CONTENTS.

Mosque at Old Delhi—Kutub Minar—Tomb of Ala ud-dÎn—Pathan Tombs—Ornamentation of Pathan Tombs.

CHRONOLOGY.

With all the vigour of a new race, the Ghorians set about the conquest of India. After sustaining a defeat in the year 1191, Shahab ud-dÎn again entered India in A.D. 1193, when he attacked and defeated Prithiraj of Delhi. This success was followed by the conquest of Canouge in A.D. 1194; and after the fall of these two, the capitals of the greatest empires in the peninsula, India may be said to have been conquered before his death, which happened in A.D. 1206.

At his death his great empire fell to pieces, and India fell to the share of Kutub ud-dÎn Ibek. This prince was originally a TÛrkish slave, who afterwards became one of Shahab ud-dÎn’s generals and contributed greatly by his talents and military skill to the success of his master. He and his successor, Altumsh, continued nobly the work so successfully begun, and before the death of the latter, in A.D. 1235, the empire of northern India had permanently passed from the hands of the Hindus to those of their Mahomedan conquerors.

For a century and a half after the conquest the empire continued a united whole, under TÛrkish, or, as they are usually called, Pathan dynasties. These monarchs exhibited a continued vigour and energy very unusual in the East, and not only sustained and consolidated, but increased by successive conquests from the infidels, that newly-acquired accession to the dominions of the faithful, and during that time Delhi continued practically the capital of this great empire. In the latter half, however, of the 14th century, symptoms of disintegration manifested themselves. One after another the governors of distant provinces reared the standard of revolt, and successfully established independent kingdoms, rivalling the parent state in power and in the splendour of their capitals. Still Delhi remained the nominal head at least of this confederation of states—if it may be so called—till the time when Baber (A.D. 1494), the fourth in descent from Tamerlane, invaded Hindustan. He put an end to the Pathan sway, after it had lasted for three centuries and a half, and finally succeeded in establishing the celebrated dynasty of the Moguls, which during six successive reigns, extending over the extraordinary period of more than two centuries (A.D. 1494-1707), reconsolidated the Moslem empire into one great whole, which reached a degree of splendour and of power almost unknown in the East.

Nothing could be more brilliant, and at the same time more characteristic, than the commencement of the architectural career of these Pathans in India. So soon as they felt themselves at all sure of their conquest, they set to work to erect two great mosques in their two principal capitals of Ajmir and Delhi, of such magnificence as should redound to the glory of their religion and mark their triumph over the idolators. A nation of soldiers equipped for conquest, and that only, they had of course brought with them neither artists nor architects, but, like all nations of Turanian origin, they had strong architectural instincts, and having a style of their own, they could hardly go wrong in any architectural project they might attempt. At the same time, they found among their new subjects an infinite number of artists quite capable of carrying out any design that might be propounded to them.

In the first place, they found in the colonnaded courts of the Jaina temples nearly all that was wanted for a ready-made mosque. All that was required was the removal of the temple in its centre, and the erection of a new wall on the west side, adorned with niches—mihrabs—to point out to the faithful the direction in which Mecca lay, towards which, as is well known, they were commanded in the Koran to turn when they prayed. It is not certain, however, that they were ever in India content with this only. In the two instances at least to which we are now referring, they determined in addition to erect a screen of arches in front of the Jaina pillars, and to adorn it with all the richness and elaboration of carving which their Indian subjects were capable of executing. Nothing could be more successful than the results. There is a largeness and grandeur about the plain simple outline of the Mahomedan arches which quite overshadows the smaller parts of the Hindu fanes, and at the same time the ornamentation, though applied to a greater extent than in any other known examples, is kept so flat as never to interfere with or break the simple outlines of the architectural construction. There may be other examples of surface-decoration as elaborate as this, but hardly anywhere on such a scale. Some parts of the interior of Sta. Sophia at Constantinople are as beautiful,[491] but they are only a few square yards. The palace at Meshita, if completed, might have rivalled it, but it is a fragment;[492] and there may be—certainly were—examples in Persia between the times of Chosroes and Harun al-Rashid, which may have equalled these, but they have perished, or at least are not known to us now; and even if they ever existed, must have been unlike these mosques. In them we find a curious exemplification of some of the best qualities of the art, as exhibited previously by the Hindus, and practised afterwards by their conquerors.

Delhi.

