THE GENESIS IN THOUGHT AND IDEAS BEHIND THE DESIGN OF THE

MUGHAL GARDENS IN INDIA

MOHAMMAD GHARIPOURUNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA -- CHARLOTTE

1. Mughals in India; Political Context

Any discussion on Mughal gardens in India without having an understanding of the

socio-political situation of that age and the importance of royal patronage is impossible.

Such contextual study could enable us to assess the degrees of foreign influence versus

local trends which led to the formation of a collection of gardens in a large territory from

Kabul to Delhi for about three centuries. What is called as “Mughal Indians” was the

dynasty of Central Asian origin that ruled portions of the Indian subcontinent from 1526

to 1857. It was founded by Babur (1526–30), a prince descended from Timur and

Genghis Khan. Babur invaded Kabul and Delhi in 1526. Supported by the Safavid court,

Babur’s successor, Humayun (1530-1555), could regain his lost territory and re-establish

Mughal power in the subcontinent after the capture of Kabul in 1545, and Delhi in 1555.

Akbar (1556–1605), who inherited a small and precarious kingdom, stretched it from

Kabul to the Deccan. Akbar’s son, Jahangir (1605–27) continued the policies set in place

by his father and, for the most part, did not interfere with the institutions of state. While

his son, Shah Jahan, mainly developed art and architecture in his territory without being

worried much about politics. His grandson, Aurangdzeb, expanded Mughal territory to

its greatest extent, but at the same time suffered from several Hindu revolts.1

Babur and his successors were well-known in history because of their great interest in

arts and architecture. In his memoirs, the Babur-Nama,2 Babur expressed his lifelong

interest in horticulture and his attraction as a young man with the gardens of the Timurid

capitals in Samarkand and Herat.3 According to Babur-Nama, Babur himself laid out

gardens and built palaces. An illustrated version of Babur-Nama, shows how careful he

1 R. Nath, “Mughal India,” Grove Art Online. Oxford University Press, December 2006, http://www.groveart.com/ 2 Babr-Nama is a reference to Babur’s ideas, interests, and concerns. 3 Probably because of his pride of his Timurid heritage, he spent ten years to invade Timur’s favorite city, Samarkand.

97

controlled his craftsmen and architects who were laying out a chaharbagh.4 After Babur

his successors followed this pattern. Although his son, Humayun didn’t have much time

to spend for designing gardens, his tomb is the earliest example of Mughal garden

mausoleums. Akbar (1556-1605), Babur’s grandson, annexed Vale of Kashmir, which,

with its enclosing mountains, flowing water, and rich vegetation with numerous settings

for dramatic water landscapes.5 He also erected a series of palaces at Kashmir, Agra,

Lahore, and Fatehpur. Tuzuk-I Jahangiri, the memoirs remained from Jahangir attests his

impressive level of interest in painting, architecture, and gardens. The dynasty’s greatest

patron of architecture, Shah Jahan (1628–58) reconstructed the palaces at Agra and

Lahore and constructed a mausoleum at Agra, called Taj Mahal. This interest in arts

gradually disappeared with a gradual increase of Islamic orthodoxy in Mughals’ court.

Aurangzib’s gardens at Awrang-abad in the Deccan are two of the last examples of the

eMughal landscape architecture.

2. Cultural Connections

4 It reminds us the description of Cyrus’ at Sardis by Xenophon. 5 L. Golombek, (1993). “[Persian] Garden in Islamic Period,” in Encyclopedia Iranica, edited by Ehsan Yarshater, New York: Mazda Publications.

98

A depiction of Babur directing the building of the Bagh-i Wafa. Note the architect/engineer consulting the plan and the workmen measuring the plots.

