History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c28: Chapter VII.

History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v2.c28

Language: English

v2.c28.s1 Capital—Gaur. — 26 parts

Chapter VII.

v2.c28.2

Bengali roofing.—Qadam-i-Rasûl Mosque, Gaur.—Sonâ, Adînah and Eklâkhî Mosques, Mâldâ—Minâr—Gateways.

Capital—Gaur.

IT is not very easy to understand why the architects of Mâlwâ should have adopted a style so essentially arcuate as that which we find in the capital, while their brethren, on either hand, at Jaunpur and Ahmadâbâd, clung so fondly to a trabeate form wherever they had an opportunity of employing it. The Mandû architects had the same initiation to the Hindû forms in the mosque at Dhâr; and there must have been innumerable Hindû and Jaina temples to furnish materials to a far greater extent than we find them utilised, but we neither find them borrowing nor imitating, but adhering steadily to the pointed-arch style, which is the essential characteristic of their art in foreign countries. It is easy to understand, on the other hand, why in Bengal the trabeate style never was in vogue. The country is practically without stone, or any suitable material for forming either pillars or beams. Having nothing but brick, it was almost of necessity that they employed arches everywhere, and in every building that had any pretensions to permanency. The Bengal style being, however, the only one wholly of brick in India Proper, has a local individuality of its own, which is curious and interesting, though, from the nature of the material, deficient in many of the higher qualities of art which characterise the buildings constructed with larger and better materials. Besides elaborating a pointed-arched brick style of their own, the Bengalis introduced a new form of roof, which has had a most important influence on both the Muhammadan and Hindû styles in more modern times. As already mentioned in describing the Chhatrî at Alwar (*ante*, p. 169), the Bengalis, taking advantage of the elasticity of the bambu, universally employ in their dwellings a curvilinear form of roof, which has become so familiar to their eyes, that they consider it beautiful (Woodcut No. 404). It is so in fact when bambu and thatch are the materials employed, but when translated into stone or brick architecture, its taste is more questionable. There is, however, so much that is conventional in architecture, and beauty depends to such an extent on association, that strangers are hardly fair judges in a case of this sort. Be this as it may, certain it is, at all events, that after being elaborated into a feature of permanent architecture in Bengal, this curvilinear form found its way in the 17th century to Delhi, and in the 18th to Lâhor, and all the intermediate buildings from, say A.D. 1650, betray its presence to a greater or less extent.

v2.c28.s1.2

404. Modern Curved Form of Roof.

v2.c28.s1.3

It is a curious illustration, however, of how much there is in architecture that is conventional, and how far familiarity may render that beautiful which is not so abstractedly that, while to the European eye this form always remains unpleasing, to the native eye—Hindû or Muhammadan—it is the most elegant of modern inventions.¹

v2.c28.s1.4

¹ In this respect it is something like the curvilinear pediments which Roman and Italian architects employed as window heads. Though detestable in themselves, yet we use and admire them because we are accustomed to them.

v2.c28.s1.5

Even irrespective, however, of its local peculiarities, the architecture of Gaur, the Muhammadan capital of Bengal, deserves attention for its extent and the immense variety of detail which it displays. It was in A.D. 1193 that Qutbu-d-Dîn Aibak captured Delhi, and in the same year Muhammad Bakhtyâr Khalji extended the Moslim conquests down the Ganges as far as Bengal. Immediately he took Nadiya he established himself, in 1194, as governor at Lakhnautî or Gaur, in which office he was afterwards confirmed by the Sultân. The successive governors ruled with almost independent authority, and in 1282 Nâsiru-d-Dîn Bughra Khân, a son of the emperor Ghiyâsu-d-Dîn Balban, was appointed governor, and the office became hereditary in his family. In 1338 Fakhru-d-Dîn Mubârak rebelled and slew the governor Qadar Khân, and separate governors ruled in East and West Bengal. But, in 1345, Shamsu-d-Dîn Ilyâs assassinated the ruler of West Bengal, and in 1352 defeated Ikhtiyâru-d-Dîn Ghâzi Shâh of East Bengal. He thus became the founder of the Purbîya dynasty, which ruled for about a century and a half, or till 1487, when the throne was usurped by Habshîs and subsequently, in 1493, by 'Alâu-d-Dîn Husain Shâh. But in the reign of his son Mahmûd, Sher Khân, the Afghân ruler of Bihâr, invaded Bengal in 1537, and completely sacked Gaur, after which this once great and wealthy capital began to decay and its buildings became neglected. The state was absorbed into Akbar's vast kingdom in A.D. 1576, under Dâ'ûd Shâh bin Sulaimân. Though none of these rulers did anything that entitles them to a place in general history, they possessed one of the richest portions of India, and employed their wealth in adorning their capital with buildings, which, when in a state of repair, must have been gorgeous, even if not always in the best taste. The climate of Bengal is, however, singularly inimical to the preservation of architectural remains. If the roots of a tree of the fig kind once find a resting-place in any crevice of a building, its destruction is inevitable; and even without this, the luxuriant growth of the jungle hides the building so completely, that it is sometimes difficult to discover it—always to explore it. Add to this that Gaur is singularly well suited to facilitate the removal of materials by water-carriage. During the summer inundation, boats can float up to any of the ruins, and after embarking stones or bricks, drop down the stream to any new capital that may be rising. It thus happens that Murshidâbâd, Mâldâ, Rangpur, and Râjmahal have been built almost entirely with its materials, whilst Hugly, and even Calcutta, are rich in spoils of the old capital of Bengal, while it has itself become only a mass of picturesque but almost indistinguishable ruins.

