Any thoughts about the Tejo mahalaya controversy?

That is an absolute eyewash Mudit

Had the throne not been usurped by his son Aurangzeb, Emperor Shah Jahan would have built a separate Taj Mahal in black marble across the River Jumna connected by a silver (?) bridge. That would have been a greater wonder.

Indeed the construction that was begun of the black Taj can be seen across the Yamuna even today.Shah Jhan wanted to connect both with a silver bridge.Lightning had destroyed the central dome of the mosque on the left (as you face the Taj) and it was repaired by Lord Curzon.The grave of Shah Jahan and the repaired dome are the only two incongrous structures in the Taj Mahal. The dome could never really be repaired properly and the poor patch work can still be seen.The grave of the emperor alongside his queen consort is another out of place thing as it breaks the sense of complete geometrical harmony of the entire monument. Shah Jhan was born exactly 1000 years after the holy prophet (Pbuh)and he believed himself to be the chosen one. There is a school of thought that the marvel that he created is a reflection of the Islamic version of paradise.The central raised dome is a replica of the mythological pool of nectar in paradise called Qausar where the devout shall be offerred wine by Saqi-e-Qausar {Hazrat Imam Ali} (a.s.) with his own hands .The flowing cypresses are a replica of the canals of paradise. The style of architecture of the four minarets especially their top portion and the overturned lotus embeliishment on the dome are the only Hindu/Indian elements in the architecture otherwise the Taj is absolutely am Iranian monument in it's design. The design replica of the kalash embellishment with a crescent on the dome can be seen on the right hand side of the monument (as you face standing the magnificent structure). The sheer size of the drawing again in pietra dura takes one's breath away.In fact most of humanity has seen the pictures, films , domumentaries of the Taj Mahal but even then seeing it for the first time takes one's breath away for one is not prepared to expect such a gigantic structure. The symmetry part and the beauty of course sinks in later.The TAJ MAHAL has been variously described as 'a tear on the cheek of time', 'jewel of the builder's art' and a 'dream in marble.'

@Digvijay, my knowledge of mughal history is very limited, but story of "black taj" is a myth. The ruins which you see across the Taj are that of Mahtab Bagh, a large "shalimar" style bagh from which people could view the Taj. Also, think about it. He really loved his wife. So logically, he would be want to buried next to her in his "monument of love" and not in another Taj across the river. I don't believe the story of black Taj.

An outline of the foundation of the black Taj Mahal across the Jumna can also be seen clearly on Google Earth. The area is exactly of the same size as the Taj Mahal and it is just opposite it, on the other side of the river. Digvijay is - as always - right. It was Aurangzeb who had Shah Jahan buried next to Mumtaz Mahal, thus breaking the symmetry of this magnificient symmetrical monument.

No, the foundations which you see from google earth are those of Mahtab Bagh, a mughal garden which existed across the river. Even ASI has confirmed this. There are plans to restore this garden.

Two European writers who saw the Taj Mahal being built and after its completion mention the plans to build the black Taj Mahal across the river. I suppose they knew better.

Some info on Mahtab Bagh: http://agra.clickindia.com/tourism/mehtabbagh.html Also, please look at this contemporary painting of Taj Mahal. You can clearly see a charbagh garden across the river. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bird%27s_Eye_View_of_the_Taj_Mahal_at_Agra.jpg The story of black taj is just an old wives's tale!

Who are these two European writers ? Which of the Mughal or Rajput contemporary literature mention about the construction of Taj Mahal ? Surely the Badshahnama - the autobiography of Shah Jjahan must speak extensively about it to put all these theories to rest !

RBSI: The contemporary writers were: Tavernier, Manucci, and Bernier. Manucci describes the plan for the black Taj Mahal; Tavernier saw it being built with scaffolding of bricks, not wood; and Bernier saw "the grand mausoleum" just after its completion. At the same time, I hear of absurd and defamatory stories being invented by recent "historians" of "mass genocide ordered by Shah Jahan". I have not read the 'Badshahnama', but the details about events in India around 1660 given by Bernier and Manucci are educated and amazingly accurate. Tavernier describes mainly the crown jewels and diamonds. Manucci only mixed up some past history of Mughals, confusing Taimur with Babur in one place, but the contemporary accounts of India are thorough and well-researched. A most interesting observation (to me as a former student of Botany) made by Manucci was that "The entire economy of India is based on four plants".

Great ! But what about Shah Jahan's -Badshanama and the autobiographies of the later Mughal kings. I guess that would be far more detailed and authoratative naturally. After all...the Taj is considered to be the greatest Mughal monument today.

If Manucci mixed up the histories...it would only make it an unreliable and frivolous source. Not to be taken seriously. I would trust only the Mughal sources.

I just found some information - Mr WE Begley, an American Historian traced the genesis that led to the myth of Black Taj Mahal. “As far as the Black Taj Mahal myth is concerned, it gained credence in the 17th century after a French traveller discovered the foundation of a building having the same measurements as that of the Taj Mahal. In my opinion, it was to be built as an observation tower." So the foreign sources mentioned are the ones who started the myth of Black Taj.

RBSI: Yes, Manuccui did mix up past history of Mughals at one place (and only one place) but his narration of contemporary events is highly credible. As far as the discovery by the 'great' American historian is concerned, one can find anything on the internet these days. They say Obama was not born the USA and that he is a Muslim! And that the AIDS virus was created by genetic engineering by the Russians. Or was it the CIA? Or that the Earth is really flat and the photos are fake.

Yes, people can believe whatever they want, including the story of black taj.

Asad Ahmed : You have not answered my query on the details of Taj in Badshanama or other Mughal literature. Could you enlighten us more from these references. it would be great to know how Shah Jahan felt about it since he built it for his Mumtaz Mahal. Ofcourse there must be many references in Jahangirnama too.

@RBSI: You are wasting your time with Mr Ahmed. He feels that with his gentle, soft persuasive style of writing, and inferences he will force his views on others. Both his European visitors are also said to be on dole from Shahjahan and hence often written to please the Emperor. As far as inferencesby Mr Ahmed are concerned, please note the following from one of his comments above: "Manucci describes the plan for the black Taj Mahal; Tavernier saw it being built with scaffolding of bricks, not wood; and Bernier saw "the grand mausoleum" just after its completion." Is he trying to tell us that the Black Taj's scaffolding were of brick and that Bernier saw the Black Taj ("the Grand Mausoleum") just after its completion. Wow! I wonder if Mr Ahmed can let us know who demolished the Black Taj, since he thinks his favourite visitors did see it being built and complete as well.

RBSI: To this I may add further from Tavernier's book:" Shah Jahan began to build his own tomb on the other side of the river, but the war with his sons interrupted his plan, and Aurangzeb, who reigns at present is not disposed to complete it." I could search out the comments of Manucci too, but have no intention of responding to the absurd comments of others.

Qamar: Many thanks for sharing the link.I am among the lucky few who has seen the Taj on a full moon night and the experience is out of this world.RBSI is a great forum where we get to learn views widely at cross purposes with our own beliefs.The mark of an educated mind is to entertain views which are very different from our own.If all think alike nobody thinks too much and there shall be no progress.

Look who inferred with absurd comments re building of Black Taj and visitors having seen them? I guess when one does not arguments, one descends to abuses. I'd like to be educated by Maniucci's comments and another source substantiating them too. Even in that age people were free to believe what they wanted to including the Black Taj, like our friends from both ages.

Asad Ahmed and Pulin Trivedi : Both of you are engaging and fascinating scholars...let alone accomplished gentlemen. You have so much to share with all of us. Differences of opinion may exist...but then, thats what make a discussion interesting. Lets agree to disagree...at best and move on.

I am shocked that the construction of Taj Mahal is not mentioned in Shah Jahan's own Badshanama or in any of the later Mughal writings. Have we based this entire story of Taj Mahal built by Shah Jahan for his beloved wife Mumtaz Mahal on the travel journals of Tavernier and Manucci alone ??? The British writers are not of any relevance since they have not given the sources and also that it was written in 1800s. When almost all of the Mughal constructions and demolitions have been scrupulously recorded...like I have seen in the 'Fatwa Alamgir' of Aurangzeb...it is almost unbeleivable that the Taj is not mentioned anywhere. What about Rajput records...because they served the Mughals ? Asad / Digvijay / Qamar / Pulin and others : Can we have an intelligent and dispassionate discussion without it deteriorating into a hindu-muslim fundalmentalist claims and counter claims which we can all gladly do without. Can we seriously try to find out the sources for the story of Taj and put it to rest forever. I reserve the right to delete any comments which are offensive and infllamatory.

Rare Book Society of India: I am sorry RBSI if I have overstepped my limits. Just felt I had to point out the inference re Black Taj.

I am educated and aware enough to know, what I don't know. I have not made any communal remarks here or in the past as yet, for which I will have to be provoked beyond imagination with private revelations from Gods.

@Nitin Ashok Bhagawat: Many thanks for the LIKE on my above comment about wasting time.

RBSI: As I mentioned before, I have not read the 'Badshahnama' because it was not written by Shah Jahan himself. It was written by Enayat Khan. Since you state that there is no mention of the Taj Mahal in it, kindly confirm that you have actually gone through it. I would be surprised if it does not refer to that monument. Any one who has read Bernier knows him as a highly literate intellectual, and Manucci as a keen and accurate observer of events, and their narration are far more credible than other sources who are attempting to rewrite history 350 years later without reading any of the books. Waldemar Hansen, the New York-based author has thoroughly researched the subject and knows more about it than any one of us. Two years ago, a "Tourist Guide" at Fatehpur Sikri was trying to convince me that Babur was defeated at the Battle of Khanua! What is happening to history in India?

Asad Ahmed : I think you misunderstood me. I have not read the Badshanama. I presumed from your comment that it Taj is not mentioned in it. I would honestly be convinced only if it is mentioned in the Mughal autobiographies or their journals. There are so many wrong assumptions in India's complex history. I find any kind of chauvanism distasteful... whether it is Hindu, Muslim or Christian. Lets ignore them for this discussion. I am not interested to right a supposed historical wrong nor do I support such causes which used for political purposes . Havent we had enough of it already. It is an unintelligent and pointless exercise. My point is plain and simple. We have many professional and amateur historians on RBSI...cant we dispassionately try to to list out the sources of many of these claims and examine their perspective and veracity. That would be a challenging and educative exercise. Most importantly...it will silence the trouble-makers once for all.

OH my God, i'd never thought I'd be asked to substanciate with proof alongwith sources that the Taj Mahal was not built by emperor Shah Jahan !!

Digvijay: Haha. Now you are morally obliged to provide evidence that Shah Jahan actually built the Taj Mahal, that Raja Jai Singh owned a palace at that site, and that there was a plan to build another mausoleum across the River - even if that means bringing Francois Bernier, Niccolo Manucci, and Jean-Baptiste Tavernier back to life as witnesses.

My question has been posed with an open mind bereft of any agenda. I dont need proof...I only asked for simple references from Mughal and Rajput literature. Plain and simple. Is that odd ??

Gentleman i do not mean any offence here I'd rather we celebrate the Taj as the greatest monument to womanhood.The Taj is he most perfect visual metaphor for the paradise garden created by the Mughals.. The Persian couplets inscribed on the entrance gateway make the imagery explicit; “ Hail, blessed space happier than the garden of paradise ! / Hail lofty building higher than the divine throne !” So great was the emperor’s grief that his hair turned white in a few days, and he needed to wear spectacles to hide the effects of weeping. The poet laureate Abu Talib Hamadani (d 1652) known as Kalim expressed the emperor’s distress in Persian couplets in his Padshahnameh “ the king of kings,cried out with grief/like an ocean raging with storm……the aggrieved heart lost its control/How can wine remain when the goblet is broken ?.....His two eyes competed with each other./Each claiming to shed a larger share of the heart’s blood” Mumtaz Mahal died in Burhanpur on June 17th, 1631 giving birth to her 14th child. Six months later her body was brought to Agra, escorted by prince Shah Shuja and her principal lady-in-waiting Satti al Nissa-Khanam and laid to rest in the garden .The chronicler Muhammad Salih (d 1660)described the setting in the Shah Jehanname as “the honour of the terrestrial world…..(in)a garden having the marks of paradise …..(with)no like and equal on the face of the earth in spaciousness of area and novelty of design” The layout is indeed unique.The mausoleum is situated overlooking the river rather than in the centre of the garden, from which it is separated by a high plinth.A mosque and a (mehmaan khana) guest house are placed in mirror image to each other.This is a new featurein the sepulchral architecture of the subcontinent for a mosque was often included in a tomb complex (never in Mughal tombs) a guesthouse is a decidedly an innovation as also are the four free standing minarets. The main gateway is approached through a great square “the Jilau Khana” a feature also in Jehangir’s tomb but here is even more elaborate.On each sides are residential facilities for tomb attendants, and to the south are platforms with subsidiary tombs. It is an enormous complex including further to the south a township names Mumtazabad with intersecting bazaar streets and caravanserais and also houses constructed by merchants. The annual income of 200,000 rupees from the bazaars and caravanserais formed part of the endowment (waqf) of the tomb, together with a 1 lac rupees from 30 villages jagir for associated expenses : maintainance , stipends for overseers, attendants, hafiz-e-Koran (reciters of the Quran), contributions to charity; and commemoration expenditure. The subsidiary tombs were probably for the emperor’s other wives although they bear no epigraphic inscriptions.Beyond the perimeter wall is the Fatahpuri masjid attributed to Shah Jahan’s 3rd wife Faehpuri Begum. On the same north south axis is another octagonal tomb of Satti al Nissa khanum teacher and confidante first to Mumtaz Mahal and later to princess royal Jahanara for whom she held the great seal used to solemnize imperial documents. The Taj I’d say is a monument to womankind associated with so many ladies of the imperial household an aspect enhanced by certain ceremonies performed at the time of the anniversary death which were peculiar to the Taj Mahal. The 1st anniversary of death took place according to precise royal orders establishing the future pattern of ceremonial.The site where the tomb foundations were already laid was prepared with carpets and canopied tents of velvet and brocade.A full day and night was spent in prayers, almsgiving, feeding the poor and other religious duties.Those present were the nobles of the court, scholars, saintly persons, religious leaders as well as ordinary subjects.A feast was provided for the rich and poor alikeand Rs 50,000 were distributed among the deserving.The unusual feature was the repetition of these ceremonies for the ladies of the royal house-hold in equal magnificence.This 2nd day od ritual was not a practice associated with other royal tombs required the associated guest-house and mosque.The woman’s assembly was open to all and especially the needy, and another 50,000 rupees were distributed. The emperor’s chroniclers claim that the design for the layout was suggested by the emperor himself. He selected the calligrapher Amanat Khan renowned for his the inscriptions on the gateway at Akbar’s tomb at Sikandra. The architect is not mentioned but supervisors Makramat Khan, minister of public worksand Mir Abd al-Karim.Some scholars and researchers take the name of Ustad Ahmad Lahori a building engineer practiced in astronomy, geometry and mathematicswho came from a Khorasani family from Heart.He was accoded the title Nadir-al-Asar (Wonder of the age). He designed royal apartments in the Delhi’s red fort at Shahjahanabad. Later his eldest son designed the tomb of Rabia Daurani Aurangzeb’s wife

