In the course of the sixteenth centm y, Mughal environmental design shifted away from gal dens as the pi imai y loc us of geographic experience and toward larger urban and regional projec ts in which gardens played a diminishing role PI evious research has shown how early Mughal gardens (1500-50) served as centers of social life/ how they adjusted in form, function, and meaning to new geographic situations; and how they transformed their sun oundiug territories (figs. 1_2).2 The term "garden" (biigh) denoted sites ranging in size from small vegetated plots to large imperial complexes. Some gardens had symmetrical layouts, repeating decorative elements, and high enclosure walls; others were loosely arranged around natural springs, meandering streams, illformal plantings, and open prospects. The connotations of garden language were equally broad-ranging Poetic and figurative allusions referred to almost any well-ordered and beautiful subject, including persons, regions, and kingdoms as well as the varieties of gardensjust described As many of the papers in this volume attest, the paradise symbolism of Muslim gardens was often accompanied, and sometimes displaced, by political, economic, and dynastic meanings. The places, forms, functions, and meanings associated with Mughal gal dens varied widely, and some of those variations can he explained by their changing territorial context. Work carried ant over the past five years has helped us go beyond simple definitions of territoriality as "a strategy, whereby an individual or group attempts to affect, influence, or control people, phenomena and relationships by delimiting and asserting control over a geographic area. ,,3 Gardens served in the early sixteenth century as (1) positions for territorial control (e.g , for military encampment and sieges); (2) loci of intense territorial experience (e.g, places to celebrate victor y over a larger region, to enjoy a famous landscape, or to take refuge when defeated); (3) emblems or markers of territorial identity (e.g., Timurid homelands, Timui id cities, and newly acquired Timuricl territory); (4) nodes in a territorial network or system (i.e., in which new gardens helped define and support the geography of political action); and (5) spatial metaphors for a well-ordered territory (as in the riverfront gardens of Agra and the garden-like territory of Kashmir). These territorial dimensions of garden design represent a rudimentary type of geographic science. Relations between garden design and political geography changed, however, in the second half of the sixteenth century, during the course of Mughal state formation (fig 3). Although still important as a building type, gardens were physically subsumed within larger complexes at the Agra Fort and Fatehpur Sikri and in larger programs of geographic inquiry. Some elements of garden design were refined, but gardens had a generally diminishing significance in the day-to-day construction of territory. The expanding role of gardens as funerary spaces, beginning with Humayuri's tomb, indicates how the heightened symbolic significance was coupled with diminished functional significance in day-to-day imperial activity For example, none of Akbar's visits to Humavuu's tomb describe its garden. The gardens that had once helped Babur orient himself in foreign lands acquired specialized roles within the expanding Mughal state - a state served by geographic surveys, gazetteers, and revenue recor ds, Although the Mughal state achieved little in the classical geographical sciences of cosmography, cartography, and topographic description compared with its Arab and Central Asian forebears, it had lasting influence on the sciences of territorial administration in South Asia. The full range of Muslim contributions to geography from the tenth century onwards includes: cosmography, astronomy, world geographic accounts (climates and countries), geographical dictionaries (regions, towns, physiography), geodesy, maritime literature, regional desci iption (administrative accounts, natural histories, and topographic literature), travel literature (routes and stages [military]; tracle and travel guides; pilgrimage [ziyamtl literature; and travelers' accounts); and finally the geographical information in other gemes (e.g., biography, autobiography, history, news and intelligence



reports) 4 Of these broad categories of geographic inquiry, significant contributions by the Mughals can be found in only three: I egional administrative description, travel routes and stages, and miscellaneous references in other genres. But all three advanced the territorial aims of the late sixteenth century and displaced the earlier role of landscape and garden accounts. The challenge for the historical geographer is to sort through contemporary evidence to show how and why this shift occurred in the sixteenth century, a challenge that will be taken up after a brief discussion of its importance in the late twentieth century. After all, what difference does Mughal garden history make for societies and environments today? Consider the words of Baron von Hugel, a nineteenth-century traveler among the gardens of Kashmir, who wrote, "We were both looked upon as two madmen, who were troubling our heads about nothing better than stones and plants. Even the Governor [of Kashmir] concluded that Mr. Vigne must be a downright idiot, to waste his time drawing the likeness of an old ruin or a poor native.:" Such judgments lllay be appropriate unless landscape history sheds light upon interests and issues surrounding Mughal gardens today. THE DESIGNER'S PROBLEM The modern relation between Mughal gardens and geographic science can be termed "the designer's problem" because it starts out with a practical problem that needs to be solved, and it uses historical and geoglaphical methods to solve it 6 The problems are serious: heritage conservation, land-use conflic ts, cultural conflicts, and environmental health.7 Historical gardens are rapidly being converted to other land uses, or suffer from overly intensive recreation or encroachments. In a 1992 symposium on Mughal gardens, a professor oflandscape architecture asked how historical knowledge of gardens could be translated into accurate and meaningful guides for design." To understand the importance and difficulties associated with this question, it is useful to consider some examples from Lahore, the Mughal City of Gardens (fig. 4). The first example, the Bagh-i Mian Khan, lies on the old road from the Lahore Fort to the Shalamar Garden (fig. 5). Nineteenth-century maps depict the entire corridor as a strand of gardens.9 Five years ago, only one garden remained; it has a black marble pavilion, mosque, tank, walls, and residual terraces," and was one of the few green spaces left in an area surrounded by dense residential and commercial development The main struc-

