PATHAN STYLE.
CONTENTS.
Mosque at Old Delhi--Kutub Minar--Tomb of Ala ud-dîn--Pathan
Tombs--Ornamentation of Pathan Tombs.
CHRONOLOGY.
Shahab ud-dîn Ghori A.D. 1192
Kutub ud-dîn Ibek 1206
Shum ud-dîn Altumsh 1210
Ala ud-dîn Khilji 1295
Tugluck Shah 1321
Nasar ud-dîn last of the Khiljis 1393
Khyer Khan under Tamerlane 1414
Behloli Lodi 1450
Shere Shah 1510
Sekunder defeated by Akbar 1554
With all the vigour of a new race, the Ghorians set about the conquest
of India. After sustaining a defeat in the year 1191, Shahab ud-dîn
again entered India in A.D. 1193, when he attacked and defeated
Prithiraj of Delhi. This success was followed by the conquest of Canouge
in A.D. 1194; and after the fall of these two, the capitals of the
greatest empires in the peninsula, India may be said to have been
conquered before his death, which happened in A.D. 1206.
At his death his great empire fell to pieces, and India fell to the
share of Kutub ud-dîn Ibek. This prince was originally a Tûrkish slave,
who afterwards became one of Shahab ud-dîn’s generals and contributed
greatly by his talents and military skill to the success of his master.
He and his successor, Altumsh, continued nobly the work so successfully
begun, and before the death of the latter, in A.D. 1235, the empire of
northern India had permanently passed from the hands of the Hindus to
those of their Mahomedan conquerors.
For a century and a half after the conquest the empire continued a
united whole, under Tûrkish, or, as they are usually called, Pathan
dynasties. These monarchs exhibited a continued vigour and energy very
unusual in the East, and not only sustained and consolidated, but
increased by successive conquests from the infidels, that newly-acquired
accession to the dominions of the faithful, and during that time Delhi
continued practically the capital of this great empire. In the latter
half, however, of the 14th century, symptoms of disintegration
manifested themselves. One after another the governors of distant
provinces reared the standard of revolt, and successfully established
independent kingdoms, rivalling the parent state in power and in the
splendour of their capitals. Still Delhi remained the nominal head at
least of this confederation of states--if it may be so called--till the
time when Baber (A.D. 1494), the fourth in descent from Tamerlane,
invaded Hindustan. He put an end to the Pathan sway, after it had lasted
for three centuries and a half, and finally succeeded in establishing
the celebrated dynasty of the Moguls, which during six successive
reigns, extending over the extraordinary period of more than two
centuries (A.D. 1494-1707), reconsolidated the Moslem empire into one
great whole, which reached a degree of splendour and of power almost
unknown in the East.
Nothing could be more brilliant, and at the same time more
characteristic, than the commencement of the architectural career of
these Pathans in India. So soon as they felt themselves at all sure of
their conquest, they set to work to erect two great mosques in their two
principal capitals of Ajmir and Delhi, of such magnificence as should
redound to the glory of their religion and mark their triumph over the
idolators. A nation of soldiers equipped for conquest, and that only,
they had of course brought with them neither artists nor architects,
but, like all nations of Turanian origin, they had strong architectural
instincts, and having a style of their own, they could hardly go wrong
in any architectural project they might attempt. At the same time, they
found among their new subjects an infinite number of artists quite
capable of carrying out any design that might be propounded to them.
In the first place, they found in the colonnaded courts of the Jaina
temples nearly all that was wanted for a ready-made mosque. All that was
required was the removal of the temple in its centre, and the erection
of a new wall on the west side, adorned with niches--mihrabs--to point
out to the faithful the direction in which Mecca lay, towards which, as
is well known, they were commanded in the Koran to turn when they
prayed. It is not certain, however, that they were ever in India content
with this only. In the two instances at least to which we are now
referring, they determined in addition to erect a screen of arches in
front of the Jaina pillars, and to adorn it with all the richness and
elaboration of carving which their Indian subjects were capable of
executing. Nothing could be more successful than the results. There is a
largeness and grandeur about the plain simple outline of the Mahomedan
arches which quite overshadows the smaller parts of the Hindu fanes, and
at the same time the ornamentation, though applied to a greater extent
than in any other known examples, is kept so flat as never to interfere
with or break the simple outlines of the architectural construction.
