Temples: History, Architecture & Distribution - 2

[Guest]

Some question marks concerning the Qutb Minar (a first inquiry)

by Ishwa



General information

Based upon standard works: "This minaret made of red sandstone was built ca. 1193-1230 CE. It was designed on the pattern of Iranian minarets. (others say after the Jam Minar of Ghor)

The bottom storey was built by Aybak in 1199, the second, third and fourth were built by Iltutmish in 1286. After a lightning strike in 1368 Sultan Fīrūz Tughluq replaced the destroyed forth storey with two more. The height of the minaret is 72.59 metres."



Ancient three storeys

First storey: 24 petals, 12 semicircular and 12 triangular fluting.

Balcony with stalactite pendentives

Second storey: semicircular fluting.

Balcony with stalactive pendentives

Third storey: triangular fluting.

(the fourth and fifth storeys and top chhatri have been built by orders of Firuz Shah by Hindu masons in 1368)



The inner staircase: The first three have 360 steps.(the other additional two built by the Hindu masons of Firuz shah Tughluq with other material and techniques, have 19 steps giving a total of 379 steps leading to the top)

The number 360 may have a connection to the number 24 of the petals of the first storey and with the number 27 of the neighbouring temples.



Qutb Minar chronology

In order to get a good idea about the Qutb Minar authorhip, these three sources must be contemplated:

A. Inscriptions

B. Court writers

C. Architecture



A. Inscriptions

Some Nagari inscriptions

The characters of the inscription on the Iron Pillar are the same as those of the mason's marks on the pillars of the colonnade of the Great Mosque, but are quite different from those of the two modern Nagari inscriptions, which are close beside it.



On the Aibak date, an Archaeological Survey Report, vol. IV by Mr. Beglar, assistent to Cunningham says:

1. On the plinth, outside on the entrance door has the date “Samvat 1256” (1199 CE).

2. On the wall of the passage of the inside door to the left “Samvat 256”.

3. Under the lowest arch-stone “Samvat 12.6”

This gives a date of Samvat 1256 = 1199 CE, the same date which is inscribed in the qiblah of the mosque.



Another inscription has "alavadina vijayastambha"

During the Khiljis, the ancient name as Vijayastambha was remembered, but now attached to the name of Alauddin Khilji. This was certainly not a Tower of Victory in the eyes of the Mamluks, otherwise both the Mamluks and Alauddin Khilji would have retained that memory instead of inventing his.



Damage through lightning

In Samvat 1382 (1326 CE) the tower was damaged by lightning. As in 1300 there were three storeys with 360 steps, the top storey which was damaged must have been a kind of cupola.



In Samvat 1424 (1368 CE) it was repaired, perhap also after a second lightning. (The upper two storeys were (re)built with its 19 steps. Otherwise, the first 3 storeys have 360 steps. See Abul Fida's testimony of 1300.)

“A Sanskrit inscription on the famous Qutb Minar in Delhi, dated 1368, records an Indian architect's repair of the Tower for Sultan Firuz Shah. ... Sahni has translated the fourth and fifth line as “the restoration of the Minar was carried out in the palace or temple of Visvakarma.” Eternal garden, by Carl W. ernst, p.32.

Line 3: … in the year Samvat 1426 (1369 ce)

Masons describing this as a Jayastambha erected by Shri Suratrana Pherojashahi by the grace of Vishvakarma.

The Minar is mentioned as 'munAro' and the word 'jIrNoddhAra' is used. This word means 'restoring that which is decayed/old'. This word is a technical one from the Vastushastras, and is a branch of knowledge being part of the 'equipment' of the master masons of India. Hindus did know how to build, but also how to repair! (even if this included to do a job on orders of a Muslim ruler - see the jIrNoddhAra jobs done by Hindu masons in preexisting cities of Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, Dhilli metropolis and Indrapata metropolis, including Shahjahanabad!)



Devata invocations

One reads, "Shri Vishvakarma-prasade rachita" = Conceived with the grace of Vishwakarma (Prasad 1990:3, 19, 34-35), engraved by the Hindu craftsmen who built the minar on behalf of their masters.

In inscription nos. I,14 and II,47,71 Hindu masons address their Deities Vishvakarma (God of Creation), Ganapati (Lord of the Gana)are praised, and Om Svasti is invoked. (an eight-line inscription in Nagari on the left of the fourth balcony)



Pirthi Nirap or King Prthvi(raja)

A slab with a Nagari inscription “Pirthi Nirap” or “the King Pirthi(raja)” was found on the minaret. On left-hand jamb of Main Entrance door, 9th course. Text. Translation. " The King Pirthi." (The reading is uncertain.) James alfred Page: An historical memoire on the Qutb, 1926, GOI Central publication branch. page 39. R. Balasubramaniam: The world heritage complex of the Qutub, 2005.