tures still exist, but, as constraints on land development loosened, the garden gave way to housing schemes and private land acquisition supported in part by the Lahore Development Authority. In nearby parts of the city, illegal encroachments and squatter settlements (katrhi abarlis) have been bulldozed by city authorities. These processes occur throughout Lahore's garden suburbs, facilitated in part by the geographic sciences of mapping, sui veying, and planning. Planned development takes its toll on historic sites, but it cannot keep pace with the larger territorial quest of the lower- and middle-class people for places to live. What has been gained by the development of the Bagh-i Mian Khan? What has been lost? What endures of the historical landscape? Are there alternatives to uncontrolled appropriation, planned development, and forcible eviction in histoi ic landscapes? Our second example is Kamrari's Baradari, a garden complex in the middle of the Ravi river. It indicates what happens when politicians take a special interest in the ten itorial legacy of Mughal gardens (figs. 6-7). This site, consisting of a garden, waterworks, and pavilion, was allegedly the eai liest Mughal garden in Lahore." In 1988, the entire complex was renovated in violation of existing laws and legal protests from the Department of Archaeology by orders from the Chief Minister of Punjab. Construction was stopped at least once, but it accelerated when it became apparent that the political forces promoting the project were more powerful than the state apparatus charged with protecting it. Kamran's Bar adari represents the worst case of reconstruction in the recent history of Lahore. Conservation in the Walled City and Jahangir's tomb garden exhibit higher standards 12 But even the Walled City conservation projects were pushed ahead at breakneck speed and with mixed results. Why Kamran's Baradari and other Mughal sites? Some people draw analogies with the bold, beneficent actions of Mughal rulers. Others draw more critical analogies with the Mughal legacy of gaining control by violently appropriating territory and remaking its symbolic places. When are such analogies accurate, effective, or helphil? One final example is the Shalamar Garden (fig. 8). Located in the far suburbs of northeastern Lahore, Shalamar has three broad terraces linked by a central water axis and hundreds of fountains Recent geographical research has shown how Shalamar influenced the spatial development of metropolitan Lahore 13 Its tame and walls have brought a certain amount of protection.




Listed as a World HCl itage site, Shalamar belongs to international as well as national and local networks of heritage conservation. Despite these many levels of significance, Shalamar has increasingly been caught up in larger processes that have a territorial dimension and material consequences. Garden maintenance tends to coincide with official VIP visits that bring Shalamar briefly out of its local recreational function into the national or international spotlight. Government funding is limited. Daily use is burgeoning. What hundreds of gardeners did in Shah Jahan's times, fifteen must do today 14 There is no coordination between garden conservation, urban planning, and environmental management in the area These are some of the "live" problems surrounding Mughal gardens today 15 They illustrate the ambivalent relations between historic gardens and modern urban environments. Most gardens stand orphaned among urban housing and commercial developments. They are either appropriated for political and private uses, or rebuilt to symbolize the territorial claims of the "new Mughals." Although recent garden research has dealt with the territorial issues of Mughal times, it has not engaged those of model n times. To understand and improve this situation, it is useful to examine the historical relations between Mughal garden research and contemporary geographic problems. Garden studies have been pursued as a subfie1d of art history, architec tural history, or landscape history, and have had little interaction with the fields of Mughal political or economic history," In general, the latter fields have received far more attention and have had far greater influence than cultural studies 17 But the point should not be conceded too quickly In a recent essay on state formation, Subramanyarn criticizes Mughal political-economic research as being "in marked conu ast to the situation in respect of cultural histoi y where much interesting work continues to emerge, on subjects like Mughal architecture and painting, 110m the western universities," and he goes on to note that "these [cultural] writings remain imperfectly integrated into the larger political, social and economic history ofthe period.'?" The gap between political economy and culture had a different pattern during the colonial period. In an essay, entitled "Knowing the Country," Bayly describes scholaradministrators who were "often associated with the generarion of high 'orientalish knowledge', these men were as important by virtue of the detailed pragmatic knowledge in geography, disease, and Indian material life which they could provide to the expanding Empire ,,19

Bayly su essed that "the study ofinfonnation, knowledge, and communications is an interesting project which might help dose the deplorable gap between studies of economic structure, on the one hand, and of orientalism and ideology, on the other. ,,20 Although research on geographic science and garden design might contribute to that end, it has not done so to date. Mughal gardens suffered during the colonial period 21 Pleasure gardens were destroyed for railway rights-of-way and ballast Tomb gardens became churches, residences, ammunition dumps, and administrative offices, i.e., the emblems and fruits of empire. Garden suburbs were reworked for canals, workshops, and cantonments with little attention to the existing landscape. The Archaeological Survey of India often yielded to the Public Works Department and to the personal preferences of archaeological officers in matters of planting design Modern Mughal garden studies developed against this backdrop during the first decade of the twentieth century.22The first generation of Mug hal-gal den historians did focus on the practical landscape problems of their times. In his role as Curator of Ancient Monuments, H. H. Cole supel vised scientific documentation of Jahangir's tomb, Shalamar Garden, and other sites using drafting techniques that linked archaeological research and conservation." In early articles on Mughal gardens, E. B. Havell decried the neglect of traditional Indian gardening styles and erafts." Finally, in 1913, Constance Mary Villiers-Stuart wrote a pioneering book on The Gardens of the Great M'IIghall', in part to adell ess contemporary city-planning issues in New Delhi.25 These few who cared about Mughal gat dens also cared about contemporary landscape issues. At the same time, they were servants of the empire who worked within the limits of imperial assumptions and institutions. There is lit tie evidence that they perceived the larger role of political-economic forces in the landscape problems of their times. They clearly did not have the same level of understanding as colonial scholar-administrators who focused their historical interests on Mughal political economy, then contemporary efforts on budgets and policy, and who gave little attention to garden scholars." Scholaradministrators had various ideas about the connec rions between Mughal and British rule, but although they gave some attention to the symbolic significance of architecture and urbanism, they gave virtually none to gardens." Even professional archaeologists exempted gardens from their otherwise high conservation standards." During the late Mughal period (1707-1857) there was no separate literature on gardens. Nobles and military