There may be other examples of surface-decoration as elaborate as this,
but hardly anywhere on such a scale. Some parts of the interior of Sta.
Sophia at Constantinople are as beautiful,[491] but they are only a few
square yards. The palace at Meshita, if completed, might have rivalled
it, but it is a fragment;[492] and there may be--certainly
were--examples in Persia between the times of Chosroes and Harun
al-Rashid, which may have equalled these, but they have perished, or at
least are not known to us now; and even if they ever existed, must have
been unlike these mosques. In them we find a curious exemplification of
some of the best qualities of the art, as exhibited previously by the
Hindus, and practised afterwards by their conquerors.
DELHI.
Of the two mosques at Delhi and at Ajmir, the first named is the
earlier, having been begun some seven or eight years before the other,
and is also very much the larger.[493] It is, besides, associated with
the Kutub Minar, and some of the most beautiful tombs of the age, which
altogether make up a group with which nothing at Ajmir can compare. The
situation, too, of the Delhi ruins is singularly beautiful, for they
stand on the gentle slope of a hill, overlooking a plain that had once
apparently been a lake, but which afterwards became the site of three
successive capitals of the East. In front are the ruins of Tugluckabad,
the gigantic fort of an old Pathan chief; and further north the plain is
still covered with the ruins of Old Delhi, the capital of the later
Pathans and earlier Moguls. Beyond that, at the distance of nine or ten
miles, are seen the towers of Shahjehanabad, the modern capital, and
till recently the seat of the nominal monarchy of the Great Mogul. Still
further north are situated the civil stations and cantonments of the
British rulers of the country. It is a fortunate circumstance that the
British station was not, as at Agra, placed in the midst of the ruins,
since it is to this that we owe their preservation. But for the
distance, marble columns would doubtless have been taken for all
purposes for which they might have been available, with a total
disregard to their beauty, and the interest of the ruins thereby
annihilated. Even as it is, the buildings belonging to the celebrated
Shahlimar gardens, which were the only buildings of importance in the
neighbourhood of the English station, have disappeared; but these are
of slight importance as compared with the ruins further south.
The general arrangement of the principal ruins will be understood from
the plan (Woodcut No. 277), which was taken with great care, though the
scale to which it has been necessary to reduce it prevents all its
peculiarities from being seen. To understand it, it is necessary to bear
in mind that all the pillars are of Hindu, and all the walls of
Mahomedan, architecture.
[Illustration: 277. Plan of Ruins in Old Delhi. (From a Plan by the
Author.) Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]
It is a little difficult to determine to what extent the pillars now
stand as originally arranged by the Hindus, or how far they have been
taken down and re-arranged by the conquerors. Even supposing them to be
undisturbed, it is quite evident that the enclosing walls were erected
by the Moslems, since all the stringcourses are covered with ornaments
in their style, and all the openings possess pointed arches, which the
Hindus never used. On the whole the probability seems to be that the
entire structure was re-arranged in the form we now see it by the
Mahomedans. The celebrated mosque at Canouge is undoubtedly a Jaina
temple, re-arranged on a plan precisely similar to that of the mosque of
Amrou at Old Cairo (Woodcut No. 921, vol. ii.). The roof and domes are
all of Jaina architecture, so that no trace of the Moorish style is to
be seen internally; but the exterior is as purely of Mahomedan
architecture. There is another mosque at Dhar, near Mandu, of more
modern date, and, without doubt, a re-arrangement of a Jaina temple.