v2.c28.s1.6

The city of Gaur was a famous capital of the Hindûs long before it was taken possession of by the Muhammadans. The Sena and Pâla dynasties of Bengal seem to have resided here, and no doubt adorned it with temples and edifices worthy of their fame and wealth. These, however, were probably principally in brick, though adorned with pillars and details in what used to be called black marble, but seems to be an indurated potstone of very fine grain, and which takes a beautiful polish. Many fragments of Hindû art in this material are found among the ruins; and if carefully examined might enable us to restore the style. Its interest, however, principally lies in the influence it had on the Muhammadan style that succeeded it. It is neither like that of Delhi, nor Jaunpur, nor any other style, but one purely local, and not without considerable merit in itself; its principal characteristic being heavy short pillars of stone supporting pointed arches and vaults in brick—whereas at Jaunpur, for instance, light pillars carried horizontal architraves and flat ceilings.

v2.c28.s1.7

The general character of the style will be seen in the example from a mosque called the Qadam-i-Rasûl at the south-east gate of the fort at Gaur, and is by no means devoid of architectural merit (Woodcut No. 405).¹ The solidity of the supports go far to redeem the inherent weakness of brick archi-

v2.c28.s1.8

¹ It was built by Nasrat Shâh, a.d. 1530, to contain a stone brought by his father Husain Shâh (1493-1519) from Mecca, bearing the supposed impression of Muhammad’s foot — *qadam-i-rasûl*, which is revered by Moslims.

v2.c28.s1.9

405. Qadam-i-Rasûl Mosque, Gaur. (From a Photograph.)

v2.c28.s1.10

tecture, and by giving the arches a firm base to start from, prevents the smallness of their parts from injuring the general effect. The façade is relieved by horizontal mouldings and panels of moulded brick, whilst string-courses of the same extend its whole length. It also presents, though in a very subdued form, the curvilinear form of the roof, which is so characteristic of the style.

v2.c28.s1.11

In Gaur itself, the Golden or Sonâ Masjid, called the Bârah Darwâza, or twelve-doored, is a very handsome mosque. The façade is in stone, and covered with foliaged patterns in low-relief, borrowed evidently from the terra-cotta ornaments which were more frequently employed, and continued a favourite mode of adorning façades down to the time of the erection of the Kântanagar temple illustrated above (Woodcut No. 354). In the interiors of the mosques the pillars have generally been removed, and the vaults consequently fallen in, so that it is not easy to judge of their effect, even if the jungle would admit of the whole area being grasped at once. Their general disposition may be judged of, however, by the plan on next page (Woodcut No. 406) of the Âdînah mosque at Panduâ, which formed at the time it was erected the northern suburb of the capital.

v2.c28.s1.12

The Bârah Sonâ Masjid, outside the fort to the north-east, is perhaps the finest memorial now left at Gaur. Built by Nasrat Shâh in 1526, it is 168 ft. in length by 76 ft. outside, with walls 8 ft. thick and faced inside and out with hornblende. It has eleven arched entrances in front, each 5 ft. 11 in. wide, and 14 ft. high. These enter the front corridor, the arches of which support the eleven domes of the roof. Beyond this is the masjid proper, of which the roof has all fallen; it had three longitudinal aisles, supported by twenty pillars, and there were eleven mihrâbs in the wall. At both sides of the doorways at the ends of the corridor, and at the back corners were polygonal minarets of brown basalt, six in all, but their heads are now ruined. From its massive solidity and size this is an imposing building; indeed this characteristic of the Gaur architecture forms a striking contrast to the lighter arcades of much of the Saracenic style.

v2.c28.s1.13

From inscriptions upon it, it appears that the Âdînah masjid was erected by Sikandar Shâh, one of the most illustrious of his race (A.D. 1358-1389), with the intention of being himself buried within its precincts, or in its immediate neighbourhood.¹ Its dimensions are considerable, being nearly 507 ft. north and south, and 285 ft. east and west. In the centre it contains a courtyard nearly 400 ft. by 154 ft., surrounded on all sides by a thick wall of brick, divided by eighty-nine similar arched openings, only one of which, that in the centre of the west side facing Mecca, is wider and more dignified than the rest. The roof in like manner was supported by some 260 pillars about 2 ft. square, at the base and 10 ft. 5 in. high—some of one block of black hornblende and others built similar in design to those represented in Woodcut No. 405. They are bold and pleasing in design, but it must be confessed wanting in variety. These with the walls supported no less than 378 domes, all similar in design and construction. The only variation that is made is where a platform, called the Bâdshâh-ka-Takht, the King’s

v2.c28.s1.14

¹ His ruined tomb is attached to the west wall near its north end.