officers built gardens "in the Mughal style." They undertook idiosyncratic restorations of garden sites and sponsored diverse celebrations in them. Although many brief garden references appeared in administrative, historical, and biographical works, they did not attain the level of integration of garden and geographic experience found in early-sixteenth-century texts and projects GARDENS AND GEOGRAPHY IN THE EARLY MUGHAL PERIOD This historical pursuit of the designer's problem brings us back to the original question and establishes a modern and practical connection with it. The question is, how and why did a change occur in the relations between gardens and territoriality during the sixteenth century? The answer may be approached by comparing three major texts: the Bdburndma, produced in the early sixteenth century, and the Akbarnama and Ain·i Ahbari, produced toward the end of that century; they can be described, respectively, as an autobiography, an official history, and an administrative encyclopedia. Although not the only sources foi this period, they are the most impoi tant extant texts for geographic information from that time. Though none of the texts is primarily concerned with gardens or geographic inquiry, none discusses agronomic, medicinal, or financial aspects of gardens," and none achieves the scope of Islamic geographic sciences described earlier, all of them do report what was most important about garden places and geographic issues for the times.
The Bdburruima. Babur's memoirs represent an extraordinary synthesis of geographic and garden experience. The text includes topographic descriptions, set within a larger narrative account. Babur included garden information in both types of text. Because previous research has focused on its nanative passages, I will concentrate on the topographic passages 30 The Bdlnu nama includes descriptions of the four regions Babui occupied Ferghana, Samarqand, Kabul, and Hindustan. These passages follow a common format, beginning with climate, bordering countries, and rivers. After general physiogl aphic and historical notes, Babur mentions the specific places and features of each region including its gardens. In Ferghana, he praised the naturalistic gardens along the valley bottoms and alluvial fans of Aush, Asfara, and Kasan ;1] Drawing upon the territorial framework introduced earlier, these gardens shaped the territorial iden-

tity and experience of Ferghana At Samarqand, Babur produced the longest list of gardens in early Mughal literature." In addition to gal dens, he listed the meadows, districts, and former rulers of Samarqand These gardens constituted a Timurid dynastic network as well as positions of control within that landscape. The gardens of Kabul included, for the first time, Babur's own projects which built upon his observations in Samai qand and Herat and which were incorporated within a systematic description of geographic subdivisions and routes." By including facts about revenue and trade, the account of Kabul comes closest among the four passages to an administrative description of the region. Babur's account of Hindustan, by contrast, had rich visual details His references to gardens were situated among wondrous images of irrigation, fauna, fruits, and flowers. Although fascinated by the landscape of Hindustan, he described its gardens as disorderly, which set the stage for his efforts to transform that landscape in the manner of Kabul 34 These four geographical sections of the Biibur nama touch upon the full range of early Mughal tei ritorial themes - control, experience, identity, system, and order. Narrative portions of the text, by contrast, reveal how gardens were used and experienced in specific historical situations. If the geographical references show how gardens fit into the landscape, the narrative referenc es recount what those gardens did in the landscape. What the Baburruima accomplished in an integrated manner, the Ahbanuima and Aiiz-i Akbari' covered separately. The Akbarnama was a tlu ee-volume chronicle of the Mughal role from Babur's time through the foi tieth year of Akbar's 1 eign. Its third volume was entitled the Afn-i Akbari, 01 "Institutes of Akbar" It describes an enormous range of administrative and cultural topics in three volumes of its own 35 Its organization of geographical information reflects the influent e of alBiruni and other medieval geographers." Interestingly, the only references to gardens are found in the main geographical section of volume 2 which describes the twelve provinces (5ubas) of the empire Although many other chapters seem relevant to gardens (e.g., those on encampments, buildings, fruits, and flowers), none of them mention gardens The descriptions of the subas in the second volume of the Ain-i Akbmigive revenue statistics and topographic data (fig. 9), but in contrast with the Btihurnama, these geographic clata include only a few stray refer ences to gardens. Information on water, crops, and fruits was not
Ain-i Akbari




linked with gardens. No reference to gardens was made in the descriptions of Bengal, Orissa, Bihar, Allahabad, Avadh, Malwa, Berar, Ajmer, Delhi, Lahore, or Multan It is particularly surprising that the famous gardens of Lahore and Delhi were neglected. The description of Agra did refer to Babur's garden on the left bank of the Yamuna, but it did so in part to note that it was near the biographer's home! There is a bt ief mention of gardens and sandalwood at Burhanpur and a prickly-pear garden fence in Cujarat Abu'l Fazl's descriptions of Kabul and Kashmir did include references to gardens, but his description of the gardens around Kabul was largely adapted from the Biiburndma: Thus, the only new and impoi tant conjunction of Mughal garden literature and geographic thought involved Kashmir, which was conquered shortly before the completion of the Azn-i AMari. In Kashmir there was a renewal of the territorial garden theme on a large scale. The newly conquered province was likened to a "rose garden," a "garden of perpetual spring," and a regional private garden: writes Badauni, "The Emperor set out from Kabul for Kashmir, which he called his private garden. ,,37 This constituted a permanent shift in the geographic center of Mughal garden design, away from the Yamuna river corridor and back to its origins in Kabul and to its locus of futut e development in Kashmir (fig 10) The Akbarndma. Although sparse in detail, garden evidence in Akbar's authorized biography sheds additional light on the transition in Mughal garden design." Figure 10 analyzes the changing i ole of gardens during Akbar's reign. It displays six types of garden references ill the text by year and region: (1) dynastic rituals; (2) garden construction; (3) garden visits; (4) minor references; (5) garden disasters; and (6) no events The chart indicates two major periods and pattelns of garden development, separated by the administrative reforms of 1572-74, during which time almost no garden events were mentioned (the gray band). Gal den events in the fir st decade of Akbar's rule (1556(6) varied widely in substance and signific ance. At the outset of Akbar's reign, Babur was given the title, "ConquerOl of the WOlld, Abiding in Paradise"; and Humayun was called, "Guardian of the World, Whose Nest is in Paradise.,,39 Akbar's aunt Gulbadan Begum recounted an apocryphal story about Babui wanting to retire to a garden in Agra.'10Humayun was betrayed and often in flight ill gardens. These early events associated gardens with paradise, retirement, refuge, and entombment." Akbar's early actions reflected an ambivalence toward