Of the two mosques at Delhi and at Ajmir, the first named is the earlier, having been begun some seven or eight years before the other, and is also very much the larger.[493] It is, besides, associated with the Kutub Minar, and some of the most beautiful tombs of the age, which altogether make up a group with which nothing at Ajmir can compare. The situation, too, of the Delhi ruins is singularly beautiful, for they stand on the gentle slope of a hill, overlooking a plain that had once apparently been a lake, but which afterwards became the site of three successive capitals of the East. In front are the ruins of Tugluckabad, the gigantic fort of an old Pathan chief; and further north the plain is still covered with the ruins of Old Delhi, the capital of the later Pathans and earlier Moguls. Beyond that, at the distance of nine or ten miles, are seen the towers of Shahjehanabad, the modern capital, and till recently the seat of the nominal monarchy of the Great Mogul. Still further north are situated the civil stations and cantonments of the British rulers of the country. It is a fortunate circumstance that the British station was not, as at Agra, placed in the midst of the ruins, since it is to this that we owe their preservation. But for the distance, marble columns would doubtless have been taken for all purposes for which they might have been available, with a total disregard to their beauty, and the interest of the ruins thereby annihilated. Even as it is, the buildings belonging to the celebrated Shahlimar gardens, which were the only buildings of importance in the neighbourhood of the English station, have disappeared; but these are of slight importance as compared with the ruins further south.

The general arrangement of the principal ruins will be understood from the plan (Woodcut No. 277), which was taken with great care, though the scale to which it has been necessary to reduce it prevents all its peculiarities from being seen. To understand it, it is necessary to bear in mind that all the pillars are of Hindu, and all the walls of Mahomedan, architecture.

It is a little difficult to determine to what extent the pillars now stand as originally arranged by the Hindus, or how far they have been taken down and re-arranged by the conquerors. Even supposing them to be undisturbed, it is quite evident that the enclosing walls were erected by the Moslems, since all the stringcourses are covered with ornaments in their style, and all the openings possess pointed arches, which the Hindus never used. On the whole the probability seems to be that the entire structure was re-arranged in the form we now see it by the Mahomedans. The celebrated mosque at Canouge is undoubtedly a Jaina temple, re-arranged on a plan precisely similar to that of the mosque of Amrou at Old Cairo (Woodcut No. 921, vol. ii.). The roof and domes are all of Jaina architecture, so that no trace of the Moorish style is to be seen internally; but the exterior is as purely of Mahomedan architecture. There is another mosque at Dhar, near Mandu, of more modern date, and, without doubt, a re-arrangement of a Jaina temple. Another, in the fort at Jaunpore, as well as many other mosques at Ahmedabad and elsewhere, all show the same system of taking down and re-arranging the materials on a different plan. If, therefore, the pillars at the Kutub were in situ, the case would be exceptional;[494] but I cannot, nevertheless, help suspecting that the two-storeyed pavilions in the angles, and those behind the screen may be as originally erected, and some of the others may be so also; but to this we will return when speaking of the Ajmir mosque, where the Jaina pillars are almost certainly as first arranged. It is quite certain, however, that some of the pillars at the Kutub are made up of dissimilar fragments, and were placed where they now stand by the builders of the mosque. The only question—and it is not a very important one—is, how many were so treated? It may, however, be necessary to explain that there could be no difficulty in taking down and rebuilding these erections, because the joints of the pillars are all fitted with the precision that Hindu patience alone could give. Each compartment of the roof is composed of nine stones—four architraves, four angular and one central slab (as explained in diagram No. 114, p. 214), all so exactly fitted, and so independent of cement, as easily to be taken down and put up again. The same is true of the domes, all which being honestly and fairly fitted, would suffer no damage from the process of removal and re-erection.

The section (Woodcut No. 278) of one half of the principal colonnade (the one facing the great series of arches) will explain its form better than words can do. It is so purely Jaina, that it should, perhaps, have been mentioned in speaking of that style; but as forming a part of the earliest mosque in India, it is more appropriately introduced in this place. The pillars are of the same order as those used on Mount Abu (Woodcut No. 130), except that those at Delhi are much richer and more elaborate. Most of them probably belong to the 11th or 12th century, and are among the few specimens to be found in India that seem to be overloaded with ornament. There is not one inch of plain surface from the capital to the base, except the pillars behind the screen and some others which may belong to older buildings. Still the ornament is so sharp and so cleverly executed, and the effect, in their present state of decay and ruin so picturesque, that it is very difficult to find fault with what is so beautiful. In some instances the figures that were on the shafts of the pillars have been cut off, as offensive to Mahomedan strictness with regard to idolatrous images; but on the roof and less seen parts, the cross-legged figures of the Jaina saints, and other emblems of that religion, may still be detected.