The dialect of Delhi of the mason is consistent in rendering the RkAra as -ir(a).

Says Pushpa Prasad of Aligarh Muslim University: Found on the jamb of the main entrance door in the ninth course of the Qutb Minar, this inscription is written in a local dialect in Nagari script. No date is given* The reading is uncertain and no impression has been published. Sanskrit inscription Delhi Sultanate 1191-1526, Oxford University Press, 1990.

Some prove this evidence away with these words: This slab must have come from an earlier structure. The construction of the mosque and the minaret both used stones from earlier Hindu and Jain structures. These claims do not have any basis either in the architecture or in contemporary historical accounts. Although extensive Hindu decorative styles were used in the motifs on the minaret, it architecture is Islamic.

But, the name of Prithviraja at the entrance causes much inconvenience. Some who accept the reading, wishes it away suggesting that it was inscribed on reused stone slabs from the demolished temples. But, masons do engrave names at the end of a project at obvious places. It would be too much of a coincidence, without any parallels. Besides, Qutbuddin did reuse material of the temples only for his mosque, as per his inscription. No such inscription exists with reference to the minar.



Some Arabic inscriptions

Ghurid overlords

Two inscriptions on the basement storey naming Muhammad bin Sam. (Gateway of mosque has also his name.) Also the name of Ghiyathuddin bin Sam is given.



Slave general

Qutbuddin Aibak is referred to as al-amir ul isfehsalar-ul ajall-uk kabir = the amir, the commander of the army, the glorious, the great.

This is in the first and lowermost band of the basement storey.



Iyaltimish

Inscription reading that the erection of this minar was ordered by shamsuddin Iltutmish.

Contradicting Inscription reading that “The completion of this edifice was ordered by the king, helped by the heavenly grace, the Sun of Truth and Religion, Iltutmish.”



B. Courtwriters

I. Mamluk courtwriters

1. Hasan Nizami, contemporary of Qutbuddin Aibak and Iyaltimish. He wrote his taj-ul ma'asir. Hasan Nizami, describing the years 1191-1217 doesn't devote a single word on the Qutb Minar, neither on its name. He mentions the mosque being built by Qutbuddin.



2. Ibn Asir, contemporary of the Ghorians. He wrote his Kamil-ut Tawarikh till the end of the Ghorians. No mention of the Qutb Minar



3. Alauddin Jawaini, contemporary. He wrote his Tarikh-i Jahan Kusha. Narrating upto 1257. Neither he mentions the Minar.



4. Minhaj-us Siraj, contemporary of Qutbuddin and Iyaltimish. He wrote the Tabaqat-i Nasiri. He doesn't mention the Minar or Qutbuddin attached to its building.



5. Nasiruddin Ufi, contemporary of Iyaltimish. He wrote the Jami-ul Hikayat wa Lawami-ul Riwayat. Nor he does refer to the Qutb Minar.



II. Khilji courtwriter

1. Amir Khushrau, court poet of Alaudin Khilji. He wrote the Tarikh-i Alai.

He says that Alauddin “then resolved to make a pair to the lofty Minar of the jami masjid, which minar was then the single (celebrated) one of the time, and to raise it so high that it could not be exceeded.” Here the name (or word) Qutb is not attached to the Minara.



III. Tughluq courtwriters

1. Barani, court historian of Muhammad Tughluq. He is silent about the minar.



2. Abul Fida, contemporary of the Tughluqs. His work is the Tarikh-ul mukhtasar fi akhbari'l bashar. Says in 1300 that “the mazanah of the Jama Masjid at Delhi as made of red stone and very lofty, with many sides and 360 steps.” This is with reference to the first three storeys.



3. Shams-i Siraj Afif, court historian of Firuz Shah Tughluq. Wrote the Tarikh-i Firuz shahi. He says in 1380, that “the large pillar in the Masjid-i Jama at Old Delhi” was built by Altamish.



4. Sultan Firuz Shah, he wrote the Futuhat-i Firuz Shahi. The Minara of Muizuddin Sam had been struck by lightning. I repaired it and raised it higher than it was before.



Based upon these testimonies, Qutbuddin Aibak is not the builder from scratch of the Qutb Minar. Ghiyathuddin and Muhammad bin Sam's names have been engraved when Qutbuddin was the slave and then his own name when Iyaltimish was the Sultan. (servants praising their Sultans)

Iyaltimish didn't build the fourth storey, otherwise this would contradict Abul Fida's testimony in 1300 before the damage of 1326. Which means that:

a. Before the lightning damage of 1300, the tower had three storeys and a top balcony.

b. Altamish didn't build storeys 2-3-4, as there was no 4th storey leading to a top balcony. The fourth was the top balcony. It was Firuz Shah who confessed that he repaired it and made it higher than before.

c. If Iyaltimish is connected with working at 3 storeys, he must have done the remodelling of the 1st storey too on behalf of his former master and father in law Qutbuddin Aibak.



