair work. The step to watch is whether the pathway and its surroundings are brought under a protected category before restoration continues over them.
Back2Basics: Kirtimukh
- What it is: Kirtimukh is a fierce swallowing face carved as an architectural motif, the name meaning face of glory.
- Where it is placed: It is set above temple doorways, over deity niches and at the apex of arches, as a guardian of the threshold.
- Its origin story: Puranic accounts describe a devouring being created by Shiva that consumes its own body at his command and is then placed at the entrance to be honoured first.
- Its reach: The motif runs across Hindu and Buddhist architecture in India and into Southeast Asia, so its presence signals a formal temple structure.
[2018, GS1, 10 marks] Safeguarding the Indian art heritage is the need of the moment. Discuss.”









