You are on page 1of 19

South Asian Studies

ISSN: 0266-6030 (Print) 2153-2699 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsas20

Mughal Tilework: Derivative or Original?

Bernard O’Kane

To cite this article: Bernard O’Kane (2019) Mughal Tilework: Derivative or Original?, South Asian
Studies, 35:1, 25-42, DOI: 10.1080/02666030.2019.1614730

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1614730

Published online: 12 Aug 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at


https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsas20
South Asian Studies, 2019
Vol. 35, No. 1, 25–42, https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1614730

Mughal Tilework: Derivative or Original?


Bernard O’Kane*
Department of Arab and Islamic Civilizations, American University in Cairo, New Cairo 11835, Egypt

Although concentrating on Mughal tilework, this paper also discusses its predecessors elsewhere in the Islamic world,
particularly in Iran, Central Asia, and Sultanate India. A brief survey of the development of the main techniques, namely
monochrome-glazed tiles, sgraffito, tile mosaic, underglaze-painted and cuerda seca, both in Sultanate India and in other
parts of the Islamic world, precedes the discussion of Mughal examples in the body of the paper. The paper highlights the
initial links with Sultanate tilework, whether underglaze-painted, as in the Punjab, or with tile mosaic, in northern India.
The development of Mughal tile mosaic is emphasized, as this was the medium most frequently used for tile decoration.
Changes in the colour palette and in the introduction of new patterns are examined, highlighting the extensive use of
figural imagery at the Lahore Fort and the simultaneous introduction of naturalistic vegetal panels. The less-frequent
Mughal use of underglaze-painted and cuerda seca tiles is also examined. The conclusions summarize the characteristic
features of Mughal tilework and suggest areas for future study.
Keywords: Tile; decoration; mosaic; glazing; architecture; Mughal; India

Given the importance and long-standing history of the use from the fragments discovered at the Rum Saljuq palace at
of tiles on monuments in India,1 both in the pre-Mughal and Konya of c.1174),3 suggest they were always a rarity. At
Mughal periods, it is surprising that there have not been about the same time, in the late 12th century, underglaze-
many publications on the subject. There are frequent men- painted tiles were also used on architecture.4 Within the
tions in older publications (whose usual mention of “enam- Khwarizmshah period we see on the madrasa at Zuzan
eled tiles” did little to classify different techniques), and attempts, other than the mina’i and underglaze-painted
fortunately in recent decades the pace of publication has examples cited, to place more than one colour in a tile, in
increased somewhat,2 but – particularly in comparison to a prototype of carved and glazed terracotta, where grooves
the well-studied fields of Central Asian, Iranian and were placed between the loci where colour was applied in
Anatolian tilework – it remains a relatively underdeve- an attempt (not always successful) to prevent them running
loped field. This paper aims, not to plug this gap, for such into one another (Figure 1). Almost simultaneously lustre
would entail a monograph, but to undertake preliminary tiles began to be used in architecture.5
classifications and analysis. In particular, I hope to address With the arrival of the Mongols in Iran and Central
the extent to which Mughal tilework can be seen as origi- Asia in the thirteenth-century innovation in tilework was
nal. The originality of Mughal architecture has been recog- transferred to Anatolia, where tile mosaic began to be
nized in its reworking of forms and motifs from Sultanate favoured. At first it was used in combination with the
India, Central Asia, and Iran – so to what extent did each of underlying white mortar to provide a colour contrast,6
these areas contribute to the development of Mughal tile- but contiguous tile mosaic also soon appeared.7 The col-
work? Although they are well-known this will entail a brief ours were limited at first to white, light- and dark-blue, and
look at the tilework precedents in these areas. the shades produced by the use of manganese, which,
By the fifteenth century Anatolia, Iran and Central Asia depending on the concentration, could range from black
had evolved the world’s most extensive repertory of tile to purple. It was in Iran in the fourteenth century that the
techniques, as well many of the finest examples of each. range increased with the addition of first ochre and then
Monochrome glazed tiles constituted the earliest examples. dark-green. In Timurid architecture in the late fourteenth
In the Saljuq period these could be flat or moulded, or century a new luxury type of overglaze-painted tile
further cut into shapes; another way of increasing their became popular for the finest monuments: cuerda seca
apparent range of colour was scratching (sgrafitto) to reveal (colourless line).8 In Safavid Iran, however, this technique
the underlying biscuit. Some Saljuq tiles preserved within was used as a cheaper and lower quality substitute for tile
museums display the mina’i technique, although their pau- mosaic to decorate a large surface area, notably in the
city, and complete absence on standing monuments (apart Masjid-i Shah in Isfahan (1611–30).

*Email: bokane@aucegypt.edu

© 2019 The British Association for South Asian Studies


26 B. O’Kane

1. Detail of tiles on qibla ayvan, madrasa, Zuzan (1219) (photo: O’Kane).

How did tilework develop in pre-Mughal India, and floral patterns, than was seen previously. In the mauso-
subsequently in Mughal architecture? Did Indian tilework leums of Baha al-Halim (c.1370) and Bibi Jawindi (1493)
avail itself of the same range of decorative techniques in at Uchch, south of Multan, the horizontal bands of the
use elsewhere, e.g. monochrome glazing, underglaze- brick-decorated exterior of the tomb the Rukn-i ‘Alam in
painting, tile mosaic, and cuerda seca? Were these tech- Multan are translated into tiles, both monochrome- and
niques introduced by way of Iran, and at roughly the same underglaze-painted, a spectacular increase in the amount
times? Were they used in the same ways in India, or did of colour found on the buildings.15 They paved the way
they develop along different lines? Did Indian tilework for the continuation of the technique in many buildings in
evolve any new techniques of its own? I will attempt to Thatta in the Mughal period, which we will explore
answer these questions below during the course of, or further below.
after, surveying the extant material. Lustre tiles are unknown in India, unsurprisingly
The first significant use of tilework in Sultanate India9 given the absence of the pottery tradition present in
is at the four mausoleums at Lal Mohra Sharif.10 These other areas where they were used.16 What then of other
have been variously dated from the eleventh to the six- Sultanate-era uses of tilework? What is interesting is
teenth century,11 but to me, at least, it seems clear that they how independent from Iranian examples was the slow
must be thirteenth century, earlier than the extensive use movement (particularly in the Delhi sultanate) towards
of underglaze-painted tiles found on the Rukn-i ‘Alam tile mosaic. But more extensive uses of tilework, some-
mausoleum (c. 1335) at Multan. These four tombs fit times of extremely fine quality, are found in other
perfectly as the link between that monument and the sultanates, particularly at Bidar, Mandu, Hyderabad
Ghurid brick-decorated monuments of the late twelfthh and Bengal.
century at Kabirwala, Muzaffargarh and Aror.12 The vast The area around Gaur has the highest concentration
bulk of their tilework is monochrome glazed, sometimes of tiled monuments in Bengal. The Lattan mosque (c.
moulded. One hitherto unnoticed feature would also fit 1500) is representative of Bengali examples; like the
well with a thirteenth-century date: the fact that two of the others in the area, its impact is hugely diminished today
mausoleums13 incorporate underglaze-painted tiles because of the very poor weathering of the glaze. The
(Figure 2).14 Their designs are crude, as noted by Holly exterior was almost completely covered in glazed
Edwards, but they are reflective of the formative period of brick, many moulded, but although most of the original
the technique which was for the following centuries, and bricks survive, they display a small fraction of the
even up to the present, a hallmark of architectural decora- original glaze. They have a unique colour scheme and
tion in the Punjab plains. glaze technique: although monochrome-glazed blue,
Significant advances in the use of underglaze-painted yellow and green tiles are found, most of its tiles
tiles in this geographical area are seen in the Rukn-i ‘Alam have two glazes on them (usually blue and white or
mausoleum (c.1335) at Multan; it employs them, as well a yellow and green) – although up to five colours (yellow,
large repertoire of monochrome-glazed tiles, more exten- orange, white, blue and green) can be found on a single
sively and in a much greater variety of shapes, including tile (Figure 3). They seem to be simply glaze-painted,17
South Asian Studies 27