v2.c28.s1.15

406. Plan of Âdînah Mosque, Panduâ. Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.

v2.c28.s1.16

Throne or Royal Gallery, divides a part of the building into two storeys. This is supported by twenty-one short pillars of much heavier form, and has others, monolithic, and of a more elegant style above. But the roof has fallen and very few of the other supporting pillars are intact.

v2.c28.s1.17

A design, such as that of the Âdînah mosque, would be appropriate for a caravanserai; but in an edifice where expression and beauty were absolutely required it is far too monotonous. The same defect runs through the whole group; and though their size and elegance of details, joined with the picturesque state of richly foliaged ruin in which they were long found, made them charming subjects for the pencil, they possess all the defects of design we remarked in the great halls of a thousand columns in the south of this country.¹ It seems, indeed, almost as if here we had again got among the Tamil race, and that their peculiarities were reappearing on the surface, though dressed in the garb of a foreign race.

v2.c28.s1.18

¹ *Ante*, vol. i. page 368, *et seqq.*

v2.c28.s1.19

Two miles to the south-west of the Âdînah masjid is the Eklâkhî mosque or tomb, for it is said to be the tomb of Ghiyâsu-d-Dîn ’Azâm Shâh (1390-1397), but there is no inscription to show this, and it may have been the work of Jalâlu-d-Dîn Muhammad Shâh (1414-1443), who was a great builder. It is 80 ft. square and covered by one dome. Much of the materials have been taken from Hindû temples, the structure being built of hornblende slabs and brick, with much embossed brick used in the decoration. The corner buttresses are richly carved, reminding one of the bases of minarets, but they had only a capstone above the level of the roof, the corners of which curve downwards on each face. Though much smaller, this was altogether a bolder and architecturally finer structure than the Âdînah mosque.

v2.c28.s1.20

407. Minâr at Gaur. (From a Photograph by J. H. Ravenshaw, B.C.S.)

v2.c28.s1.21

One of the most interesting of the antiquities of the place is a minâr, standing just outside the fort to the east (Woodcut No. 407). For two-thirds of the height it is a polygon of twelve sides; above that circular, till it attains the height of 84 ft. The door is at some distance from the ground, and altogether it looks more like an Irish round-tower than any other example known, though it is most improbable that there should be any connection between the two forms. Probably a platform about 15 ft. in height once surrounded the base, but if so, it has entirely disappeared. Inside, a spiral stair leads to the small chamber on the summit, once roofed by a dome. It is perhaps a pillar of victory—a Jaya-Stambha—such as the Qutb Mînâr at Delhi, and those at Koil, Daulatâbâd, and elsewhere. There is said to have been an inscription on this monument which ascribed its erection to Saifu-d-Dîn Fîruz Shâh II., who reigned in Gaur A.D. 1488-1490, and the character of the architecture fully bears out this adscription. The native tradition is, that a saint, Pîr Âsâ,¹ lived, like Simon Stylites, on its summit!

v2.c28.s1.22

¹ Probably a corruption of Fîruz-Shâh.

v2.c28.s1.23

Besides these, there are several of the gateways of Gaur which are of considerable magnificence. The finest is that called the Dâkhil or Salâmî gateway, the north entrance into the fort, said to have been built by Ruknu-d-Dîn Bârbak Shâh (1460-1474), which, though of brick, and adorned only with terra-cotta ornaments, is as grand an object of its class as is to be found anywhere. The gate of the citadel, and the southern gate of the city, are very noble examples of what can be done with bricks, and bricks only. The latter of these, known as the Kotwâlî Darwâza, is a handsome and imposing gateway leading from the south side of the old city, and, except above, is in pretty good preservation. To the apex of the arch is 31 ft. and the depth is 51 ft., and on the south it was provided with semicircular abutments on each side for the military guard.²

v2.c28.s1.24

² J. H. Ravenshaw’s ‘Gaur, its Ruins and Inscriptions’ (4to, London, 1878); Montgomery Martin’s ‘Eastern India,’ vol. ii. pp. 643-658, and vol. iii. pp. 67-80; Major Francklin’s ‘Journal of a Route from Rajmehal to Gaur in 1810’ (MS. in India Office); Cunningham, ‘Reports,’ vol. xv. pp. 39-94, and plates 13-26.

v2.c28.s1.25

It is not, however, in the dimensions of its buildings or the beauty of their details that the glory of Gaur resides; it is in the wonderful mass of ruins stretching along what was once the high bank of the Ganges, for nearly twenty miles, from Panduâ southwards—mosques still in use, mixed with mounds covering ruins—tombs, temples, tanks and towers, scattered without order over an immense distance, and long half buried in a luxuriance of vegetation which only this part of India can exhibit. What looks poor, and may be in indifferent taste, drawn on paper and reduced to scale, may give an idea of splendour in decay when seen as it is, and in this respect there are none of the ancient capitals of India which produce a more striking, and at the same time a more profoundly melancholy, impression than these ruins of the old Afghân capital of Bengal.¹

v2.c28.s1.26

¹ The clearance of undergrowth by the introduction of cultivation in 1879, and the attention of the Bengal Government to these remains since then have rendered them much more accessible.