This tomb built around 1325, by Sultan Tughlaq, has a lovely blending of red stone with white marble on a large scale. I do not know of any marble dome before this, and that may have been the inspiration for the dome on Humayun's tomb. An interesting thing about this tomb is that its design was copied six centuries later (1948) in the mausoleum of Mr Muhammad Ali Jinnah in Karachi, Pakistan. That mausoleum is all in marble since red stone is scarce in what is Pakistan now.

Oh yes now I recall Jinnah's tomb does resemble this one

Also to be noted in the architecture of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq are the sloping walls which can be seen in his tomb above and in Tughlaqabad Fort built by him as by now the defences of Old city of Lalkot and Qila Rai Pithora were in decline and Ghazi Malik the governor of Khaljis in Multan had seen the Khalji Sultans cowering behind the ruined fortification of Lalkot. So when Ghazi Malik proclaimed himself as Sultan in 1320, he assumed the grand title of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq. The sloping walls have their own story as to why they were sloped.

Why are the walls sloping? I am curious.

@ Pulin: The kalash on the dome and the base of the kalash are absolutely Hindu elements. In fact the base of the kalash is found in all south Indian temples which are pagoda shaped in comparison to north Indian ones which have a shikhar (Hindu steeple), dome and a square dome as their principal characterstic elements. The sloping walls are indeed a mystery pl enlighten us.

Sloping walls: As I said earlier Ghazi Malik aka Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq was the Governor of Khaljis, in Multan where buildings were made out of bricks due to paucity of stone. High fort walls meant that the dead weight of the high wall would crush the lowest and lower courses of bricks at the base. In order to reduce the dead weight, the wall were tapered or sloped from outside, whereas they were straight from inside. Say an 8' thick wall at the base was only 3-5 thick at the top, there by reducing the weight exerted on the base courses. So when Ghiyas started constructing of Tughlaqabad Fort, either he did not take into account the property of stone whose crushing stress is a lot higher than that of brick or disregarded the properties of stone for the defensive reason given below. Added advantage of the sloping walls was defensive. It is easy to rest a ladder for the attackers to scale the walls if the wall is straight, but difficult when the wall is sloping. I hope I have been able to explain somewhat without being able to sketch and draw pictures at this forum.

@Digvijay: Yes they are, what is known in temple architecture as "Amalak" that goes as the finial on the shikhar. A lota or a pot of water with coconut on top of the pot, both considered life supporting i.e. water and flesh of coconut. It is a Hindu feature. Also notice the Arch/Lintel/Bracket combination in the Tomb above. You either need an arch to span a wall opening or a lintel, and if the lintel is too long then brackets to support it. True arch was brought to India by the Muslims which they had learnt from Romans. And Hindus used lintel and brackets to span the wall opening. Former is arcaded system of architecture and later is the trabeated system of Architecture. Arcaded system was used by Romans, Arabs, Muslims and Trabeated system by Greeks and Hindus. So there we have, like the kalash on top of the dome, arch/lintel/bracket as another fusion of Hindu/Muslim style of architecture. :)

Hey this sure is interesting Pulin to learn the mystery behind the sloping walls.So red sand-stone and marble has been used primarily as an overlay on the brick construction after all ?Just as marble has been used on the Taj from outside while the inner skeleton is all of baked bricks. I wonder why was a similar design preferred for Jinnah's tomb in modern times where there were no such constraints on acc of RCC having made an appearance? Interestingly the bricks of that period are thinner and longer than the standardised ones we use today.Use of pebbles/macadam and broken bricks as fillers alongwith the mortar was not uncommon as the area now devoid of plaster on account of decay and ruin in several old buildings suggests. Can you enlighten us about the ingridients of the mortar / paste used. I have noticed that all fort ramparts stand impressively while the inner structures like palaces etc have crumbled upon the forts being abandoned.

