I n ancient India theatrical performances were the main attractions for the people. Literary evidences prove that ancient Indian theatre is a comprehensive one and is a very popular for entertainment. Cultural arts like dancing, singing, puppet shows etc. were formulated and enacted from pre-Vedic period onwards. Historically, the origin of dance as a form of entertainment can be traced in the Indus valley period. The findings of archeological excavations from Mohenjo-Daro suggest that dance was very much popular in those days. ‘Some of the earliest representations of scenes of dancing occur in cave paintings found in Mesolithic rock shelters. Subsequently, finds of sculpture and representations on seals from Harappan civilization (c. 2700- 1800 BCE) have been taken to represent dancers.’ [i] The posture of grey slate figure of a male dancer from Harappa reminds of tāṇḍava and supports the affinity between the male deity of Harappan culture and later Śiva. It seems that Indus people...

This essay looks at the evolution of "nrtta" (graceful physical movement), "nrttya" (graceful movement and expressions) and "natya" (acting, dancing, singing) and their close interfaces with sculpture and architecture in ancient India (1500B.C.E--800C.E). According to Kapila Vatsayayan in the "Square and the Circle of the Indian Arts", the fundamental rituals of the Rig Veda were inherently dramatic as they involved movement and the utterance of sonorous sounds. Bharata's "Natyashastra" ( 2 B.C.E- 2 C.E) a prodigious compendium of the various rituals of performance, its techniques and manifestations lays out what he designates as "natyadharmi", a term later picked up and used by theatre director and anthropologist Eugenio Barba to mean the specialized world of an actor's training and performance. It is opposed to "lokdharma" which is the stuff of life from which theatre or "natya" emanates.The essay takes the reader through the nine rasas (quintessential emotions), 49 bhavas (feelings), the sahrdaya (ideal spectator), the various kinds of "abhinaya" or acting (sattvika, vacika, angika, aharya), "vrittis" (mental attitudes) and "pavrittis" (local colour), various kinds of auditoriums, themes of "natya", and most importantly the operation of rasa as aesthetic principle. Abhinavagupta is one of the key theoreticians referred to in this essay. The essay also looks at the development of Bharatnatyam from Bharat Natya, from the 1000 C.E. in the great temples of South India, principally, Tanjore (Brihadeshvara). The court of the Naik rulers of Tanjore in the 16th and 17th centuries, provided strong encouragement to artists, principally dancers, to develop their talents. As E. Krishna Iyer posits in "Rasa and Bhava in Bharat Natya", Kshetrayya, a court poet for the Naik rulers in the 17th century, wrote many beautiful padas (poems, songs) for Bharatnatyam, which performed by the devadasis or the temple dancers, reached great heights of artistic fulfillment during this time. The essay also looks at the evolution of Indian classical music from its origins in the Samagaan (Vedic period) and the music of the Gandharvas, through "Jati" and "Graam" ragas to its final form of fruition in both North and South Indian classical music traditions.

Kūṭiyāṭṭam, the traditional Sanskrit theatre of Kerala has come to the limelight in recent times with the UNESCO awarding the title ‘Masterpiece of Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity’ to it in 2001. Being the only surviving Sanskrit theatre anywhere, it opens up vast possibilities of research in classical theatre .India is fortunate in having a seminal text like the Nāṭyaśāstra which happens to be the only ancient treatise in the world in outlining the a to z of theatre. However, the abstract principles of performance described in the text are often baffling for want of a living theatre. Sanskrit theatre, it is well known, has become extinct in most parts of India from medieval times. However, through Kūṭiyāṭṭam, we can understand the implications of theatrical practices of ancient India to a considerable extent, though it has developed a lot of regional ramifications in the course of its development. It is proposed here to explore what Kūṭiyāṭṭam has to offer us in decoding the theatre language of ancient India. The salient features of the Sanskrit theatre, especially its emotive dimensions, body language, dance orientation and orchestration could be better understood if we could explore the theatrical practices of this unique art.

Drama has been an integral part of ancient Indian culture. In fact the dramas reflected the social milieu of its time. The origin of the Indian theatre is still obscure. It is certain, how-ever, that even in the Vedic period dramatic performances of some kind were given, passing references in early sources point to the en-action at festivals of religious legends, perhaps only in dance and mime. Some writers have found elements in common between the Indian and the classical Greek theatre. The curtain at the back of the stage was called yavanika, a diminutive form of the name by which the Greeks were generally known in India. One play at least, “The Little Clay Cart”, has a superficial resemblance to the late Greek comedy of the school of Menander. We cannot wholly reject possibility that Greek comedies, acted at the courts of the Greco-Bactrian kings of N.-W.India, inspired unknown Indian poets to develop their own popular stage into a courtly art form.

Indian Theatre was and is always a marginal phenomenon in the larger context of the Indian society. Though, theatre was one of those mediums which were always there with the society for the entertainment of the people but it was not entertained always by the same people and the society. Theatre as a tool or medium was much stronger to reign easily than the other performing and other art forms that’s why it was sidelined, displaced and marginalized in the society at certain point of time. The people associated with it were thrown out of the periphery of the localities (society) and simultaneously were declassed, of which we get several instances in history.