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.s25.276

v6.c41.s25.276

The layout of existing villages and towns, and the orientation and the arrangement of dwelling-houses therein, would supply ample proof to hold the view that there was a deliberate policy of the Muslim invaders and conquerors of India to impose their own methods and principles of architecture in India. Thus, in the layout of villages and towns and in the orientation of still existing houses, the scientific principles of Hindu architecture, though more suitable for the soil and climate, are missing. 'A casual inspection of houses in cities of Bengal, Madras, Bombay, the Punjab, the United Provinces, and Bihar and Orissa may supply many convincing illustrations. Not only certain quarters of Lahore, Delhi, Meerut, Lucknow, Benares, Patna, and Calcutta are named after the Pathans and the Moguls, but there are actually houses with the characteristic features of Arabian deserts and colder regions wherefrom the Moguls emerged.’ These works of foreign architecture, unsuitable for the Indian climate and soil, have been rendered possible largely for political reasons. This is mostly due to the natural desire of the conquerors firmly to establish their domination and culture by removing the customs, habits, and traditions of the conquered as far as possible; and, partly, on account of the ignorance of the scientific methods of Indian architecture or a dislike to apply them in preference to their own. Thus, in muslimized structures in India are seen in abundance the Saracenic domes and arches introduced by the Muhammadans of Syria and Palestine, known as the Arab-Berber races of Northern Africa, who conquered Spain and Sicily and invaded France. In fact this style has materially affected the Hindu style in the layout of villages, towns, forts, as well as in civil buildings, instead of its being merged into the Hindu one. Byzantine architecture, introduced by the Turks of Byzantium, or Constantinople, and prevalent in the Eastern empire down to 1453, appears almost to have migrated to India, materially dispossessing the Hindu style. It is ‘marked by the round arch springing from columns or piers, the dome supported upon pendentines, capitals elaborately sculptured, mosaic or other incrustations, etc.,’ which are largely visible in Hindu buildings of the Muslim period in India. These features are visible not only in domestic structures of the Hindus, but they have also penetrated into some of the Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain temples of the period, belonging to western, northern, and eastern India, where the architectural traditions of the Hindus were entirely forgotten.