Receptions in the palaces of ther early Sultansderived much from the courtly practice from the Islamic world notably Persia continuing and adapting indiginous traditions. The ceremonies can be reconstructed from the accounts of Ibn Batuta a north African travellerwho was an eye witness to the court of Mohd.Bin Tuglaq.The outer gate of Mod Tuglaq's palace at Jahanpanah was guarded by soldiers and eqipped with a band of musicians.At the second gate was the principal usher whose head-dress was surmounted with peacock feathers.At the third gate which marked the enterance to the immense hall with a thousand wooden pillars the names of all visitors were recorded. The formalities were under the chief master of ceremonies who was of royal blood.Togather with other deputies his job was to marshall those attending the durbar according to precedence and seniority, to present all petitions to the sultan and to transmit the royal command to subordinate officials and to any petitioners.One officer had the special task of making an inventory of all gifts recieved by the sultan. Mohd himself sat on a cushioned seat. The wazir and his secretaries stood before him followed by various officers and more than a hundred assistants.The attendent appointed to carry the fly whisk was positioned immidiately behind the royal figure and there were speacial armed body-guards on either side. Ranged in order down the durbar hall were religious leaders and holy men,then the sultan's relations by blood and marriage and finally the principal amirs or nobles and their commanders.When all of this ceremony was in place, some sixty caprisoned horses and fifty adorned war-elephants were brought in.Approved visitors were permitted to hand over gifts in person, often recieving a ceremonial sash. Durbars on feast days were more elaborate an d the audience hall was extended by erecting vast awnings.The Sultan sat on a cushion on a large golden throne, attendents held a jewelled parasol over his head. Those attending the court saluted the king individually, in descending order of precedence, then revenue holders would bring presents and all would be entertained to a big banquet, again being served in strict order.A large golder brazier would fill the hall with the smoke of diff kinds of incense and fragerant woods, and the assembled throng would be springkled wityh rose water. Dishes were escorted from the kitchen by ushers, and praises of the sultan would be recited before those present were assigned their places.The serving of paan (leaves containing chopped betel nut with lime anda bitter gum) signified the end of the meal and the durbar

@Digvijay: Re your comment "Hey this sure is interesting......": I didn't say that covered brick wall with stone at Tughlaqabad. Here the entire masonery is of stone. the only difference is that the facing is done with dressed stones which cover random-rubble masonery inside. Radom Rubble masonery is a bed of lime concrete with stones of any size and shape placed on it with another bed of lime concrete and another course of stone and so on. And such a wall was then surfaced with dressed stones, of equal size, generally rectangular in shape. The mortar and concrete to bind were made from lime as is done even now for economic reasons in villages (Chuna lagana.......). Lime concrete was the binding paste between stones. Lime stone (CaCo2) was crushed in mills (such a mill can be seen at Fatehpur Sikri even now) and mixed with water (H2O) and used to make a bed of lime concrete as mentioned above. Over a period of time, the lime concrete gave away the water and absorbed the oxygen from the atmosphere. Chemical equation was CaCo2 + H2O = CaOH + Co2, for making concrete. After the exposure to atmosphere when construction was finished, the equation reversed itself viz. CaOH + Co2 = CaCo2 + H2O. Back to being a lime stone. So in effect it was stone binding two other stones. Hope that explains. I have heard of lot of exotic stuff going into this concrete of yore e.g. jaggery, fenugreek etc, but haven't come up on any written account of formula for this. Perhaps, Air-i-Akbari, the procedure file of Akbar might have something to say about it. Will check and revert if I find a formula.

@Digvijay: That is a fascinating account of the court procedures. Many thanks for sharing it with us.