The glory of the mosque, however, is not in these Hindu remains, but in the great range of arches on the western side, extending north and south for about 385 ft., and consisting of three greater and eight smaller arches; the central one 22 ft. wide and 53 ft. high; the larger side-arches 24 ft. 4 in., and about the same height as the central arch; the smaller arches, which are unfortunately much ruined, are about half these dimensions (Woodcut No. 279). Behind this, at the distance of 32 ft., are the foundations of another wall; but only intended, apparently, to be carried as high as the roof of the Hindu pillars it encloses. It seems probable that the Hindu pillars between the two screens were the only part proposed to be roofed, since some of them are built into the back part of the great arches, and all above them is quite plain and smooth, without the least trace of any intention to construct a vault or roof of any sort. Indeed, a roof is by no means an essential part of a mosque; a wall facing Mecca is all that is required, and in India is frequently all that is built, though an enclosure is often added in front to protect the worshippers from interruption. Roofed colonnades are, of course, convenient and ornamental accompaniments, yet far from being indispensable.

The history of this mosque, as told in its construction, is as curious as anything about it. It seems that the Afghan conquerors had a tolerably distinct idea that pointed arches were the true form for architectural openings; but, being without science sufficient to construct them, they left the Hindu architects and builders whom they employed to follow their own devices as to the mode of carrying out the form. The Hindus up to this time had never built arches—nor, indeed, did they for centuries afterwards. Accordingly, they proceeded to make the pointed openings on the same principle upon which they built their domes. They carried them up in horizontal courses as far as they could, and then closed them by long slabs meeting at the top, the construction being, in fact, that of the arch of the aqueduct at Tusculum, shown in Woodcut No. 178, vol. i.[495] The same architects were employed by their masters to ornament the faces of these arches; and this they did by copying and repeating the ornaments on the pillars and friezes on the opposite sides of the court, covering the whole with a lace-work of intricate and delicate carving, such as no other mosque except that at Ajmir ever received before or since; and which—though perhaps in a great measure thrown away when used on such a scale—is, without exception, the most exquisite specimen of its class known to exist anywhere. The stone being particularly hard and good, the carving retains its freshness to the present day, and is only destroyed above the arches, where the faulty Hindu construction has superinduced premature decay.

The Kutub Minar, or great minaret, is 48 ft. 4 in. in diameter at the base, and, when measured in 1794, was 242 ft. in height.[496] Even then, however, its capital was ruined, so that some 10 ft., or perhaps 20 ft., must be added to this to complete its original elevation. It is ornamented by four boldly-projecting balconies; one at 97 ft., the second at 148 ft., the third at 188 ft., and the fourth at 214 ft. from the ground; between which are richly-sculptured raised belts containing inscriptions. In the lower storey the projecting ribs which form the flutes are alternately angular and circular; in the second circular and in the third angular only. Above this the minar is plain, and principally of white marble, with belts of the same red sandstone of which the three lower storeys are composed (Woodcut No. 280).

It is not clear whether the angular flutings are copied from some peculiarity found in the minarets at Khorasan and further westward, or whether they are derived from the forms of the temples of the Jains. The forms of the bases of the minarets at Ghazni appear to lend probability to the first hypothesis; but the star-like form of many temples—principally Jaina—in Mysore and elsewhere (ante, p. 394, et seqq.) would seem to countenance the idea of their being of Hindu origin. No star-like forms have yet, however, been found so far north, and their destruction has been too complete for us to hope that they may be found now. Be this as it may, it is probably not too much to assert that the Kutub Minar is the most beautiful example of its class known to exist anywhere. The rival that will occur at once to most people is the campanile at Florence, built by Giotto. That is, it is true, 30 ft. taller, but it is crushed by the mass of the cathedral alongside; and, beautiful though it is, it wants that poetry of design and exquisite finish of detail which marks every moulding of the minar. It might have been better if the slope of the sides had been at a higher angle, but that is only apparent when seen at a distance; when viewed from the court of the mosque its form is perfect, and, under any aspect, is preferable to the prosaic squareness of the outline of the Italian example.