A. Nomadic background: Timurids and Mongols

Historical references written by Clavijo, Sharaf Al-Din Ali Yazdi, and Ahmad ibn

Arabshah indicate that Timur and his court lived

in tents (yurt-aq oya) during most of the spring

and summer. These accounts even describe the

ceremonies that Timur’s family members such as

Ulugh Beg held in these gardens. A miniature

painting in Zafarnama illustrates Timur and his

courtiers in a garden, filled with tents.6 Gronke

states, when Timur chose a capital, he “gave up

the fundamental nomadic principle of mobility

and local independence.”7

Babur as descendant of Timur tried to regain the

control of his grandfather’s capital, Samarkand.8 Babur’s memoirs demonstrate that he

was an intelligent leader who was aware of Timur’s cultural interests such as gardens and

probably tried to keep them as a heritage. Babur never got settled and continued Timur’s

nomadic life, mainly because he was always involved in ruling his army. More or less,

Babur’s successors never felt safe and most of them had to keep their dynamic life style.

Such phenomenon changed their perception of place. For these nomadic people, “place”

had mobility qualities and garden was something which should have the enough room

(and spatial flexibility) to fit their army. Babur, who had inherited this habit from Timur,

designed his gardens in a way that they could be filled by army tents.9 Such capability

6 Ibid. p. 180.7 M. Gronke, (1992). “The Persian Court between Palace and Tent: From Timur to 'Abbas I,” in Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, edited by Lisa Golombek and Maria Subtelny, Leiden, p.19.8 From 1494 to 1504.9 The influence of nomadic life-style on the garden design goes back to early years of Islamic invasion of Arab nomads, Turkish Seljuks, and Mongols. But the integration of nomadic ideas into garden design became more evident when these nomadic tribes such as Mongols and Timurids got interested in constructing gardens as places to stay in certain periods of the year. Such tradition was not limited to nomadic tribes. For example, we read in history that since Shah Abbas was still challenging with his neighborhood empires (Ottomans and Uzbeks) Qazvin was still a royal camp (orduy-I humayun) after six years. (M. Gronke, (1992). “The Persian Court between Palace and Tent: From Timur to 'Abbas I,” in Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, edited by Lisa Golombek and Maria Subtelny, Leiden, p. 18.)

99

A Persian depiction of Timur in his garden pavilion meeting European emissaries. Note the dais raised above the intersection of the four paths or watercourses.

made him and his architects to reduce the density of planted areas (to increase void

spaces) in their gardens. This trend changed after the 17th century as the result of the

increasing power of Mughals and getting settled in subcontinent. In that respect, if

gardens for Babur, like his grandfather, were calm places which could make him and his

soldiers mentally prepared for his wars, they had different meanings for Shah Jahan, who

was more settled down and used to urban life style.

Considering their Timurid background, we can ask what influences the early Mughal

gardens got from the concepts of the earlier Timurid gardens in Samarqand, Herat,

Tabriz, and Yazd.10 The plans of Timurid gardens show that in all of them, the

chaharbagh was an established layout. Clavijo and Babur’s accounts of Timurid gardens

prove their huge number in this area. We can assume that the young Babur, who explains

his fascination by these gardens in his memoirs, got motivated to continue this trend. But

we don’t know what ideas Babur got after observing these gardens and spending some

time over there. To answer this question, we need to briefly investigate the principles of

garden design in the Timurid age, which could affect Babur. Influenced by Islamic

ideologies, Timurids considered gardens as symbols of paradise. This strong belief was

even reflected on the façade of Timurid buildings in form of vegetal and floral motifs.

The tree-of-life designs in the shape of isolated trees on the façade of mausoleums at

Samarqand (Shirin Bika Aqa, Tuman Aqa, Saray Mulk Khanum) and in the mausoleum

of Ulugh Beg’s relatives in Shahr-I Sabz show these patterns. Golombek and Wilber

believe that these illustrations are more than simple ornaments and decorations, and

probably have iconographic values.11 It is evident that Timurid should not be credited for

inventing such iconography, which was already an established tradition in Islamic

buildings, but using the same patterns over and over could lead us to their extreme belief

in Paradise. Another significant factor, that could have influences on Babur was Timur’s

insistence on monumentality of buildings.12 Collecting artisans and architects (from

1379) from his conquered lands gave him this opportunity to reach his goals in creating

10 L. Golombek and D. Wilber, (1988). The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, Princeton University Press, p. 174.11 Ibid. p. 207.12 L. Golombek and D. Wilber, (1988), ibid. p. 189.