2. Lal Muhra Sharif, details of underglaze-painted tiles from Mausoleums A (top) and B (bottom) (photo: O’Kane).

with each opaque matte colour painted side by side on underglaze-painted, mostly blue and white, but with the
the biscuit.18 occasional surprising addition of yellow.23 This fine qual-
More variety is found on the monuments of the Bidar ity of tile mosaic is even surpassed in another Bidar
sultanate, which suddenly display some of the most monument, at the Rangin Mahal (1543–80) in the Fort,
developed examples. The tomb of ‘Ala al-Din Shah where unglazed red is added to the palette.24
(d. 1458) has very extensive tilework on each facade.19 Contemporary with it is, also in Bidar, another monument
These are mainly underglaze-painted blue and white tiles with an exceptional use of tilework; the tomb of ‘Ali Barid
(Figure 4), set within borders of monochrome-glazed (1577) (Figure 5). This uses exclusively underglaze-
yellow.20 The madrasa of Mahmud Gawan (1472), a painted tiles, extensive bands and medallions of which
much larger building, also had extensive exterior tilework are found on the interior.25 The palette includes yellow
on its minarets and upper walls. The upper inscription monochrome-glazed tiles again as well as underglaze
band and the friezes above and below are it are tile yellow and blue and white, like the Mahmud Gawan
mosaic, with the thuluth inscription in particular being, madrasa.26 There are parallels with Bidar in the use of
not just the finest example in this technique to appear in tilework under the Khalji dynasty of Malwa (1402–
India to this date, but arguably unsurpassed by later 1526).27 Yves Porter has noted that a local history,
Indian examples.21 The tilework framing the two stories Kermani’s Ma’asir-i Mahmudshahi, specifically mentions
of arches below is, however, not tile mosaic,22 but again the employment, in 1442, of Persian tileworkers on the
28 B. O’Kane

3. Detail of tilework, Gaur, Lattan mosque (c. 1500) (photo: O’Kane).

decoration of the now ruined Bam-i Bihisht madrasa Framing the inner arches is a band of very basic tile
there.28 Whether or not those tileworkers might have mosaic with yellow half-octagonal tiles bordering dark-
found employment in nearby Bidar, the extraordinary blue cross tiles. Framing this in turn, and the outer arch
close cultural ties of the Bahmanid sultanate with Iran and spandrels are sgraffito dark-blue and green tiles
and the Ni’matullahi Sufi order29 would explain the taste (Figure 6).31 This, even if the palette is uncharacteristic
and quite possibly also the expertise for the tilework of any Iranian or Central Asian examples,32 is not there-
(even if the tiles must have been produced locally); we fore very sophisticated. The work carried out some two
will see how the equally close ties of the Mughals with decades later (probably by Sher Shah Sur33) at the Qal’i-i
greater Iran affected their tilework below. Kuhna mosque at Delhi shows great similarity: the inter-
In the Delhi Sultanate, which of course was the terri- ior hexadecagonal zone of transition of the main dome
tory over which the Mughals first ruled, tilework was not uses the same colours, techniques, and virtually the same
as advanced as it had been at Bidar.30 The tomb of patterns (Figure 7). Sher Shah Sur’s interest in tilework is
Sikandar Lodi in Delhi (1518) is a good example, where also seen in his mausoleum at Sasaram: beneath the eaves
tiling is found only on the interior zone of transition. on the lower storey are impressive sun-disk medallions
South Asian Studies 29

4. Detail of underglaze-painted tiles, Tomb of ‘Ala al-Din Shah (d. 1458), Bidar (photo: O’Kane).

supported on arabesque-filled stands, all made of dark- examples, with tile mosaic used for the spandrels and
blue sgraffito tiles. Below it was a band of simple lozenges framing arches (Figure 8). The colour palette is similar
tiled in light- and dark-blue. The mihrab seems to have to characteristic pre-Mughal examples – light- and
had denser tile mosaic, now very poorly preserved.34 dark-blue, yellow and green. But the patterns here are
Little tilework is found on early Mughal monu- repeating geometric ones, even on the spandrels where,
ments. A singular early example is the mausoleum of in a Timurid, Safavid or Uzbek context one always
Jamali Kamali at Delhi (c. 1536) which, in addition to would find arabesques. Two other features connect it
typical Sultanate style monochrome-glazed tiles, has a with Sultanate tilework: the incorporation of unglazed
frieze of underglaze-painted tiles, rare in Delhi. 35 stone elements and areas, such as the frieze above the
We saw in the previous paragraph that the tilework carved stucco inscription, where larger tiles with sgraf-
of the Surid interim also followed Sultanate models fito decoration are found. 37 One other unfortunate, but
closely. Major advances in tilework during the Mughal very common characteristic, is the poor quality of the
era are not seen until the 1560s. 36 On the mosque of glaze which in many parts has disappeared due to
Khayr al-Manzil (1561) at Delhi, for instance, the weathering.
prayer hall façade now has much more of the surface The west wall of the enclosure of the mausoleum of
decorated with tile than previous Sultanate or Surid Atgah Khan in Delhi (1566) also displays extensive tile
30 B. O’Kane