Yes fenugreek seeds, hemp/ jute fibre ,jaggery is what was used in the forts of Rajasthan alongwith the lime paste formula that you have so beautifully mentioned alongwith physics formulae of water and limestone .Many thanks for the same.While chuna (lime paste) was used in stone masonry in brick construction gaara (river bed-soil or chikni mitti) paste was used as per my understanding.The bricks used were 'kakaiya eint' as I know them as these were thinner and larger than the standardised versions used today. Brick kilns at that time in Rajasthan used the hay and straw of lentils (like arhar ki daal) as wood was always a prized commodity for us in Rajasthan. Several fort walls were stored with baatis ( a kind of baked bread somewhat like scones) alongwith cotton dipped and shade dried in chaachh ( butter milk) and sealed. When the siege of the forts went on for long periods this served as food.The dried cotton was again dipped in water to yield a faint taste of chaachh in which broken baatis were dipped for use as a survival tactic alongwith salt.Several fort walls still yield this stuff intact to this day after centuries altogather.

The durbar as you may notice in the Tuglaq period had begun to incorporate essentially Hindu elements: peacock plumes, jewel studded parasols (umbrella as a Hindu symbol of sovereignity), fly-whisks made of yak-tails, rose water and paan. The Mughal durbars were even more elaborate but resolutely august affairs.There are still people around who have attended the durbars of the Hindu and Muslim provincial courts which were in effect a faint copy of the Mughals with their own indiginous variations.I am fortunate to have met these people through whom I have tried to fathom the court etiqqette of Rajput and Muslim kingdoms that had continued well into the 20th century. There were indirect feelers from Nehru to the Jaipur royals not to organise a durbar in the honour of the Queen and prince Philip who had come on a state visit to Jaipur in 1961 as such a practice had begun to be deemeded un-democratic in the republic of India

Digvijay, What a treasure trove of information on (1) mortar and plaster, (2) bricks, (3) survival tactics with Baati and chhachh and (4) court etiquettes. Fabulous. Where are you based? Would love to meet you some day if possible. I am in Delhi. Re bricks, the straw was used as reinforcement with the clay just the same way we use iron rods (saliyas) in RCC beams, which increased their tensile strength and clay providing the compressive strength. I have a friend in Delhi, who made bricks with broken shards of glazed tiles on one surface of brick (Height x length) to reflect of the heat and making them waterproof. Very ingenious and indigenous. Re Nehru requesting jaipur Royals to not host a durbar, I feel it was just an effort to swing the pendulum to other side.

Wonderful nuggets ! Thanks Pulin and Digvijay.

Perhaps a silly question? Does anybody know if the architect was not also a military engineer? Had he just adopted techniques he had formerly used on forts? It's a really striking building. It is great to get the background behind these buildings from you all because so often we see pictures but have no idea of the human tale behind these places. Nick Balmer

On the wood, the prized comodity , I wish to mention that in those days trees were not easily cut down. There were a procedure to obtain permission from local jagirdar/patwari or states representatives, specifying the reason of need.Even for the dead bodies pyre...family was allowed only 3 local forest wood {dhok], 2 for pyre n one for his 12th day rituals. Local jagirdars were held resposible if any damage done in their area to the forests or wild animals, specially the Tiger.

Well ,Nick, the forts were invariably built with forced bonded labour who were prisnors-of war. So even if they fell off the dangerous cliffs of the hills ,over which these forts were under construction, they were dispensible anyway !! I am sure you are aware about how the largest man-made structure (the great wall of china) visible from space was constructed in a similar way. The dead and dyoing POWs on account of under-nourishment and disease were buried in the trench of the wall itself ! Whether the architect was a military engineer is anybody's guess now. There surely were'nt any seperate military and civil engineers in those days and India never had an organisation of a Freemasons guild as in Britain.

Carrying forward what Rao sb has dwelt upon, I wish to add the story of the last fort which was constructed in India (probably the world): Naila fort was built around the mid nineteenth century over a table top, long hill in the erstwhile kingdom of Jaipur.Records tell us that express state permission had to be sought from 'Raj sawai Jaipur' to cut the trees on top of the hill. Only those trees were allowed to be felled which were an obstruction in the construction of the rampart walls and the palace, granary and stables. Inventory of trees had to be maintained about the kinds and numbers of trees in the realm by the forest officials.Contracts were granted to only collect fallen twigs and 'chhantai' (preening of the trees).Applying the axe to the trunk of a tree without permission was a severely punishable offence. Forest wealth ,though plentiful in those times, was jealously guarded by the princes as trees have a painfully slow and stunted growth in Rajasthan on account of the arid climate and periodically failing monsoons. The landed gentry could be pulled up for forest depletion in their territory. Independence brought a free-for-all which resulted in the rapid destruction of our flora and fauna.