The only Mahomedan building known to be taller than this is the minaret of the mosque of Hassan, at Cairo (p. 389 and Woodcut No. 928, vol. ii.); but as the pillar at Old Delhi is a wholly independent building, it has a far nobler appearance, and both in design and finish far surpasses not only its Egyptian rival, but any building of its class known to me in the whole world. This, however, must not be looked at as if erected for the same purposes as those usually attached to mosques elsewhere. It was not designed as a place from which the mÜeddin should call the prayers, though its lower gallery may have been used for that purpose also, but as a Tower of Victory—a Jaya Stambha, in fact—an emblem of conquest, which the Hindus could only too easily understand and appreciate.

At the distance of 470 ft. north of this one a second minar was commenced, by Ala ud-dÎn, of twice its dimensions, or 297 ft. in circumference. It was only carried up to the height of 40 ft., and abandoned probably in consequence of the removal of the seat of government to the new capital of Tugluckabad.

The date of all these buildings is known with sufficient exactness from the inscriptions which they bear,[497] from which it appears that the inner court was enclosed by Shahab ud-dÎn. The central range of arches (Woodcut No. 279) was built by Kutub ud-dÎn; the wings by Altumsh, whose tomb is behind the northern range, and the Kutub Minar was either built or finished by the same monarch; they extend, therefore, from A.D. 1196-1235, at which date they were left incomplete in consequence of the death of the last-named king.

One of the most interesting objects connected with this mosque is the iron pillar which stands—and apparently always has stood—in the centre of its courtyard (Woodcut No. 281). It now stands 22 ft. above the ground, and as the depth under the pavement is now ascertained to be only 20 in., the total height is 23 ft. 8 in.[498] Its diameter at the base is 16·4 in., at the capital 12·05 in. The capital is 3½ ft. high, and is sharply and clearly wrought into the Persian form that makes it look as if it belonged to an earlier period than it does; and it has the amalaka moulding, which is indicative of considerable antiquity. It has not, however, been yet correctly ascertained what its age really is. There is an inscription upon it, but without a date. From the form of its alphabet, Prinsep ascribed it to the 3rd or 4th century;[499] Bhau Daji, on the same evidence, to the end of the 5th or beginning of the 6th century.[500] The truth probably lies between the two. My own conviction is that it belongs to one of the Chandra Rajas of the Gupta dynasty, either consequently to A.D. 363 or A.D. 400.

Taking A.D. 400 as a mean date—and it certainly is not far from the truth—it opens our eyes to an unsuspected state of affairs to find the Hindus at that age capable of forging a bar of iron larger than any that have been forged even in Europe up to a very late date, and not frequently even now. As we find them, however, a few centuries afterwards using bars as long as this lÂt in roofing the porch of the temple at Kanaruc (ante, p. 222), we must now believe that they were much more familiar with the use of this metal than they afterwards became. It is almost equally startling to find that, after an exposure to wind and rain for fourteen centuries, it is unrusted, and the capital and inscription are as clear and as sharp now as when put up fourteen centuries ago.[501]

As the inscription informs us the pillar was dedicated to Vishnu, there is little doubt that it originally supported a figure of Garuda on the summit which the Mahomedans of course removed; but the real object of its erection was as a pillar of victory to record the “defeat of the Balhikas,[502] near the seven mouths of the Sindhu,” or Indus. It is, to say the least of it, a curious coincidence, that eight centuries afterwards men from that same Bactrian country should have erected a Jaya Stambha ten times as tall as this one, in the same courtyard, to celebrate their victory over the descendants of those Hindus who so long before had expelled their ancestors from the country.

Immediately behind the north-west corner of the mosque stands the tomb of Altumsh, the founder. Though small, it is one of the richest examples of Hindu art applied to Mahomedan purposes that Old Delhi affords, and is extremely beautiful, though the builders still display a certain degree of inaptness in fitting the details to their new purposes. The effect at present is injured by the want of a roof, which, judging from appearance, was never completed, if ever commenced. In addition to the beauty of its details it is interesting as being the oldest tomb known to exist in India. He died A.D. 1236.