Another, in the fort at Jaunpore, as well as many other mosques at
Ahmedabad and elsewhere, all show the same system of taking down and
re-arranging the materials on a different plan. If, therefore, the
pillars at the Kutub were _in situ_, the case would be exceptional;[494]
but I cannot, nevertheless, help suspecting that the two-storeyed
pavilions in the angles, and those behind the screen may be as
originally erected, and some of the others may be so also; but to this
we will return when speaking of the Ajmir mosque, where the Jaina
pillars are almost certainly as first arranged. It is quite certain,
however, that some of the pillars at the Kutub are made up of dissimilar
fragments, and were placed where they now stand by the builders of the
mosque. The only question--and it is not a very important one--is, how
many were so treated? It may, however, be necessary to explain that
there could be no difficulty in taking down and rebuilding these
erections, because the joints of the pillars are all fitted with the
precision that Hindu patience alone could give. Each compartment of the
roof is composed of nine stones--four architraves, four angular and one
central slab (as explained in diagram No. 114, p. 214), all so exactly
fitted, and so independent of cement, as easily to be taken down and put
up again. The same is true of the domes, all which being honestly and
fairly fitted, would suffer no damage from the process of removal and
re-erection.
The section (Woodcut No. 278) of one half of the principal colonnade
(the one facing the great series of arches) will explain its form
better than words can do. It is so purely Jaina, that it should,
perhaps, have been mentioned in speaking of that style; but as forming a
part of the earliest mosque in India, it is more appropriately
introduced in this place. The pillars are of the same order as those
used on Mount Abu (Woodcut No. 130), except that those at Delhi are much
richer and more elaborate. Most of them probably belong to the 11th or
12th century, and are among the few specimens to be found in India that
seem to be overloaded with ornament. There is not one inch of plain
surface from the capital to the base, except the pillars behind the
screen and some others which may belong to older buildings. Still the
ornament is so sharp and so cleverly executed, and the effect, in their
present state of decay and ruin so picturesque, that it is very
difficult to find fault with what is so beautiful. In some instances the
figures that were on the shafts of the pillars have been cut off, as
offensive to Mahomedan strictness with regard to idolatrous images; but
on the roof and less seen parts, the cross-legged figures of the Jaina
saints, and other emblems of that religion, may still be detected.
[Illustration: 278. Section of part of East Colonnade at the Kutub, Old
Delhi. Scale 25 ft. to 1 in.]
The glory of the mosque, however, is not in these Hindu remains, but in
the great range of arches on the western side, extending north and south
for about 385 ft., and consisting of three greater and eight smaller
arches; the central one 22 ft. wide and 53 ft. high; the larger
side-arches 24 ft. 4 in., and about the same height as the central arch;
the smaller arches, which are unfortunately much ruined, are about half
these dimensions (Woodcut No. 279). Behind this, at the distance of 32
ft., are the foundations of another wall; but only intended, apparently,
to be carried as high as the roof of the Hindu pillars it encloses. It
seems probable that the Hindu pillars between the two screens were the
only part proposed to be roofed, since some of them are built into the
back part of the great arches, and all above them is quite plain and
smooth, without the least trace of any intention to construct a vault or
roof of any sort. Indeed, a roof is by no means an essential part of a
mosque; a wall facing Mecca is all that is required, and in India is
frequently all that is built, though an enclosure is often added in
front to protect the worshippers from interruption. Roofed colonnades
are, of course, convenient and ornamental accompaniments, yet far from
being indispensable.
[Illustration: 279. Central Range of Arches at the Kutub. (From a Sketch
by the Author.)]
The history of this mosque, as told in its construction, is as curious
as anything about it. It seems that the Afghan conquerors had a
tolerably distinct idea that pointed arches were the true form for
architectural openings; but, being without science sufficient to
construct them, they left the Hindu architects and builders whom they
employed to follow their own devices as to the mode of carrying out the
form. The Hindus up to this time had never built arches--nor, indeed,
did they for centuries afterwards. Accordingly, they proceeded to make
the pointed openings on the same principle upon which they built their
domes. They carried them up in horizontal courses as far as they could,
and then closed them by long slabs meeting at the top, the construction
being, in fact, that of the arch of the aqueduct at Tusculum, shown in
Woodcut No. 178, vol. i.[495] The same architects were employed by
their masters to ornament the faces of these arches; and this they did
by copying and repeating the ornaments on the pillars and friezes on the
opposite sides of the court, covering the whole with a lace-work of
intricate and delicate carving, such as no other mosque except that at
Ajmir ever received before or since; and which--though perhaps in a
great measure thrown away when used on such a scale--is, without
exception, the most exquisite specimen of its class known to exist
anywhere. The stone being particularly hard and good, the carving
retains its freshness to the present day, and is only destroyed above
the arches, where the faulty Hindu construction has superinduced
premature decay.
