The urban growth of the city of Delhi from the beginning itself composed a picture of diffusion of cultural traits in its varied monumental heritage, representative of sublime Indian ethos which were encountered by several depredationist forces in the course of history. The entrepreneurs and plunderers who were stunned to see this grandeur and majestic sight yielded in obeisance and intermingled soon afterward in the Indian cultural complex.
With the growth and increase of ritualistic congregations and commemorations, the mausolea in the Islamic world gained popularity and grandeur during and after the ninth century AD. The concept of tomb building witnessed unparalleled development when it reached India in the late twelfth century with substantial demographic growth of the Muslim population and aristocracy in a city like Delhi which already had a tradition of architectural merit and where the Indo-Islamic style added a new dimension in the creative genius. This has always attracted scholars researchers and genuine visitors as well.
One such young scholar is Ms. Savita Kumari, who submitted her dissertation to the National Museum Institute of History of Art. Conservation and Museology in the partial fulfillment of the requirement of the degree of M.A. in History of Art under my guidance in June 2005. The topic was selected as a Typological Study of the Tombs in Sultanate Delhi (1192-1526 AD.) after careful consideration of the interest she had taken in the architectural study of monuments of Delhi, particularly those belonging to the Delhi Sultanate period.
The tombs, based on their form and composition, have been categorized by her in the book into three major groups, octagonal and pillared ones which can further be divided into sub-categories taking into account various sources of inspiration, requirements and influences that nurtured the new tradition in Indian architecture in both time and space. Thus the buildings reflect the engineering skill of the master craftsmen in developing the system of arcuate style in combining the square plan of the building with its circular superstructure by proper arrangement of squinches and development of true-arch Different monuments in Delhi, mostly under the central protection many of which conserved by me during 1988-1995, under the Archaeological Survey of India stand as testimony to the various steps of architectural growth, reaching to its climax with the incorporation of indigenous techniques and embellishments through traditional elements blending with the new trends excellently. The outcome of such a typological study of Tomb architecture tracing the developmental stages and finally reaching to culmination of stylistic preferences and rejections as visible in architecture of the following Mughal period prompted the authoress to publish the analytical monograph which may be useful to both the researchers as well as general readers.
Ironically, funerary architecture that enjoyed universal acceptance among Muslims especially in certain periods was condemned by the Prophet Muhammad himself. A substantial group of Islamic religious texts, including hadith, commentaries, and pious tracts regard them as distinctly unreligious, pagan, and anti-Islamic. In pre-Islamic Arabia existed a cult of ancestors and the practice of veneration of the death. The followers of Islam propagated a break from these ancient customs for two major reasons. First of all, performing prayer at, or facing towards a grave was considered by them an act of polytheism. It was therefore against the Islamic principle of unity of god. Secondly erection of funerary buildings was seen as a practice that made one part of the Muslim community more privileged than the rest after death, when at least theoretically all should be on the same level. These buildings were considered symbols of worldly pomp for which the dead had no need and hence condemned.
Elaborate funerary rituals were discouraged. Instead, the corpse was to be borne quickly to the grave as the prophet had expressed that "it was good for the righteous to arrive soon at happiness." There existed an ancient Islamic custom of throwing earth into the grave while coating the Quran. Sura XX. 55 "From it we created you and into it we shall return you, and from it raise you a second time." The grave itself was to be leveled with the ground and no structure of any kind was to mark it. This leveling of tombs symbolized the equality of all believers in death as in life.
The question arises as to how then tomb architecture became so central to Islam. Thomas Leisten mentions "a special problem the Ulemas had to deal with and the one that probably weakened the enforcement of the prohibition against funerary building was posed by the bayt, the simple Middle Easter one room house commonly used as a funerary structure On the one hand, the bayt belonged among the structure banned by the hadith on the other Islamic theology had to cope with the fact that the prophet had died and had been buried in one. He had been entered in Aisha's Bayt-which together with other buyouts and the court wall formed the dar of Muhammad in Madina". Thus incidentally, the customs of burial in Mosques.
Initially, Prophet Muhammad's desire not to mark his grave with special distinction was obeyed. However, within about seventy years of his death his tomb, newly embellished, occupied a much venerated position in the magnificent mosque of the Prophet built by Umayyad Caliph al-Walid-I. Whatever the views of the strictly orthodox, the austerity of early Islam had been set aside decisively for the places of burial. The incident should not be taken to mean that mausolea immediately began to spring up throughout the Islamic world. It was only in and after late 9 century the concept enjoyed popularity.
It is significant to mention that earlier mausolea were modest in scale because their prime purpose was not to house a congregation but to commemorate a person. Minor burial practice occurred.
