Why Taj Mahal cant be what it is know to be....The World has been fooled for Long Enough
AN ARCHITECT LOOKS AT THE TAJ MAHAL
LEGEND
by
Professor Marvin H.
Mills
Pratt Institute, New
York
In their book TAJ MAHAL-THE ILLUMINED
TOMB, Wayne Edison Begley and Ziyaud-Din Ahmad Desai have put together a very
commendable body of data and information derived from contemporary sources and
augmented with numerous photo illustrations, chroniclers' descriptions, imperial
directives plus letters, plans, elevations and diagrams. They have performed a
valuable service to the community of scholars and laymen concerned with the
circumstances surrounding the origin and development of the Taj Mahal.
But these positive contributions
exist within a framework of analysis and interpretation that distorts a
potential source of enlightenment into support for fantasy and misinformation
that has plagued scholarship in this field for hundreds of years, thus obscuring
the true origin of the Taj Mahal complex. The two basic procedural errors that
they make is to assume that the dated inscriptions are accurate and that court
chroniclers are behaving like objective historians.
As an architect, my principal
argument with the authors is their facile acceptance of the compact time frame
that they uncritically accept for the coming into being of the Taj from
conception to its first Urs (anniversary) of the death of Mumtaz and the
completion of the main building. Construction processes that had to consume
substantial blocks of time are condensed into a few months. They feel justified
in relying on what evidence is available, but fail to consider the objective
needs of construction. They regret the loss of what, they say, must have been
millions of Mughal state records and documents produced each year on all aspects
of the Taj's construction. They do not consider that the lack of drawings,
specifications and records of payment may be due to their not being generated at
the time. Nor do they consider Shahjahan's potential for deception as to when
and by whom it was built. Yet they point out Shahjahan's careful monitoring of
the contents of court history:
"Shajahan himself was probably
responsible for this twisting of historical truth. The truth would have shown
him to be inconsistent and this could not be tolerated. For this reason also,
the histories contain no statements of any kind that are critical of the Emperor
or his policies, and even military defeats are rationalized so that no blame
could be attached to him. ... effusive praise of the Emperor is carried to such
extremes that he seems more a divinity than a mortal man." (p. xxvi)
With the court chroniclers' histories
carefully edited, and with the great scarcity of documents we are fortunate to
have four surviving farmans or directives issued by Shahjahan to Raja Jai Singh
of Amber-the very same local ruler from whom the Emperor acquired the Taj
property. On the basis of these farmans, the court chroniclers and a visiting
European traveler, we learn that: (i) Mumtaz died and was buried temporarily at
Burhanpur on June 17, 1631; (ii) her body was exhumed and taken to Agra on
December 11, 1631; (iii) she was reburied somewhere on the Taj grounds on
January 8, 1632; and (iv) European traveler Peter Mundy witnessed Shahjahan's
return to Agra with his cavalcade on June 11, 1632.
The first farman was issued on
September 20, 1632 in which the Emperor urges Raja Jai Singh to hasten the
shipment of marble for the facing of the interior walls of the mausoleum, i.e.,
the Taj main building. Naturally a building had to be there to receive the
finish. How much time was needed to put that basic building in place?
Every successful new building
construction follows what we call in modern-day construction a "critical
path". There is a normal sequence of steps requiring a minimum time before
other processes follow. Since Mumtaz died unexpectedly and relatively young
(having survived thirteen previous child-births), we can assume that Shahjahan
was unprepared for her sudden demise. He had to conceive, in the midst of his
trauma, of a world class tomb dedicated to her, select an architect (whose
identity is still debated), work out a design program with the architect, and
have the architect prepare designs, engineer the structure and mechanical
systems, detail the drawings, organize the contractors and thousands of workers,
and prepare a complex construction schedule. Mysteriously, no documents relating
to this elaborate procedure, other than the four farmans have survived.
We cannot assume that the Taj complex
was built additively with the buildings and landscaping built as needed. It was
designed as a unified whole. Begley and Desai make this clear by their analysis
of the grid system that was employed by the designer to unite the complex
horizontally and vertically to into a three-dimensional whole. If one did not
"know" that it was a solemn burial grounds, one would believe that it
was designed as a palace with a delightful air of fantasy and secular delights
of waterways and flowering plants. Could it be that this is Raja Jai Singh's
palace, never destroyed, converted by decree and some minimum face-lifting to a
Mughal tomb?