[Illustration: 280. Minar of Kutub.
(From a Sketch by the Author.)]
The Kutub Minar, or great minaret, is 48 ft. 4 in. in diameter at the
base, and, when measured in 1794, was 242 ft. in height.[496] Even then,
however, its capital was ruined, so that some 10 ft., or perhaps 20 ft.,
must be added to this to complete its original elevation. It is
ornamented by four boldly-projecting balconies; one at 97 ft., the
second at 148 ft., the third at 188 ft., and the fourth at 214 ft. from
the ground; between which are richly-sculptured raised belts containing
inscriptions. In the lower storey the projecting ribs which form the
flutes are alternately angular and circular; in the second circular and
in the third angular only. Above this the minar is plain, and
principally of white marble, with belts of the same red sandstone of
which the three lower storeys are composed (Woodcut No. 280).
It is not clear whether the angular flutings are copied from some
peculiarity found in the minarets at Khorasan and further westward, or
whether they are derived from the forms of the temples of the Jains. The
forms of the bases of the minarets at Ghazni appear to lend probability
to the first hypothesis; but the star-like form of many
temples--principally Jaina--in Mysore and elsewhere (_ante_, p. 394, _et
seqq._) would seem to countenance the idea of their being of Hindu
origin. No star-like forms have yet, however, been found so far north,
and their destruction has been too complete for us to hope that they may
be found now. Be this as it may, it is probably not too much to assert
that the Kutub Minar is the most beautiful example of its class known to
exist anywhere. The rival that will occur at once to most people is the
campanile at Florence, built by Giotto. That is, it is true, 30 ft.
taller, but it is crushed by the mass of the cathedral alongside; and,
beautiful though it is, it wants that poetry of design and exquisite
finish of detail which marks every moulding of the minar. It might have
been better if the slope of the sides had been at a higher angle, but
that is only apparent when seen at a distance; when viewed from the
court of the mosque its form is perfect, and, under any aspect, is
preferable to the prosaic squareness of the outline of the Italian
example.
The only Mahomedan building known to be taller than this is the minaret
of the mosque of Hassan, at Cairo (p. 389 and Woodcut No. 928, vol.
ii.); but as the pillar at Old Delhi is a wholly independent building,
it has a far nobler appearance, and both in design and finish far
surpasses not only its Egyptian rival, but any building of its class
known to me in the whole world. This, however, must not be looked at as
if erected for the same purposes as those usually attached to mosques
elsewhere. It was not designed as a place from which the müeddin should
call the prayers, though its lower gallery may have been used for that
purpose also, but as a Tower of Victory--a Jaya Stambha, in fact--an
emblem of conquest, which the Hindus could only too easily understand
and appreciate.
At the distance of 470 ft. north of this one a second minar was
commenced, by Ala ud-dîn, of twice its dimensions, or 297 ft. in
circumference. It was only carried up to the height of 40 ft., and
abandoned probably in consequence of the removal of the seat of
government to the new capital of Tugluckabad.
The date of all these buildings is known with sufficient exactness from
the inscriptions which they bear,[497] from which it appears that the
inner court was enclosed by Shahab ud-dîn. The central range of arches
(Woodcut No. 279) was built by Kutub ud-dîn; the wings by Altumsh,
whose tomb is behind the northern range, and the Kutub Minar was either
built or finished by the same monarch; they extend, therefore, from A.D.
1196-1235, at which date they were left incomplete in consequence of the
death of the last-named king.
[Illustration: 281. Iron Pillar at Kutub. (From a Photograph.) The
dotted line shows the extent below the ground.]
