Memoir on Kotla Firoz Shah/Sirat-i Firoz Shahi, by J.A. Page

[admin]

THE RIVER FRONT AND ROYAL PALACES.

That the royal apartments were located in this position is, I think, reasonably to be adduced both from the ruined remains of a central mahal here and from the analogy of the later Mughal palaces placed on the river front of the forts at Delhi and Agra, such a position being naturally the most pleasant and desirable one the citadel would afford; while the river itself would form a protection on that side against hostile land forces in the event of a siege.

The dalans [noun. (in Persian and Indian architecture) a veranda or open hall for reception of visitors.] labelled "Zenana palace” in the illustration were, I infer, reserved for this purpose. Though now much ruined, their original division into a number of small connecting chambers can readily be traced on the site; while the numerous little holes to serve as pigeon-nests are an interesting feature, as is again what seems to be the base of a pinjra stand for birds on the east wall. A curious decorative feature on the roof of these dalans still remains in the shape of a somewhat crude attempt at a mosaic, set in squares outlined with small pebbles embedded in the concrete of which it is composed. No evidence of a second storey on these river front palaces is apparent, but, from the decorative feature above mentioned as the presence of stair ascents, the roof was evidently intended to be used in the cool of the evening; and doubtless was sheltered from the sun by large crimson shamianas [an Indian ceremonial tent, shelter or awning, commonly used for outdoor parties, weddings, feasts etc.] during the day, and screened for the use of the Zanana by kanats [a gently sloping underground channel or tunnel constructed to lead water from the interior of a hill to a village below.] from the view of the public courts below.

The River wall below the Royal palace, and, in fact, practically all along this front, seems to have been treated as a low roofed terrace, with an open arcaded facade looking out on to the river, and must have been a very picturesque feature of the royal citadel (see Plate III). Narrow staircases descend at various points from this terrace to the river bed below.


Plate III. Kotla FerozShah: Delhi. Perspective View of River Front. Reconstructed on the Existing Internal Evidence and on Analogous Contemporary Structure. November 1919.

[admin]

INTERIOR COURTS AND GATES.

The actual ramp descending from the level of the royal private enclosure on the river front to the public quadrangle (marked Bari-Amm in the illustration) still remains, but the specific use to which this latter court was put can only be conjectured, it being impossible in the present state of decay of the Kotla to identify with any assurance the several palaces mentioned in the account by Shams-i-Siraj Afif cited on page 11 (infra).

The existence of the remains of the dual gates in the several positions indicated in the illustration afford, however, a clue to the number and relative positions of the various courts and enclosures into which the citadel was divided; and from this evidence (somewhat slender, it is true!) has been adduced the arrangement of the private courts and "grape garden" indicated in the illustration, which, it is assumed, were linked with the Royal quarters on the river front, whence private access to them was obtained.

Remains of what would appear to be the walls of a narrow dalaned way forming the back of the court, marked “Bari Amm" in the Plate II, exist; but whether the wooden reception hall indicated here as a possible feature of the Court of Public Audience ever existed is again problematical.


Plate II: Kotla Feroz Shah: Delhi. Vue D'Oiseau of a Conjectural Reconstruction of the Ruined Citadel (Founded 1354: abandoned c?1490 A.D.) The Restoration suggested below is based on a survey of existing internal evidence, and on the analogy of contemporary erections still extant; e.g. al Qadam Sharif, Khirka Beganpur, et. at Delhi. View from W-S-W.

That the quadrangle was divided off from the garden enclosure indicated to the right of it, is, I think, to be inferred from the existence of the separate pairs of gates in situ, one pair of which I have assigned to each court. A little further digging here would, in all probability, do much to clear up this point.

The probability of the existence of the garden enclosure above mentioned is inferred from the presence of the little square-vaulted pavilions it contains, which would be very appropriate to such a setting.

[admin]

THE BAOLI.

There still exist the remains of a fine circular baoli immediately north-west of the pyramidal lat structure, with a range of subterranean apartments, which from fragments still remaining appears to have had its upper terrace enclosed by a low open stone railing. A recent partial clearance of this terrace disclosed the remains of a system of water channels which, it seems, conveyed water from a couple of elevated tanks (surmounted with conjectured chattris in the illustration in Plate II) across to the water pavilion situated immediately to the north (left, in illustration) of the well.