100

monumental buildings. Studying Babur-Nama reveals that such passion for art,

architecture, and garden was transferred to Babur who was very proud of his ancestry.

Babur’s buildings such as the Bagh-I Babur in Kabul show his passion in creating

monumental building.

B.

Dependency on Persians

Another important factor in the history of Mughal gardens is Mughals’ relations to

Persians. It is stated that Babur was very familiar with the Persian culture, fluent in

101

Humayun in Tahmasp’s court

Humayun in Tahmasp’s court

Persian, and even interested in Shi’ism, though being a Sunni.13 An illustrated version of

Babur-Nama, includes Babur’s memories in Persian language. The poetic language that

he uses in this book shows his mastery in Persian. Babur, who didn’t hide his fascination

by Persian culture and literature (like his grandfather), hired Persians artists, architects,

and craftmen in his court. After decades, his son, Humayun, who was exiled to Iran was

kindly hosted by Shah Tahmasp and could gain the power with the support of the Safavid

court. After that Humayun and his successors felt that they are indebted to Safavid kings.

Such feelings and political and cultural exchanges kept the relations between Safavid and

Mughal Empire very warm and strong. These good relations continued in form of

exchanging architects and artists in the whole period. The large number of Persian

artists, architects, craftsmen, and poets who were working for Mughal kings is an attest to

this claim. For example, Haji Begom, Humayun’s widow, hired Mirak Mirza Ghias, a

Persian architect to erect a mausoleum for Humayun. It has been said that 200 Persian

stonemasons were hired for this construction.14 The large number of Persian workers for

such project could not be possible without the support of the Safavid court. This trend

continued by hiring Persian architects and craftsmen in several projects such as Taj

Mahal.

The next question is why Babur and his successors showed that excitement to hire

Persians in their court in India, which already had a rich artistic and architectural

heritage. The reason could be the difference between their aesthetic values and tastes and

the Indians’. The following quote from Babur can prove this assert: “Hindustan is a

country of few charms….in handcraft and work there is no form or symmetry, method or

quality.” He also adds “, except their large rivers and their standing-waters which flow in

ravines or hollows (there are no waters). There are no running waters in their gardens or

residences. These residences have no charm, air, regularity or symmetry.”15 Based on

Babur’s statement, it could be concluded that the Mughals, especially their early rulers

13 H. Stirlin, (2002). Islamic Architecture from Isfahan to the Taj Mahal, New York: Thames and Hudson Publications, p. 96.14 Moynihan, E. B. (1979). Paradise as a Garden in Persia and Mughul India, New York, George Braziller Inc, p. 111.15 Babur, Babar-Nama, 518. (quoted from A. Welch (1996)“Gardens that Babur didn’t like,” in Mughal Gardens, edited by J. Jr. Wescoat, J. Wolschke-Bulmahn, J. (1996). Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, p. 65.)

102

such as Babur, felt closer to Persian concepts and ideas rather than the Indian ones.16 But

we should note that this point cannot be easily generalized to all Mughal kings, who

gradually became part of the Indian culture. But it could justify Persians presence in

Mughals’ court. Moreover, another benefit of having foreign craftsmen and architects

was to bring all their technical mastery and artistic traditions. That could probably satisfy

their Mughal patrons who were very demanding and apparently very familiar with

stylistic trends. In that sense, we can agree with Golombek, who puts these gardens in a

wider category, “Persianate gardens.”17

C. Other Influences

Mughal gardens could have other significant sources of influence. One of these sources

could have been the long tradition of landscape design in China. Unfortunately, most

studies done by well-known scholars in this field such as Golombek, Wilber, Wescoat,

Koch, Ettinghausen, and Moynihan have ignored the resources (in terms of materials or

concepts) that Mughal Indians could receive through their eastern boundaries. Such trend

was probably launched by Gothein who separated these gardens from Chinese and

Japanese gardens (“eastern gardens”, as she calls them) simply because of the lack of

evidence which could prove the connection between Buddhist India and her neighbor,

China.18 It seems that giving all the credit to Islamic and Persian concepts as inspiration

sources for Mughal gardens is an oversimplification, especially when we know that a

school of landscape design was being developed at the time of Mughals in India.