One of the most interesting objects connected with this mosque is the
iron pillar which stands--and apparently always has stood--in the centre
of its courtyard (Woodcut No. 281). It now stands 22 ft. above the
ground, and as the depth under the pavement is now ascertained to be
only 20 in., the total height is 23 ft. 8 in.[498] Its diameter at the
base is 16·4 in., at the capital 12·05 in. The capital is 3½ ft.
high, and is sharply and clearly wrought into the Persian form that
makes it look as if it belonged to an earlier period than it does; and
it has the amalaka moulding, which is indicative of considerable
antiquity. It has not, however, been yet correctly ascertained what its
age really is. There is an inscription upon it, but without a date. From
the form of its alphabet, Prinsep ascribed it to the 3rd or 4th
century;[499] Bhau Daji, on the same evidence, to the end of the 5th or
beginning of the 6th century.[500] The truth probably lies between the
two. My own conviction is that it belongs to one of the Chandra Rajas of
the Gupta dynasty, either consequently to A.D. 363 or A.D. 400.
Taking A.D. 400 as a mean date--and it certainly is not far from the
truth--it opens our eyes to an unsuspected state of affairs to find the
Hindus at that age capable of forging a bar of iron larger than any that
have been forged even in Europe up to a very late date, and not
frequently even now. As we find them, however, a few centuries
afterwards using bars as long as this lât in roofing the porch of the
temple at Kanaruc (_ante_, p. 222), we must now believe that they were
much more familiar with the use of this metal than they afterwards
became. It is almost equally startling to find that, after an exposure
to wind and rain for fourteen centuries, it is unrusted, and the capital
and inscription are as clear and as sharp now as when put up fourteen
centuries ago.[501]
As the inscription informs us the pillar was dedicated to Vishnu, there
is little doubt that it originally supported a figure of Garuda on the
summit which the Mahomedans of course removed; but the real object of
its erection was as a pillar of victory to record the “defeat of the
Balhikas,[502] near the seven mouths of the Sindhu,” or Indus. It is, to
say the least of it, a curious coincidence, that eight centuries
afterwards men from that same Bactrian country should have erected a
Jaya Stambha ten times as tall as this one, in the same courtyard, to
celebrate their victory over the descendants of those Hindus who so long
before had expelled their ancestors from the country.
Immediately behind the north-west corner of the mosque stands the tomb
of Altumsh, the founder. Though small, it is one of the richest examples
of Hindu art applied to Mahomedan purposes that Old Delhi affords, and
is extremely beautiful, though the builders still display a certain
degree of inaptness in fitting the details to their new purposes. The
effect at present is injured by the want of a roof, which, judging from
appearance, was never completed, if ever commenced. In addition to the
beauty of its details it is interesting as being the oldest tomb known
to exist in India. He died A.D. 1236.
[Illustration: 282. Interior of a Tomb at Old Delhi. (From a Sketch by
the Author.)]
A more beautiful example than even this is the other, shown on the left
hand of the plan (Woodcut No. 277). It was erected by Ala ud-dîn Khilji,
and the date 1310 is found among its inscriptions. It is therefore
about a century more modern than the other buildings of the place, and
displays the Pathan style at its period of greatest perfection, when the
Hindu masons had learned to fit their exquisite style of decoration to
the forms of their foreign masters. Its walls are decorated internally
with a diaper pattern of unrivalled excellence, and the mode in which
the square is changed into an octagon is more simply elegant and
appropriate than any other example I am acquainted with in India. The
pendentives accord perfectly with the pointed openings in the four other
faces, and are in every respect appropriately constructive.[503] True,
there are defects. For instance, they are rather too plain for the
elaborate diapering which covers the whole of the lower part of the
building both internally and externally; but ornament might easily have
been added; and their plainness accords with the simplicity of the dome,
which is indeed by no means worthy of the substructure. Not being
pierced with windows, it seems as if the architect assumed that its
plainness would not be detected in the gloom that in consequence
prevails.
This building, though small--it is only 53 ft. square externally, and
with an internal apartment only 34 ft. 6 in. in plan--marks the
culminating point of the Pathan style in Delhi. Nothing so complete had
been done before, nothing so ornate was attempted by them afterwards. In
the provinces wonderful buildings were erected between this period and
the Mogul conquest, but in the capital their edifices were more marked
by solemn gloom and nakedness than by ornamentation or any of the higher
graces of architectural art. Externally it is a good deal damaged, but
its effect is still equal to that of any building of its class in India.
AJMIR.
