Manasara Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Manasara-Shilpashastra; III. Manasara on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Manasara: Translation; V. Architecture of Manasara: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v6.c41.s25.273
Mānasāra Series (I. A Dictionary of Hindu Architecture; II. Indian Architecture according to Mānasāra-Śilpaśāstra; III. Mānasāra on Architecture and Sculpture: Sanskrit Text; IV. Architecture of Mānasāra: Translation; V. Architecture of Mānasāra: Illustrations; VI. Hindu Architecture in India and Abroad; VII. An Encyclopaedia of Hindu Architecture) v6.c41.s25.273
- Language
- English
v6.c41.s25.273.1
So far as the Persian architecture in Persia is concerned it is necessary to observe, as pointed out before, that not a single monument of recognizable condition was ever seen by even the earliest historians, although some objects have been cleverly restored from scanty materials and fertile imagination. It has been shewn in detail in Appendix I, quoting from Herodotus (I, 121), that the Persian had ‘neither images, nor temples, nor altars.’ There is in India nothing like the Persian tombs divided into three portions of almost equal size. The middle and longer compartment, in conjunction with the other two, forms what is called the Greek cross. It is carved architecturally into four engaged columns and a lofty double-recessed doorway, surmounted by an Egyptian gorge and a row of dentels, so as to reproduce a palace façade. The upper portion of this doorway is solid rock, but the lower section is cut away to provide an entrance to the vault excavated in the mass behind. Upon a stage the king is seen on a pedestal. Between the king and the altar floats the image of Ahura-Mazda, borne on huge wings, behind which a solar disc is roughly suggested. The Indian *stūpas*, *chaityas* and *dagobas* are entirely different monuments in appearance, measurement, and architectural details.
v6.c41.s25.273.2
The *atesh-gah*, having no affinity to a Hindu Buddhist, or Jain temple, is ‘the sole monumental type and representative of religious architecture in Persia.’ This consists of ‘three altars, with very salient horns, which rise upon a block of masonry; between the pillars at the angle, two parallel flights approach laterally the landing place that led to the platform.’ The remains of the plans of villages, cities, and forts are also scanty. ‘When Alexander invaded the country of Persia there were no walled cities.’ ‘The fortification works consisted of a deep broad ditch, full of water, communicating with the Shaur and a double rampart. Behind the second rampart ran a path. . . . The enceinte was not furnished with bastions. . . . Towers had been distributed at the crenelated summits of the fortress.’ This would look like the scheme adopted at Babylonia and Assyria, rather than in India. Of the civil architecture in Persia fragmentary information of certain unstoreyed halls and palaces only are available. They are divided, as stated before, into three types, the open-roofed, the walled throne-room, and inhabited palace. They were in capital cities, Ecbatana, Susa, Persepolis, and in lesser centres where the kings stopped a few days to escape from the extreme cold and heat.
v6.c41.s25.273.3
The restored Persian palaces and the halls, open, walled, pillared, or unstoreyed, have no substantial resemblance with the Indian buildings of the same types which have been referred to in the Vedic literature long before the Persian period. The contemporary Indian buildings of the Persian period comprise the cities described in the *Rāmāyaṇa*, the numerous halls referred to in the *Mahābhārata*, and the *vihāra* (monastery), *ardhayoga* (bungalow type of old Bengal buildings), *prāsāda* (storeyed palaces), *harmya* (storeyed mansions comprising several rows or blocks), and *guhā* (cave-houses) which have been described in the Buddhist Vinaya text.¹ These buildings do not look like the Persian structures referred to above. The later Indian works of architecture, comprising villages, towns, forts, civil, military, and religious buildings, various articles of furniture and personal ornaments, including royal and divine crowns, etc., described in detail in our architectural texts, like the standard work *Mānasāra*, and referred to above, do not bear any resemblance to the scanty materials and the reconstructed monuments of Persia. Thus there appears to be no similarity between Persia and India in works of architecture proper. There is, however, a sort of similarity between a certain type of capitals of columns, bearing only the unicorn and bull in Persia, but with a larger variety of animals in India, including the lion and elephant, as well as man.