Assuming that Shahjahan was
galvanized into prompt action to initiate the project on behalf of his deceased
beloved, we can safely assume that he needed one year minimum between conception
and ground-breaking. Since Mumtaz died in June 1631, that would take us to June
1632. But construction is said to have begun in January 1632.
Excavation must have presented a
formidable task. First, the demolition of Raja Jai Singh's palace would have had
to occur. We know that the property had a palace on it from the chronicles of
Mirza Qazini and Abd al-Hamid Lahori. Lahori writes:
"As there was a tract of land (zamini)
of great eminence and pleasantness towards the south of that large city, on
which before there was this mansion (manzil) of Raja Man Singh, and
which now belongs to his grandson Raja Jai Singh, it was selected for the burial
place (madfan) of that tenant of paradise.[Mumtaz]" (p. 43)
Measures would have to be taken
during excavation of this main building and the other buildings to the north to
retain the Jumna River from inundating the excavation. The next steps would have
been to sink the massive foundation piers, put in the footings, retaining the
walls and the plinth or podium to support the Taj and its two accompanying
buildings to the east and west plus the foundations for the corner towers, the
well house, the underground rooms, and assuming the complex was done at one
time, all the supports for the remainder of the buildings throughout the
complex. To be conservative in our estimate, we need at least another year of
construction which takes us up to January 1634.
But here is the problem. On the
anniversary of the death of Mumtaz, each year Shahjahan would stage the Urs
celebration at the Taj. The first Urs occurred on June 22, 1632. Though
construction had allegedly begun only six months earlier, the great plinth of
red sandstone over brick, 374 yards long, 140 yards wide, and 14 yards high was
already in place! Even Begley and Desai are somewhat amazed.
Where was all the construction
debris, the piles of materials, the marble, the brick scaffolding, the temporary
housing for thousands of workers, the numerous animals needed to haul materials?
If "heaven was surpassed by the magnificence of the rituals", as one
chronicler puts it, then nothing should have been visible to mar the exquisite
panorama that the occasion called for.
But by June 1632, it was not
physically possible that construction could have progressed to completion of
excavation, construction of all the footings and foundations, completion of the
immense platform and clearing of all the debris and eyesores in preparation for
the first Urs.
Begley and Desai have little use for
the testimony of the European travelers to the court of Shahjahan. But they
consider Peter Mundy, an agent of the British East India Company, to be the most
important source on the Taj because he was there shortly before the first Urs at
the new grave site, and one year later at the second Urs.
It was Mundy who said that he saw the
installation of the enameled gold railing surrounding Mumtaz's cenotaph at the
time of the second Urs on May 26, 1633. But there is no way that construction
could have moved ahead so vigorously from January 1632 to May 1633 as to be
ready to receive the railing. After all, the railing could not have stood forth
in the open air. It means that the Taj building had to be already there. It must
have been immensely valuable since the cost of the Taj complex was reported to
be fifty lakhs, while the cost of the gold railing was six lakhs of rupees. The
gold railing was removed by Shahjahan on February 6, 1643 when it was replaced
by the inlaid white marble screen one sees now.
An alternate interpretation of events
regarding the railing is that Shahjahan revealed the gold railing of Raja Jai
Singh at the first or second Urs. In 1643 he appropriated it for himself and put
in its place the very fine marble screen with its inlaid semi-precious stones, a
screen that was not nearly as valuable as the gold railing.
If Shahjahan's construction and
interior adornment of the Taj are in question, what rework of the Taj can we
attribute to him? The inscriptions were undoubtedly among the few rework tasks
that he was obliged to do. He may also have removed any obvious references to
Hinduism in the form of symbolic decor that existed.
The book's plate illustrations show
that the inscriptions are almost always in a discrete rectangular frame which
renders them capable of being modified or added to without damaging the
adjascent material. In my judgement the black script on the white marble
background seems inappropriate esthetically in the midst of the soft beige
marble that surrounds it. By adding the inscriptions Shahjahan probably sought
to establish the credibility of its having been his creation as a sacred
mausoleum instead of the Hindu palace that time will undoubtedly prove that it
was.
Based on the latest inscriptions
dated 1638-39, which appear on the tomb, the authors estimate a construction
period of six years. Six years in my judgement is simply not enough time. As
reasonable approximation of the total time required to build the Taj complex, we
can consider Tavernier's estimate of twenty-two years. Although he first arrived
in Agra in 1640, he probably witnessed some rework or repair. The time frame of
twenty-two years may have been passed on to him by local people as part of the
collective memory from some previous century when the Taj was actually built.
The issue of repairs is taken up by
the authors in their translation of the original letter of Aurangazeb to his
father dated December 9, 1652. He reports serious leaks on the north side, the
four arched portals, the four small domes, the four northern vestibules,
subchambers of the plinth, plus leaks from the previous rainy season. The
question the authors do not raise is: Would the Taj, being at most only thirteen
years old, already have shown symptoms of decay? Wouldn't it be more reasonable
to believe that by 1652 it was already hundreds of years old and was showing
normal wear and tear.