The mosque at Ajmir (Woodcut No. 283) was commenced apparently in the
year 1200 and was certainly completed during the reign of Altumsh, A.D.
1211-1236.[504] According to tradition, it was finished in two days and
a half; hence the only name by which it is now known--the “Arhai dîn ka
Jhompra,” which, if it means anything, can only apply to the clearing
away of the Pagan temples and symbols, and the dedication of a heathen
shrine to purposes of the Faithful. In this instance it seems almost
certain, whatever may be the case at Delhi, that the pillars are _in
situ_. At all events, if they were taken down by the Mahomedans, they
certainly have been re-erected exactly as they were originally designed
to stand.[505] The pillars, their architraves, the roofing stones, and
the domes, are all of a piece, and so exactly what we find at Abu and
Girnar as to leave no doubt that we see before us a part of the
courtyard of a Jaina Temple, which probably had been used by the
followers of that religion for a couple of centuries at least before it
was appropriated by the conquerors. It is only the west side, with its
nine domes, that is now standing. The cloisters on the other three sides
are in ruins, though their plan can easily be traced even now. What
remains, however, is sufficient to show that it must originally have
been a singularly elegant specimen of its class. The pillars are taller
and more slender than those of the mosque at Delhi, but purer and more
elegant in design.
[Illustration: 283. Mosque at Ajmir. (Compiled from a Plan by Gen.
Cunningham.) Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]
The glory, however, of this mosque, as of that of the Kutub, is the
screen of seven arches with which Altumsh adorned the courtyard (Woodcut
No. 284). Its dimensions are very similar to those of its rival. The
central arch is 22 ft. 3 in. wide; the two on either side 13 ft. 6 in.,
and the outer one at each end 10 ft. 4 in. In the centre the screen
rises to a height of 56 ft., and on it are the ruins of two small
minarets 10½ ft. in diameter, ornamented with alternate circular and
angular flutes, as in the lower storey of the Kutub. It is not clear
[Illustration: 284. Great Arch in Mosque at Ajmir. (From a Photograph.)]
whether anything of the same sort existed at Delhi--probably not, as the
great minar may have served for that purpose, and their introduction
here looks like an afterthought, and the production of an unpractised
hand working in an unfamiliar style. Wherever and whenever minars were
afterwards introduced, preparations for them were always made from the
foundations, and their lines are always carried down to the ground, in
some shape or other, as in true art they ought to be. This solecism, if
it may be so called, evidently arose from the architects being Hindus,
unfamiliar with the style; and to this also is due the fact that all the
arches are constructed on the horizontal principle. There is not a true
arch in the place; but, owing to their having the command of larger
stones than were available at Delhi, the arches are not here crippled,
as they were there before the late repairs.
It is neither, however, its dimensions nor design that makes this screen
one of the most remarkable architectural objects in India, but the mode
in which it is decorated. Nothing can exceed the taste with which the
Cufic and Togra inscriptions are interwoven with the more purely
architectural decorations, or the manner in which they give life and
variety to the whole, without ever interfering with the constructive
lines of the design. As before remarked, as examples of
surface-decoration, these two mosques of Altumsh at Delhi and Ajmir are
probably unrivalled. Nothing in Cairo or in Persia is so exquisite in
detail, and nothing in Spain or Syria can approach them for beauty of
surface-decoration. Besides this, they are unique. Nowhere else would it
be possible to find Mahomedan largeness of conception, combined with
Hindu delicacy of ornamentation, carried out to the same extent and in
the same manner. If to this we add their historical value as the first
mosques erected in India, and their ethnographic importance as bringing
out the leading characteristics of the two races in so distinct and
marked a manner, there are certainly no two buildings in India that
better deserve the protecting care of Government; the one has received
its fair share of attention; the other has been most shamefully
neglected, and latterly most barbarously ill-treated.[506]
LATER PATHAN STYLE.
