History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c25.s23: Amber.
History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c25.s23
- Language
- English
Amber.
v2.c25.s23.1
The palace at Amber, the original capital of the Jaypur State, ranks next after that of Gwâliar as an architectural This page appears to be entirely blank, containing no printed text, headings, figures, or page furniture.
v2.c25.s23.2
PALACE IN GWÂLIAR FORT, FROM THE ASCENT.
v2.c25.s23.3
object among the Râjput palaces. It is, however, a century more modern, having been commenced by another Mân Singh, who ascended the throne in 1592, and was completed by Jaysingh I. (1625-1666), who added the beautiful gateway which bears his name; Sawâî Jaysingh II. removed the seat of government to Jaypur in 1728.¹ In consequence of this more modern date it has not that stamp of Hindû originality that is so characteristic of the Gwâliar example, and throughout it bears a strong impress of that influence which Akbar’s mind and works stamped on everything that was done in India during his reign. Its situation, too, is inferior to that of Gwâliar for architectural effect. Instead of standing on a lofty rocky pedestal, and its pinnacles being relieved boldly against the sky, the Amber palace is situated in a valley—picturesque, it is true, but where the masonry competes with the rocks in a manner which is certainly unfavourable to the effect of the building. Nothing, however, can be more picturesque than the way in which the palace grows, as it were, out of a rocky base, or reflects itself in the mirror of the lake at its base, and nothing can be happier than the mode in which the principal apartments are arranged, so as to afford views over the lake and into the country beyond.
v2.c25.s23.4
¹ Heber, by mistake, seems to have attributed the work of Jaysingh I. to his more illustrious descendant Sawâî Jaysingh II. 1698-1743.
v2.c25.s23.5
The details, too, of this palace are singularly good, and quite free from the feebleness that shortly afterwards characterised the style. In some respects, indeed, they contrast favourably with those of Akbar’s contemporary palace at Fathpur Sîkrî. There the Moslim antipathy to images confined the fancy of the decorator to purely inanimate objects; here the laxer creed of the Hindûs enabled him to indulge in elephant capitals and figure-sculpture of men and animals to any extent. The Hindûs seem also to have indulged in colour and in mirrors to an extent that Akbar did not apparently feel himself justified in employing. The consequence is that the whole has a richer and more picturesque effect than its Muhammadan rival, but the two together make up a curiously perfect illustration of the architecture of that day, as seen from a Hindû, contrasted with that from a Muhammadan, point of view.²
v2.c25.s23.6
² Jacquemont, ‘Voyage dans l’Inde,’ tome iii. pp. 375f., Heber’s ‘Journal,’ vol. ii. pp. 39f. ; ‘Architecture, etc., in Gujarat and Rajputana,’ pp. 46f., and pl. 30.
v2.c25.s23.7
It was the same Mân Singh who erected a ghât and the Observatory at Benares which still bears his name,³ and though not very architectural in its general appearance, has on the river-face a balconied window, which is a fair and pleasing specimen of the architecture of his age (Woodcut No. 362). He also was the king who erected the temple at Brindâban, which has been illustrated above (pp. 156, 157).
v2.c25.s23.8
³ A century later, his descendant Sawâî Jaysingh set up several of the instruments in it and built other observatories at Jaypur, Ujjain, Mathurâ and Delhi.—‘Indian Antiquary,’ vol. xxxv. (1906), p. 234, and references.
v2.c25.s23.9
362. Balcony at the Observatory, Benares. (From a Drawing by the late James Prinsep.)