C. Architecture

Hindu masons

"The influence of Hindu Rajput craftsmen is visible in the naturalistic motifs, the serpentine tendrils, and even the curves of the alphabets of Quranic inscriptions.", says the Encyclopaedia Brittannica. The repairings were also done by Hindu masons.



Hindu motives

A website has this information: "Although the Qutb Mīnār is an exclusively Islamic conception it was made by Hindus so the ornamentation arround the carved Koran-Verses is influenced by the hindu-style." http://www.bergerfou...y=Inde&col=pays

Look at the flowers moving through or beneath the Quranic verses.



Indian workmen incorporate looped bells and garlands and lotus borders into the carving. But, also witness the 2 x 12 petalled = totally a 24 petalled lotus model looking at the Minar shaft from above. Again a clear hint to a Hindu motive.

(taking 360 steps of the ancient storey inner staircase, with this 2x12=24 number and 27 demolished temples, this hints at some astronomical meanings)



Three levels of decorations

band 1. flowers and twigs in the band intertwined with Quranic verses

band 2. Look at the serpentine wave pattern (Makara?) and floral wave patterns below the Quranic verses

band 3. See also circular floral patterns



Entrance decorations

http://commons.wikim...e_to_Qutb_Minar,_Delhi.jpg

1.Decoration – Floral motives: three times triple leaves within circular serpentine

2.Flutings: band with floral motives, above a band with chain motives, above open 8petalflowers



Balcony decorations

balcony supports

"... but details such as the pendant lotus supports of the three circular balconies were in the regional idiom." , as per M. Hattstein and P. Delius: Islami: art and architecture. The stalactite pendentives with lotus motives, thus was a regional one.



balconies

- First balcony has disconnected four-petalled flowers and turrets have flowerbuds

- Second balcony has an eight-petalled flower decoration all around and turrets have flowerbuds

- Third balcony has four-petalled flowers and turrets with flowerbuds

6.Fourth balcony has eightstarshaped and turrets with flowerbuds



All point to a surprising conclusion that the masons who worked on the minar, but also on the Quranic inscriptions were Hindus, otherwise Muslim masons would have tried to destroy the original organic iconography.

Note also that the balcony support (pendant lotus supports) is classified as belonging to the regional idiom = Indian by Hattstein and Delius. And that while researches want to see these stalactite pendentives as an imported Persian product. Lotuses don't have any meaning to Persians or Muslims.



Dislodged stone slabs with Hindu deities

One day in August, 1986, The Times of India printed on its front page the photographs of two stones carrying defaced carvings of some Hindu deities. There was a short statement beneath the photographs that the stones had been found by the Archaeological Survey of India in course of repairs to the Qutb Mînãr at Delhi. The stones, according to the Survey, had been built into a wall with the carved faces turned inwards. But the daily had dropped this part of the news.

Some correspondence cropped up in the letters-to-the-editor column of the newspaper. The majority of writers congratulated the editor for breaking a conspiracy of silence regarding publication of a certain type of historical facts in the mass media. A few writers regretted that a news item like that should have been published in a prestigious daily in an atmosphere of growing communal tension. None of the writers raised the question or speculated as to how those stones happened to be there. From: Hindu Temples, what happened to them by Sitaram Goel, vol. II chapter 4.

For a photo of a slab, see Stephen Knapp's site:

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/kutab_minar...ixteen.htm

Stones dislodged from more constructions in Delhi having Hindu images on one side with Arabic lettering on the other can also be seen in Sultan Ghari, the so-called burial of a son of Iyaltimish. For a photo, see also stephen Knapp's site: http://www.stephen-knapp.com/sultan_ghar...enteen.htm

These examples clearly show that Muslim invaders gave orders to their Hindu masons to remove the stone-dressing of Hindu buildings, turn the stones inside out to hide the image facial and inscribe Arabic lettering on the new frontage.



what do these anomalies tell us?

Remember we are in the 12th century, the Qutb Minar is said to have been a new Muslim building from scratch. Which simply means, that despite its Hindu masons, their Muslim overlords were not that blind to allow organic iconic Hindu motives, which were a violation to their religion. Especially not as this was a tower of victory over the kafirs on their very sacred ground.



