Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
|
Forgotten craftsmen who built Taj Mahal
Post Reply 
|
Page <1234> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rakhsh 
Consul 
Joined: 23-Oct-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 331 |
 Topic: Forgotten craftsmen who built Taj MahalPosted: 31-Oct-2005 at 23:13 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lol yes the key point intellectuals, you make me laugh, there is nothing intellectual about this theory. What muslims where? names? date they said this! The reason they prob banned it is cause of Hindu nationals..... It is Persian end of bloody story, the person who commissioned it and paid ofr it is recorded no archaeological or historical reference to anything Hindu.... So my reply to you is be an intellectual and realaise this building is Mulsim, by muslim is the whole bloody design is Islamic to the core, persian as well.... no other Hindu bildings look like this... again this article I did read I did. Lies it did say it did.... soo lies Look I can make a Stone understand this then the author of your article, a stone has more comprehension then nationals who try to rewrite histroy to sui their agendas and inferiority complexes and hatred for others...... That is a very true statement about nationalisic view points.... I believe your a very intellegent guy, try to look beyond these guys |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Never under estimate the predictablity of stupidity! - Bullet Tooth Tony
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Afghanan
Chieftain 
Durr e Durran Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 1098 |
Posted: 26-Nov-2005 at 18:10 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
That is the beauty of Muslim architecture. So many different workers from all parts of the world, from Sheraz, to Rum, to Qandahar, to Lahore, Multan, Samarqand, and even Kashmir. Mash'Allah
Edited by Afghanan |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Jamukha
Housecarl 
Joined: 18-Dec-2005 Location: Tonga Online Status: Offline Posts: 30 |
Posted: 19-Jan-2006 at 21:09 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You have to be totally ignorant of reality and lack the basic abilities required for adequate comprehension if you belive the Taj Mahal was not built by Muslims. However they could have had hindu's participate in the actual labour but there is absolutely no evidence that it is a Hindu monument. THe best way to solve this disagreement is by looking at what a third party at that time said about the Taj Mahal and the mughals. The British, as we all know colonized India and before they did they had many british ambassadors that dwelled in India. These ambassadors would keep records of what was happening with the mughal empire and kept a record of events that occured. In these accounts it is clearly stated that the mughal rule Shah Jahan had the monument erected in the memory of his beloved wife, mumtaz mahal. THe europeans were living in India before the rule of shah jahan and thus have full accounts of events leading up to and after the monument was built. Also at this time there were many white mughals(europeans who started to internalize the indian culture), which is definetly off topic. If you would like to do any further reading on the topic there is an excellent book called the story of the taj mahal. I think that is the title, i read it a year ago so i might be mistaken. But it discusses and list and well as displays pictures of the accounts of many europeans that clarify the taj mahal was built by muslims and not hindus. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
varma
Knight 
Joined: 26-Jun-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 60 |
Posted: 29-Jun-2006 at 01:17 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
First of all, I
request the posters to argue ratioanlly citing reason against some 101
reasons presented by the researchers of why Taj Mahal is not a Muslim
tomb wghich consists of evidence of wide variety including
inscription, architectural, documentary and common knowledge.
Just rubbishing the research as Hindu nationalism doesnt confirm that the Taj Mahal is a Muslim Tomb. I thought the Iranains were little different from their muslim counterparts around the World, But treally I am mistaken all the muslims are of the same ilk, beleivers than thinkers. What more can anyone expect from muslims simply becoz of ur conditioning in beleif than in Thought. Here are some of the point u need to answer before rubbishing The Real origins of Taj mahal DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 18. Shahjahan's own court chronicle, the Badshahnama, admits (page 403, vol 1) that a grand mansion of unique splendor, capped with a dome (Imaarat-a-Alishan wa Gumbaze) was taken from the Jaipur Maharaja Jaisigh for Mumtaz's burial, and the building was known as Raja Mansingh's palace. 19. The plaque put the archealogy department outside the Tajmahal describes the edifice as a mausoleum built by Shahjahan for his wife Mumtaz Mahal, over 22 years from 1631 to 1653. That plaque is a specimen of historical bungling. Firstly, the plaque sites no authority for its claim. Secondly the lady's name was Mumtaz-ul- Zamani and not Mumtazmahal. Thirdly, the period of 22 years is taken from some mumbo-jumbo noting by an unreliable French visitor Tavernier, to the exclusion of all muslim versions, which is an absurdity. 