4. Characteristics

A. The Pre-Mughal Background

Once Mughals arrived India, they faced an established tradition of garden design, which

had roots in Indian culture and mythologies. Water was a significant element in Hindu

mystic tradition and necessary in Indian religious ritual.19 Rich geography of India

16 Using Persian vocabulary to call gardens in Mughal India is a witness to this Persian influence.17 L. Golombek, (1995). “The Gardens of Timur: New Perspectives,” in Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, Volume XII, Leiden: E.J. Brill, p. 137.18 M. L. Gothein, (1979). History of Garden Art, Hacker Art Books, p. 45.19 E. B. Moynihan, (1979). Paradise as a Garden in Persia and Mughul India, New York, George Braziller Inc, p. 89.

103

included Himalaya and Vindhya mountains and Gange, Godavari, and Yamuna rivers and

Naimisa forest.20 All these places, according to Eck, “affirmed to have particularly strong

strands of connection to the macrocosm.” Eck adds, these elements and places create a

“spiritual ford, a place of pilgrimage.”21 Indian religions such as Buddhism and

Hinduism all confirmed and shaped traditions which were based on natural elements such

as plants, trees, and flowers. That is why, probably, priests in India have maintained

groves of flowering trees at temple sites. For Indians, certain trees and flowers have

symbolic and metaphoric meanings and planting trees is an act of piety.22 Unfortunately,

the documents are not enough to illustrate gardens in pre-Mughal age. The influence of

Hindu and Buddhist civilizations of India on later Indo-Islamic gardens could be a

subject for further research.

Mughal gardens were spread in a wide geographical area from east boundaries of India to

Kashmir and Lahore in west. Moynihan writes, “The custom of Persian gardens had not

been adopted in India. The building of such geometrically-planned, water-oriented

Paradise gardens by the Mughals was an achievement, as the land, the climate and the

culture of Hindustan were incompatible with such a garden tradition.”23 In contrast,

Dickie believes that these gardens had this capability to adapt themselves to the

conditions of the sites that they were located in. For example, he mentions with changing

the density of plants, they attempted to find solutions to control periodical floods.24

Similarly, Wescoat disagrees with Moynihan’s generalization. He refers to three

autobiographies written by Mughal kings, Baburnama, Akbarnama, and Ain-I Akbari to

show the relationship between Mughal gardens and their sites. These historical

documents suggest that the process of site selection was a “regional sense of place,” as

Ardalan and Bakhtiar call it.25 The strong connection between Mughal gardens and their

sites could be explained by studying the major climatic differences between the arid

20 D. L. Eck, “Ganga: The Goddess in Hindu Sacred Geography,” (unpublished paper), Harvard University. 21 Ibid. 22 E. B. Moynihan, ibid. 23 E. B. Moynihan, p. 89.24 J. Dickie, (1985). “The Mughal Garden: Gateway to Paradise,” in Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, edited by Oleg Grabar, vol. III, Leiden: E.J. Brill, p. 128-137.25 N. Ardalan, L. Bakhtiar, (1973). The Sense of Unity. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

104

climate of Iran, as the origin of chaharbagh, and the fertile climate of nowadays India,

Pakistan, and Kashmir. In the next section, we will indicate some examples to explore to

what extent these gardens were site-specific.

C. Spiritual Concepts

Similar to other gardens founded in Islamic Persia and its neighborhood, gardens were

considered more than material resources. Carrying a spiritual meaning, gardens were

designed on metaphors and meanings which were mainly based on the perfection of

earthly gardens as reflections of the paradise. The integration of such spiritual beliefs

and gardens and their relation to Islamic concept of paradise has motivated some scholars

such as Ettinghausen to categorize these gardens as “Islamic gardens.”26 While it is

correct that Islamic ideology used paradise as one of its major concepts, there are doubts

on the Islamic originality of “paradise.” In that sense, it seems that the term “Islamic

garden” is an addition to some superficial readings of architecture in the Islamic world,

which have been encouraged by some scholars. However, we can agree with Moynihan

and Lehrman who preferred to categorize them as “Paradise gardens.” Such implication

stresses on the spiritual and metaphoric values that the gardens had for their Mughal

patrons. We can how these

gardens which were originally

places for encampment and

pleasure could be related to

these symbolic meanings? The

answer is in a key monument,

Humayun’s tomb garden,

which later became a model for

other Mughal gardens.

26 R. Ettinghausen, (1976). “Introduction.” in The Islamic Garden, edited by R. Ettinghausen, Washington D.C., Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, p. 3.

105

Brand states that this tomb garden marked an important break in early Mughal garden

design in India.27 Wescoat confirms Brand’s idea, “it initiated a shift away from active

territorial construction directed from garden encampments, and toward more formal

symbolic uses of gardens as emblems of territorial authority.”28 The story that 200

Persian architects and stonemasons were in charge of this project might lead us to the

Persian influence in this project. While the connections between this tomb garden and its

precedents in Iran needs further investigation, it

cannot be denied that certain elements such as

the combination of the first floor colonnade with

the mausoleum and decorations (including

motifs and colors used in this building) could

not be found it previous examples in Persia.

The construction of mausoleums was a favorite

tradition, especially from the Seljuk period in

Persia, Central Asia, and India. At the same

time, while founding gardens by Mughal kings

was not a new fashion in India,29 it seems that these kings should be credited for the

integration of funerary architecture in a chaharbagh setting.30 In that sense, we can assert

that pre-Islamic Persians invented the concept of chaharbagh and Muslims developed

this concept and attempted to integrate it with the concept of paradise.31 But Mughal

kings were the first ones who could discover a functional way of such integration

(between chaharbagh and pardise). Dickie states, “burial in a garden amounts to a

material anticipation of immaterial bliss, and the closer the garden approximates the

27 M. Brand, (1993).“Orthodoxy, Innovation, and Revival: Considerations of the past in Imperial Mughal Tomb Architecture,” Muqarnas, Vol. X, p. 323-334.28 J. Dickie, (1985). “The Mughal Garden: Gateway to Paradise,” in Muqarnas III: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, edited by Oleg Grabar, Leiden: E.J. Brill, p. 191. 29 Because of the lack of material and physical evidence, we are not very clear about India’s pre-Islamic gardens. Marie-Luise Gothein discusses a love of flowers and forests runs deep in Hindu literature and Buddhism culture, which had apparently played an important role in the development of Indian pre-Islamic gardens. (M. Gothein, (1979), History of Garden Art, Hacker Art Books, p. 46.)30 The symbolic meaning behind this tradition was to reach peace and tranquility after life.31 The integration of garden and paradise could have roots in Cyrus’ garden at Pasargadae.

106

Koranic model the more effective is the analogy.”32 In that sense, according to

Fergusson, “the usual procedure for the erection of these structures is for the king or

noble who intends to provide himself with a tomb to enclose a garden outside the city

walls, generally with high, crenellated walls, and with one or more splendid gateways;

and in the center erects a square or octagonal building.”33

Another aspect of the Mughal gardens which has been always in the shadow of their

symbolic values, is their economic functions.34 According to Habib, “most of the gardens

of the emperor, princes, and nobles must have been designed to produce fruits and

flowers directly for use in their own establishments.”35 However, we need more

historical studies to investigate the (potential) commercial objectives of Mughal gardens.

Design; Foreign or Indigenous

The gardens of Mughals as part of larger “Persianate” world used the most common

chaharbagh form (with a major fourfold division with a pavilion in it). In these gardens,

pools were placed at the intersections of a grid of water channels. Golombek argues two

different layouts developed by Timurids and later practiced by Mughals in India.

In the first model, the pavilion was located at the end of garden, while in the second

model the pavilion is in the center. The second layout was never used in Persia, while

Persian architects showed their interest to the placement of pavilion at the end of garden.

The earliest discovered sample of the first layout was Cyrus’ pavilion at the garden of

Pasargadae. Choosing that specific location for the pavilion mainly refers to the function

of pavilions as places for observation for Persian kings. Corbin states, “[this specific

layout] of a garden assumes a liturgic meaning as a mental recomposition of paradise…

All the elements of the Zoroastrian visionary landscape appear in paradise garden: the

different terraces symbolize the Cosmic Mountain; and on the highest level, the throne in

32 J. Dickie, (1985). “The Mughal Garden: Gateway to Paradise,” in Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, Vo. III, edited by Oleg Grabar, Leiden: E.J. Brill, p. 131.33 J. Fergusson, (1910). History of Oriental Architecture, London, 2: 289-290.34 Another factor which should be considered in the study of Mughal gardens is categorizing them based on their accessibility; whether they were private gardens or open to public.(I. Habib, (1996).“Economic and Social Aspects of Mughal Gardens,” in Mughal Gardens, edited by Wescoat, Jim, Jr. Wolschke-Bulmahn, J. (1996). Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, p. 134.)35 I. Habib, (1996).“Economic and Social Aspects of Mughal Gardens,” in Mughal Gardens, edited by J. Wescoat and J. Wolschke-Bulmahn, (1996). Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, p. 132.

107

the iwan of the royal pavilion represents the glittering residence of gods. In front of this,

the water basin is the Cosmic Ocean, source of all waters that run in small channels like

rivers. Around it trees and flowers of all kinds complete the image.”36

Such metaphysical reading of the elements in Persian garden, doesn’t clarify why

Mughals, who were not Zoroastrians, used the same layout.37 Golombek attempts to

differentiate between two layout mentioned above, through a semiological reading. She

explains that the placement of a pavilion in the center of the garden enables people to see

it from all parts of the garden, while the pavilion at one end comes as a climax which can

impact on the visitor “like a crescendo the closer one gets into it.”38 The tombs of Akbar

and Shah Jahan are examples of mausoleums which are located in the center of garden,

while Taj Mahal and Shalimar bagh in Kashmir are examples of the traditional Persian

model. At the same time, for Indian architects, the placement of mausoleums (or

pavilions) in garden was a means to take advantage of the qualities sites. For example, in

Taj Mahal, the he location of the mausoleum at the end of garden was a way to

emphasize the river behind it. Nishat bagh is another example, in which we can see a

strong connection between the garden and its site. In this garden, which is located

36 M. Alemi, (2002). “Persian Gardens and Courtyards: An Approach to Designing Contemporary Architecture,” Understanding Islamic Architecture, edited by A. P. Petruccioli, K. Khalil, New York: Routledge Curzon, p. 75.37 We know that that this layout was later used in Sassanian and Umayyad gardens and Mughals were inheritors of this traditions. (V. Strika, (1986). “The Umayyad Garden: Its Origin and Development,” Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre, no. 1, pp. 72-75.)38 L. Golombek, (1995). “The Gardens of Timur: New Perspectives,” in Muqarnas Volume XII: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, Leiden: E.J. Brill., p. 137.

108

Sketch of the Royal Garden at Pasargadae built by Cyrus the Great.

between a mountain and lake, two pavilions are located at two ends of the garden to

facilitate the visual connection between mountains and lake.

Mausoleums and pavilions remained as the

focal point of Mughal gardens. Koch in

Mughal Architecture discusses the key role

that pavilion of Muhammad (1533-34) at

Bayana played in the formation of Mughal

pavilions.39 This building, which was ordered

by Muhammad, Humayun’s Bakhshi, included

two design elements which were later

followed by architects. The first design

feature was the flat-roofed post-and-beam

construction and the second one was the

configuration of a closed central block with a verandah running round it. The design of

this building not only was connected to local tradition of trebeate pillared halls, but also

to the long tradition masonry buildings with timber porches in Persia. The connection

between Mughal and Persian pavilions could be proved by the fact that Mughals used

iwan to designate pillared constructions.40 Koch believes that this building as a variant of

the “stepped superimposed trabeate constructions,” played a significant role as a link

between what she calls “pre-Mughal Indo-Islamic” architecture and Indian architecture.