After the death of Ala ud-dîn (A.D. 1316) a change seems to have come
over the spirit of the Pathan architects, and all their subsequent
buildings, down to the time of Shere Shah, A.D. 1539, exhibit a stern
simplicity of design, in marked contrast to the elaborate ornamentation
with which they began. It is not clear whether this arose from any
puritanical reaction against the quasi-Hinduism of the earlier examples,
or from any political causes, the effect of which it is now difficult to
trace: but, certain it is, that when that stern old warrior Tugluck
Shah, A.D. 1321, founded the New Delhi, which still bears his
name--Tugluckabad--all his buildings are characterised by a severe
simplicity, in marked contrast with those which his predecessors erected
in the capital that overlooks the plain in which his citadel is
situated. His tomb, which was finished at least, if not built, by his
successor, instead of being situated in a garden, as is usually the
case, stands by itself in a strongly-fortified citadel of its own,
surrounded by an artificial lake. The sloping walls and almost Egyptian
solidity of this mausoleum, combined with the bold and massive towers of
the fortifications that surround it, form a model of a warrior’s tomb
hardly to be rivalled anywhere, and in singular contrast with the
elegant and luxuriant garden-tombs of the more settled and peaceful
dynasties that succeeded.
The change, however, of most interest from a historical point of view
is, that by the time of Tugluck Shah’s reign, the Moslems had worked
themselves entirely free from Hindu influence. In his buildings all the
arches are true arches; all the details invented for the place where
they are found. His tomb, in fact, would be as appropriate--more so,
indeed--if found in the valley of the Nile than on the banks of the
Jumna; and from that time forward Mahomedan architecture in India was a
new and complete style in itself, and developed according to the natural
and inevitable sequences of true styles in all parts of the world.
It is true, nevertheless, that in their tombs, as well as in their
mosques, they frequently, to save themselves trouble, used Hindu
materials when they were available, and often with the most picturesque
effect. Many of these compound edifices are composed of four pillars
only, surmounted by a small dome; but frequently they adopt with the
pillars the Jaina arrangement of twelve pillars, so placed as to support
an octagonal framework, easily moulded into a circular basement for a
dome. This, as before observed, is the arrangement of the tomb at
Mylassa, and the formative idea of all that is beautiful in the plans of
Jaina buildings in India.
One example must suffice to explain the effect of these buildings
(Woodcut No. 285). At first sight the dome looks rather heavy for the
substructure; but the effect of the whole is so picturesque that it is
difficult to find fault with it. If all the materials were original, the
design would be open to criticism; but, when a portion is avowedly
borrowed, a slight want of balance between the parts may be excused.
[Illustration: 285. Pathan Tomb at Shepree, near Gualior. (From a Sketch
by the Author.)]
There are several examples of tombs of this sort at the Bakaraya Kund in
Benares, evidently made up from Jaina materials;[507] and, indeed,
wherever the Mahomedans fairly settled themselves on a site previously
occupied by the Jains, such combinations are frequent; but no attempt is
ever made to assimilate the parts that are Mahomedan with those
belonging to the Hindu style which they are employing; they are of the
age in which the tomb or mosque was built, and that age, consequently,
easily recognisable by any one familiar with the style.
The usual form of a Pathan tomb will be better understood from the
following woodcut (No. 286), representing a nameless sepulchre among the
hundreds that still strew the plains of Old Delhi. It consists of an
octagonal apartment, about 50 ft. in diameter, surrounded by a verandah
following the same form, each face being ornamented by three arches of
the stilted pointed form generally adopted by the Pathans, and it is
supported by double square columns, which are almost as universal with
them as this form of arch.
[Illustration: 286. Tomb at Old Delhi. (From a Sketch by the Author.)]
It is a form evidently borrowed from the square pier of the Jains, but
so altered and so simplified, that it requires some ingenuity to
recognise its origin in its new combination.
* * * * *
[Illustration: 287. Tomb of Shere Shah at Sasseram. No scale.]
The series of Pathan tombs closes with that of Shere Shah (Woodcut No.
287), the last but one and the most illustrious of his race. It is
situated on a square terrace in the middle of a large tank, near
Sasseram, in Shahabad, and, from its locality and its design, is now a
singularly picturesque object (Woodcut No. 288). Its dimensions too are
considerable.[508] Its base is an octagon, 54 ft. on each side
externally. In the interior a gallery, 10 ft. wide, surrounds the
central apartment, which is surmounted by a dome 65 ft. in diameter,
beneath which stands the tomb of the founder and of some of his
favourite companions in arms.