20. Prince Aurangzeb's letter to his father, emperor Shahjahan,is recorded in atleast three chronicles titled `Aadaab-e-Alamgiri', `Yadgarnama', and the `Muruqqa-i-Akbarabadi' (edited by Said Ahmed, Agra, 1931, page 43, footnote 2). In that letter Aurangzeb records in 1652 A.D. itself that the several buildings in the fancied burial place of Mumtaz were seven storeyed and were so old that they were all leaking, while the dome had developed a crack on the northern side. Aurangzeb, therefore, ordered immediate repairs to the buildings at his own expense while recommending to the emperor that more elaborate repairs be carried out later. This is the proof that during Shahjahan's reign itself that the Taj complex was so old as to need immediate repairs. 21. The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur retains in his secret personal `Kapad-Dwara' collection two orders from Shahjahan dated Dec 18, 1633 (bearing modern nos. R. 176 and 177) requestioning the Taj building complex. That was so blatant a usurpation that the then ruler of Jaipur was ashamed to make the document public. 22. The Rajasthan State archives at Bikaner preserve three other firmans addressed by Shahjahan to the Jaipur's ruler Jaising ordering the latter to supply marble (for Mumtaz's grave and koranic grafts) from his Makranna quarris, and stone cutters. Jaisingh was apparently so enraged at the blatant seizure of the Tajmahal that he refused to oblige Shahjahan by providing marble for grafting koranic engravings and fake centotaphs for further desecration of the Tajmahal. Jaising looked at Shahjahan's demand for marble and stone cutters, as an insult added to injury. Therefore, he refused to send any marble and instead detained the stone cutters in his protective custody. 23. The three firmans demanding marble were sent to Jaisingh within about two years of Mumtaz's death. Had Shahjahan really built the Tajmahal over a period of 22 years, the marble would have needed only after 15 or 20 years not immediately after Mumtaz's death. 24 Moreover, the three mention neither the Tajmahal, nor Mumtaz, nor the burial. The cost and the quantity of the stone also are not mentioned. This proves that an insignificant quantity of marble was needed just for some supercial tinkering and tampering with the Tajmahal. Even otherwise Shahjahan could never hope to build a fabulous Tajmahal by abject dependence for marble on a non-cooperative Jaisingh. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
varma
Knight
Joined: 26-Jun-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 60 |
Posted: 29-Jun-2006 at 01:19 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
EUROPEAN VISITOR'S ACCOUNTS 25. Tavernier, a French jeweller has recorded in his travel memoirs that Shahjahan purposely buried Mumtaz near the Taz-i-Makan (i.e.,`The Taj building') where foriegners used to come as they do even today so that the world may admire. He also adds that the cost of the scaffold- ing was more than that of the entire work. The work that Shahjahan commissioned in the Tejomahalaya Shiva temple was plundering at the costly fixtures inside it, uprooting the Shiva idols, planting the centotaphs in their place on two stories, inscribing the koran along the arches and walling up six of the seven stories of the Taj. It was this plunder, desecrating and plunderring of the rooms which took 22 years. 26. Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra recorded in 1632 (within only a year of Mumtaz's death) that `the places of note in and around Agra, included Taj-e-Mahal's tomb, gardens and bazaars'. He, therefore, confirms that that the Tajmahal had been a noteworthy building even before Shahjahan. 27. De Laet, a Dutch official has listed Mansingh's palace about a mile from Agra fort, as an outstanding building of pre-Shahjahan's time. Shahjahan's court chronicle, the Badshahnama records, Mumtaz's burial in the same Mansingh's palace. 28. Bernier, a contemporary French visitor has noted that non-muslim's were barred entry into the basement (at the time when Shahjahan requisitioned Mansingh's palace) which contained a dazzling light. Obviously, he reffered to the silver doors, gold railing, the gem studded lattice and strings of pearl hanging over Shiva's idol. Shahjahan comandeered the building to grab all the wealth, making Mumtaz's death a convineant pretext. 29. Johan Albert Mandelslo, who describes life in agra in 1638 (only 7 years after mumtaz's death) in detail (in his `Voyages and Travels to West-Indies', published by John Starkey and John Basset, London), makes no mention of the Tajmahal being under constuction though it is commonly erringly asserted or assumed that the Taj was being built from 1631 to 1653. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
varma
Knight
Joined: 26-Jun-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 60 |
Posted: 29-Jun-2006 at 01:29 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
30. Peter Mundy, a Englishman records (in 1632, within a
year of Mumtaz's death) having seen a gem studded gold railing around her tomb. Had the Taj been under construction for 22 years, a costly gold railing would not have been noticed by Peter mundy within a year of Mumtaz's death. Such costly fixtures are installed in a building only after it is ready for use. This indicates that Mumtaz's centotaph was grafted in place of the Shivalinga in the centre of the gold railings. Subsequently the gold railings, silver doors, nets of pearls, gem fillings etc. were all carried away to Shahjahan's treasury. The seizure of the Taj thus constituted an act of highhanded Moghul robery causing a big row between Shahjahan and Jaisingh. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ramserkan