Although the early pavilions were influenced by Persian tradition, a study of the typology

of pavilion and mausoleums in Mughal gardens could show that the later examples such

as Taj Mahal appeared very different from the Persian examples. The main difference

between Indian and Persian example, though using chaharbagh as a common model, was

Indian elements which were employed both in macro and micro scales. The placement of

minarets, the relationship between the first floor and second floor (with cutting the

39 Koch, E. (2002). Mughal Architecture, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, p. 42.40 For instance, Akbar’s historian, Qandahari, refers to Panch Mahal (at Fatehpur Sikri) as “iwan khana.” Koch, E. (1987). “The architectural forms [of Fatehpur Sikri],” in Fatehpur Sikri, edited by M. Brand and G.D. Lowry, Bombay: Marg Publications, p. 139.

109

elevation), and colors and decorations used on the façade of these mausoleums reveals a

strong Indian influence.

A stated, in all Mughal gardens, the chaharbagh was

used as a dominant model, but in different forms.

Various patterns which were generated by architects

show their high degrees of creativity and their freedom

in design.41 Most of their gardens are divided into

different terraces in order to highlight the pavilion and

mausoleum within the garden. In most cases, the height

and the number of terraces depends on the natural

properties of the site. For example, in hilly areas, the

garden includes more levels, while in flatter areas the

number of levels is limited. An instance is Shalamir

bagh, where the whole garden, which is located in a flat

site, is placed on just three terraces.

The access to the garden is most of the times from one main entrance while several

gateways are designed to facilitate circulation of people from outside to the garden. The

situation is different in the gardens, in which the building is located at one end. In these

gardens, architects wanted people to enter from certain points from which they could

have an impressive view to the mausoleum (or pavilion). Amber, a lake garden at Jaipur,

is an example of this feature.

One of the characteristics of Mughal gardens is the experimentation with water as a major

element in the garden. In some cases, the pool which is located in front of the pavilion is

intended to reflect the image of the mausoleum and pavilion on the water. This is what

happens in Taj Mahal, while in some other examples, such as Akbar’s tomb, such

relationship between the building and the pool could not be found. In this garden, the

pool is much smaller to show the image of the huge building. We can conclude that in

41 These gardens were designed in a way that we can hardly find any two gardens with the same plan.

110

Shalimar Bagh

contrast to the Persian examples, such as gardens in Isfahan, there is not a direct and

constant relationship between the proportions of the pavilion and the pool. In some

cases, such as Fatehpur Sikri, water is in a closer relationship with the observer.42 In

some gardens like Humayun’s the pools are relatively small, but the large number of

pools located at the intersection of grid system, makes the person feel surrounded by

water. Babur in Babur-Nama states that he likes the running water.43 The interest in

flowing water motivated architects in Mughal court to design waterfalls, especially as

connectors between main pools and fountains and water sprays. Achabal garden in

Kashmir is a good example of this dynamicity of water within the garden. Generally

speaking, in Mughal gardens, the channels which make the connection between different

pools are usually narrower and shallower than channels in Persian gardens.

Another feature which should be mentioned here is the design of large spaces within the

garden which might refer to their Timurid origin of Mughal gardens. Even though

Mughal gardens gradually lost their function as spaces for encamping, architects showed

an interest in having vast unplanted areas in their gardens. This factor was also the result

of a control on the density of trees and plants. In that sense, comparing to Safavid

gardens, Mughal gardens were less planted. This phenomenon allowed people have

clearer views in gardens and possibilities for easier navigation towards the pavilion and

mausoleums. However, because of the large number of Mughal gardens founded in

different sites, these features could be different in different sites.

Bibliography

Alemi, M. (2002). “Persian Gardens and Courtyards: An Approach to Designing Contemporary Architecture,” Understanding Islamic Architecture, edited by A. P. Petruccioli, K. Khalil, New York: Routledge Curzon, pp. 75-84.

42 Even in some areas in Fatehpur Sikri, water surrounds the people who are walking in the garden. Such connection between the observer and water enhances the experience of garden and its elements. 43 A. Welch, (1996). “Gardens that Babur didn’t like,” in Mughal Gardens, ed. by J. Wescoat and J. Wolschke-Bulmahn, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, p. 61.

111

Dickie, J. (1985). “The Mughal Garden: Gateway to Paradise,” in Muqarnas III: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, edited by Oleg Grabar, Leiden: E.J. Brill, pp. 128-137.

Ettinghausen, R. (1976). "Introduction,” in The Islamic Garden, edited by E. B. Macdougall and R. Ettinghausen, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, pp. 1-10.

Fergusson, J. (1910). History of Oriental Architecture, London.

Golombek, L. (1993). “[Persian]Garden in Islamic.” In Encyclopedia Iranica, edited by Ehsan Yarshater, New York: Mazda Publications, 1993.

Golombek, L. Wilber, D. (1998). The Timurid Architecture of Iran and Turan, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Golombek, L. (1995). “The Gardens of Timur: New Perspectives,” in Muqarnas Volume XII: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture, Leiden: E.J. Brill, pp. 137-147.

Gothein, M. L. (1979), History of Garden Art, Hacker Art Books.

Gronke, M. (1992). “The Persian Court between Palace and Tent: From Timur to 'Abbas I,” in Timurid Art and Culture: Iran and Central Asia in the Fifteenth Century, edited by Lisa Golombek and Maria Subtelny, Leiden: E.J. Brill, pp. 18-22.

Habib, I. (1996).“Economic and Social Aspects of Mughal Gardens,” in Mughal Gardens, edited by Jim Wescoat, J. Wolschke-Bulmahn, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, pp. 134.

Khansari, M. Moghtader, M.R. Yavari, M. The Persian Garden (Echoes of Paradise), Washington DC: Mage Publications.

Koch, E. (1997). “Mughal Palace Gardens from Babur to Shah Jahan, 1526-1648,” in Muqarnas XIV: An Annual on the Visual Culture of the Islamic World, edited by Gülru Necipoglu, Leiden: E.J. Brill, pp. 143-165.

Koch, E. (1987). “The architectural forms [of Fatehpur Sikri],” in Fatehpur Sikri, edited by M. Brand and G.D. Lowry, Bombay: Marg Publications, pp. 29-56.

Koch, E. (2002). Mughal Architecture, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Moynihan, E. B. (1979). Paradise as a Garden in Persia and Mughul India, New York, George Braziller Inc.

112

Nath, R. “Mughal India,” Grove Art Online. Oxford University Press, December 2006, http://www.groveart.com/

Pinder-Wilson, R. (1976). “The Persian Garden,” in The Islamic Garden, edited by E. B. Macdougall and R. Ettinghausen, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, pp. 71-85.

Ruggles, D. F. (2000). Gardens, Landscape, and Vision in the Palaces of Islamic Spain, University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.

Schimmel, A. (1976). “The Celestial Garden in Islam,” in The Islamic Garden, edited by E. B. Macdougall and R. Ettinghausen, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, pp. 11-40.

Strika, V. (1986). “The Umayyad Garden: Its Origin and Development,” Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre, no. 1, pp. 72-75.

Welch, A. (1996).“Gardens that Babur didn’t like,” in Mughal Gardens, ed. by Wescoat, Jim, Jr. Wolschke-Bulmahn, J. (1996). Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University, pp. 59-93.

Wescoat, Jim, Jr. Wolschke-Bulmahn, J. (1996). Mughal Gardens, Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks and Trustees for Harvard University.

Wescoat, Jim, Jr. (1986). “The Islamic Garden: Issues for Landscape Research,” In Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre, no. 1: 10-19.

Wescoat, James L., Jr. (1997).” Mughal Gardens and Geographic Sciences, Then and Now,” in Gardens in the Time of the Great Muslim Empires: Theory and Design, edited by Attilio Petruccioli, Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, pp. 187-202.

Wilber, D. N. (1962). Persian Gardens. Tokyo, Charles E. Tuttle Company.

113