We see the same serpentine and floral motives in the Quwwat mosque! This points to the Minar and mosque to be of the same pre-Muslim period and architects. The fact that Muslim monuments (of this period) allow clear Hindu motives all point to a new use of preexisting structures adapted to new rulers, though militarily in power, but lacking in time, peace and artisans, masons, sculptors and of course architects. The most simple road for the Muslims was simply capturing Hindu masons and taking them to their realms. That is exactly what Timur also did in 1398.



Thus, these serpentine (Makara?) and floral (lotus) motives are a strong indication of the tower being usurped from a previous period and ruler who was a Hindu. The job done by the Sultans was:

a. remodelling the Hindu iconography in such a way that it was not too disturbing for the Muslims

b. adding quranic verses in order to give it a Muslim stamp

c. stressing overall the submission of Hindu symbolism to Muslim supremacy within former Hindu sacred ground



Conclusion

Muhammad bin Sam's name had been inscribed twice, mot probably by Qutbuddin's order. Qutbuddin's function names were also inscribed, as a general. But nowhere is he connected with its construction neither in inscription nor in literature.

All the sources of the mamluk period and Khilji period are silent about the authorship, but certainly do not connect either Qutbuddin or Iyaltimish with the construction from scratch.



In 1199 Qutbuddin must perhaps have ended the project of removing icons of the previous ruler both from the mosque and the minar. His successor Iyaltimish must have started with the Quranic texts on the first floor and finished till the third. The Tower may have been tried to function as mazanah around 1300, as the tower had only three storeys. But thiss practice never came in vogue later.

Then a few decades later the tower was damaged by lightning. Probably the cupola was destroyed.

In 1368 Hindu masons, on behalf of Firuz Shah Tughluq built (after another lightning?) two more storeys.

This was not in the same style. These storeys also has inscriptions.



The serpentine and floral (lotus) iconography and that too in the quranic texts points to the tower being remodelled like the adjacent mosque, thus both being constructions before the Muslims. The tower was remodelled through Quranic inscriptions initially into a mazanah, later during the Tughluq regaining its older name of Vijaya Stambha, but now for the mamluks.



A Minar built from scratch on the very sacred soil of the hated last Hindu ruler could never have included Hindu symbols or organic iconography. Like the mosque, this points to a pre-existence of the Tower, having been remodelled ornamentally just like adjacent temple structure into a new Muslim symbol. The early Mamluks didn't have the time, tools or personnel to execute such a grand project of remodelling, let alone to build anything from scratch. Remember that the Mamluks face a constant thread from Hindu rebels and also repeated invasions of Mongols, which caused the Sultans to constantly shift their vulnerable royal seats. (vulnerable, because as rulers you need the support of the majority Hindu citizens)



The Minar of Jam doesn't look like the complexer built Qutb Minar. That Minar is a monolithic tower built of bricks, without any nearby mosque. The same counts for the Ghazni towers, who also don't look like the Qutb Minar. The Ghazni towers must have been built by captured Hindu masons during Mahmud Ghaznavi. (Perhaps also the tower of Jam, more probably by masons of Bauddha Marga.) Ghazni was a former Hindu capital city of Bhatti Rajas, ancestors of the Jaisalmer Rajputs.



The name of Prithviraja is engraved at the entrance by a local Hindu mason (of his period). This may be wished away by some, but in the light of all other evidence, like floral and serpentine icons, even within the Quranic verses, only leads to the conclusion that the tower must have been at least from Prithviraja's time, perhaps ordered to have been built or repaired by him.



Hindu temples, Shaiva, Vaishnava, Jaina and Bauddha, etc. do have monolithic (or sometimes polylithic) Stambhas in front of their temples, forming part of the temple plan. Indian inspired Boud Khanas > But Khanas with their monolithic cylindrical Stambhas were scattered from the NW towards Afghanistan, Iran and Central-Asia. Cylindrical Towers forming a part of the temple complex are not met with farther west in early Muslim period as minaras or mazanahs.



Both the Qutb Minar as the doublesized Alai Minar base are in a neat central line within the outer court. In my opinion the mosque with the temple iron pillar and the outer court containing the two minars, formed integral part of the greater temple complex. The Turk disturbed the original sanctuary planning.



Qutbuddin conquered the city and sanctuary with the tower and had finished in 1199 the first remodelling of the icons and a few inscriptions. His successor Iyaltimish started and finished the Quranic inscriptions on this former Hindu symbol. The hatred for Prithviraja by the Turko-Afghans and the desecration of the sanctuary and tower in such a way that it became the symbol of power of the conquerors point to the direction of this conclusion of mine: the sanctuary and tower turned into mosque and minar were part of a special sacred spot of Prithviraja Chauhana. It may have been his Kula Devalaya housing the Murti of his Kula Devata