Thanks Shivraj and RBSI for "Like" on my response to Digvijay.

Digvijay, I have read about the Taj's foundation. It is a kind of pile foundation where the piles are made of huge tree trunks as you mention above. The tree trunks were pushed in the ground till they hit the solid bedrock. And the plinth of the Taj (the high deck/platform) is partly exposed foundation to take the dead weight of the massive structure of the Taj. This platform had openings on riverside so that the flood water would rush in and soak the tree trunks which would make them swell and prevent them from drying out over years and crumble. Now of course it is a serious concern that the tree trunks are not being flooded and consequently shriveling up. Did you know that in the time of Aurangzeb, the inner dome of the Taj was leaking and the cenotaph chamber was flooded with water. To prevent the leaks, Aurangzeb had molten silver poured in the leaks to seal them. But using lead in the buildings is new to me. The co-efficient of heat for lead is very different from the commonly used building materials and hence wherever lead would be used, the cracks would develop. That is why it is not used as a weather bar between the sil level of window and the window frame which is generally of timber. But maybe it worked well with stones, as they might be expanding in the heat only negligibly.

@ Nick Balmer: To answer your question re architect being a military engineer, in the early days of advent of Muslims it was very true. The armies did not march with Architects, but instead with military engineers who could throw a boat bridge across the river for the army to cross. And in building the early Islamic building in India, it is these engineers who doubled up as architects too which consequently left the building devoid of any aesthetics. Case in point being Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque at Qutub Complex, Delhi.

The Qutub Minar is one of the most impressive buildings in India. Who can say that it is not aesthetically pleasing? Its history may not that be that pleasant to some - but it is a remarkable example of medieval Indian architecture. Three years ago, I was there and a French tourist exclaimed ecstatically "Magnifique". It is time that we started looking at monuments and events of Indian history as Indians and not through the eyes of narrow-minded and divisive religious prejudice.

Did some one say Qutub Minar is not aesthetic? Who? I was talking about the Quwwat-ul-Islam mosque at the Qutub complex. If that is a magnificent mosque and aesthetic, I have nothing to add. And why do we have to bring in religious prejudice in there. If Babar was a pucca Sunni, he was and there is nothing anyone can do about it. And Qutub Minar does not become 'magnifique' becasue a French man said it. Why is it necessary for a white man to appreciate for us to take a 2nd look. The fact remains that Taj is beautiful and Bibi-ka-Maqbara is Mughal tomb in decay and it has nothing to do with being an Indian, Hindu or Muslim.

Right at the top of this page there is mention of Sultan Tughlaq. Who is Sultan Tughlaq? There was nobody by that name. Perhaps the reference is to Sultan Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq........

No I was not aware of the use of molten silver to seal the inner sanctum of the mausoleum.Thanks for the info. Pulin. The flooding of the Taj's base is no longer a regular feature but it does happen every few years now

As I had posted earlier elsewhere, the century-old Krishnarajasagar dam (famous for its Brindavan Gardens) is constructed with mortar and no cement is used! The mortar was made locally near the dam site. The 'Sukri mortar' was an outcome of lime, jaggery and eggs. Jaggery and eggs were binding factors. Many buildings in Mysore were constructed during the period of recent Maharajas using this 'Sukri mortar'. A huge stone grinder where mortar was made with the help of elephants and oxen still stands in front of the Jaganmohan Palace, the art gallery in Mysore.