Immortal Guard 
Joined: 23-Jun-2010 Location: Turkey Online Status: Offline Posts: 3 |
Posted: 23-Jun-2010 at 10:38 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Its left from ottoman. khan = Turk same my name is ser( kan ) brother gök (han) mother nur (han) uncle cengiz-cengiz han like this name ismail = more than serkan and gokhan and nurhan that tree name coming from pure Turkish names ismail is islamic name as well soi know u allready know ottoman empire (when we capture somewhere we dont suck their power foundations we try to make there rich put new thinks from our culture and their culture so mixed so they feel we are close them -not like britain when they capture some where they get all foundations and exploid :D
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Atatürk
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel 
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 00:57 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taj Mahal: Was it a Vedic Temple? The Photographic Evidence
A Presentation Assembled by Stephen Knapp, Available at www.stephen-knapp.com This presents photographs (listed below in two collections) that show the Vedic influence found in such buildings as the Taj Mahal, Red Fort, and other structures in India. It also presents photos of drawings and art that have been discovered from other parts of the world, such as Arabia, Egypt, Greece and Italy, that show a definite Vedic influence. This also presents articles that explain the evidence for and against the idea that the Taj Mahal was a pre-existing structure before it was said to be built by Shah Jahan. So, no matter whether you accept all of this or not, it nonetheless makes for an extremely fascinating and interesting story. Take a look and decide for yourself what you think. The articles listed below are practically more important than the photographs that are supplied. So be sure to read them.
The point of this presentation is that we have all heard how the Taj Mahal, which is considered one of the great wonders of the world, was built as the preeminent expression of a man's love for a wife. That it was built by emperor Shah Jahan in commemoration of his wife Mumtaz. However, is this a true story? So, in our continuous effort to get to the truth, we have acquired some very important documents and information. Regardless of what anyone thinks, there is some thoughtful information that indicates that the Taj Mahal was never built by Shah Jahan. Some say the Taj Mahal pre-dates Shah Jahan by several centuries and was originally built as a Hindu or Vedic temple/palace complex, and that Shah Jahan merely acquired it from its previous owner, the Hindu King Jai Singh. This is not unlike the many other buildings that were acquired by the Muslim invaders to be used for their own purposes. The point to consider is how much more of India's history has been distorted if the background of such a grand building is so inaccurate. PHOTOGRAPHS: COLLECTION ONE The photographs listed below are taken from an album that was found in India. On the back of each photo there is a stamp mark that says, "Copyright Archaeology Survey of India." This signifies that they may have been the property of that institution, or that they had researched the evidence that shows the Taj Mahal and many other buildings may not have been of Muslim origin. Thus, it would be good if they could open up further research into areas of the Taj Mahal that would reveal the true nature and originality of the buildings. These photos are black and white and except for old age and some water damage on some of them (creating white spots in areas), most are still in relatively good condition. Each photograph was accompanied by a typed caption taped in the album under or near the photo, each of which gives a very interesting explanation of the subject and the Vedic influence recognized on the building and what it means. The captions accompany the photos on the following pages just as they were written in the album, so the style of English and the explanations are kept the same. I did not write them myself. They are obviously written from an Indian perspective. Whatever I may say about the photos are displayed in brackets [ ]. Otherwise, I let the captions and photos speak for themselves. Some of these photos will show areas of the Taj where the public presently has no access, or what is rarely seen or noticed today. It is because of the manipulation of history by invaders that the true greatness of India and Vedic culture has been stifled or hidden. And it is time that people everywhere realize how numerous lies and false propaganda have been passed around as if it were the truth in regard to India and its past, as well as its art, archeology, and the wonder of its culture. India and its Vedic society was one of the preeminent civilizations of the world, as I explained in "Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence." Now, through the increasing amount of revealing evidence that is being uncovered, that greatness of India's past and its contributions to the world are gradually being recognized. It is because of this that it is now time to rewrite the history of India. PHOTOGRAPHS: COLLECTION TWO These photos (scroll down to find the list) provide a deeper view and a tour into the secrets of the Taj Mahal. There are also a few blueprints of the Taj Mahal to look at further proofs of the real purpose and function of the Taj Mahal. I thank Mr. V. S. Godbole for allowing me to use these photos to present them in a way so that everyone can see them through the internet.
