Forgotten craftsmen who built Taj Mahal

Forgotten craftsmen who built Taj Mahal

As it's Iranian Architect

The names of more than 670 previously unknown "masons and labourers" who helped build the Taj Mahal have been discovered by a team of Indian archaeologists.

The findings by the Indian Archaeological Survey tell a forgotten story of the craftsmen who were summoned to Agra in northern India 350 years ago to build the great monument to loss and love.

The names, mostly in Arabic and Persian, were found etched into the sandstone walls and peripheral structures on the northern side of the monument.

"Most of these masons came from Iran, Central Asia and India," said D Dayalan, the superintending archaeologist. "The names have been meticulously divided into sections such as dome makers, garden development department, furnishing workers and inlay artists." [Continue]:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07 /07/wtaj07.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/07/ixworld.html
 

 
 
 

It was commissioned by the mughul Emperor Shah Jahan, the son of Jahangir, as a mausoleum for his Persian wife, Princess Arjumand Banu Begum, also known as Mumtaz-ul-Zamani.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taj_Mahal
http://www.tajmahalindia.net/taj-mahal-architecture.html

Architect & craftsmen were Persian.

recently Europeans said Architect was Italian!!!

Surely This Italian was Shiraz Lover, or He has Built Shiraz & Isfahan Palace before,

The architect of the modification was one Usman Beg.

Edited by Vivek Sharma - 02-Nov-2006 at 02:38

Didn't the stones for Taj Mahal come from iran?

Lol. I think you should learn Persian before you attempt to translate it. Seriously.

Edited by Zagros - 01-Nov-2006 at 18:18

Edited by Zagros - 02-Nov-2006 at 16:41

Banoo is Persian for lady or madam, eg. Shahbanoo, shah's lady. Where did you read Banu Begam?

banu begam

[QUOTE=Vivek Sharma] Taj mahal was not built by Shah Jahan. It was an old palace complex, belonging to the King of Jaipur and just modified by Shah Jahan.html

Hi Vivek,
King of Jaipur was salve king of Mughals. Hence every thing which the Raja of Jai Pur had belonged to his overlords, the Mughals. He was also given the Alwar which was ruled by Bad Gujjars earlier and Ranthambor to rule which was ruled by Gujjars of Chauhan gotra earlier. It does not mean that both these places belong to him but he was ruling these places on behalf of his overlords, the Mughals.

The actual site was where Taj Mahal is made is Shiva tepmle and big garden made by Gujjars Partihar Emperor Samrat Mihir Bhoj Mahan. There are many places in India like Delhi founded by Gujjar Tanwars and was named Mihirawli (Meharauli) and Bhopal (Founded by Gujjar parmars named after him as Bhoj Pal. Both the Tanwars and Parmars were his fuedatory kings and have done so please their overlord, the Gujjar Samrat Mihir Bhoj Mahan.
About tajmahal Here is the authentic details of my claim.

[http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/godbole_taj2

1872-73
Archaeological Survey of India Report for the Year 1871-72 was prepared by M/s Beglar ( on Delhi ) and Carllyle (on Agra ) In volume II Mr Carlleyle tells us :

p 4 " ... Again as bearing on the other side of the argument I have now to mention that, on the right bank of the river about three miles above the fort, there is the site of an ancient garden palace called the garden and palace of Raja Bhoj! Certain intelligent educated Hindus in Agra say that it is traditionally held to have been a palace of Raja Bhoj of Malwa of the fifth to sixth century; but at any rate all agree as to the fact that this garden palace of Raja Bhoj was in existence previous to the Muhammadan conquest of this part of the country.





    
    
    
    
    

Edited by AP Singh - 03-Nov-2006 at 07:54

Originally posted by Vivek Sharma These craftsmen did not actually build the Taj Mahal. What was done by Shah Jahan was a retrofitting & modification of the Tejo Mahalaya temple - palace complex of maharaja Jai Singh, after aquiring it from him forcibly.

I haven't read Oak's book, but if it was a retrofit, it must've been very extensive if not a full remodeling.  Compare it say with the Hagia Sophia where it's very obvious to see what was added on later and what is original.  The Taj's domes are pure muslim, derived from Byzantine domes which were an improvement on Roman domes, only the upturned lotus at the pinnacle is a Hindu element.  There is no such thing as a circular dome element in Hindu architecture.  The Taj's arches wouldn't look out of place in a mosque from Shiraz or Isfahan.  Arches don't occur anywhere in Hindu temples from Kanchipuram to Angkor Wat.  The whole structure of the Taj (simple outside silhouette, intricate inside) is foreign to Hindu construction and I have trouble seeing how the Taj Mahal gets any of its character from a pre-existing structure.  

Edited by jayeshks - 04-Nov-2006 at 13:26