10-24-2010, 09:12 AM
By chance, I found out the truth about the forts of Agra, see above, when I was looking for information concerning the construction of Humayun's tomb in the Akbarnama. Below is a general survey, which already reveals huge gaps, vagueness and lack of interest concerning patronship and execution of an important project by Akbar: the tomb of Humayun. While the Akbarnama gives figures of peoples working daily and information of preparation of the new fort on the eastern bank, it does say nothing (!!) about any preparation or peoples working. Suddenly we get the information that Akbar visits his father's tomb in spring 1570, after a gap of several years of expeditions, at which time he had visited his fathers Supurdgah in 1558 in Sirhind.
Only Badayuni provides the information of an architect and that around 1570 the tomb was ready. As the complex is huge and the construction process complicated, the architect didn't build the mausoleum from scratch, but he was involved in converting a lofty mansion into a graveyard complex within a short timespan.
Question marks Humayun's tomb
Humayun's tomb is another vague case. No contemporary or other court writer gives clear information about the project. Abul Fazl only refers twice in his Akbarnama vol. II that Akbar visited Humayun's Supurdgah in Sirhind in 1558 (chapter 16) and his tomb in Indarpat early in 1570 (chapter 72).
Hamida Begam had hardly anything to do with either supervising or designing the tomb, as she arrived in Agra in april 1568, after having visited Mecca and Madina. (chapter 66) Thus, she was most of the time during the construction period away. That must have been after Akbar's 1564 visit to Delhi, where he went to Awliya's shrine not referring to Humayun's tomb, upto early 1570). The great mausoleum complex built in hardly 6 years, without Abul Fazl even bothering to mention anything of a construction process, makes it doubtful to have been commissioned by Akbar or someone of his age. But Badayuni refers to one Mirak Mirza Ghiyas as having finished his 'tomb' in 1570.
This gives us a clue as again converting a lofty grand mansion into a Mughal graveyard in a short time span. This means that shortly before 1570 Mirak made the preparations to turn a palatial Barahdari into a tomb. Abul Fazl calls it a marqud, Badayuni an imarat and rauza and Nizamuddin Ahmad a mazar and hazirah. The origins of this grand mansion must be sought in non-Islamic circles, belonging to the Indarpat city culture.
In another post, I will elaborate on the Hindu symbolism of the garden-mansion complex. Dr. Balasubramaniam has already demonstrated in his paper that the complex is laid out on the traditional grid pattern units (Vitasti etc.) of the ancient Vastushastras, Arthashastra etc.
New research
I am recently gathering data concerning Indian art(isan)s influence in Afghanistan and Greater Khurasan upto Xinjiang. And especially the Ghaznavid (11th/12th century) and Ghurid (late 12th century) architecture, focussing on their Minars. One can clearly see the hands of (captured) Hindu masons in these, like floral/leaves motives intertwined with Quranic verses and information on the Sultans. The sunnite Ghazi rulers were fanatic Muslims. It seems that the Arabic was either engraved by captured Hindu masons on ancient non-Muslim towers, or the captured Hindu masons built the towers from scratch with floral motives. This last seems unlikely, supposing that most Ghaznavids were illiterate, floral motives are recognizable by anyone.
The so-called origin of the Qutb Minar in Jam, Herat, is cylindrical doesn't look like it, and it seems to have been built in 1194, thus after the defeat of Prithviraja. Besides, a fallen stoneslab of the Qutb Minar has Hindu figures, pointing simply to another case of a conversion.
Only Badayuni provides the information of an architect and that around 1570 the tomb was ready. As the complex is huge and the construction process complicated, the architect didn't build the mausoleum from scratch, but he was involved in converting a lofty mansion into a graveyard complex within a short timespan.
Question marks Humayun's tomb
Humayun's tomb is another vague case. No contemporary or other court writer gives clear information about the project. Abul Fazl only refers twice in his Akbarnama vol. II that Akbar visited Humayun's Supurdgah in Sirhind in 1558 (chapter 16) and his tomb in Indarpat early in 1570 (chapter 72).
Hamida Begam had hardly anything to do with either supervising or designing the tomb, as she arrived in Agra in april 1568, after having visited Mecca and Madina. (chapter 66) Thus, she was most of the time during the construction period away. That must have been after Akbar's 1564 visit to Delhi, where he went to Awliya's shrine not referring to Humayun's tomb, upto early 1570). The great mausoleum complex built in hardly 6 years, without Abul Fazl even bothering to mention anything of a construction process, makes it doubtful to have been commissioned by Akbar or someone of his age. But Badayuni refers to one Mirak Mirza Ghiyas as having finished his 'tomb' in 1570.
This gives us a clue as again converting a lofty grand mansion into a Mughal graveyard in a short time span. This means that shortly before 1570 Mirak made the preparations to turn a palatial Barahdari into a tomb. Abul Fazl calls it a marqud, Badayuni an imarat and rauza and Nizamuddin Ahmad a mazar and hazirah. The origins of this grand mansion must be sought in non-Islamic circles, belonging to the Indarpat city culture.
In another post, I will elaborate on the Hindu symbolism of the garden-mansion complex. Dr. Balasubramaniam has already demonstrated in his paper that the complex is laid out on the traditional grid pattern units (Vitasti etc.) of the ancient Vastushastras, Arthashastra etc.
New research
I am recently gathering data concerning Indian art(isan)s influence in Afghanistan and Greater Khurasan upto Xinjiang. And especially the Ghaznavid (11th/12th century) and Ghurid (late 12th century) architecture, focussing on their Minars. One can clearly see the hands of (captured) Hindu masons in these, like floral/leaves motives intertwined with Quranic verses and information on the Sultans. The sunnite Ghazi rulers were fanatic Muslims. It seems that the Arabic was either engraved by captured Hindu masons on ancient non-Muslim towers, or the captured Hindu masons built the towers from scratch with floral motives. This last seems unlikely, supposing that most Ghaznavids were illiterate, floral motives are recognizable by anyone.
The so-called origin of the Qutb Minar in Jam, Herat, is cylindrical doesn't look like it, and it seems to have been built in 1194, thus after the defeat of Prithviraja. Besides, a fallen stoneslab of the Qutb Minar has Hindu figures, pointing simply to another case of a conversion.