ADDITIONAL ONLINE ARTICLES "The Question of the Taj Mahal" (Itihas Patrika, vol 5, pp. 98-111, 1985) by P. S. Bhat and A. L. Athavale is a profound and thoroughly researched and well balanced paper on the Taj Mahal controversy. This paper goes well with the photographs listed below. It uncovers the reasons for the rumors and assumptions of why it is said that Shah Jahan built the Taj Mahal, and presents all the inconsistencies of why that theory doesn't hold up. It also covers such things as the descriptions found in the old Agra court papers on the Taj; descriptions and measurements of the building in the old records; Aurangzeb's letter of the much needed repairs even in 1632 which is unlikely for a new building; records that reveal Shah Jahan acquired marble but was it enough for really building the Taj or merely for inlay work and decorative coverings; the observations of European travelers at the time; the actual age of the Taj; how the architecture is definitely of Indian Hindu orientation and could very well have been designed as a Shiva temple; the issue of the arch and the dome; how the invader Timurlung (1398) took back thousands of prisoner craftsmen to build his capital at Samarkhand and where the dome could have been incorporated into Islamic architecture; how it was not Shah Jahan's religious tolerance that could have been a reason for Hindu elements in the design of the Taj; how the direction of the mosque does not point toward Mecca as most mosques do; the real purpose of the minarets at the Taj; the Hindu symbolism recognized in the Taj which would not have been allowed if it was truly Muslim built; and even as late as 1910 the Encyclopaedia Britannica included the statement by Fergusson that the building was previously a palace before becoming a tomb for Shah Jahan; and more. A most interesting paper. "An Architect Looks at the Taj Mahal Legend" by Marvin Mills, is a great review of the information available on the Taj Mahal and raises some very interesting questions that make it obvious that the Taj could not have been built the way or during the time that history presents, which makes it more like a fable than accurate history. This suggests a construction date of 1359 AD, about 300 years before Shah Jahan. The True Story of the Taj Mahal. This article by P. N. Oak (from Pune, India) provides an overview of his research and lists his 109 proofs of how the Taj Mahal was a pre-existing Hindu temple palace, built not by Shah Jahan but originally at least 500 years earlier in 1155 AD by Raja Paramardi Dev as a Vedic temple. Mr. P. N. Oak is another who has done much research into this topic, and such a study is hardly complete without considering his findings. The evidence he presents here is a most interesting read, whether you agree with it all or not, or care for some of the anger in his sentiment. Mr. Oak has presented his own conclusions in his books, most notably Taj Mahal--The True Story (ISBN: 0-9611614-4-2). The Letter of Aurangzeb ordering repairs on the old Taj Mahal in the year just before it is said to have been completed. The Badshahnama is the history written by the Emperor's own chronicler. This page shows how Aurangzeb had acquired the Taj from the previous owner, Jai Singh, grandson of Raja Mansingh, after selecting this site for the burial of Queen Mumtaz. Taj Mahal -- Time to Tell the Truth, an analysis by Dr. V. S. Godbole that shows how the Taj Mahal was not built by ShahJahan but was the Palace of Raja Mansingh. The Distorted History of the Taj Mahal, by Dr. Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari shows how pervasive the false history of the Taj Mahal is and how it developed, but how it should be corrected.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 00:58 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 00:58 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 01:00 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taj Mahal Photo # 3 A frontal view of the Taj Mahal alias Tejo Mahalaya in Agra. It is octagonal because the Hindus believe in 10 directions. The pinnacle pointing to the heaven and the foundation to the nether world, plus the eight surface directions make the 10 directions. Divinity and royalty are believed to hold sway in all those 10 directions. Hence in Hindu tradition, buildings connected with royalty and divinity must have some octagonal features or the buildings themselves should be octagonal. The two flanking cupolas (two others to the rear are not seen in this photo) are also identical. The towers at the four plinth corners served as watch towers during the day, and to hold lights at night. Hindu wedding altars and Satyanarayan worship altars invariably have such towers at corners. [Many other Hindu temples, such as those at Khajurao, also can be found to have four towers or temples, one at each corner of the temple foundation.] The lotus flower cap on the head of the dome is a Hindu feature. Muslim domes are bald. This marble edifice has four stories. Inside the dome is an 83 ft. high hall. The Taj has a double dome. The dome one sees from inside ends like an inverted pan on the terrace. The dome seen from outside is a cover on the inner dome. Therefore, in between them is an 83 ft. hall. This may be considered as one storey. Underneath may be seen the first storey arches and the ground floor rooms. In the basement, visitors are shown one room. All these constitute the four storeys in the marble edifice. Below the marble structure are two stories in red stone reaching down to the river level. The 7th storey must be below the river level because every ancient Hindu historic building did have a basement. Thus, the Taj is a seven-storied structure.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 01:00 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Taj Mahal Photo # 4 The dome of the Taj Mahal bearing a trident pinnacle made of a non-rusting eight-metal Hindu alloy. The pinnacle served as a lightning deflector too. This pinnacle has been blindly assumed by many to be an Islamic crescent and star, or a lightning conductor installed by the British. This is a measure of the careless manner in which Indian history has been studied till now. Visually identifiable things like this pinnacle too have been misinterpreted with impunity. The flower top of the dome, below the pinnacle, is an unmistakable Hindu sign. A full scale figure of this pinnacle is inlaid in the eastern courtyard.
