Page:History of Indian and Eastern Architecture Vol 2.djvu/207

 CHAP. V. CENOTAPHS, 167 that gloom or solemnity which characterise the contemporary tombs of the Moslims, but, in doing this, to have erred in the other direction. The base here is certainly not sufficiently solid for the mass it has to support ; but the whole is so elegant, and the effect so pleasing, that it seems hypercritical to find fault with it, and difficult to find, even among Muhammadan tombs, anything more beautiful. He it was, apparently, who erected the cenotaph to the memory of his predecessor Amara Singh II. (1699-1711). In style it is very similar to that last described, except that it possesses only thirty-two columns instead of fifty-six. It has, however, the same lofty stylobate, which adds so much to the effect of these tombs, but has also the same defect that the dome is raised on eight dwarf pillars, which do not seem sufficient for the purpose. 1 Woodcut No. 357 represents a cenotaph in this cemetery with only twelve columns, which, mutatis mutandis^ is identical with the celebrated tomb at Mylassa. 2 The lofty stylobate, the twelve columns, the octagonal dome, and the general mode of construction are the same ; but the twelve or thirteen centuries that have elapsed between the construction of the two, and the difference of locality, have so altered the details that the like- ness is not at first sight easily recognisible. From the form of its dome it is evidently more modern than that last described ; it may, indeed, have been erected within the limits of the last century. To the right of the same woodcut is another cenotaph with only eight pillars, but the effect is so weak and unpleasing that it is hardly to be wondered at that the arrangement is so rare. The angle columns seem indispensable to give the design that accentuation and firmness which are indispensable in all good architecture. These last two illustrations, it will be observed, are practi- cally in the Jaina style of architecture ; for, though adopting a Muhammadan form, the Ranas of Udaypur clung to the style of architecture which their ancestors had practised, and which under Kumbha Rana had only recently become so famous. This gives them a look of greater antiquity than they are entitled to, for Udaypur was not the capital of the kingdom before the sack of Chitor in 1568 ; and nearly equally so that the Hindus never thought of this mode of commemorating their dead till the tolerant reign of Akbar. He did more than all that had been done before or since to fuse together the anta- 1 A view of this cenotaph is given in my ' Picturesque Illustrations of Ancient Architecture in Hindostan,' plate 14. 2 ' History of Ancient and Medieval Architecture,' 3rd ed. vol. i. Woodcut No. 242.