gardens. As a young child he stayed in gardens with female relatives while his exiled father desperately sought to regain his followers and kingdom. One of his biographers wrote that "to be in a prison in the company of friends is better than to be in a garden with strangers. ,,42 Rebels often camped in gardens, and Akbar stayed in gardens while pursuing them." Some garden references involved disasters, like murders and floods." Akbar interpreted one flood as a divine message against "this business of 1 ecreation, ,,45 At the same time, he clearly enjoyed visiting gardens constructed by others, and he ordered a garden to be built after a profound spiritual experience at a hunt in the Punjab." Despite these mixed connotations, Akbar's reign began with his coronation in a garden in Punjab in 1556 - a dynastic ritual very much in keeping with early Mughal tradition." The coronation was described with elaborate horticultural metaphor and allegory. Echoes of Babur's gardens are also heard in a 1558 description of the Agra riverfront as having (harming gardens on either side." Humayuri's monumental tomb garden marked an important break in early Mughal garden design in India 49 Among other things, it initiated a shift away from active territorial construction directed from garden encampments, and toward more formal symbolic uses of gardens as emblems of territorial authority. As figure 10 indicates, tomb gardens had only occasional ritual significance; but their monumentality may still have occupied a significant place in the" consciousness of the dynasty. 50 Akbar built palace-fortresses and ceremonial centers which set ved his expanding territorial vision and drew upon architectural and artisanal influences from Rohtas, Mandu, and Gujarat." After returning from Manclu, Akbar "decreed that pleasant buildings and life-cherishing gardens should be made there [in Nagarcain near Agra]. ,,52 Gardens became refined components within large urban complexes. The second stage of garden history coincides with the expansion ot Akbar's territorial vision through the administrative reforms of the 1570's.53 These reforms laid the foundation for an elaborate system of military and territorial organization that was subsequently reported in geographic sec tions of the AZll-i Akbari This process of state formation coincided with diminished garden activity. No garden events were mentioned in six of the ten yeals bracketing the reforms. Other types of imperial patronage and geographic science displaced earlier traditions of landscape description and garden design. This shift repl esents the beginning of a return to the Timui id




tradition in which gardens were built within and around a thriving, fortified urban center 54 Several incidents indicate the tensions associated with these changes. When criticizing Akbar's order to build mileage markers decorated with antlers and other territorial features, Bada'iuni wrote, "Would that instead of these he had ordered gardens and caravanserais to be madel'l" Another official who criticized the administrative reforms was exiled to "monastic solitude in his own garden."% This emerging territorial system placed less emphasis on designing specific sites and more on administering territory. AsAbu'l Fazl put it when Akbar headed oft for Kashmir, "He does not fix his heart to one place, and gathers affluence from every quarter.t''" Events in Kashmir and the mountainous regions of northwestern India and Afghanistan defined the third and final stage of garden history in Akbar's reign Initially influenced by his visits to Babur's gardens around Kabul in the 1580's, including Babur's tomb garden, Akbar emulated his grandfather by building a few gardens of his own. But he made a decisive aclvance in Mughal garden design after conquering the beautiful province of Kashmir, his "private garden," in 1589. Subsequent Mughal nobles would build numerous gardens in Kashmir and would attempt to bring the Kashmiri garden style down to the plains with local, but never regional, success. Kashmir became and remained the center of Mughal garden design." Akbar's ambivalence toward gardens continued even in Kashmir, where the natural flora was said to rival that of the most beautiful gardens Akbar felt that these natIII al and constructed flower gardens led to self-indulgence, and despite his efforts to redirect the experience of beauty toward religious devotion, Abu'I Fazl notes that "wisdom caused him not to stay longer ,,59 In these changing relations between gardens and territoi iality in the sixteenth century, four related themes stand out: (1) Akbar's ambivalence toward Babur's garden legacy; (2) new models of design to serve an expanding imperial vision; (3) advances in geographic sciences associated with territorial administration; and (4) a geographic shift of Mughal garden culture in Kashmir. This last development reminds us that the synthesis of garden design and geographic science exemplified by the Bdburnama had not been forgotten, but had instead been displaced by a more systematic geographic and architectural program for the ernpii e, and a return to the historical association between Timurid garden design and mountain environments. Although Jahangir reintroduced the genre of landscape description, it lacked Babur's synthe-

sis of garden design and geographical inquiry in all but one region, Kashmir. THE DESIGNER'S PROBLEM RECONSIDERED Reflecting back from the late twentieth century on these events, at a time when Mughal garclen studies and modern geographic research have with few exceptions continued to diverge hom one another, and when the problems confronting both fields are formidable, what practical lessons, if any, might be drawn from these sixteenth-centuryevents? To address the types of problems found at Kamran's Baradari, Bagh-i Mian Khan, and Shalamar Garden, we need historical methods that can generate constructive solutions. We began with the current problematic and illdefined relationships between gardens, geography, and territoriality, n acing them bac k through earlier periods to the Mughal period itself, and then used conventional histoi ical-geographic methods to explain the divergence between garden design and geographic inquiry during the sixteenth century. To assess the legacy of this divergence in the contemporary landscape, the final task involves tracing its influences forward to the present to show how earlier experiments and solutions suggest useful analogies for addressing current problems Working forward involves a combination of historiography and analogy. It is a large task, the details of which lie beyond the scope of this paper; here we need only outline the connections between "then" and "now". Figures 11 and 12 depict the historiographic legacy of two texts, the Bdburndma and the Ai!n-i AMari, and depict, in rough outline, the continuing influence of these two texts upon both scholarship and social action. A comparison of the two figures helps us understand the changing relations between garden history and geographic science that have shaped the present situation After the Mughal period, lor example, the Bdburruima had little effect on garden research, conservation, documentation, interpretation, 01 design until the twentieth century when it drew enthusiastic attention from garden specialists, precisely for the prominen t role it gave to gardens. There had been continuing work on the text of the Bdburruima, from its translation into Persian in 1595 to additions by the fourth Mughal emperor Jahangir, copies of the manuscript, and English translations by William Erskine, Annette Beveridge, and most recently Wheeler Thackston. This continuing interest in the text of the Bdlncrnama is paralleled by a legacy of garden design traceable from Babur's early prose and projects to