[All photos available at: http:// www.stephen-knapp.com] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 01:01 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 01:02 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ranjithvnambiar
Colonel
Joined: 10-Mar-2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 672 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 01:03 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
balochii
Colonel
Joined: 23-May-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 699 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 18:32 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
^ lol what garabage pics collection, they show nothing "hindu" in them. All this bullshit coming from hindus is so stupid, Just because you guys couldn't build a such a beautiful building doesn't mean you take credit for other people's work. There is no proof of that temple, because if it exisited surely some one would have documented it. Keep living in your fantasy world dumbasses
Moderator Edit:
Post contains several code of conduct violations and the poster has been warned. Edited by Cryptic - 10-Jul-2010 at 19:36 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
balochii
Colonel
Joined: 23-May-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 699 |
Posted: 10-Jul-2010 at 20:26 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
^ sorry, i just get flamed when people beleive a "lie" as historical fact. They totally close their eyes and turn blind to the truth
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Cryptic
Arch Duke 
Retired AE Moderator Joined: 05-Jul-2006 Location: United States Online Status: Offline Posts: 1962 |
Posted: 11-Jul-2010 at 09:00 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Do you think this scenario is possible:
- Accounts by impartial European travelers seem to indicate that there was a structure of some sort on the site.
-An elaborate and wealthy temple would have been mentioned in other sources (as you mention), especially if the sacred treasury had been stolen in the requision.
-The structure was not a temple. Instead, it was an abandoned or semi abandoned palace. If semi abandoned, it was probably not serving as a palace, but perhaps as a military barracks, granary, ware house etc. This would make requisioning it that much easier.
-Existing structure gets razed, some materials are re used
-The beautiful Taj Mahal was conceived and built from the start as a product of Islamic culture.
Edited by Cryptic - 11-Jul-2010 at 09:06 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
balochii
Colonel
Joined: 23-May-2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 699 |
Posted: 11-Jul-2010 at 10:13 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
^ yes some thing like that is possible, however many hindu nationtionalistic claim that all beautiful things in the Taj Mahal like the "marble" were part of the temple, that some how Mughals remade/carved the whole top side of the temple to make taj mahal (just look at the pics the guy posted above). Architecturally it does not make sense, we have well documented accounts of the where the marble and the people who designed the Taj Mahal came from. I mean it took 20 years to make the building and the whole surrounding palace/garden area. Almost everything about the Taj Mahal is "persian-islamic" architecture, yet many hindu nationalistic turn a blind eye on this. Luckily most hindus today are secular, so they dont believe their right wing nationalistics.
Edited by balochii - 11-Jul-2010 at 10:15 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
red clay
Administrator 
Tomato Master Emeritus Joined: 14-Jan-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 10226 |
Posted: 11-Jul-2010 at 12:31 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Certain sections of the Exterior "sing". The Marble filigree work allows the wind to pass through, but when the wind is stronger it makes soft whistling sound. When the wind changes, the sound does also. The legend is that the marbles were chosen for the pitch they had when the wind blew through. Which sort of throws out the idea that any marble would do.
In undergrad. [a few years back
 ] A course I had spent some time on Islamic Architecture. The documentation available for the TM is amazingly complete, and cancels the Idea that it was "recycled".The TM has more than one influence, it's a fusion of several cultures. When I think of Persian-Islamic only, I am more inclined to look at something like "the Alhambra".
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Come my brother take my hand and lets walk into the light together as brothers with no nation.... just brothers from one planet.
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.
