History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c26.s3: Ajmîr.
History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c26.s3
- Language
- English
Ajmîr.
v2.c26.s3.1
The mosque at Ajmîr (Woodcut No. 375) was commenced apparently in the year 1200, and was certainly completed during the reign of Altamsh, A.D. 1211-1235.¹ According to tradition, it was finished in two days and a half; hence the only name by
v2.c26.s3.2
¹ Cunningham, ‘Archæological Reports,’ vol. ii. p. 261.
v2.c26.s3.4
375. Mosque at Ajmîr. (Plan as restored by Gen. Cunningham, 1864.) Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.
v2.c26.s3.5
which it is now known—the “Arhai dîn ka Jhomprâ,” which, if it means anything, can only apply to the clearing away of the Hindû temples and symbols, to provide materials for the erection of a magnificent mosque to the glory of the iconoclast conquerors and their self-exalting creed of Islâm. It stands on the outskirts of the city at the base of Târâgadh hill. Like the remains at Old Delhî, the entire plan is Moslim, whilst the columns and roofs are the spoils of Hindû temples. At first sight the plan, with its large cloistered court, bears a resemblance to that of a Jaina temple, and the octagonal arrangement of the pillars for the support of the roofs, might seem to support the comparison.² But like many others elsewhere this formed an enclosure, about 262 ft. square outside,³ with towers at the corners, to be surrounded on the north, east, and south sides, by open cloisters raised on Hindû pillars, now almost quite ruined. The principal entrance is, of course, on the east side, but there was another on the south with a projecting porch. The north side is built close to the scarped rock of the hill. The open court would be about 200 ft. wide by 175 ft. to the front of the Masjid on its west side, which is the only part now standing; and Woodcut No. 376 shows all that now exists
v2.c26.s3.6
² Tod, in his ‘Annals,’ treats it simply as a Jaina temple, without referring to any possible alterations, except additions made by Moslim architects, vol. i. p. 779, see also his plate, which is singularly correct.
v2.c26.s3.7
³ General Cunningham’s measurements and his plan do not agree. He gives the outside length from north to south as 272 ft. 6 in., and next page the exterior length of the mosque as 259 ft.; but the plan makes the outside dimensions equal, whilst his measurement from east to west is 264 ft. 6 in.
v2.c26.s3.8
[Figure: 376. Plan of Ajmîr Mosque as it exists (from a drawing by Mr. H. Cousens). Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]
v2.c26.s3.9
of the mosque itself. No tower at the north-west corner probably ever existed, whilst that at the south-west has been the shrine of a small Hindû temple of which the *sikhara* was demolished; but the small bastions on the east corners of the court are Muhammadan and of the same plan as the turrets over the central piers of the screen. The corridor on the east has been rebuilt but of much less width than is shown on the restored plan; of the north corridor there is no trace, and only the wall of the south one is left. What remains, however, is sufficient to show that, if completed, it must originally have been a singularly elegant specimen of an early Indian mosque. The roof extends only over six of the front piers, or about 141 ft., beyond which about 54 ft. at each end is quite open and even unpaved. Behind the screen piers the area of the mosque is 40 ft. 8 in. deep. The roof is supported by four rows of lofty shafts and another of pilasters (or pillars built into the back wall)—70 in all—each formed of three superimposed Hindû pillars. These are arranged as in Jaina and Hindû temples so as to support on eight pillars each the roof and its five domes, or rather, conical roofs, which are all that exist.¹
v2.c26.s3.10
¹ The outer form of these early domes, in conformity with their interiors, being conical, was regarded as ugly, and the Archæological Survey replaced them a few years ago by "better shaped hemispherical ones."
v2.c26.s3.11
The glory, however, of this mosque, as of that of the Qutb, is the screen of seven arches with which Altamsh adorned the courtyard (Woodcut No. 377). Its dimensions are very similar to those of its rival. The central arch is 22 ft. 2 in. wide; the two on each side 13 ft. 3 in., and those at the ends 13 ft. 4 in. and 12 ft. 8 in. Each arch is surrounded by three lines of writing, the outer in the Kufic and the other two in Arabic character, and divided from each other by bands of Arabesque ornament boldly and clearly cut, and still as sharp as when first
v2.c26.s3.12
377. Great Arch in Mosque at Ajmîr. (From a Photograph.)
v2.c26.s3.13
chiselled. 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 Qutb. It is not clear whether anything of the same sort existed at Delhi—probably not, as the great mînâr 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 minârs 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 Hindûs, 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 repairs.
v2.c26.s3.14
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 Kûfî and Tughrâ 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 Altamsh at Delhi and Ajmîr 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 Muhammadan largeness of conception, combined with Hindû 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, till quite lately, been most shamefully neglected, and most barbarously ill-treated.¹
v2.c26.s3.15
¹ Owing to the Muhammadan part being better built and with larger materials, the mosque is not in the same ruinous condition as that at the Qutb was before the repairs of some thirty-five years ago. There is, so far as I can judge, no building in India more worthy of the attention of Government than this.