Who built the Taj? The authors say it
was Ahmad Ustad Lahori, chief architect for Shahjahan. They base this belief
mainly on the assertion by Luft Allah, the son of Lahori, in a collection of
verses, that Shahjahan commanded Lahori to build both the Taj and the Red Fort
at Delhi. As evidence this is quite weak.
The court historians are unfailing in
their praise for the Emperor's personal participation in his massive
architectuaral projects and they are never lacking in glorifying his sterling
character. But the European travelers have other things to say about his
personality and his inability to focus on anything for long except his lust for
women. Nor is the object of his supposed great love either tender or
compassionate. It seems that both "lovers" were cruel, self-centred
and vicious. To believe that out of this relationship, with the support of
Shahjahan's alleged great architectural skills, came what many consider to be
the most beautiful building complex in the world, is sheer romantic nonsense.
While Begley and Desai are sceptical
of the Taj Mahal's being a consequence of romantic devotion, they yield not an
inch in asserting its Mughal origin. They support this traditional view by
overlooking some key problems:
1. Consider the identical character
of the two buildings on either side of the Taj main building. If they had
different functions-one a mosque, the other a guest residence-then, they should
have been designed differently to reflect their individual functions.
2. Why does the perimeter wall of the
complex have a Medieval, pre-artillery, defense character when artillery
(cannons) was already in use in the Mughal invasions of India? [Why does a
mausoleum need a protective wall in the first place? For a palace it is
understadable.]
3. Why are there some twenty rooms
below the terrace level on the north side of the Taj facing the Jumna River? Why
does a mausoleum need these rooms? A palace could put them to good use. The
authors do not even mention their existence.
4. What is in the sealed-up rooms on
the south side of the long corridor opposite the twenty contiguous rooms? Who
filled in the doorway with masonry? Why are scholars not allowed to enter and
study whatever objects or decor are within?
5. Why does the "mosque"
face due west instead of facing Meccah? Certainly, by the seventeenth century
there was no problem in orienting a building precisely!
6. Why has the Archaeological Survey
of India blocked any dating of the Taj by means of Carbon-14 or thermo-luminiscnece?
Any controversy over which century the Taj was built could easily be resolved.
[Radiocarbon dating of a piece of wood surreptiously taken from one of the doors
gave 13th century as a possible date. But more data is needed.]
If Shajahan did not build the Taj for
the love of Mumtaz, then why did he want it? His love for Mumtaz was evidently a
convenient subterfuge. He actually wanted the existing palace for himself. He
appropriated it from Raja Jai Singh by making him an offer he could not refuse,
the gift of other properties in exchange. He also acquired whatever was precious
within the building including the immensely valuable gold railing.
By converting the complex into a
sacred Moslem mausoleum he insured that the Hindus would never want it back.
Shahjahan converted the residential quarters to the west of the main building to
a mosque simply by modifying the interior of the west wall to create a mihrab
niche. He added Islamic inscriptions around many doorways and entries to give
the impression that the Taj had always been Islamic. Sure enough, the scholars
have been silent or deceived ever since.
Yet, we must thank Begley and Desai
for having assembled so much useful data and translated contemporary writings
and inscriptions. Where they failed is in accepting an apocryphal legend of the
Taj for an absolute fact. Their interpretations and analyses have been forced
into the mold of their bias. It would be well to take advantage of their work by
scholars and laymen interested in deepening their knowledge of the Taj Mahal to
read the book while keeping an open mind as to when and by whom it was built.
Added note:
A leading Indian architect, former professor of architecture at Mysore
University adds:
There are fundamental problems with
the current theory of Islamic Architecture in India of which the following may
be noted.
(1) Unlike in the case of Hindu
architecture, where there are literally hundreds of works on Vastu in several
Indian languages, there seem to be almost no texts or manuals on Islamic
architecture. It is difficult to see how a great school of architecture lasting
600 years could flourish without any technical literature.
(2) Hindu architectural practices and
traditions are maintained by thousands of mason families, especially in South
India. These are known as Vishwakarmas or Vishwa Brahmanas. They are greatly in
demand all over the world. No such Muslim families are known.
(3) There are no standards of units
and measurements for Islamic architecture in India. It is inconceivable that
great works of architecture could come up without them. This is an objective
requirement.
TAJ MAHAL-The Illumined Tomb, an
anthology of seventeenth century Mughal and European documentary sources, by W.E.
Begley and Z.A. Desai: Published by the University of Washington Press, Seattle
and London, 1989 (The Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture).
The reviewer Marvin Mills is a leading New York architect and professor of
architecture at the Pratt Institute.
[Home]
[Back to the
Taj Mahal page]