08-13-2008, 02:31 PM
Dear Bodhi and HH, you are absolutely right.
Many standard work and tourist information drawing upon those standard works lean towards Fergusson's misconceptions.
Havell rightly criticized him for this. Havell everytime underlines the Indian mind and execution behind Muslim period structures.
My own conception, like of some other, goes further than Havell's. The Muslim structures are occupied pre-Muslim structures or Muslim-period Hindu structures reconverted or stripped off of Hindu/Jain elements. There was some minimal cosmetic change needed: getting rid of icons and idols and choosing an empty niche for the qiblah was enough. But they failed to get rid of of flower and some animal ornamentations in the walls and Jaalis.
The Muslims deliberately choose structures like Ashtashra Mandapas or octagon sanctums. Maha-Stambhas or Towers (functioning as Dipa-Stambha or Kirtti-Stambha) of vajra=ashtashra and vrtta forms were retained, even though these were worthless for a muezzin.
In some structures the Bhitti-Stambhas in the walls of the edifice grew like Maha-Stambhas above the sanctum in the 4 corners giving the name of charminar. (the pre-Mughal palace of Mansingh Tomara has Bhitti-Stambhas in the corners and two in the middle towering above the walls)
The onion-shaped dome with lotus, etc. were all Indian inventions, for which they had the Shastra and executors. This becomes clear when in ca. 1654 Aurangzeb ordered Muslim dome experts to repair the cracks in domes of the Taj, which they couldn't for the most part.
The Hindus even had an ashtashra variant of this onion-shaped dome, like in Chittorgarh.
The influential indigenous Shilpa schools from Gaur (Magadha) in the east and Gujarat (Nagara) in the west interacted vividly with the northern, central (Malava), central-southern (Vesara) and southern (Dravida) Shilpa schools.
On can find the lost Panjab-Haryana and Doaba Shilpa schools in the Turk-Pathan-Mughal occupied structures, mostly tombs. (ekaratna, triratna and pancharatna domes, eka-,dvi-, catuh-shala Mandapas
On Babur
Like most Muslim and Mughal rulers, his information about his building activities contain much half-truths. He wasn't active with new structures, but like most Muslims ordered masons in many occupied cities to strip the structures off their icons and idols. Babur was a true Ghazi.
While showing his contempt for India it made him blind for what India had to offer. His assumption that there were no gardens or artificial watery works in India is a sign of his ignorance or his intention to cover up that he occupied and gave his name to existing Vapins (wain or baoli) and canals in his territories. Being totally ignorant of structures in Rajasthan, Vijayanagara and elsewhere.
How much could he have built just in four years, while being constantly insecure of his position, not having subdued Pathans and Hindus. (Mewar lost a battle at Khanua, but Babur didn't dare to attack Chittor or Jodhpur or Jaipur.)
A Persian manuscript giving names of workers constructing the Taj Mahal, give the name of Ramlal Kashmiri as the garden expert! Not a Tajik-Turk or Persian, but a Hindu from Kashmir (probably also responsible for the Shalimar garden).
The word Chahar Bagh is very misleading. Any garden divided in 4 parts can be a chaturbhaga Vatika. Hindu constructional planning is based upon Pada-metry. The Taj garden displays the 4/16-fold Pada concept.
A few miles above the Taj was the ancient garden palace of Raja Bhoja (as per ASI records), the Paramara.
Gardens were essential parts of palaces and temples.
The number 8 for palace courts is old, see Brhacchakatikam describing the palace of Vasantasena in Ujjain. The vivid description must have been of a real existing palace.
The number 8 is central to the Navaranga Mandapa, 8 Padas around a central hall.
In short, what is really originally Muslim in the structures of India upto Central-Asia? In my opinion, almost nothing.
Many standard work and tourist information drawing upon those standard works lean towards Fergusson's misconceptions.
Havell rightly criticized him for this. Havell everytime underlines the Indian mind and execution behind Muslim period structures.
My own conception, like of some other, goes further than Havell's. The Muslim structures are occupied pre-Muslim structures or Muslim-period Hindu structures reconverted or stripped off of Hindu/Jain elements. There was some minimal cosmetic change needed: getting rid of icons and idols and choosing an empty niche for the qiblah was enough. But they failed to get rid of of flower and some animal ornamentations in the walls and Jaalis.
The Muslims deliberately choose structures like Ashtashra Mandapas or octagon sanctums. Maha-Stambhas or Towers (functioning as Dipa-Stambha or Kirtti-Stambha) of vajra=ashtashra and vrtta forms were retained, even though these were worthless for a muezzin.
In some structures the Bhitti-Stambhas in the walls of the edifice grew like Maha-Stambhas above the sanctum in the 4 corners giving the name of charminar. (the pre-Mughal palace of Mansingh Tomara has Bhitti-Stambhas in the corners and two in the middle towering above the walls)
The onion-shaped dome with lotus, etc. were all Indian inventions, for which they had the Shastra and executors. This becomes clear when in ca. 1654 Aurangzeb ordered Muslim dome experts to repair the cracks in domes of the Taj, which they couldn't for the most part.
The Hindus even had an ashtashra variant of this onion-shaped dome, like in Chittorgarh.
The influential indigenous Shilpa schools from Gaur (Magadha) in the east and Gujarat (Nagara) in the west interacted vividly with the northern, central (Malava), central-southern (Vesara) and southern (Dravida) Shilpa schools.
On can find the lost Panjab-Haryana and Doaba Shilpa schools in the Turk-Pathan-Mughal occupied structures, mostly tombs. (ekaratna, triratna and pancharatna domes, eka-,dvi-, catuh-shala Mandapas
On Babur
Like most Muslim and Mughal rulers, his information about his building activities contain much half-truths. He wasn't active with new structures, but like most Muslims ordered masons in many occupied cities to strip the structures off their icons and idols. Babur was a true Ghazi.
While showing his contempt for India it made him blind for what India had to offer. His assumption that there were no gardens or artificial watery works in India is a sign of his ignorance or his intention to cover up that he occupied and gave his name to existing Vapins (wain or baoli) and canals in his territories. Being totally ignorant of structures in Rajasthan, Vijayanagara and elsewhere.
How much could he have built just in four years, while being constantly insecure of his position, not having subdued Pathans and Hindus. (Mewar lost a battle at Khanua, but Babur didn't dare to attack Chittor or Jodhpur or Jaipur.)
A Persian manuscript giving names of workers constructing the Taj Mahal, give the name of Ramlal Kashmiri as the garden expert! Not a Tajik-Turk or Persian, but a Hindu from Kashmir (probably also responsible for the Shalimar garden).
The word Chahar Bagh is very misleading. Any garden divided in 4 parts can be a chaturbhaga Vatika. Hindu constructional planning is based upon Pada-metry. The Taj garden displays the 4/16-fold Pada concept.
A few miles above the Taj was the ancient garden palace of Raja Bhoja (as per ASI records), the Paramara.
Gardens were essential parts of palaces and temples.
The number 8 for palace courts is old, see Brhacchakatikam describing the palace of Vasantasena in Ujjain. The vivid description must have been of a real existing palace.
The number 8 is central to the Navaranga Mandapa, 8 Padas around a central hall.
In short, what is really originally Muslim in the structures of India upto Central-Asia? In my opinion, almost nothing.