Plate II: Kotla Feroz Shah: Delhi. Vue D'Oiseau of a Conjectural Reconstruction of the Ruined Citadel (Founded 1354: abandoned c?1490 A.D.) The Restoration suggested below is based on a survey of existing internal evidence, and on the analogy of contemporary erections still extant; e.g. al Qadam Sharif, Khirka Beganpur, et. at Delhi. View from W-S-W.

Encircling the lower surrounding chambers of the well is a series of contiguous water receptacles connected by pipes and ducts with the channels on the top terrace; and it seems probable that the attractions of the baoli as a cool retreat in the summer heats were thus considerably heightened by the ornamental display of falling water. A large underground drain for the water overflow connected the baoli with the river front of the citadel.

A similar series of cool sun-sheltered chambers occur beneath the mosque where they were probably also connected with a central well referred to on page 6.

[admin]

WATER TANKS AND DUCTS.

An interesting feature of the Kotla are the remains of a system of water-tanks and pipe-ducts to be found in the bay of the citadel immediately north of the main entrance court (Plate II).


Plate II: Kotla Feroz Shah: Delhi. Vue D'Oiseau of a Conjectural Reconstruction of the Ruined Citadel (Founded 1354: abandoned c?1490 A.D.) The Restoration suggested below is based on a survey of existing internal evidence, and on the analogy of contemporary erections still extant; e.g. al Qadam Sharif, Khirka Beganpur, et. at Delhi. View from W-S-W.

[admin]

THE CITADEL WALLS. MAIN ENTRANCE BAY.

The main entrance court to the west, as reconstructed from a study of the existing fragmentary remains, was surrounded by a series of low one-storeyed chambers, the roof of which served as a terrace from which the loop-holed upper wall of this bay of the Kotla could be manned. These chambers evidently served the purpose of guard-rooms, and were so arranged on plan as to convert the polygonal outline of the exterior fortified walls to a simple inner quadrangle, forming the entrance court, which was reached by way of an open passage from the front gateway. Immediately opposite this passage was an open colonnaded dalan [a veranda or open hall for reception of visitors.] (which served, perhaps, as a waiting hall for visiting retainers) flanked by dual gates leading to the inner courts of the citadel. Towards the south end of the entrance court were found fragments of a low stone railing which probably enclosed a small raised dais before the dalan at this end.

The court is now in too ruinous a condition to permit of an accurate detailed reconstruction of the lesser features; but the arrangement indicated in the accompanying Plate II may be considered to be substantially authenticated by the internal evidence still preserved in situ.


Plate II: Kotla Feroz Shah: Delhi. Vue D'Oiseau of a Conjectural Reconstruction of the Ruined Citadel (Founded 1354: abandoned c?1490 A.D.) The Restoration suggested below is based on a survey of existing internal evidence, and on the analogy of contemporary erections still extant; e.g. al Qadam Sharif, Khirka Beganpur, et. at Delhi. View from W-S-W.

Outside the entrance gate there still remains one of the little 'sentry boxes’ shewn in the perspective view, and the foundations of the other were disclosed recently during the clearance of the front. The low guard-walls before the gates shewn in the illustration are reconstructed on the analogy of a similar feature existing at Qadam Sharif; and, in fact, the remains of such a wall actually exist in the case of the smaller gate in the central wall bisecting the extreme south wing of the citadel. The smaller gate in the fausse brail at the main western entrance shewn in the perspective view is taken from an illustration of the gate appearing in Blagdon's Brief History of India, dated 1805 A.D.

[admin]

DEFENCE OF THE WALLS.

The enclosing walls of the Kotla generally which have lost their crowning merlons [the solid part of an embattled parapet between two embrasures.] (kangura) and machicolations [(in medieval fortifications) an opening between the supporting corbels of a projecting parapet or the vault of a gate, through which stones or burning objects could be dropped on attackers.] (damoghar) are pierced towards the top with two rows of loopholes (jhirna) for the discharge of arrows. A curious point in this connection is that there is now no apparent means by which these loopholes could have been reached by the defenders inside the Kotla walls, for with the exception of the main entrance bay mentioned above, there is no masonry terrace at that level, nor are any holes left which would have served to bond the members of a possible wooden staging to the walls. Nevertheless it is probable that such a timber staging was used in this position.

