History of Indian and Eastern Architecture

by James Fergusson

When we consider how much was done by his father and his son, it is rather startling to find how little Jehangir contributed to the architectural magnificence of India. Partly this may be owing to his not having the same passion for building which characterised these two great monarchs; but partly also to his having made Lahore the capital during his reign, and to his having generally resided there in preference to Agra or Delhi. The great mosque there, however, which was built by him, seems to be equal in magnificence to that built by Shah Jehan at Delhi. This mosque, however, seems to have been surpassed by one erected in the city of Lahore by his vizir. It is in the Persian style, covered with enamelled tiles, and resplendent in colours, but not very graceful in form. His tomb, in which he lies buried with his queen, the imperious Nurjehan, was worthy of its builder, but has been used as a quarry by the Sikhs, and half the splendour of the temple at Amritsir is due to marbles plundered from this mausoleum. The palace, too, which he erected, was worthy of his other buildings, but it has suffered as much as the rest. It has been used as a habitation from that time to this, and so altered, to adapt it to the wants of its successive occupants, that little of its original form remains.

We have, however, no measurements and no information about these monuments which would enable us to speak with any confidence either regarding them, or the other buildings of that city, which seems to owe its principal splendour to the reign of this monarch.

At the other end of his dominions also he built a splendid new capital at Dacca, in supersession to Gaur, and adorned it with several buildings of considerable dimensions. These, however, were principally in brick-work, covered with stucco, and with only pillars and brackets in stone. Most of them, consequently, are in a state of ruinous decay; marvellously picturesque, it must be confessed, peering through the luxuriant vegetation that is tearing them to pieces, but hardly worthy to be placed in competition with the stone and marble buildings of the more northern capitals.

There is one building—the tomb known as that of Eti-mad-Doulah—at Agra, however, which certainly belongs to this reign, and, though not erected by the monarch himself, cannot be passed over, not only from its own beauty of design, but also because it marks an epoch in the style to which it belongs. It is situated on the left bank of the river, in the midst of a garden surrounded by a wall measuring 540 ft. on each side. In the centre of this, on a raised platform, stands the tomb itself, a square measuring 69 ft. on each side. It is two storeys in height, and at each angle is an octagonal tower, surmounted by an open pavilion. The towers, however, are rather squat in proportion, and the general design of the building very far from being so pleasing as that of many less pretentious tombs in the neighbourhood. Had it, indeed, been built in red sandstone, or even with an inlay of white marble like that of Humayun, it would not have attracted much attention. Its real merit consists in being wholly in white marble, and being covered throughout with a mosaic in “pietro duro”—the first, apparently, and certainly one of the most splendid, examples of that class of ornamentation in India.

It seems now to be ascertained that in the early part of the 17th century Italian artists, principally, apparently from Florence, were introduced into India, and taught the Indians the art of inlaying marble with precious stones.[551] No instance of this mode of decoration occurs, so far as I know, in the reign of Akbar; but in that of Shah Jehan it became the leading characteristic of the style, and both his palaces and his tombs owe their principal distinction to the beauty of the mode in which this new invention was employed.

It has been doubted whether this new art was really a foreign introduction, or whether it had not been invented by the natives of India themselves. The question never, probably, would have arisen had one of the fundamental principles of architecture been better understood. When we, for instance, having no art of our own, copy a Grecian or Roman pillar, or an Italian mediæval arch in detail, we do so literally, without any attempt to adapt it to our uses or climate; but when a people having a style of their own wish to adopt any feature or process belonging to any other style, they do not copy but adapt it to their uses; and it is this distinction between adopting and adapting that makes all the difference. We would have allowed the Italians to introduce with their mosaics all the details of their Cinque-cento architecture. The Indians set them to reproduce, with their new materials and processes, the patterns which the architects of Akbar had been in the habit of carving in stone or of inlaying in marble. Every form was adapted to the place where it was to be used. The style remained the same, so did all the details; the materials only were changed, and the patterns only so far as was necessary to adapt them to the smaller and more refined materials that were to be used.[552]

As one of the first, the tomb of Eti-mad-Doulah was certainly one of the least successful specimens of its class. The patterns do not quite fit the places where they are put, and the spaces are not always those best suited for this style of decoration. Altogether I cannot help fancying that the Italians had more to do with the design of this building than was at all desirable, and they are to blame for its want of grace. But, on the other hand, the beautiful tracery of the pierced marble slabs of its windows, which resemble those of Selim Chisti’s tomb at Futtehpore Sikri, the beauty of its white marble walls, and the rich colour of its decorations, make up so beautiful a whole, that it is only on comparing it with the works of Shah Jehan that we are justified in finding fault.

Shah Jehan, A.D. 1628-1658.

It would be difficult to point out in the whole history of architecture any change so sudden as that which took place between the style of Akbar and that of his grandson Shah Jehan—nor any contrast so great as that between the manly vigour and exuberant originality of the first, as compared with the extreme but almost effeminate elegance of the second. Certainly when the same people, following the same religion, built temples and palaces in the same locality, nothing of the sort ever occurred in any country whose history is now known to us.

Nowhere is the contrast between the two styles more strongly marked than in the palace of Agra—from the red stone palace of Akbar, with its rich sculptures and square Hindu construction, a door opens into the white marble court of the hareem of Shah Jehan, with all its feeble prettiness, but at the same time marked with that peculiar elegance which is found only in the East. The court is not large, 170 ft. by 235 ft., but the whole is finished with the most elaborate care. Three sides of this are occupied by the residences of the ladies, not remarkable for size, nor, in their present state, for architectural beauty; but the fourth, overhanging the river, is occupied by three white marble pavilions of singular elegance, though it is not easy now to see them, some English officer having pitched upon the principal one as a residence, and having in consequence covered the polished marble and elegant arabesques of flowers inlaid in precious stones with thick coatings of that whitewash which was indispensable to his idea of comfort and elegant simplicity.