The Cambridge History of India, Vol. III: Turks and Afghans v3.c30.5.3

v3.c30.5.3

Hinduism found concrete expression in the worship of images, and its monuments were enriched with countless idols of its deities; Islam rigidly forbade idolatry or the portrayal of any living thing. Decorative ornament in Hindu architecture delighted in plastic modelling; it was naturalistic as the Gothic and far more exuberant; Islamic ornament, on the other hand, inclined to colour and line or flat surface carving, and took the form of conventional arabesques or ingenious geometric patterning. Yet, with all these conspicuous contrasts (and there are many more that might be added), there are certain factors common to both forms of architecture which materially assisted towards their amalgamation. Thus, a characteristic feature of many Hindu temples, as well as of almost every Muslim mosque—a feature derived from the traditional dwelling-house of the East and as familiar in India as in other parts of Asia—was the open court encompassed by chambers or colonnades, and such temples as were built on this plan naturally lent themselves to conversion into mosques and would be the first to be adapted for that purpose by the conquerors. Again, a fundamental characteristic that supplied a common link between the two styles, was the fact that both Islamic and Hindu art were inherently decorative. Ornament was as vital to the one as to the other; both were dependent on it for their very being. In the Indian architect this sense for the decorative was innate;