It is also curious to note that in some cases (e.g., the bays flanking the western central entrance bay and, again, the dividing wall of the extreme south wing of the Kotla) these loopholes are so arranged as to permit of the discharge of arrows into the interior of the courts. It has been suggested that the reason for this was that the retainers of a visitor might be kept under guard while the visitor himself was received in the inner court of the citadel; but I think this feature results merely from the fact that the outer courts1 [The addition of these bays and the extension of the citadel to the south were probably effected during the troubled period following on Firoz Shah’s death in 1388 A.D.; a time when any inherent weakness of the fortifications would soon have been disclosed.] were a subsequent addition to the original citadel, the arrow slits in the walls of the latter not being interfered with in the extension. There is certainly a logical reason for this in the case of the west entrance bay, which, as originally constructed, formed a very narrow salient exposed to the concentrated converging fire in an attacker. And the widening of the salient to counter this disadvantage was doubtless felt to be as necessary in those days as it is in the military tactics of the 20th Century.

In the other instance quoted in parenthesis above, the fact that these southern bays were added later to the original citadel is very apparent when one examines the junction of its walls where they impinge on the bastions of the original structure; the total absence of any "bond" of the masonry between them seeming conclusive on this point. This extension to the south would also have the tactical advantage of securing this end of the vulnerable river front palaces from a flank attack.

The remains of the ascending ramp at the south end of the river front still exist, and serve as the basis of this feature as [size]restored in the perspective drawing[/size] (Plate III). A good deal of clearance of debris, from this end of the river front particularly has yet to be done before a better appreciation of its features can be obtained.


Plate III. Kotla FerozShah: Delhi. Perspective View of River Front. Reconstructed on the Existing Internal Evidence and on Analogous Contemporary Structure. November 1919.

A feature of the citadel are said to have been the three tunnels, one of which led to the river, and the others to the Kushak-i-Shikar on the Ridge and to the Qila Rai Pithora respectively. The tunnels which have been described by the Reverend Father Hosten, S.J. (Journal and Proceedings of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. VII. No. 4, 1911) have yet to be discovered; and that they ever existed except as a tradition is extremely problematical.

[admin]

CONTEMPORARY ACCOUNTS OF THE CITADEL.

Shams-i-Siraj Afif, in Lis Tarikh-i-Firozshahi relates that “there1 [Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III, Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, p. 343.] were three palaces in which Sultan Firoz used to sit publicly in State. One was the Mahal-i- sahan-i-gilin (the palace of the clayey court). It was also called the Mahal-i- dikh (dakh), i.e., the Mahal-i-angur, or palace of grapes. The second was called the Mahal-i-chhajja-i-chobin (Palace of the wooden gallery). The third was the Mahal-i-bari-amm, or palace of the Public Court, and it was also called the Sahn-i- miyanagi, the central quadrangle. The first palace was appropriated to the reception of the khans, maliks, amirs, officials and distinguished literary men. The Mahal-i-chhajja-i-chobin was for the reception of the principal personal attendants. The palace of the Sahn-i-miyanagi was used for general receptions”. Firoz Shah is said to have introduced the system, afterwards adopted by the Mughal emperors, of the division of the Audience or Darbar into three classes according to the rank of those present2. [List of Monuments, Delhi Zail, Vol. II, p. 71.]

[admin]

FIROZABAD, THE ROYAL RETREAT.

Shams-i-Siraj Afif goes on to say that “Sultan Firoz had given up residing in Dehli, and stayed at Firozabad”. Delhi, it would seem, however, still remained the capital of the kingdom, and continued to be used for State functions, for “when3 [Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III, Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, p, 343.] it was necessary to hold a court he left his devotions and proceeded to the capital”. To use Lane Poole’s simile, “Firozabad4 [Mediaeval India under Muhammadan rule, p. 144.] became the Windsor of his London”.  

[admin]

FEATURES OF THE PALACES.

The Sultan, we are told, was possessed of a penchant for history and, in despair of getting an adequate historical record written of his own reign, caused5 [Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III, Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, p. 316.] the following lines of his own composition (az zaban-i khwesh), to be inscribed in letters of gold on the walls (imarat) of the Kushk-i Shikar-rav6, [This palace, it seems, was the one on the "Ridge."] and on the domes of the Kushk-i nuzul, and the walls (imarat) of the minarets of stone which are within the Kushk-i Shikar-rav at Firozabad: —

“I made a great hunt of elephants, and I captured so many:

“I performed many glorious deeds; and all this I have done:

“That in the world and among men; in the earth and among mankind, these verses

“May stand as a memorial to men of intelligence, and that the people of the world, and the wise men of the age, may follow the example.” Which literary excursion it may be remarked, does not reveal the Sultan’s pen to have been any mightier than was his sword in his vacillating campaigns undertaken in Bengal and Thatta. Firoz adopted the practice.” “The1 [Medieval India under Muhammadan Rule by Stanley Lane Poole, pp. 148, 149-150, 151.] court to which these pampered servants ministered was luxurious but orderly. It is true the Sultan was somewhat addicted to wine, and on one occasion, in the midst of the Bengal campaign, the general Tatar Khan discovered his sovereign in an undignified position, lying half-dressed on his couch, with a mysterious sheet concealing something under the bed. Tatar Khan saw what was the matter, and both were speechless with surprise. At last he began a little sermon on the wickedness of indulgence at such a time of anxiety. The Sultan inquired what he meant, and asked innocently if anything untoward had happened. The Khan pointed to the hidden wine cups under the bed and looked solemn. Firoz said he liked a modest drop now and then to moisten his throat, but Tatar was not to be mollified. Then the Sultan swore that he would drink no more wine whilst the Khan was with the army. So the general thanked God and went out. But Firoz soon afterwards bethought him that the Khan was much needed at the other end of the kingdom, and sent him there in all haste. Several times the Sultan was lectured by holy men on his weakness, but he worked off his excesses by vigorous hunting, to which he was enthusiastically devoted, and the vice cannot have gone to such lengths as to interfere with affairs of state— at least so long as the able Hindu wazir2 [Makbul Khan, a converted Hindu named Kutta of Telingane, who became a slave under Muhammad Tughlaq and was raised to the office of Wazir by Sultan Firoz in the beginning of the reign.] was there to control them.”

“The testimony of all contemporary chroniclers shows that Firoz was adored by the people. It was not only that he reformed abuses, checked extortion, reduced taxation, increased irrigation, and enlarged the markets and opportunities of labour: he was 'a father to his people', took care of the needy and unemployed, refused to dismiss aged officials but let their sons act for them,— ‘the veteran’, he said, ‘may thus stay at home in comfort, whilst the young ride forth in their strength': he contrived the marriages of poor Muslims who could not otherwise afford the usual dowries, and provided state hospitals for the sick of all classes, native and foreign” ..... "A devout Muslim, he kept the fasts and feasts and public prayers, and in the weekly litany the names of his great predecessors were commemorated as well as his own and that of the caliph who had sanctioned his authority. When an old man he went on pilgrimage to the shrine of the legendary hero Salar Mas’ud at Bahraich, and humbly shaved as an act of piety. He never did anything without consulting the Koran, and even selected a governor in accordance with a fal or lucky omen in the sacred book. [b][size=120]Making every allowance for the exaggeration of the court chronicler, his panegyric, written after the Sultan’s death, is probably not misplaced: ‘Under Firoz all men, high and low, bond and free, lived happily and free from care. The court was splendid. Things were plentiful and cheap.3 [Some prices may be quoted: wheat 3d. (8 jitals) the quarter (man); barley 1-1/2d. the quarter; sugar 1d. to 1-1/2d. the sir or 3/4 lb.] Nothing untoward happened during his reign. No village remained waste, no land uncultivated” ....." No king since Nasir-ad-din (Khilji) had so appealed to the affections of his subjects; none had had shown himself so just, and merciful, so kind and religious — or such a builder’. In the brief and modest memoirs which the Sultan left, he recites some of the successful efforts he made to repress irreligion and wickedness, and to restore good Government, just law, kindness, and generosity to the people, in the place of torture and bloodshed and oppression. ‘Through the mercy which God has shown to me,’ he says, ‘these cruelties and terrors have been changed to tenderness, kindness, and compassion ..... I thank the All-Bountiful God for the many and various blessings He has bestowed upon me”.

[admin]

THE SULTAN’S GARDENS.

“Sultan3 [Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III, Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, p. 345.] Firoz had a great liking for the laying out of gardens which he took pains to embellish. He formed 1,200 gardens in the vicinity of Delhi. All gardens received abundant proofs of his care, and he restored thirty gardens which had been commenced by Alau-d-Din (Khilji). . . . In every garden there were white and black grapes of seven varieties. They were sold at the rate of one jital per seer”. This hobby of the Sultan was not without its remunerative side, for “of the various articles grown in the gardens, the Government share of the produce amounted to 80,0004 [Elliot and Dowson, Vol. III, Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, p. 346.] tankas, without taking into account the dues of the owners and gardeners”, which it seems were paid in kind.