[Illustration: 288. Tomb of Shere Shah. (From a Photograph.)]
On the exterior, the terrace on which it stands is ornamented by bold
octagonal pavilions in the angles, which support appropriately the
central dome, and the little bracketed kiosks between them break
pleasingly the outline. In the same manner the octagonal kiosks that
cluster round the drum of the dome, and the dome itself, relieve the
monotony of the composition without detracting from its solidity or
apparent solemnity. Altogether, as a royal tomb of the second class,
there are few that surpass it in India, either for beauty of outline or
appropriateness of detail. Originally it was connected with the mainland
by a bridge, which fortunately was broken down before the grand trunk
road passed near. But for this, it would probably have been utilised
before now.
The mosques of the Pathans bore the same aspect as their tombs. The
so-called Kala Musjid in the present city of Delhi, and finished,
according to an inscription on its walls, in A.D. 1389, is in a style
not unlike the tomb (Woodcut No. 286), but more massive, and even less
ornamented. This severe simplicity seems to have been the characteristic
of the latter part of the 14th century, and may have been a protest of
the more puritanical Moslem spirit against the Hindu exuberance which
characterised both the 13th and the 15th centuries. A reaction, however,
took place, and the late Pathan style of Delhi was hardly less rich, and
certainly far more appropriate for the purposes to which it was devoted
than the first style, as exhibited in the buildings at the Kutub.
This, however, was principally owing to the exceptional splendour of the
reign of Shere Shah, who, however, is so mixed up both in date and in
association with the earlier Moguls, that it is difficult to
discriminate between them. Though Baber practically conquered India in
A.D. 1494, his successor, Humayun, was defeated and driven from the
throne by Shere Shah in A.D. 1540, and it was only in A.D. 1554 that the
Mogul dynasty was finally and securely established at Delhi. The style
consequently of the first half of the 16th century may be considered as
the last expiring effort of the Pathans, or the first dawn of that of
the great Moguls, and it was well worthy of either.
At this age the façades of these mosques became far more ornamental, and
more frequently encrusted with marbles, and always adorned with
sculpture of a rich and beautiful character; the angles of the buildings
were also relieved by little kiosks, supported by four richly bracketed
pillars, but never with minarets, which, so far as I know, were not
attached to mosques during the Pathan period. The call to prayer was
made from the roof; and, except the first rude attempt at Ajmir, I do
not know a single instance of a minaret built for such a purpose, though
they were, as we know, universal in Egypt and elsewhere long before this
time, and were considered nearly indispensable in the buildings of the
Moguls very shortly afterwards. The Pathans seem to have regarded the
minar as the Italians viewed the Campanile, more as a symbol of power
and of victory than as an adjunct to a house of worship.
The body of the mosque became generally an oblong hall, with a central
dome flanked by two others of the same horizontal dimensions, but not so
lofty, and separated from it by a broad bold arch, the mouldings and
decorations of which formed one of the principal ornaments of the
building.
The pendentives were even more remarkable than the arches for
elaborateness of detail. Their forms are so various that it is
impossible to classify or describe them; perhaps the most usual is that
represented in Woodcut No. 289, where the angle is filled up with a
number of small imitations of arches, bracketing out one beyond the
other. It was this form that was afterwards converted into the honeycomb
work of the Arabs in Spain.
[Illustration: 289. Pendentive from Mosque at Old Delhi. (From a Sketch
by the Author.)]
If it were not that the buildings of the Pathans are so completely
eclipsed by the greater splendour of those of the Mogul dynasty, which
succeeded them in their own capitals, their style would have attracted
more attention than has hitherto been bestowed upon it; and its
monograph would be as interesting as any that the Indian-Saracenic
affords. In its first period the style was characterised by all the
richness which Hindu elaboration could bestow; in the second by a stern
simplicity and grandeur much more appropriate, according to our ideas,
to the spirit of the people; and during the latter part of its
existence, by a return to the elaborateness of the past; but at this
period every detail was fitted to its place and its purpose. We forget
the Hindu except in his delicacy, and we recognise in this last
development one of the completed architectural styles of the world.