later MughaJ gardens, Sikh gardens, colonial gardens, and modern parks. During the 1980's and 1990's design returned to this tradition, notably in Kamal Khan Mumtaz's design for the Doon School near Lahore, Elizabeth Moynihan's garden at the Jai Mahal Hotel atJaipur, and Ravi Bahrr's design for the Mughal Sheraton at Agra. But by focusing on these early gardens, and on the Bdburnama, modern garden scholars have confined themselves to a limited perspective on the larger political-economic and geographic contexts of gardens. The Bdburruima represents only a brief pel iod preceding the formation of the Mughal state. Subsequent events in the Mughal period shed considerable light upon the historical use, design, neglect, and renovation of gardens Garden scholars can obtain a broader perspec rive on the changing context of garden design by studying the legacy of the Ain-i AMari Notwithstanding the cultural riches of that text, its political and economic sections have received the greatest attention from scholar-administrators in subsequent periods. Figure 12 indicates its chains of influence in I esear chon political economy, cartogi aphy, and regional studies; the latter two fields are largely appurtenant to the former. In contrast with the largely scholarly interest in the Biiburndma, Governor-General Warren Hastings commissioned the first full English translation of the "Ayeen Akbery" by Francis Gladwin in 1783, in part to counter the rising influence of his rivals, English utilitarians like James Mill, on East India Company policies. Subsequent translations byJarrett, Blockmann, and Sarkar supported further economic and institutional analysis by Moreland in the late nineteenth century, and more critic al reinterpretations of Mughal political economy in recent decades by Irfan Habib, Stephen Blake, and Shireen Moosvi." The Ain-i Akbari also influenced cartography and topographic description, for it was the most important source for early-modern European cartography of India. Although the resulting maps occasionally included a garden feature or toponym, such as the indication of "Shalamar" near Delhi on the d'Anville map of 1752 and "Chah la Mar" on Bernier's map of "Cashmere," they gave detailed attention to revenue districts, routes, and settlements." Gentil's atlas of the Mughal Empire in 1770 marked the transition between attempts to apply the Ain-i Ahbari for practical purposes and mapping for historical geographic analysis by H.M. Elliot, John Beames, and more recently Irfan Habib.fi2 These cartographic efforts were linked with regional gazetteers and archaeological surveys that had a prosaic administrative character, like Abu'l Fazl's descriptions of

the twelve subas, hut they fall far short of the full cultural geographic scope of the Aln-i Akbari and the early European descriptions of Roe, Bernier, and de Laet. Recently, several attempts have been made to integrate administrative and landscape approaches within a regional context 63 These regional and art historical studies indicate that gardens for the elite played an important role in selected towns, natural areas, and routes; they were neither ubiquitous in areas of Mughal control, nor were they entirely absent from peripheral areas. They also underscore the need for basic field research at the metropolitan and regionallevel to understand the significance of gardens (vernacular as well as elite) within regional landscapes. These divergent legacies of the Bdburndma and iIin-i Akbari go part way toward explaining why garden specialists have had little impact on their administrative colleagues, and vice versa. Art historians, geographers, and historians have begun to bridge this gap, but "the designer's problem" requires something more than historical geogwphy and historiography. It requires a scientific use of analogies: not casual analogies that harken back to the good or bad old days and gardens of the Mughals; not analogies that seek to justify or replicate historic garden forms; not analogies that search foi historical precedents or exact correspondence between past and present situations; not analogies that encourage some designers to follow Babur out onto the frontier, linking new gardens with new conquests and aggressive patronage; or to follow Akbar, seeking more insulated opportunities to i efine their craft, awayfrom the turbulent frontier, in cultivated localities, with limited concern for the territorial and economic pi ocesses upon which they depend Instead, historicist approaches to problems at places like the Bagh-i Mian Khan, Kamran's Baradari, and Shalarnar Garden require a science of analogy that draws upon historical geography, historiography, and the imagination to generate solutions to acute problems surrounding Mughal gardens and their neighborhoods - problems of public access and private use; cultural identity and conflict; environmental health and degradation; and changing conservation norms and practices Such analogies are already implicit, but they should be made explicit in efforts to coordinate cultural heritage conservation, urban development, and environmental management. These are the live problems associated with Mughal gardens that the geographic sciences might address and to which we all might contribute.
University oj Colorado Boulder, Colorado