5. Detail of interior inscription panel of underglaze-painted tiles, tomb of ‘Ali Barid (1577), Bidar (photo: O’Kane).

6. Tile mosaic and sgraffito tiles on interior, tomb of Sikandar Lodi, Delhi (1518) (photo: O’Kane).

mosaic on the west (qibla) wall (Figure 9).38 In addition projects, but now that the restoration of the tomb of
to the panels of geometric ornament, we now have for the Humayun has taken place it is possible to see that
first time in Mughal architecture arabesque patterns domes of the twin chhatris above each of the four faces
deployed in this technique. These are very much in the of the mausoleum had a simple but bold floral tile mosaic
style of both earlier Timurid monuments and contempor- pattern in white, yellow, blue and green.39
ary Safavid and Uzbek ones, although again they use a There is little tilework of note on subsequent
distinctive colour palette of the characteristic bright yel- Mughal architecture until that on the exterior of the
low and light-green, with little use of the light-blue so Lahore fort.40 It has been attributed to both the late
common in Iran and Central Asia. The mausoleum itself Jahangir and early Shah Jahan periods (1624–1631),
is built of marble and sandstone, as is the most famous of although, as Ebba Koch has pointed out, the work is
its contemporary monuments, the tomb of Humayun (c. homogenous in style and was probably executed by the
1566). Marble and sandstone remained the favoured same group of artists.41 The first important point is that
building materials for the Mughals’ most prestigious this is, or certainly was (much is now missing), the
South Asian Studies 31

7. Tile mosaic and sgraffito tiles on zone of transition, Qal’i-i Kuhna mosque (1540s), Delhi (photo: O’Kane).

most extensive use of tilework found on any one Indian painted stucco on the rear of the inner side of the
monument. In this, it follows from what was previously gateway to the tomb of Akbar at Sikandra (1612–14).
the most extensive, on the Hindu Man Mandir fort at These may therefore have preceded the examples in
Gwalior.42 Both patrons evidently viewed the Fort tilework, the best-known examples of which are the
walls as a suitable location for advertising their riches highlight of the Wazir Khan mosque (1635) in the
and ideology. Koch has noted that, in addition to the same city (Figure 10), to which I now turn.
scenes of daily life of the Mughal court and symbols of The same team of craftsmen may have worked the
rulership and power, they contain Solomonic angels Wazir Khan mosque, so similar are their asymmetrical
subjugating djinn, a theme mirroring the Jahangir per- panels. Its entrance portal is remarkable for its emphasis
iod paintings in the Kala Burj within the Fort, which on epigraphy. The projecting balconies on the middle of
associated the ruler with the one of the most revered each side preclude the framing inscriptions that are seen
pre-Islamic prophets, forever linked with justice.43 A on many other portals (as on the Chini-ka-Rauza, dis-
foundation inscription (1617) of Jahangir in the fort cussed below), but this is compensated by the smaller
also refers to him as ‘a Solomon in dignity’.44 twin rectangular panels on each side and the bottom
Regarding the quality of the tile mosaic, however, it arched panels, all filled with dark-blue nasta’liq on a
has to be said that the tesserae of the figural panels are, white ground. Tile mosaic features extensively on the
first of all, mostly larger than on previous examples minarets and their bases, but pride of place within the
such as the Khayr al-Manzil mosque or the mausoleum prayer hall is given instead to painted plaster.
of Atgah Khan. The panels are admittedly mostly high Also roughly contemporary with those two monu-
up on the walls and therefore difficult to see from afar, ments is another in Lahore, the tomb of Jahangir
but the frequent plain ground, devoid of detail at the (1628-38).46 Like its imperial funerary predecessors,
edges of the panels, reveals a distracting grid pattern Humayun’s tomb at Delhi and Akbar’s at Sikandra, it
where the uncut square tiles have been placed side by also greatly emphasizes marble and sandstone but dis-
side. Some indication that this was taken into account is plays tile mosaic on the dadoes of the external arcade
seen in the tile mosaic on the Elephant Gate adjacent to and in the corridor leading to the cenotaph. The mosaic
the curtain wall of the Shah Burj: the tesserae here are patterns in the corridor are all symmetrical, but they
much smaller, more suitable for the arched panels of now show a motif borrowed from the pietra dura on the
flowering shrubs that are found at the top and bottom lowest tier of the cenotaph, a naturalistic curving leaf
of the sides of the gate. Those on the bottom are that distinguishes the upper and lower sides by different
noteworthy for their asymmetry.45 Similar panels of shades of tile, in this case dark-green and dark-blue
asymmetric and naturalistic trees can be seen in (Figure 11). As one might expect, the interior location
32 B. O’Kane

8. Tile mosaic, Khayr al-Manzil mosque (1561), Delhi (photo: O’Kane).

of these tiles has spared their glaze from the effect of the finance minister of Shah Jahan. Tile mosaic origin-
weathering, although it must also be said that the ally covered all of the exterior of this structure.
Lahore monuments have consistently fared much better Although much of the glaze has disappeared due to
than those of Delhi and Agra in this respect.47 weathering, the overall design is still clear. Where in
Still contemporary, but at Agra, is the Chini-ka- other monuments the façade would be articulated
Rauza, probably the tomb of Afzal Khan (d. 1638), through a series of arched niches, here it is flat.
South Asian Studies 33

9. Tile mosaic on west wall, mausoleum of Atgah Khan (1566), Delhi (photo: O’Kane).

10. Left: tile mosaic panel, Elephant Gate, Lahore Fort (1624–1631) (photo: O’Kane). Right: tile mosaic panel, Mosque of Wazir
Khan (1635), Lahore (photo: O’Kane).