I used the word "Sultan Tughlaq" deliberately because no one is sure if this Tomb was built by Sultan Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq (for himself) or by his son Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlaq, or both. Muhammad Tughlaq was a destructive Sultan; there were not many buildings constructed by him. The only one I have seen is the gateway to the shrine of Khwaja Hameeduddin Nagori in Nagor, Rajasthan. There is very little I read at this site (with a few notable exceptions) that is not colored by narrow religious prejudices - unfortunately. The only objective narration of Indian history was by the British scholars who made great contributions to Indian archaeology and history. Since then it has been mainly religious propaganda of one sort or the other. If Babur was a "pucca Sunni", so were his descendents. So why single him out? Because there are the hidden undercurrents of recent events which cloud our vision. A favorite (and very coarse) slogan of religious extremists (actually criminals) during Babari Masjid demolition was " tel lagao Dabar ka, aur naam mita do Babur ka". This mission is being perpetuated by others.

The narrow prejudices are in the eye of the reader. If the vision is tinted then one can find a black cat in a dark room, where it does not exist. If one is reading comments only to find faults with others, it is pitiable, as it happens when one mistakes Qutub for its mosque in a hurry to figure where one can jab.

The narrow prejudices are in the eye of the reader generally, when one reads only to find faults with everything. That is how one confuses the Qutub Minar with the Quwwal-ul-Islam mosque in a hurry to read and comment. Easy to finda black cat, in a dark room, where it does not exist. Sins of father do not have to visit their sons. Nobody can deny that Akbar was liberal, and that Aurangzeb was not. If Babar was a Sunni, is it difficult to accept it? Coming to Hindustan was his first exposure to non-islamic people and in that case what else would he be but a pucca sunni? It is a matter of exposure and opening one's mind.

Well gentlemen ,we cannot let a fantastic forum as this one created by Subbiah become a medium where let ourselves be saddened by the expression of someone's personal religious and political affiliations and view-points. The best learning that I have recieved through this medium is : History is never one sided. There are several dimensions to any one event People of history will revel in it and others will always find ways to ridicule them on account of "their living in the past" or" day-dreaming about a return to that period" History can generate emotional responses by those who may have an ancestor who was a dramatis personae in that period. We should view events in the light of the prevailing circumstances (we can only speculate about that period today but only people living in those times were privvy to the facts ) and the prevailing wisdom of the times. Dynasties also evolve and with time either became liberal or turned philistine and could again turn tolearnt towards their subjects. It will afford us little time to dwell upon what all was achieved during those times if we let our personal prejudices colour our assessment of the events of periods past. I have learnt to ignore the comments which I find tiresome on account of prejudice.Sometimes we can learn even from people who have very radical views or opinions absolutely at cross purposes with our own. At all events it is Voltaire who should be allowed to prevail "I may not agree with what you have to say but will defend unto death your right to say so" regds etc.

@Digvijay: I am entirely in agreement with what you say and that is what is important. But the moment you talk about a building not being aesthetically pleasing (which again is always a subjective opionion) it is not necessary for others to pounce on it and that too by mixing up monuments and talk infer or imply "....of narrow-minded and divisive religious prejudice." If one mostly finds that what this forum offers is "There is very little I read at this site (with a few notable exceptions) that is not colored by narrow religious prejudices - unfortunately." then instead of thrusting and jabbing all the time, one should stop wasting time on it. It is all too easy to accuse others of religious prejudices, object to words like 'Pucca Sunni', drag in slogans chanted by people who have not contributed a sou's worth to this forum and imply that those contributing are of the same stock. Ridiculous. One should realise that this forum is not formal education but informal or non-formal education, that this is not the class room where the master's word is the law. Some of us do and can react to the parochial, patronizing attitude that is displayed here. Digvijay, I shall not utter a word more on this topic any more, in deference to you and this forum, both of which I respect for their knowledge. :))

@Digvijay: To add one last bit, I am with Voltaire - everyone has a right to differ, offer their opinion as long as it does not hurt others. But my liberty ends or should end where your nose begins.

Better we put an end to this topic n hope to discuss next ...with regards to both n others too.