JAMES L. WESCOAT,JR. 7 8. James L Wescoat,Jr, "Water works and Culture in Metropolitan Lahoi e," A sian Al t and Culture (in press) Symposium on Mughal gal dens sponsor ed by Dumharton Oaks and the Arthur 1\1 Sackler Gallery, May 14,-15, 1992. The question was put by Professor Rober t Riley of the University of Illinois who fur ther stated that "we need to get beyond myths and errors for design students." For a full aCCOUlJtof the syiuposium, see Mughal Gardens: Sources, Representaiions, Places, Prospects, ed. James L. Wescoat, [r , and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn (Washington, D.C: Dumbarton Oaks, 1996) James L Wescoat, jr , "Toward a Map of Mnghal Lahore: A Survey of Cartographi« Sources from 1590 to 1990," Environmental Design, 1993, no 1, pp. 186-93 Saifur Rahman Dar, Some Ancient Gardens of Laham, 2nd ed (Lahore: Newflne Printing Press, 1989), p.19 Ibid, p. 9;James L. Wescoat, [i , Michael Brand, and M Nacem Mir, "The Shahdara Gardens of Lahore: Site Documentation and Spatial Analysis," Pakistan Archaeology 25 (1993): 3:13-66 M Rafique Mughal, "Theory and Practice in Carden Conservation," paper presented at the International Symposium on Mughal Gardens, Lahore, November 5-19,1993 (forthcoming publication; copy with author); Gilmore Hankey Kii ke, Conservation oj the Cultural Heritage in Paki stan, Policy and Practice in the Walled City of Lahore; 2 vols (Washington, DC: World Bank, 1993); and James L Wescoat, Jr, and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmaim, "The Mughal Gardens of Lahore: Histoi y, Geography and Conservation Issues," Die Gartenhunst ii (1994): 19-33 James L. Wescoat, Jr., "Gardens, Urbanization, and Ui hanism in Mughal Lahore, 1531-1657," in Mughal Gardens: Sources Places, Representations, Prospects; cd James L Wescoat, JI , and Joachim Wolschke-Bnlmahn (Washington, D.C : Dumbai ton Oaks, 1996), pp 139-69; and idem, "The Ceogi aphical Mean" ing of Shalarnai Garden," in Shalomar Garden: Landscape, Form, and Meaning, ed Sajjad Kausar, Michael Brand, and james L Wescoat, Jr (Karachi: Pakistan Department of Archaeology and Museums, 1990), pp. 45-58 These gardeners ale paid as common laborers, which is significantly less than the wages for trained malis working for private households None of the current sraff is descended from a mali family Interviews at Shalamai Carden, October 19~H The concept of "live" issues and decisions is discussed in William James, The Will to Believe and Other Essays in Popular PhilosoPhy (1897; rpt , New YOlk: Dovel, 1956), pp 2-3 John Richards, The Mugha! Empire, New Cambridge History of India, vol 1, 5 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Pless, 1993) Joseph E. Schwartzberg, ed , fin Historical At/a, of South Asia, 2nd ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), contains much more detailed plates on Mughal administration than on cultural sites This gap was widened in Irfan Habib's lin Atlas of the Mug/zal Empiro: Political and Economic Maps with Detailed Notes, Bibliography and Index (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1986), which has no cultural plates Sanjay Subramanyam, "The Mughal State - Sn ucrure 01 PIOcess? Reflections on Recent Wesrern HistoIiography," Indian Economic and Social Histoi y Review 29 (1992): 291-321. Christophel A Bayly, "Knowing the Counu y: Empire and Information in India," Modern Asian Studies 27 (1993): 28 Ibid, P 43 See also M Z Siddiqui, "The Intelligence Sei vices under the Mughals," Medieval India, A Miscellany 2 (1972): 51-60.

Author's note: I would like to thank the Smithsonian Institution For" eign Current. y Program, the Arthur M Sacklcr Gallery, and Dum" barton Oaks for providing fellowship and financial support for this research over the years I have benefited enormously fi om collaborative woi k with the University of Engineering and Technology at Lahoi e and the Pakistan Department of Archaeology My col" leagues Milo Beach, Michael Brand, and Atlilio Pen uccioli have been gencrous with their ideas and encouragement Catherine BAsher, "Babin and the Timurid Chat Baglt," Enuironmental Desion; nos. I am! 2, pp 46-55; Elizabeth B Moynihan, "The Lotus Garden Palace of Zahir al-Din Muhammad Babur," Muqainas 5 (1988): 134-52; James 1. Wescoat, Jr., "Early Water Systems ill Mughal India," Enuironmental Design 1985, no 2, pp 50-57; idem, "Picturing an Early Mughal Garden," fisianA1t2 (1989): 59-·79 2 On the relations between imperial and sub-imperial patronage, see Catherine B Asher, Architecture of l'viughat India, New Cambridge History of India, vol 1,4 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Pless, 1992) For a macroregional perspective, see Stephen Blake, "The Hierarchy of Central Places in North India during the Mughal Period ofIndian History," South Asia 6 (1983): 1-32 Tet ritoi ial issues in architecture and garden design are treated by various scholars in Michael Brand and Glenn D Lowry, eds , Fathepu: Sihri (Bombay: Marg Publications, 1987) ;James L Wescoat,Jr, "Gardens of Invention and Exile: The Precarious Context of Mughal Garden Design during the Reign of Humayun (1530-1556)," Jou,HUlI oj Garden History 10 (\990): 1Ofi-16; idem, "Gardens of Conquest and Transformation: Lessons fi om the Earliest Mughal Gardens in India," Landscape [oumal 10 (1991): 105-1'1; idem, "Ritual Movement and Territoriality: A Study of Landscape Transformation dming the Reign of Humavun," Enoironmental Design 1991, nos. 1-2, pp. 56-63 3 Robert D Sack, Human Teiriuniality: Its Theoi» and History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), P 19. 4 For broad surveys of these massive literatures, see S Maq bul Ahmed, "Djugln afiya," Encyclopaedia oj Islam, 2nd ed., 2: 575-87; J Bi ian Harley and David Woodward, eds , The History ofCmtogmphy, vol. 2, bk 1, Cmtogwphy in the Traditional Islamic and South Asian Societies (Chicago: Universi ty of Chicago Press, 1992); Dale F Eickelman and James Piscarori, eds , Muslim Travellers Pilgdmage, Migration and the Religious Imagination (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990) 5 Balon Charles von I-Iugel, Travels in Kashmir and the Punjab, cd and trans TB jervis (1845; rpt, Lahore: Qausain, 1976), p.l.56 6 This type of argument has been criticized in other contexts as subject to the pitfalls of "present-rnindedness" and "historicism " Douglas Streusand has perhaps gone furthest down this road, characterizing model n historians after Mughal period variously as "Hindu communalist," "Muslim communalist," "secular political economists," and so on This classification performs poorly in some cases and neglects the necessai y relations between historians and their times (Duuglas E Streusand, The Formaiicn of the MughalEmjJire [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989]) I acknowledge the pitfalls of "presentism," i e., misinterpretation and misrepresentation, but regard them as more than offset by the value of constructive inquiry on contemporary landscape problems


10 11








19 20.