A more beautiful example than even this is the other, shown on the left hand of the plan (Woodcut No. 277). It was erected by Ala ud-dÎn Khilji, and the date 1310 is found among its inscriptions. It is therefore about a century more modern than the other buildings of the place, and displays the Pathan style at its period of greatest perfection, when the Hindu masons had learned to fit their exquisite style of decoration to the forms of their foreign masters. Its walls are decorated internally with a diaper pattern of unrivalled excellence, and the mode in which the square is changed into an octagon is more simply elegant and appropriate than any other example I am acquainted with in India. The pendentives accord perfectly with the pointed openings in the four other faces, and are in every respect appropriately constructive.[503] True, there are defects. For instance, they are rather too plain for the elaborate diapering which covers the whole of the lower part of the building both internally and externally; but ornament might easily have been added; and their plainness accords with the simplicity of the dome, which is indeed by no means worthy of the substructure. Not being pierced with windows, it seems as if the architect assumed that its plainness would not be detected in the gloom that in consequence prevails.

This building, though small—it is only 53 ft. square externally, and with an internal apartment only 34 ft. 6 in. in plan—marks the culminating point of the Pathan style in Delhi. Nothing so complete had been done before, nothing so ornate was attempted by them afterwards. In the provinces wonderful buildings were erected between this period and the Mogul conquest, but in the capital their edifices were more marked by solemn gloom and nakedness than by ornamentation or any of the higher graces of architectural art. Externally it is a good deal damaged, but its effect is still equal to that of any building of its class in India.

Ajmir.

The mosque at Ajmir (Woodcut No. 283) was commenced apparently in the year 1200 and was certainly completed during the reign of Altumsh, A.D. 1211-1236.[504] According to tradition, it was finished in two days and a half; hence the only name by which it is now known—the “Arhai dÎn ka Jhompra,” which, if it means anything, can only apply to the clearing away of the Pagan temples and symbols, and the dedication of a heathen shrine to purposes of the Faithful. In this instance it seems almost certain, whatever may be the case at Delhi, that the pillars are in situ. At all events, if they were taken down by the Mahomedans, they certainly have been re-erected exactly as they were originally designed to stand.[505] The pillars, their architraves, the roofing stones, and the domes, are all of a piece, and so exactly what we find at Abu and Girnar as to leave no doubt that we see before us a part of the courtyard of a Jaina Temple, which probably had been used by the followers of that religion for a couple of centuries at least before it was appropriated by the conquerors. It is only the west side, with its nine domes, that is now standing. The cloisters on the other three sides are in ruins, though their plan can easily be traced even now. What remains, however, is sufficient to show that it must originally have been a singularly elegant specimen of its class. The pillars are taller and more slender than those of the mosque at Delhi, but purer and more elegant in design.

The glory, however, of this mosque, as of that of the Kutub, is the screen of seven arches with which Altumsh adorned the courtyard (Woodcut No. 284). Its dimensions are very similar to those of its rival. The central arch is 22 ft. 3 in. wide; the two on either side 13 ft. 6 in., and the outer one at each end 10 ft. 4 in. In the centre the screen rises to a height of 56 ft., and on it are the ruins of two small minarets 10½ ft. in diameter, ornamented with alternate circular and angular flutes, as in the lower storey of the Kutub. It is not clear

whether anything of the same sort existed at Delhi—probably not, as the great minar may have served for that purpose, and their introduction here looks like an afterthought, and the production of an unpractised hand working in an unfamiliar style. Wherever and whenever minars were afterwards introduced, preparations for them were always made from the foundations, and their lines are always carried down to the ground, in some shape or other, as in true art they ought to be. This solecism, if it may be so called, evidently arose from the architects being Hindus, unfamiliar with the style; and to this also is due the fact that all the arches are constructed on the horizontal principle. There is not a true arch in the place; but, owing to their having the command of larger stones than were available at Delhi, the arches are not here crippled, as they were there before the late repairs.

It is neither, however, its dimensions nor design that makes this screen one of the most remarkable architectural objects in India, but the mode in which it is decorated. Nothing can exceed the taste with which the Cufic and Togra inscriptions are interwoven with the more purely architectural decorations, or the manner in which they give life and variety to the whole, without ever interfering with the constructive lines of the design. As before remarked, as examples of surface-decoration, these two mosques of Altumsh at Delhi and Ajmir are probably unrivalled. Nothing in Cairo or in Persia is so exquisite in detail, and nothing in Spain or Syria can approach them for beauty of surface-decoration. Besides this, they are unique. Nowhere else would it be possible to find Mahomedan largeness of conception, combined with Hindu delicacy of ornamentation, carried out to the same extent and in the same manner. If to this we add their historical value as the first mosques erected in India, and their ethnographic importance as bringing out the leading characteristics of the two races in so distinct and marked a manner, there are certainly no two buildings in India that better deserve the protecting care of Government; the one has received its fair share of attention; the other has been most shamefully neglected, and latterly most barbarously ill-treated.[506]

Later Pathan Style.