Thank you Digvijay ! Splendid ! Are these extracts from Badshanama ?

Raja Man Singh 1st was close to Akbar who was also his brother-in-law and had recieved the prestigious rank or mansab of 'seven thousand horse'. He tried hard to convince Akbar to supercede his son Prince Salim (later Jehangir) in favour of his grandson prince Khurram (later Shah Jahan). Although this did not happen Cary Welch writes "A final link between the old raja (Man Singh) and prince Khurram was forged after Khurram had assumed ruling powers and he came to the throne.On the death of his favourite wife the land that belonged to the Kachhawas was acquired as the site for her tomb. Now surely that place must have had a place of worship so this theory taht the Taj is built on teh site of the temple must have got credence over time and got blown so much out of proportion that there is a sizable brainwashed section of society that says that it is Tejo-mahal dedicated to Lord Shiv ! There are equally fantastic stories that the Taj was a Laxmi temple. I find all that absolute eyewash as any student of architecture will tell you that the Taj is absolutely an Iranian monument there is nothing Hindu in it except two features.

Yes indeed and from other sources as well

It would be great if you could list out the sources to help students of history who might be reading these comments.

Well Padshanameh primarily of Hamdani not to be confused with Badshanama of Inayat Khan . Philippa Vaughan who is a reasonably good authority on Mughal history alongwith Marriane Barracund who has written "The Garden as a reflection of Paradise"

When was Padshanameh of Hamdani written ?

RBSI: I present another excerpt from the book "Agra: Historical and Descriptive" published in 1896 by S. Muhammad Latif (Calcutta: Central Press Company, Ltd). "Exactly opposite the Taj, on the opposite bank of the river, are ruins of old foundations. Shah Jahan had intended these foundations for a monument for himself corresponding with the Taj, and to connect the two tombs by a magnificient marble bridge, to show the bond of affection between himself and his beloved consort even after death. But his subsequent captivity prevented the execution of his design, and, when he died, his austere son, Aurangzeb, as has already been noted, buried him by the side of his wife, observing " My father entertained a great affection for my mother; so let his last resting place be close to hers." Thus, in the words of Mr Taylor, " Fate conceded to Love what was denied to vanity." Digvijay: Please note 'marble bridge', not 'silver bridge'. RBSI: I found out that the Badshahnama does give details of the Taj Mahal since it mentions that "in 1042 A.H., a fence or enclosure of solid gold studded with gems was placed around the Empress's sarcophagus. It was a perfect specimen of the art of Indian jewelry. It weighed 40,000 tolas of pure gold and was valued at six lakhs of rupees" ... etc. I don't have access to this book and would appreciate if you could post it. Thank you. 2 seconds ago · LikeUnlike.

Thank you Digvijay and Asad Ahmed ! Truly appreciate your sincerity and scholarship.

Again, Mr Muhammad Latif's book that was published in 1896 cannot be taken as authoritative re the monument across Yamuna opposite the Taj. If the book was published in 1896, I would say that maybe in was written at the earliest in later half of the 19th century, a good many years after the death of Shahjahan. Let us not try to foist our brand of history by citing examples that may or may not have been truthful and had chances of author's fanciful imagination.