Instead the impression of articulation is given by the Even in its truncated state, the otherwise perfectly
different-sized rectangular panels of the tilework preserved tile mosaic (Figure 12) of the tomb of Asaf
design, each filled with a variety of ogee or polylobed Khan (1642–4)49 at Lahore is an impressive ensemble,
arches, in turn containing central stems with symme- as befits the status of its exalted dedicatee, Shah Jahan’s
trical floral designs to either side.48 father-in-law (Mumtaz Mahal was his daughter). The
34 B. O’Kane

11. Detail of tile mosaic dado, tomb of Jahangir (1627–37) Lahore (photo: O’Kane).

building itself and surrounding garden were ordered to flowers, although some green and dark-blue is found
be constructed by Shah Jahan.50 It too apparently had too. The attempt to depict the upper and lower sides of
much marble on its lower walls, now sadly all leaves is shown both in two shades of green (as at the
plundered.51 We should notice how the colour palette tomb of Jahangir, Figure 11), and in dark-blue and
has shifted, with the formerly dominant blue yielding orange (Figure 12).
mainly to orange52 and yellow, with some black, white What is most surprising is firstly, how long it took
and green also occasionally used as a ground.53 The cuerda seca tiles to appear in Mughal architecture, given
floral designs are once again all completely symmetri- its frequent appearance in Timurid and Safavid tilework,55
cal. The palette might have been chosen to match the and secondly, how extremely limited then was its further
cuerda seca tiles on the lower walls which appear here use, with very few later examples known.56 One other
possibly for the first time in India. They all have a prominent example was at the tomb complex of al-
yellow ground,54 with mainly orange stems and Madani in Srinagar, where a gateway dated to the reign of
South Asian Studies 35

12. Tile mosaic (upper) and cuerda seca tiles (lower), tomb of Asaf Khan (d. 1641), Lahore (photo: O’Kane).

Shah Jahan was decorated with cuerda seca tiles.57 The of mortar for the spaces between bricks. Banna’i tech-
Tomb of al-Madani was unique in India in having a figure nique is found on the soffits of the arches connecting
of Sagittarius on its spandrels, much like those in tile the three qibla dome chambers. An indication of how
mosaic at the north side of Shah ‘Abbas’s Maydan-i much more comfortable the tileworkers in this part of
Naqsh-i Jahan.58 India were with their traditional underglaze technique
One of India’s finest tiled monuments is Shah than with tile mosaic is seen on the semi-dome of the
Jahan’s Friday mosque (1647) at Thatta.59 I mentioned mihrab niche: a curved surface is ideal for tile mosaic
above the continuous use of underglaze-painted tiles in as the small pieces mould themselves to the surface,
the monuments around Multan and Uchch.60 They had but here with large flat tiles they had to resort to
also become widespread in monuments from the 16th faceting of triangles instead (Figure 13). At Shah
century onwards at Thatta. The Dabgir mosque (1588) Jahan’s mosque, underglaze-painted tiles are again
there (Figure 13) already uses many of the same forms dominant, although here they are also frequently seen
and techniques found in Shah Jahan’s mosque. Thin in geometric panels with unglazed brick tiles in a
turquoise monochrome-glazed tiles are used instead variation of the inset-technique found in Timurid
36 B. O’Kane

13. Detail of underglaze-painted tilework on mihrab, Dabgir Mosque (1588), Thatta (photo: O’Kane).

architecture.61 Within the central qibla dome chamber, Conclusions


the framework of the tile panels is in dark- and light-
blue banna’i tiles, with wide bands of mortar between We have seen that Indian tilework evolved in substan-
them, a colour contrast highlighted by the recent tially different ways from its Iranian predecessors. This
restoration of the white mortar. is hardly surprising. The South Asian peninsula has
One further example of tile mosaic may be men- vast stone quarries, and the skill of the Hindu stone-
tioned, to show its sharp decline in the eighteenth masons was everywhere evident in the ornate carvings
century. The tomb of Sharaf al-Nisa Begum at Lahore on their temples. We normally find that, where good
(Figure 14) is a simple rectangle, with large panels of building stone is available, as in Egypt, Syria and
tile mosaic encircling the upper walls. Whether the Turkey, for example, then it tends to be used as the
borders of the square white background tiles were medium both of construction and decoration. The use
better concealed on its erection is unclear, but now of marble and sandstone by the Mughals in some of
their all-too apparent dividing lines resemble, to the their finest buildings was another way to achieve colour
modern viewer, bathroom tiles. There is an attempt at contrast without the use of tiles. The most prestigious
variation in the use of different colours for the crossing buildings of the Mughals – the mausoleums of the
of leaves, but the stiffness of the cypress trees is also rulers the Friday mosques in Delhi and Lahore, the
apparent.62 major buildings within the forts of Agra, Delhi and
South Asian Studies 37

14. Detail of tilework, tomb of Sharaf al-Nisa Begum at Lahore (2nd quarter 18th century) (photo: O’Kane).

Lahore, were all executed in stone. In central India quite different, with white and orange or yellow back-
therefore, tiles were essentially second rank decorative grounds being more popular than the dark- or tur-
material. quoise-blue of Iran and Central Asia. The motifs are
The situation was different in the Punjab, where also different, beginning in the seventeenth century
stone was in comparatively short supply and brick, as with greater use of naturalistic trees and flowers,64
in Iran, was the usual medium of construction. The and, on the Lahore Fort, figural panels.65 The tesserae
main tilework technique in the Punjab was under- are larger, with plainer backgrounds. Tile mosaic was
glaze-painting. From its introduction in the thirteenth also used as a device to give the appearance of break-
century at Lal Mohra Sharif to its burgeoning in the ing up a solid wall into smaller panels, rather than
Rukn-i ‘Alam mausoleum and the tombs of Uchch, reflecting the existing architectural subdivisions in the
Punjabi underglaze-painted tilework owes little to its form of niches, as in Timurid and Safavid Iran.
Anatolian or Iranian predecessors63 in terms of place- As for the limited use of cuerda seca tiles used on
ment and patterns, and can be considered a quite sepa- Mughal buildings, the initial unfamiliarity of Indian
rate development. Underglaze-painted blue and white masons with cuerda seca technology would have been
tiles cover much greater proportions of the monuments a barrier to their switching from the labour intensive –
than any in Iran, and were used over a much greater but technologically simpler – tile mosaic.66 Cuerda
span, through Sultanate architecture right up to the seca tiles are extremely rare, and were never used, as
demise of the Mughal empire, at a time when they in Safavid examples, as a cheap substitute for tile
had become virtually forgotten in Safavid and, to a mosaic. In addition, none of the surviving Mughal
lesser extent, in Uzbek architecture. examples exhibits any of the overglaze gilding of the
Tile mosaic took almost a century and a half to early Timurid examples.
appear in India after its appearance in 14th century What were the decisions that led to the choice of a
Iran, at first sparsely in Northern India, but more con- particular kind of tilework? Obviously, patrons wanted
fidently in the Deccan. Its first tentative uses in their buildings to be as prestigious and attractive as
Sultanate architecture owe little to Iranian prototypes. possible, although this also presented a range of
It only came into regular extensive use in the Mughal choices, from a large sparsely decorated structure to a
period, a change most likely connected with the rulers’ small heavily decorated one. For buildings in Lahore,
heritage of tile-covered Timurid architecture and its Delhi and Agra, the main cities of the Mughal empire,
successors in Safavid Iran and Uzbek Central Asia. sandstone and marble were the favoured medium for
However, in Mughal India, the colour palette was prestigious decoration, with tile mosaic coming in a
38 B. O’Kane

distant third. However, in the southern part of Punjab, Alireza Anisi (Tehran, Research Institute for
as at Thatta, lack of locally available stone and marble Cultural heritage and Tourism, 2018), pp. 263-
and the continuing expertise of the ateliers in under- 99; Abdul Hamid Akhund and Nasreen Askari,
glaze-painted tiles, only rarely found further east than Tale of the Tile: The Ceramic Tradition of
the Indus valley,67 ensured that they continued to be Pakistan (Karachi, Mohatta Palace Museum,
extensively used along with tile mosaic in the Mughal 2011); Gerard Degeorge and Yves Porter, The
period. Art of the Islamic Tile (Paris, Flammarion,
The distinctiveness of Mughal tilework can now be 2002), Chapter 5; Yves Porter, ‘Décors émaillés
recognized. Its initial tile mosaic colour palette of yel- dans l’architecture de pierre de l’Inde centrale:
low, dark-blue and green was strongly influenced by the les monuments islamiques de Mandu, XVe-
preceding Sultanate period. Changes in the reign of XVIe s.,’ Archéologie islamique, 7 (1997), pp.
Akbar occurred in two ways, firstly with the introduc- 121-146, Tanvir Hasan, “Ceramics of Sultanate
tion of more varied colours, with white and some light- India,” South Asian Studies, 11 (1995), pp. 83-
blue becoming more common, and secondly with the 106; and, for technical studies of glazes,
introduction of panels with arabesque patterns. While Maninder Singh Gill and Thilo Rehren,
the seventeenth century saw a move towards more ‘Material Characterization of Ceramic Tile
naturalistic designs, earlier than comparable Iranian Mosaic from Two 17th-Century Islamic
examples, it also gives us the single most extensive Monuments in Northern India,’ Archaeometry
use of tile mosaic figural imagery of any Islamic monu- 53, 1 (2011), pp. 22-36; Saima Gulzara et al.,
ment in the picture wall of the Lahore Fort. ‘Characterization of 17th Century Mughal Tile
Underglaze-painted tiles continued to be the main Glazes from Shahdara Complex, Lahore-
medium of decoration in Mughal Punjab, where their Pakistan,’ Journal of Cultural Heritage, 14
extensive use with monochrome-glazed light- and (2013), pp. 174-9; M. S. Gill and Th. Rehren,
dark-blue tiles produced a style unknown elsewhere. ‘The Intentional Use of Lead–Tin Orange in
Cuerda seca tiles were used much less frequently, Indian Islamic Glazes and Its Preliminary
although the surviving examples also show a distinctive Characterization,’ Archaeometry 56, (2013), pp.
colour palette, with an orange ground unknown in 1009-23; M.S. Gill, Th. Rehren and I. Freestone,
Iranian examples. ‘Tradition and Indigeneity in Mughal
There are still unanswered questions, such as the Architectural Glazed Tiles,’ Journal of
reasons for the frequent abrasion of the tile mosaic Archaeological Science 49, (2014), pp. 546-55;
glazes, and for their strangely matte quality when com- Maninder Singh Gilla and Thilo Rehren, ‘An
pared to the best Timurid or Safavid examples. Further Analytical Evaluation of Historic Glazed Tiles
technical analysis may provide the answers. However, from Makli and Lahore, Pakistan,’ Journal of
the above examples can permit us to celebrate Mughal Archaeological Science: Reports, 16 (2017), pp.
tilework for its original contribution to the history of 266-75.
Islamic decoration. 3. Richard McClary, Rum Seljuq Architecture, 1170-
1220: The Patronage of Sultans (Edinburgh:
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Edinburgh University Press, 2017), pp. 31-3, dis-
cusses the Konya examples and, given the absence
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. of mina’i produced anywhere other than Kashan,
suggests they were imported from there. In addition
to the figural mina’i examples we also find over-
NOTES glaze-painted tiles in the colour scheme of what
becomes later known as lajvardina (white and gold
1. Rather than using the historically more accurate on a dark-blue ground), and figural underglaze-
Hindustan to describe the region of South Asia painted tiles, such as the ensemble in the
ruled by the Mughals, I use India throughout in Metropolitan Museum of Art: https://www.metmu
its pre-partition historical sense. My thanks go to seum.org/art/collection/search/452817 (accessed 20
Mehreen Chida-Razvi, the editor of this volume, April 2018).
for her constructive comments on an earlier ver- 4. What may be the earliest surviving underglaze-
sion of this paper. painted tile, from the Raqqa Jami’ masjid, is pos-
2. In particular Yves Porter, ‘Revêtements émaillés sibly Zangid: Bernard O’Kane, ‘The
des premiers Moghols à Delhi,’ in Adle Nāmeh: Development of Iranian Cuerda Seca Tiles and
Studies in Memory of Chahriyar Adle, ed. by the Transfer of Tilework Technology,’ in And
South Asian Studies 39

Diverse Are Their Hues, ed. by Sheila Blair and Architecture in the Indus Valley (Karachi:
Jonathan Bloom (Yale: Yale University Press, Oxford Univ. Press, 2015). For Shaykh Sadan
2011), p. 179, fig. 111. The technique was widely the most comprehensive publication is Finbarr
used in Saljuq Anatolia before it also became Barry Flood, ‘Ghurid Architecture in the Indus
common in Ilkhanid Iran and Mamluk Syria and Valley: The Tomb of Shaykh Sadan Shahid’, Ars
Egypt. Early examples are found at the Sivas Orientalis, 31 (2001), pp. 129-66.
Great Mosque minaret (1212-13) and the Sivas 13. They correspond to tombs A and B in the cata-
‘Izz al-Din Kay Kawus Hospital: McClary, Rum logue in Edwards, Of Brick and Myth.
Seljuq Architecture, pp. 46-7, 144, 159. See also 14. Described on tomb A in Edwards, Of Brick and
Michael Meinecke, Fayencedekorationen Myth, p. 213 as “glazed in two colours,” and,
seldschukischer Sakralbauten in Kleinasien, 2 appropriately, as “hastily executed in crude
vols. (Tübingen: Wasmuth, 1976), vol. 1, pp. 22- hatching patterns;” and as indicating that “the
7 and idem, ‘Syria Blue and White Tiles of the potential of the medium of glazing was being
9th/15th Century,” Damaszener Mitteilungen, 3 exploited;” and on tomb B (ibid., p. 217) as
(1988), 203-14. “two-colour tiles.”
5. In the Astan-i Quds, Mashhad: Sheila Blair, ‘Art 15. For an overview of similar later mausoleums, all of
as Text: The Luster Mihrab in the Doris Duke which extensively employ underglaze-painted tiles,
Foundation for Islamic Art,’ in No Tapping see Hasan, ‘Seraiki Style,’ p. 177, 11-15.
around Philology: A Festschrift in Honor of 16. As in Abbasid Mesopotamia (O. Bobin et al., ‘Where
Wheeler McIntosh Thackston Jr.’s 70th Birthday, Did the Lustre Tiles of the Sidi Oqba Mosque (AD
ed. by Alireza Korangy and Daniel J. Sheffield 836-63) in Kairouan Come From?,’ Archaeometry,
(Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2014), pp. 409-10, 45,4 [2003], pp. 569-577), Raqqa and Saljuq
Figures 5-6. Anatolia (Marilyn Jenkins-Madina, Raqqa
6. It may also have given more margin for error in Revisited: Ceramics of Ayyubid Syria [New Haven
laying out the design. The tilework on the facade and London: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2006]
of the main ayvan of the Sirçali Madrasa, Konya and Iran (Oliver Watson, Persian Lustre Ware
(1242) provides a good example. [London and Boston: Faber, 1985]) .
7. The Eşrefoğlu Mosque (1296), Beyşehir, is one of 17. I am grateful to Oliver Watson for his comments of a
the finest examples: Bernard O’Kane, Mosques: The photograph of these tiles, who also notes that ‘it has
100 Most Iconic Islamic Houses of Worship (New just been shown that opaque white and opaque yel-
York and Paris: Assouline, 2019), no. 36. low glazes are essentially the same thing, one or
8. O’Kane, ‘The Development of Iranian Cuerda other colour occurring because of small differences
Seca Tiles,’ pp. 174-203. in the making procedure (both being tin-lead
9. A useful overview of the topic is found in Hasan, compounds).’
‘Ceramics of Sultanate India.’ 18. Very similar tiles are in the V&A collection:
10. Heinz Gaube, ‘Die Mausoleengruppe in Adheri, http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O82264/tiled-
NW-Pakistan,’ in Studies in Honour of Clifford panel-tile-panel-unknown/.
Edmund Bosworth: 2 – The Sultan’s Turret, ed. 19. Described in detail in Giovanni Curatola, ‘Un per-
by Carole Hillenbrand (Leiden, 2000), pp. 96- corso di lettura sulle arti decorative nel Deccan,’
108; Shaikh Khurshid Hasan, ‘Pakistan: Its Rivista degli studi orientali, 64 (1990), pp. 221-5.
Seraiki Style of Tomb Architecture, East and 20. Yolande Crowe, ‘Some Glazed Tiles in 15th-
West 51 (2001), pp. 167-78; Holly Edwards, Of Centruy Bidar, in Facets of Indian Art, ed. by
Brick and Myth: The Genesis of Islamic Robert Skelton et al. (London: Victoria and
Architecture in the Indus Valley (Karachi: Albert Museum, 1986), p. 44, seems to assume
Oxford Univ. Press, 2015), pp. 145-57, 211-29. that they are tile mosaic; Merklinger, Deccan, p.
11. The extensive earlier literature is reviewed in 114: mosaic tiles; Curatola, ‘Percorso,’ p. 221,
detail in Edwards, Of Brick and Myth, pp. 147-8. majolica; George Michell and Mark Zebrowski,
12. The Ribat of ‘Ali ibn Karmakh (Kabirwala), and Architecture and Art of the Deccan Sultanates
the mausoleums of Suhagan and Duagan (Aror) (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1999),
and Shaykh Sadan (Muzaffargarh). For the first cuerda seca. I must admit that there is some
three see Holly Edwards, The Genesis of Islamic possibility that they are in fact cuerda seca tiles,
Architecture in the Indus Valley, Ph.D. disserta- as the resolution on my photograph is not so high
tion, New York University, 1990, and idem, Of as to determine conclusively the technique. The
Brick and Myth: The Genesis of Islamic glaze surface looks matte rather than shiny, and
40 B. O’Kane

some of the designs are outlined by a black line 25. Not tile mosaic, as described in Michell and
(both suggesting cuerda seca). However, there is Zebrowski, Architecture and Art, p. 137.
some running of the dark-blue and light-blue on 26. Their technique is not mentioned by Merklinger,
the white base, and many details of the petals are Deccan, p. 121, or Curatola, ‘Percorso,’ p. 225,
not outlined at all, suggesting underglaze paint- although the latter comments extensively on their
ing. Testing, or more detailed photography, may patterns. The tilemakers had trouble maintaining
permit a conclusive verdict (I am again grateful colour control. For instance, the blue ground of
to Oliver Watson, and to Robert Mason for their the epigraphic panels at the springing of the
comments on my photographs of these tiles, and arches ranges from light- to dark-blue, and the
on those mentioned in n. 24 below). yellow can shade, even on adjacent tiles, to a
21. One should perhaps mention another impressive much darker orange. This shading and the tile
use of tile mosaic in pre-Mughal India here, but division are not represented in the reproduction
on a Hindu monument, the Man Mandir in of the painting of one panel of the inscription in
Gwalior (1486-1517). Ducks, parrots, elephants, G. Yazdani, Bidar: Its History and Monuments
lions and human figures all feature amongst both (Oxford: Oxford Uni. Press, 1947), Pl. XCV.
geometric and foliate designs, using green, yel- 27. Porter, ‘Décors émaillés.’
low, and light-blue tiles, often in combination 28. Ibid., p. 125.
with unglazed sandstone. As noted in Degeorge 29. Most recently explored in detail in Peyvand
and Porter, Islamic Tile, p. 233, the only Mughal Firouzeh, Architecture, Sanctity and Power:
fort to rival this ensemble in it use of tilework is Ne’matollahi Shrines and Khanqahs in Fifteenth-
that in Lahore, which shall be examined further Century Iran and India, PhD thesis, Cambridge,
in the article. However, although the Man Mandir 2106.
probably exhibits the most extensive use of tile 30. The Delhi examples are now published in detail
mosaic on an Indian pre-Mughal monument, the in Porter, ‘Revêtements émaillés.’
tesserae are much larger in size than at the Bidar 31. Ibid., p. 267, describes the techniques here as being
madrasa (admittedly, as befits, in most cases, the tile mosaic and (underglaze-) painted tiles (‘des car-
greater viewing distance). reaux découpés et - fait plus exceptionnel - des
22. Elizabeth Merklinger, ‘The Madrasa of Mahmud carreaux peints’), but I see no sign of underglaze
Gawan in Bidar,’ Kunst des Orients, 11 (1977), painting there. Surprisingly, in light of this, Porter
pp. 147-8, mentions only the tile mosaic. later affirms just two examples of underglaze-
23. The same colour scheme is noted in Porter, painted tilework in his Delhi corpus, those of the
‘Décors émaillés,’ p. 136, on the 15th century Shisha Gunbad and Jamali Kamali: ibid., p. 283.
hammam of the palace at Mandu, which he iden- 32. Also noted in Porter, ‘Revêtements émaillés,’
tifies however as cuerda seca. Yellow is admit- pp. 270.
tedly an extremely unusual colour in underglaze 33. On this see Catherine Asher, ‘The Qal’a-i Kuhna
painting, although two 15th century Ottoman Mosque: A Visual Symbol of Royal Aspirations,’
examples are known: O’Kane, ‘Cuerda Seca in Chhavi II, ed. by Anand Krishna (Varanasi:
Tiles,’ pp. 193-5; and see the later example of Bharat Kala Bhavan, 1981), pp. 212-7.
‘Ali Barid mentioned further in the article. Again, 34. I was unable to access the interior; Caherine Asher,
my photos are not detailed enough to allow for an ‘The Mausoleum of Sher Shāh Sūrī,’ Artibus Asiae,
absolute identification of this technique, but it 39 (1977), p. 292, mentions that, regarding the mih-
seems likely on the balance of probability. rab, “the archivolt with its impost is set with delicate
24. Helen Philon, ‘Architectural Decoration,’ in Silent floral tilework.” Her black and white photograph
Splendor: Palaces of the Deccan 14th-19th centuries, suggests this might have been fine tile mosaic, but I
ed. by Helen Philon (Mumbai: The Marg have been unable to find any colour photographs that
Foundation, 2010), p. 120 mentions the red, but would enable us to confirm this.
describes the technique as underglaze painted. 35. Porter, ‘Revêtements émaillés,’ pp. 267-9;
Bianca Maria Alfieri, Islamic Architecture of the Figures 1-2, 4. As he notes, however, under-
Indian Subcontinent (London: Laurence King glaze-painted tiles are also found on a late
Publishers, 2000), p. 153, notes the resemblance to Sultanate building in Delhi, the early sixteenth-
Persian designs but claims that the tiles were almost century Shisha Gunbad in the Lodi Gardens:
certainly imported from Kashan. Apart from the ibid., Figure 3.
logistical difficulty, the colour palette would rule 36. Given the confines of this paper, it is not possible
out an Iranian provenance for them. to select more than some of the more important
South Asian Studies 41

Mughal monuments to analyse prevailing trends. weathering of the glaze. Its dilapidated state, missing
Similar tilework is found on the possible contem- much of the original tilework (both tile mosaic and
porary Nila Gunbad, for which see ibid., 276-7, cuerda seca), makes it unlikely to have been subject
Figures 16-17. to any restoration, yet its exterior tile mosaic shows
37. Sgraffito is also used for the tiles on the friezes absolutely no signs of weathering of the glazes.
above the interior mihrabs which alternate reci- Similarly, a tile mosaic gateway of the Shalimar
procal green and blue lobed medallions, Porter, Bagh (1636-42) at Lahore is fraying at the edges,
‘Revêtements émaillés,’ pl. 19. but the tiles that remain show no sign of the glaze
38. Described in detail in Porter, ‘Revêtements itself weathering. However, on the gateway to the
émaillés,’ p. 280; also mentioned in Degeorge Gulabi Bagh (1655) at Lahore, there are some signs
and Porter, Islamic Tile, p. 256. of weathering, although nowhere as bad as the Delhi
39. Ratish Nanda, ‘The Area of Humayun’s Tomb,’ in and Agra examples. Analysis of the glazes of tile
Heritage of the Mughal World, ed. by Philip mosaic at Lahore and Delhi has revealed significant
Jodidio (Munich: Prestel, 2015), p. 159; Aga chemical differences, with the latter having a ‘high
Khan Trust for Culture, Humayun’s Tomb alumina mineral soda signature’ (Gill, Rehren and
Conservation 2007-2013 (Delhi: Aga Khan Freestone, ‘Tradition and Indigineity,’ p. 554). My
Trust for Culture, 2015) (https://archnet.org/sys knowledge of chemistry is not sufficient to know
tem/publications/contents/10601/original/ whether could this explain the difference in weath-
DTP102986.pdf?1468329160). The Amar Singh ering; future chemical analysis of the glazes or tile
gate of the Agra Red Fort (c. 1565-1573) also has biscuit may produce an answer. I also wondered
tile mosaic very similar to that of the mausoleum whether heavier precipitation might have an effect,
of Atgah Khan. although the difference is not that great: the average
40. With the continuing exception of the monuments annual for Lahore is 628.8 mm vs. 795.4 mm for
with underglaze-painting in Punjab (at Thatta, Delhi: ‘Climate of Lahore,’ https://en.wikipedia.org/
Multan and Uchch), discussed further in the arti- wiki/Climate_of_Lahore (accessed 25 April 2018)
cle in connection with Shah Jahan’s Jami’ Masjid and ‘Climate of Delhi,’ https://en.wikipedia.org/
at Thatta. For the Lahore Fort see J. Ph. Vogel, wiki/Climate_of_Delhi (accessed 25 April 2018).
Tile-Mosaics of The Lahore Fort (reprinted with Both are much greater than the average for, for
additions, Karach: Pakistan Publications, n.d.). instance, Herat of 238.9 mm: https://en.wikipedia.
41. Ebba Koch, Muhgal Art and Imperial Ideology (New org/wiki/Herat#Climate (accessed 23 January
Delhi: Oxford Uni. Press, 2001), p. 33, n. 62. 2019).
42. See n. 22 above. 48. Well-illustrated in Degeorge and Porter, Islamic Tile,
43. Koch, Muhgal Art, pp. 32-3. p. 265. For an analysis of some of the glazes used on
44. Ibid., p. 19. the mausoleum, see Maninder Singh Gill and Thilo
45. The pair at the top issymmetrical; those at the Rehren, ‘Material Characterization.’ The authors
bottom of the gate are identical to each other refer to a purple glaze, that derived from manganese
(rather than being mirror image), showing use oxide. Its shade here varies, depending on its density,
of the same pattern. As noted in Degeorge and from black to dark purple.
Porter, Islamic Tile, p. 256 (caption), their natur- 49. The dating range is established in Anjum
alism may have been derived from European Rehmani, Lahore: History and Architecture of
herbals which became available in India at the Mughal Monuments (Karachi: Oxford Univ.
same time. Press, 2016), p. 245.
46. For a chemical analysis of the glazes used here 50. Ibid., 244.
see Saima Gulzara et al., “Characterization.” 51. Ibid., p. 245. A detail of the tile mosaic is illu-
47. At a lecture on tilework in the time of Shah Jahan at strated in Degeorge and Porter, Islamic Tile, p.
Pembroke College on 27 April 2018, Susan Stronge 264.
suggested that other contemporary examples of tile- 52. The orange seems to be an innovation of the late
work in Lahore might have had elements of their sixteenth century; its first use may be on the tomb
decoration restored. While this could also explain of Sultan Ibrahim Quli Qutb Shah at Golconda
the unusually good state of preservation of the tile- (1580), as mentioned in Aga Khan Development
work of some Lahore monuments, I believe that the Network, Qutb Shahi Heritage Park Conservation
example of the Asaf Khan mausoleum, discussed & Landscape Restoration (n.p., n.d.): https://arch
further in the article, suggests that some original net.org/system/publications/contents/10206/origi
tile mosaic from this period shows little signs of nal/DTP102591.pdf?1434963592 (accessed 23
42 B. O’Kane

April 2018), pp. 26 and 79 (the latter unnum- ‘Beast at Madin Sahib:’ https://www.searchkash
bered). Gill and Rehren, ‘Intentional Use,’ ana- mir.org/2014/12/beast-at-madin-sahib.html
lyse orange glaze samples from four 17th-century (accessed 19 April 2018).
Mughal buildings in Northern India; in addition 59. Henry Cousens, The Antiquities of Sind with
to those four they also analyze tiles from the Sabz Historical Outline (Calcutta: Government of
Burj in Delhi, supposedly 16th century, but only India central publication branch, 1929), pp. 120-
yellow tiles were sampled from it. The use of a 1, Pls. LVIII-LXII; Ahmad Hasan Dhani, Thatta:
special recipe called ‘lead-tin orange’” in the Islamic Architecture (Islamabad, Institute of
Punjab monuments for the orange colour, as Islamic History, Culture and Civilization, 1982),
opposed to the mixing of lean-tin yellow with pp. 190-7; Akhund and Askari, Tale of the Tile,
other substances found in the Delhi monuments, pp. 90-95.
is also noted by them in ibid., p. 14. 60. For analyses of these tiles see Gill and Rehren,
53. A similar palette is found on the tile mosaic of ‘Analytical Evaluation.’
the Badshahi Ashurkhana at Hyderabad in the 61. Bernard O’Kane, Timurid Architecture in Khurasan
Deccan. The monument is usually dated to (Costa Mesa: Mazda Publications, 1987), pp. 70-71.
1596, and it has been suggested that the tilework For good colour illustrations of the tilework at the
dates to 1611: Michell and Zebrowski, Shah Jahan mosque see Degeorge and Porter,
Architecture and Art, p. 138. But a tiled medallion Islamic Tile, pp. 266-70, and Akhund and Askari,
there is in the name of Abu’l-Muzaffar ‘Abd Allah Tale of the Tile, pp. 70-95.
Qutb Shah (r. 1626-72), suggesting it was 62. Also noted in Asher, Architecture, p. 316.
restored by him. 63. See n. 4.
54. For the main field; green is used on the borders. 64. Panels comparable to those of the Wazir Khan
55. As far as I know, they are unknown in Uzbek Mosque at Lahore appear in Iran only in the 19th
architecture, although Ilse Sturkenboom kindly century, such as those in the Masjid-i Vakil at
informed me that in a lecture on 5 April 2018 Shiraz. The mosque was constructed by Karim
at St. Andrews University Mustafa Tupev men- Khan Zand in 1766, but most of the tile panels,
tioned some Uzbek cuerda seca tiles; I have been in cuerda seca technique, were added or
unsuccessful in contacting him. In any case, it is restored by Husayn ‘Ali Mirza ibn Fath ‘Ali
clear that they never formed a significant part of Shah in 1827-8: see Jennifer Scarce, ‘The Arts
the Uzbek tile decorative repertoire. of the Eighteenth to Twentieth Centuries,’ in
56. Anjum Rehmani, ‘The Persian Glazed Tile The Cambridge History of Iran, v. 7: From
Revetment of Mughal Buildings in Lahore,’ Nadir Shah to the Islamic Republic, ed. by Peter
Lahore Museum Bulletin, 10-11 (1997-8), Pl. 1 Avery, Gavin Hambly and Charles Melville
left, illustrates (but does not discuss in the text), (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni. Press, 1991), 908-
in black and white, tiles from the tomb of Nadira 9.
Begum (d. 1659), which seem to be in cuerda 65. An exception is a fascinating underglaze-painted tile
seca technique. Degeorge and Porter, Islamic (16th century) showing a bird with a snake in its
Tile, p. 271, illustrate the late 17th century mouth above a horse, on the tomb of Rajan Shah at
Dargah of Qutb Sahib, Delhi (reign of Layyah in Punjab, illustrated in Hasan, ‘Ceramics,’
Aurangzib), which has tiles on a dark-green Fig. 19. The closest parallel to the use of figural
ground in addition to the orange ground seen imagery in the Lahore fort on an Iranian building
previously. would be that of the Hasht Bihihst pavilion at Isfahan
57. Susan Stronge (see. n. 47) showed a photograph (1669), for which see Ingeborg Luschey-
of this gateway taken by Ebba Koch of a painted Schmeisser, The Pictorial Tile Cycle of the Hašt
inscription (no longer extant) that mentioned its Bihišt in Isfahan and Its Iconographic Cycle (Rome:
erection within his reign. IsMEO, 1978).
58. As Susan Stronge has ascertained, many of its 66. As helpfully pointed out by one anonymous
tiles are now in the collection of the Victoria reviewer.
and Albert Museum. Her detailed publication of 67. Mainly in Bahmanid monuments, as noted above.
the tiles of the monument is immanent. Some Some badly worn traces of (previously unno-
pertinent information and photographs of the ticed) underglaze-painted tiles are present on
tiles can also be found in Vinayak Razdan, the Mughal tomb of Firuz Khan, Agra (c. 1647).

You might also like