MUGHAL GARDENS AND GEOGRAPHIC the argument that European interest ill gardens diminished during the "Age of Exploration" and growth of natural history, see Barbara Stafford, journey into Substance (Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1984) 22 James L Wescoat,]r, and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn, "A Perspective of Mugbal Gardens," in Mughal Gardens Sources, Representations, Place I; Prospects (Washington, DC: Dumbai ton Oaks, 1996), pp 5-29 23 H.H Cole, First Report of the Curator of Ancient Monuments in India, fo> the Year 1881-82 (Simla: Covernment Central Branch Press, 1882) For the argument that architectural plans worked against the conservation of traditional building crafts, see G H R Tillotson, The Indian Tradition (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1989), pp 99-100 24 E B Havell, "Indian Gardens," House and Gardens 6 (1904): 213-20 25 Constance Mary Villicrs-Stuart, Gardens oj the Great Mughals (London: A & C Black, 1913). 26. The distinguished scholar-administrator Richard Temple offered condescending praise to Villier-Stuart in a book 1eview in Indian Antiquary 43 (1913): 48. 27. Though the role of colonial gardens deserves far moi e attention, see Ian Ken, "The Agri-HonicuJtural Society of the Punjab, 1851-71," in Punjab Past and Present, Essays in Honour of In: Ganda Singh, cd H Singh and N Gerald Barrier (Patiala: Punjab University, 1976) 28 John Marshall, Conservation Manual: A Handbook tm the Use oj Archaeological Officers and Others Entrusted with the Care oj ,incient Monuments (Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing, 1923) 29 Cf Karl Butzer, "The Islamic Traditions of Agroecology: Crosscultural Experience, Ideas, and Innovations," A Journal of En vironment, Culture, Meaning1 (1994): 7-50 30 The text used in Zahlr al-Din Muhammad Babur, Bdbur-Ndma, n ans, Annette S Beveridge (rpt Lahore: Sang-e-Mecl Publications, 1987) Analyses of the Bdburruima narrative include Howard Crane, "The Patronage ofZahir al-Din BabUI and the Origins of Mughal Architecture," Bulletin of the Asia Institute 1 (1987): 95-110; James L Wescoat,]r, "Gardens vs Citadels: The Territot ial Context of Early Mughal Gardens," in Garden Hist01Y: Issues, Approaches, Methods, ed John Dixon Hunt (Washington, DC: Dnmbarton Oaks, 1992) pp 331-58; and idem, "Gardens of Conquest and Transformation: Lessons hom the Eai liest Mughal Gardens in India," Larulscapefoumai 10 (1991): 105-14. 31 Btihur-ruima. pp 1--12 32 Ibid, pp 71-86 33 Ibid, pp 199-227. 34. Ibid, pp 478--521,532. Elizabeth B. Moynihan argues persuasively (in Wescoat and Wolschke-Bulmalm, eds , Mughn! Gardens, J996) that Babui 's criticisms ofIndia were outweighed by his favorable observations His criticisms should perhaps be viewed partly as a rhetorical device to indicate how he would view his own conu ibution to the landscape 35 The text used is Abu'l Fazl ibn (Allami, Avn-i Ahbari, 3 vols.; vol 1, trans H Blochrnann, 2nd ed, revised by DC. Phillot; vols 2 and 3 by H S Jarrell and lev by] N. Sarkar (1948-49; rpt., Lahore: Low Price Publications, 1989) 36 Abu Raihan al-Biruni, Alberuni': India, trans. E Sachau, 2 vols (rpt, Lahore: Sheikh MubarakAli, 1962) 37 'Abd al-Qadii Bada'l1111, Muruakhab al-Tauarikh: vol. 2, ed.,





39 ,10 41

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49.






55 56

M A CAlI, trans W.H Lowe (rpt , Delhi: Idarah-i Adabiyat-i Delli, 1972), P 381,398 Cf Babur's note that Timur described the inigated Zarafshan valley as his own private garden, Baburruima, p.84 The text used here is Ahu'I Fa~1 ibn cAllami, Akbunuima, 3 vols , Persian text ed. H. Blochmann, trans Henry Beveridge (1902-39; ipt , Lahore: Book Traders, n d). Culbadan Begam, Husnayun-Niima, trans Annette S Beveridge (Lahore: Sang-e-Meel, 1987), P 83. Ibid., P 108 James L Wescoat, Jr, "Gardens of Invention and Exile: The Precarious Context of Mughal Carden Design during the Reign of Humayun," [ournul of Garden History 10 (1990): 106-16 Munutkhal) al-Tavii,ikh, 2: 191 Akbamiima, 2: 416 In two incidents, Shaham Beg and Baiiarn Khan were murder ed in gardens, Ahbarndma, 2: 128, 201. Ahbamdma, 2: 579 Badafini, Muntahhal: al-Taudrihh, 2: 260-61. Ahbtnruima, 2: 4; Bada)f1111, Mnntahhab al-Taiuirihh, 2: 8. Akbtnruima, 2: 118; though Abu'l Fazl compared Agra with Baghdad rather than Kabul Michael Brand, "Orthodoxy, Innovation, and Revival: Considerations of the Past in Imperial Mughal Tomb Architecture," Muqarnas 10 (1993): 323-34; and Glenn D Lowry, "The Tomb of Nasir ud-Din Muhammad Hurnayun," Ph D dissertation, Harvard University, 1982, and idem, "Humayuu's Tomb: Form, Function and Meaning in Early Mughal Architecture," Muqarnas A (1987): 133-48 On the relations between imperial travel and landscape experience, see Ebba Koch, "The Delhi of the Mughals prior to Shahjahanabad as reflected in the Pauei ns of Imperial Visits," in Felicitation Volume in Honour of Professor S Niuul Hasan Art and Culture, eds. AJ Qaisar and S P Verma (Jaipur: Publication Scheme, 1993), pp 3-20; Charles Melville, "The Itineraries of Sultan Oljeitu, 1304-16," 11Cln 28 (1990): 55-70; Bernard O'Kane, "From Tents to Pavilions: Royal Mobility and Persian Palace Design," Ars Orienialis 23 (1993): 249-68;]ames L. Wescoat, .Ir, "Gardens of Conquest and Transformation"; and idem, "Ritual Movement and Terrirorialiry" Ahbas ruima, 2: 187-88, 365-66 Ebba Koch discusses Gujarati influence in MughalArchitecture: An Outline of Its History and Development (Munich: Pres tel Verlag, 1991), and Wescoat the influence on garden design in "Gardens of Invention and Exile," pp 109-10 Ahbanuima, 2: 357-58 Cf article by Michael Brand, "Mughal Ritual in Pre-Mughal Cities: The Case of Jahangir at Mandu," Environmental Design 1991, no 1, pp 8-17 Stephen Blake, "The Patrirnonial-Bur eaucratic Empire of the Mughals," Tournai oj Asian Studies 39 (1979): 77-94; I H Qureshi, The Administration of the Ivlughal Empire (Karachi: Uuiveisitv of Karachi, 19(6); and Srr eusand, The Formation of the Mughal Empire, passim Asher, Aichuecture of Mughal India, p 98; Wescoat, "Garden vs Citadel," P 340-48 This idea is also discussed in recent work on Fatehpur Sikri, including Artilio Peu uccioli, Fathfmr Sikri La Ciua del sole e delle acquae (Rome: Carucci Editore, 1988); and Brand and LOWIy, Fatehpu» Sikri Bada)fI111, Muntakhab al-Taoarikh, 2: 176 Ibid, 2: 218