After the death of Ala ud-dÎn (A.D. 1316) a change seems to have come over the spirit of the Pathan architects, and all their subsequent buildings, down to the time of Shere Shah, A.D. 1539, exhibit a stern simplicity of design, in marked contrast to the elaborate ornamentation with which they began. It is not clear whether this arose from any puritanical reaction against the quasi-Hinduism of the earlier examples, or from any political causes, the effect of which it is now difficult to trace: but, certain it is, that when that stern old warrior Tugluck Shah, A.D. 1321, founded the New Delhi, which still bears his name—Tugluckabad—all his buildings are characterised by a severe simplicity, in marked contrast with those which his predecessors erected in the capital that overlooks the plain in which his citadel is situated. His tomb, which was finished at least, if not built, by his successor, instead of being situated in a garden, as is usually the case, stands by itself in a strongly-fortified citadel of its own, surrounded by an artificial lake. The sloping walls and almost Egyptian solidity of this mausoleum, combined with the bold and massive towers of the fortifications that surround it, form a model of a warrior’s tomb hardly to be rivalled anywhere, and in singular contrast with the elegant and luxuriant garden-tombs of the more settled and peaceful dynasties that succeeded.

The change, however, of most interest from a historical point of view is, that by the time of Tugluck Shah’s reign, the Moslems had worked themselves entirely free from Hindu influence. In his buildings all the arches are true arches; all the details invented for the place where they are found. His tomb, in fact, would be as appropriate—more so, indeed—if found in the valley of the Nile than on the banks of the Jumna; and from that time forward Mahomedan architecture in India was a new and complete style in itself, and developed according to the natural and inevitable sequences of true styles in all parts of the world.

It is true, nevertheless, that in their tombs, as well as in their mosques, they frequently, to save themselves trouble, used Hindu materials when they were available, and often with the most picturesque effect. Many of these compound edifices are composed of four pillars only, surmounted by a small dome; but frequently they adopt with the pillars the Jaina arrangement of twelve pillars, so placed as to support an octagonal framework, easily moulded into a circular basement for a dome. This, as before observed, is the arrangement of the tomb at Mylassa, and the formative idea of all that is beautiful in the plans of Jaina buildings in India.

One example must suffice to explain the effect of these buildings (Woodcut No. 285). At first sight the dome looks rather heavy for the substructure; but the effect of the whole is so picturesque that it is difficult to find fault with it. If all the materials were original, the design would be open to criticism; but, when a portion is avowedly borrowed, a slight want of balance between the parts may be excused.

There are several examples of tombs of this sort at the Bakaraya Kund in Benares, evidently made up from Jaina materials;[507] and, indeed, wherever the Mahomedans fairly settled themselves on a site previously occupied by the Jains, such combinations are frequent; but no attempt is ever made to assimilate the parts that are Mahomedan with those belonging to the Hindu style which they are employing; they are of the age in which the tomb or mosque was built, and that age, consequently, easily recognisable by any one familiar with the style.

The usual form of a Pathan tomb will be better understood from the following woodcut (No. 286), representing a nameless sepulchre among the hundreds that still strew the plains of Old Delhi. It consists of an octagonal apartment, about 50 ft. in diameter, surrounded by a verandah following the same form, each face being ornamented by three arches of the stilted pointed form generally adopted by the Pathans, and it is supported by double square columns, which are almost as universal with them as this form of arch.

It is a form evidently borrowed from the square pier of the Jains, but so altered and so simplified, that it requires some ingenuity to recognise its origin in its new combination.

The series of Pathan tombs closes with that of Shere Shah (Woodcut No. 287), the last but one and the most illustrious of his race. It is situated on a square terrace in the middle of a large tank, near Sasseram, in Shahabad, and, from its locality and its design, is now a singularly picturesque object (Woodcut No. 288). Its dimensions too are considerable.[508] Its base is an octagon, 54 ft. on each side externally. In the interior a gallery, 10 ft. wide, surrounds the central apartment, which is surmounted by a dome 65 ft. in diameter, beneath which stands the tomb of the founder and of some of his favourite companions in arms.

288. Tomb of Shere Shah. (From a Photograph.)