57 58

JAMES L. WESCOAT, Akbamama; 3: S17 Attilio Pctruccioli, "Il Giardini Moghul del Kashmir," in Il Giardino Islamico: Architettura; Natura, Paesaggio, ed Attilio Pen uccioli (Milan: Electa, 1994), pp 249-66. Ahbarndma, 3: S35. Stephen Blake, "The Hierarchy of Central Places in North India"; It fan Habib, The Agrarian System oj J'vlughal India (1556·· 1707) (New York: Asia Publishing House, 1963); and Shireen Moosvi, The Economy oj the Mughal Empire, ( 1595. A Statistical Study (Delhi: Oxford University Press) See Susan Gole, India within the Ganges (New Delhi:Jayaprints, 1983); and idem, MatH of Mughal India, Draum by Colonel [canBaptiste-Iosepii Gentil, Agent /01 the French Gouernment to the Court Shuja-ud-Doula at Faizabad, in 1770 (New Delhi: Manohar Publications, 1985) The first detailed mapping was undertaken by John Bearnes, "On the Geography of India in the Reign of Akbar, Part 1, Subah Awadh," [ournal oj the Asiatic Societ» of Bengal 53 (IS84):


59 60





215-32; idem, "On the Geography of India in the Reign 01 Akbar, Pal t 2, Subah Bihar," Journal of the Asiatic Society oj Bengal 54 (ISS5): 162-82; and idem, "Notes on Akbar's Subahs with Reference to the Ain-! Akbari: Bengal and Orissa," [ournal oj the Asiatic Society of Bengal 65 (1896): 83-136, 743-65 The expansian and fruition of this project occurs in Habib's Atlas af the Mughal Empire See also lrfan Habib, "Cartography ill Mughal India," Medieval India: A Mil'cellany 4 (1977): 122-34 Chetan Singh, Region and Empire: Panjab in the Seuenteenth. Cen· tury (Delhi: Oxford University Press); and idem, "Centre and Periphery in the Mughal State: The Case of Seventeenth Century Panjab," Modern. Asian Studies 22 (1988): 299 .. 31S Abdul Rehman and James 1. Wescoat, [r , Pivot oj the Punjab: The Historical Geography of Medieval Gujuu (Lahore: Dost Publishers, 1993); Asher, The Architecture of Mughal India; and Subhash Parihar, Mughal Monuments in Punjab and Haryana (Delhi: Inter-India Publications, 1985)



II lnufoate s succ of eanur such liS (lu,dans, pools Q c conetrucuon and walls projects 100noj


Fig 1 Babur's conquest and garden projects in India, 1526-30

Fig 2 Dholpui

Bagh-i Nilufer



Legend • Imperial Capitals Provincial Capitals



Boundaries approximate and variable

Univ of Calamdo cen l"b


Han~on Robb 10/93

Fig 3. Provinces of the Mughal Empire around 1600





LEGEND • Extant Garden o Alleged Garden Roads 2 km

Fig 4 Lahore

Extant Mughal gal dens




Fig 5 Lahore

Bagh-i Mian Khan. 1993.

Fig G Lahore


Bai adari before reconstruction




Fig 7 Lahore



dui iug reconstruction


1. Climate (iqlim) 2. Length and Breadth 3. Boundaries 4. Rivers [& Routes] 5. Weather [& Soils] 6. Crops, Fruits [& Flowers] 7. _§~lect.~1_ law;_~nd Cll.:s_t()!l~S * P 8. List of Sarkars, Mahals, and Revenues 9. [Chronology of Local Rulers]


** -- Main Focus
Fig 9. Geographic

* -- Occasional References to Gardens
of Modem Research

.- Not included for all Subas


of subas in the Ain-i Akbar!

Fig 8 Lahore


Gal den



Kashmir Kabul Punjab Gujarat& Rajasthan Agra & Ajmir Delhi Awadh No Events III

o No Events

III Garden Disasters
Fig 10 Garden events in the Ahbarruima


Minor Reference Garden Visits

III Garden Construction III Dynastic Rituals

TIME 2000 1950 1900 1850 1800 1750 1700 1650 1600 1550 1500













I ~iIf,1~I~I~s












Fig 11 Garden legacy of the Bdburndma

TUne PoliticalEconomy



Cartography! Topography

Regional! Cultural

2000 1950 1900 1850 1800 1750 1700 1650 1600 1550 l500






Fig 12. Carden legacy of the



Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful