The Question of Mughal Urban Planning
The study of urban planning during the Mughal period in India has perhaps yet to receive adequate attention, with most works remaining confined to descriptions of urban centres as sites of commercial activity rather than developing a coherent theory of planning. However, the reigns of Emperor Akbar (1556-1605) and his grandson Shah Jahan (1628-1658) represent particularly fertile periods for such an inquiry, for it was during their rule that three distinct models of imperial urbanism emerged. As Javed Hasan has noted, almost all the major urban centres of historical importance in northern India received their basic imprint in this period. Yet, apart from Fathpur Sikri and Shahjahanabad, it is generally held that no other Mughal town was planned. In this paper, an attempt is being made to describe the broad outlines of Mughal town planning through a study of Agra, Fathpur Sikri, and Shahjahanabad, utilizing plans, poetical descriptions, archaeological surveys, and the identification of masons’ marks to demonstrate that Mughal urbanism was far more sophisticated and deliberate than has often been acknowledged.
Pre-Mughal Traditions and the Mughal Departure
To understand the innovation of Mughal planning, one must first appreciate the traditions it overturned. Students of history and architecture have put forward three major models of pre-modern town planning: the European, the Islamic, and the Hindu. The authors of the Shilpa-sastra categorized town models on the basis of their physical pattern into circular, crescent or half-moon, cross, square, and rectangular types. In each of these pre-Mughal models, the citadel along with the public buildings and the main place of worship was placed at the centre, with roads from all sides leading to them. The full city concentrated its attention on the citadel which was the seat of power, with fortifications surrounding it. There was no other distinguishing or monumental form, the rest of the city being left unfortified and defenceless. In pre-Mughal towns, the city of the inhabitants grew fairly freely, although following by and large the logic of caste or professional hierarchy. The priestly and warrior classes, being closer to the seat of power, were usually placed in areas close to the citadel, while the menial and labouring classes were relegated to the very periphery of the town. Secondly, and most critically for the case of Agra, when a city was to be built on a river bank, it was always to be on the right bank, for amongst the pre-medieval Indians there was a deep-rooted belief that it was an ill-omen to build a city on the left bank of the river.
The Mughal town, on the other hand, appears to have a strong centralizing basis that departed from these traditions. Its colossal hydraulic works for irrigation, the efficient well-planned roads, streets and by-lanes, and the presence of a large number of monumental gardens all point to the desire of the Mughal architects to redesign the urban landscape. Two major sources appear to have informed this new urban design. The first was the Mughal encampment procedure. Discussing a typical Mughal camp, Abul Fazl writes that the imperial quarters were pitched at the centre, with the tents of royal ladies and princes placed at specific distances to the right and left, the karkhanas behind them, and the bazaars at the four corners of the camp. The nobles were encamped on all sides, according to their rank, outside the complex reserved for imperial use. By and large, the plan of a Mughal town was laid down accordingly, with the fort or citadel at the centre, surrounded by the mansions of nobles, and beyond them, the markets and commercial areas.
The second source for Mughal urban design was the chahārbāgh garden with its centripetal symmetry. The axes, joints and modules of a chahārbāgh were turned architecturally, from time to time, into pavilions, platforms, waterfalls, pools, caravanserais, and symmetrical streets. The grids and proportions of a garden were enlarged into the planning of a Mughal town. Like in a chahārbāgh, the town was divided into various distinct divisions revolving around a localized central structure on the one hand and aligned symmetrically with the actual centre on the other. This garden-inspired geometry, combined with the hierarchical logic of the imperial encampment, formed the dual foundation of Mughal urbanism.
Agra: The Riverfront Garden City
Agra, apart from being an administrative centre, was a major commercial centre as well. Though the antiquity of this town is shrouded in mystery, we know that Sikandar Lodi (1489-1517) was the first Muslim ruler who gave it the status of a military headquarters. Subsequently, under Akbar, it was turned into the capital city. Agra apparently developed during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries into a thriving metropolis. However, it was Babur who set the agenda for the development of Agra. The Baburnama is full of references to the Emperor lamenting the existing landscape and his attempts to mould it. It was the desire to reshape the landscape and iron out the chaos on the one hand, coupled with the inherent ancient taboo not to build on the left bank of the river, which led Babur and his successors to get away from the noise and confusion of old Agra and build an uninterrupted sequence of gardens on the free left bank of the Yamuna, which was linked with the city both by boat and by land.
An old plan of Agra dating back to the 1720s, preserved at the Jaipur Palace Museum, depicts around sixteen gardens situated on the left bank of the river. Some of the famous gardens on this side were Aram Bagh (originally Bagh-i Nur Afshan, now known as Ram Bagh), Zohra Bagh, Moti Bagh, Baland Bagh, and Mahtab Bagh. The famous Mahtab Bagh is depicted along with other gardens on the left bank, just opposite the Taj Mahal, where Babur is alleged to have built an astronomical observatory. The right bank of the river was also provided with a long chain of gardens, tombs, and havelis of the nobles of the empire. The plan depicts gardens located between the Taj and the Fort, including an extensive garden with a waterside building of red sandstone known as Bagh Khan-i Alam, and another garden nearby called Tatiyar ka Baghicha, which according to Fuhrer is also known as the Garden of Mahabat Khan.
A glance at the plan goes to prove the assertion of the Dutch traveller Pelsaert that “the breadth of the city is by no means so great as the length, because every one has tried to be close to the river bank, and consequently the water front is occupied by the costly palaces of all the famous lords, which make it appear gay and magnificent, and extend for a distance of 6 hos or 3.5 Holland miles.” Among some of the palaces mentioned by Pelsaert which were situated on the river bank were those of Bahadur Khan, Ibrahim Khan, Rustam Gandhi, Itiqad Khan, Wazir Khan, and Baqar Khan, apart from the quarters of some of the princesses of royal blood. The plan under discussion too depicts around nineteen such havelis, some of which are identified as those belonging to Agha Khan, Khan-i Dauran, Asalat Khan, Mahabat Khan, Hasdan Khan, Azam Khan, Mughal Khan, and Yamtan Khan Rumi. A set of at least eight radial roads can be discerned which converge from all directions towards the main gate of the fort. The city was surrounded by a bed-sandstone and rubble wall which had eight main gates apart from around twenty-five smaller gateways. Towards the west is located the Chaharsuq Darwaza through which the road passed straight towards the fort. This road was lined by a huge market linked with shops on both sides, and beyond it lay the main square of the city known as the Bara or Badshahi Chowk.
An eighteenth-century ghazal from Rajasthan, translated into Hindi by Dr. B.L. Bhadani, provides a vivid description of Agra’s commercial landscape. According to the ghazal, there was a big market in this Chowk where all kinds of goods were available. Provisions like diamonds, semi-precious stones, cloths, and swords were sold here. This market also had a number of shops owned by banya merchants dealing with sweetmeats and other goods. Hawkers too frequented this market. Beyond this was located a Tripolia which again had a variety of shops frequented by a large number of merchants. Nearby was yet another market selling paper, adjacent to which were the grain-market and the cloth-market. To its north was situated yet another market inhabited by sweetmeat sellers, who had their houses in the nearby locality. Adjoining this locality was located the Muhalla Roshan where Jain merchants were residing, and nearby was another locality inhabited by Hindus.
Beyond the lane of the sweetmeat sellers was situated the Jauhari Bazar where precious stones were sold. Adjacent to this pearl market were the innumerable houses of big merchants, and it was here that the Imperial Mint was situated. Beyond the Imperial mint but within the second wall of the town were Hing-ki Mandi and Munga Bazar. The ghazal also mentions Nai-ki Mandi along with a very good market known as Gari-i Siyah, beyond which was the so-called garden of Jodhbai, where all kinds of vegetables were sold. On the other side of the Chaharsuq Bazar and the Badshahi Chowk were the markets selling utensils and dairy products. Towards this side were the houses of cloth merchants and the mansions of nobles. Other localities mentioned are Chhipi para (now known as Chhipitola), Hazrat Mandi, Chirimartola (the locality of bird catchers), Namak-ki Mandi, Loha Mandi, Perfume Market, and Chohatta Bazar. The ghazal also mentions certain gardens like Motibagh and Achanak Bagh which were situated opposite the Itimadud Daulah’s tomb on the left bank of the river.
A survey of Agra town shows that apart from these markets mentioned in the ghazal, there were a large number of wholesale markets in the Tajganj area as well. In the English Factory Records we have constant references to the cotton textile procured by the English and other Europeans at Tajganj. The mercantile area of Tajganj, or Muntazabad as it is known in the Persian sources, had a very large ferry and consequently a number of serais and warehouses. From the above discussion, it would be apparent that the town of Agra, like any other Mughal city, was a well-laid-out township with separate localities for various professions. The citadel, or the Fort, like in a Mughal encampment, was surrounded all around with beautiful gardens and well-laid-out mansions of the noble class. Beyond the residential structures and gardens were the localities of the mercantile classes and the markets. The commercial area, along with the central mosque and the citadel, was protected by fortifications. The lesser-important classes of the merchants and the civilian population too were surrounded and protected by an all-encompassing city wall. Most of the important roads led to the centrally located administrative centre, and most of them were lined with shops or residences of various kinds of people. The left bank of the river was sparsely populated and lined with pretty gardens and tombs of the nobles. The very planning and development of the city of Agra reflects a conscious attempt by the powers that be to protect the commercial importance of the town and an endeavour to bring order into the visual chaos.
Fathpur Sikri: The Encampment City and Its Autonomy
While Agra represented the transformation of an existing settlement into a riverfront imperial capital, Akbar’s most ambitious urban project was the construction of an entirely new city at Fathpur Sikri. Founded in 1571 and serving as the capital until 1585, Fathpur Sikri embodied a different set of planning principles. The city was built on a ridge, not along a river, and its layout drew inspiration not from the waterfront but from the Mughal encampment and the chahārbāgh. However, a closer look at the remains and a reading of the text points to a city that did not develop at one point of time, nor does it appear to have followed a single plan. Fathpur Sikri emerged gradually over a period of years, and as a survey of the site reveals, many changes were wrought in the original plan, if any existed at all.
The initial order to build the shahr was given in 1571, when a compulsory decree was issued that nobody should obstruct anyone who wanted to build a house within the said circuit. In anticipation of a large number of people settling in the new city, the emperor in 1576-77 further decreed that five shops of red stone should be constructed from the royal court to the Agra gate, and close to the darbar a chaharsuq comprising well-decorated shops was built. A Tripoliya, or three-arched structure, of red stone was built towards the bazaar. Arif Qandhari also mentions the order for the building of mosques, baths, and caravanserais in the city, all erected to fulfil the needs of the common people and the commercial classes.
The Jami’ Masjid at Fathpur Sikri was explicitly a public edifice built with an eye to the future citizens. Regarding its construction, Qandhari writes that its court was raised on steps, and subterranean reservoirs were covered and made level with the surface of the courtyard. In some places they were latticed so that whenever it rained, the water collected in the courtyard poured through those lattices into the subterranean tanks. Thus the general public had its need for water fulfilled. My survey of Fathpur Sikri revealed five Akbari markets and at least four serais catering to visiting merchants. Even after Fathpur Sikri ceased to be an imperial town, it continued to flourish as an important commercial centre. In 1581, Hakim Abul Fath Gilani mentions that commerce was better pursued at Fathpur when the town was still the capital. Then in the second decade of the seventeenth century, after twenty-five years of its abandonment as the capital, it had turned into a centre of indigo plantation attracting foreign merchants. Pelsaert mentions the manufacture of carpets that could be woven fine or coarse as required.
This economic resilience is crucial for understanding the difference between Agra and Fathpur Sikri. Agra’s economy, while robust, was intimately tied to the presence of the imperial court and the nobility who maintained riverfront gardens. Fathpur Sikri, by contrast, possessed a remarkable economic autonomy, continuing to flourish long after the court had departed for Lahore. When we examine the actual layout of the two cities, the relationship between palace and noble housing was one of difference rather than emulation. In a typical noble’s mansion at Fathpur Sikri, the entry was through a main gate which opened into a courtyard or a deorhi with sharp bends, frustrating any attempt to peep into the house. This courtyard formed the mardankhana, and through an interconnecting passage one could enter a second courtyard serving as the zanankhana. The plans of the emperor’s mansion and the noble’s mansions were different in utility perception and concept of space, and when one compares a common man’s house with a noble’s mansion, Blake’s thesis of unidirectional copying is not found even remotely substantiated. Furthermore, the noble’s mansions at Fathpur Sikri were mostly confined to one region, namely the top of the north-eastern ridge, arguing against the thesis that they created satellite growth equating to districts and provinces. The imperial city catered to the needs of the nobility, but this would be true for any city. Fathpur Sikri was founded at a junction on the important Agra-Rajasthan-Gujarat route; fancy or reverence for a saintly presence was only a secondary factor. The town continued to flourish even after the court shifted to Lahore. If we accept Blake’s thesis, Fathpur Sikri should have disappeared from the map along with the transfer of capital. That it did not proves that the Mughal Empire was neither a patrimonial-bureaucratic empire in the sense Blake uses the term, nor was Fathpur Sikri an extension of the imperial household.
The Sources and Inspirations of Urban Design at Fathpur Sikri
The Mughal emperors being often on the move, the traditional plan of the Mughal encampment appears to have been the principal inspiration for town planning at Fathpur Sikri. Being one of the first organized towns to develop, Fathpur Sikri appears to have drawn on the various principles used in setting up such camp cities. Even the vocabulary applied by the Persian sources to describe the permanent stone structures is often the same as was used for the temporary portable dwellings. The public audience hall is sometimes referred to as bargah-i am (the large audience tent), the sleeping or retiring room of the emperor as khalwatkada-i khas (the tent of privacy), the haram as saraparda or saraparda-i ismat (the screened-in area of chastity), such being the names also of different categories of tents.
Explaining the plan of a Mughal imperial encampment, Abul Fazl writes that the shabistan-i iqbal (the haramsara), the daulatkhana (the imperial palace or quarters), and the naqqarkhana (the drum house) are all pitched within a distance of 1530 yards. To the right and left of these, and behind them, an open space of 300 yards is reserved for guards. Within the principal enclosure, at a distance of 100 yards from the centre, are pitched the tents of the royal ladies and the princes. Behind the tents, at some distance, the buyutat (karkhanas or workshops) are placed; and at a further distance of 30 yards behind them, at the four corners of the camp, the bazaars. The nobles are encamped on all sides, according to their rank, outside the complex reserved for imperial use. According to this scheme, the central area was reserved for imperial use, flanked by the princes’ area, which was surrounded by that of the nobles. The bazaars and markets were located behind the workshops, that is, at the outer limits of the camp.
At Fathpur Sikri, due to the topography of the site, the camp’s single north-south axis was broken into two constituents: the axis of progression from public to private and the axis of royal appearance. The axis of progression was laid out from north-east to north-west, aligning the diwan-i am, daulatkhana, and the haramsara. The main ceremonial access to the emperor’s sight was obtained by an opening from the Hathipol to the khwabgah, on a north-south axis. Further, like a Mughal encampment, the language of the palace at Fathpur was one of pavilions and enclosures. Large spaces alternated with stone pavilions. As in an encampment, we find that the palace was surrounded by rings of bureaucratic establishments, nobles’ houses, and habitations of the common people. The markets were constructed in a linear fashion along the sides.
Another possible source of its design appears to have been the Mughal garden, the chaharbagh. According to Petruccioli, the centripetal symmetry of the chaharbagh could be an inspiration for the Mughal urban design. The axes, joints, and nodules of a garden were turned architecturally into pavilions, platforms, waterfalls, pools, caravanserais, and symmetrical roads. Thus it was the modular grid that became a systematic design instrument. The town was divided into various distinct divisions revolving around a localized central structure on the one hand, and aligned symmetrically with the main centre, on the other.
For the individual structures and buildings, the inspiration came from a number of traditions. By the time Fathpur Sikri began to be constructed, the traditions of Rajput and Gujarat architecture had already been incorporated in the buildings of the pre-Mughal Muslim rulers of India. At Fathpur Sikri, the dominant influence appears to be that of the Timurid and Gujarati Sultanate architecture. In a number of structures at Fathpur Sikri, the central vaults over the chambers are masked by a flat roof. This may at one level be a combination of the structurally accurate with the visibly trabeate. We have this example in the khwabgah, the emperor’s seat in the diwan-i am, the daftarkhana, the Tansen Baradari, Todarmal Baradari, Hada Mahal, Qushkhana, and the city gateways. Central Asian features are also encountered in the hammams, caravanserais, and pavilions on top of palace buildings where Timurid masonry vaults form the ceilings. The Rang Mahal and complexes around it, the four-storeyed pavilion erroneously known as ‘Panch Mahal’, and the ‘Hawa Mahal‘ adjoining the haramsara are all based on the Iranian and Timurid post-and-beam porches. In Iran, such structures were known as talar and in Trans Oxiana as aiwan. The trabeate construction of these structures is marked by a strong sense of weight and measure. Geometrical precision appears to be the hallmark of Akbari structures. Echoes of wooden architecture are also encountered—the ceilings of the hujra-i Aniptalao and the chaharkhana, the pillars of the Rang Mahal and the so-called Badi Mahal remind us of wooden structures.
The Plan and Layout of Fathpur Sikri
Describing the plan of Fathpur Sikri, Abu’l Fazl writes that a stone masonry fort was erected and several noble buildings arose in completion. Although the royal palace and the residences of many of the nobles are upon the summit of the hill, the plains likewise are studded with numerous mansions and gardens. Adjacent to the town is a reservoir, and on its embankments, His Majesty constructed a spacious courtyard, a Minār, and a polo-ground where elephant fights are organized. In its vicinity is a quarry of red sandstone whence columns and slabs of any dimensions can be excavated. Under His Majesty’s patronage, carpets and fine stuffs are woven and numerous handicraftsmen have full occupation.
Arif Qandhari also points out that when in 1571 orders were issued to begin building Fathpur Sikri, Emperor Akbar ordered it to have a two or three kuroh circumference on the face of the earth, for houses to be built on the top of the hill, and that they should lay out orchards and gardens at its periphery and centre. Trees were planted in the environs which had formerly been the habitat of rabbits and jackals; mosques, markets, baths, caravanserais, and other fine buildings were constructed in the city. Father Monserrate, who visited the court of Akbar in 1580, also gives a very detailed account of the city. He notes that the most noteworthy features of Fathpur are, firstly, the king’s audience chamber, which is of huge size and very beautiful in appearance, overlooking the whole city; secondly, a great building supported on arches around which is a very spacious courtyard; thirdly, the circus where elephants fight; fourthly, the baths; fifthly, the bazar, which is more than half a mile long, and is filled with an astonishing quantity of every description of merchandise, and with countless people.
From these passages it becomes clear that most of the imperial structures and the houses of the influential sections of the nobility were located on top of the ridge; the civic population inhabited the areas below the ridge, where gardens were also located; the vicinity of the lake was adorned with pleasure resorts; there was a brisk commercial activity in the township; the town was oriented towards the lake where was situated the main gateway to the official area; and the whole town, along with its civic population, was placed within fortified walls.
The fortification wall of Fathpur Sikri had eight gateways to the city: the Ajmeri Darwaza, Tehra Darwaza, Dholpur/Gwalior Darwaza, Chandra Pol, Birbal/Bir Pol, Agra Darwaza, Lal Darwaza, and the Dehli Darwaza. As in the case of the Central Asian cities, where the walls encompassed not only the madina or shahristan (the town proper with the palace), but the rabaz (the suburbs) as well, the city wall and gates of Fathpur Sikri contained within them not only the imperial quarters and the houses of the nobility but also the habitation of the common population comprising merchants, traders, professionals, and others. This would suggest a fairly close relationship between the political authority and the commercial classes.
The whole town was intersected by two horizontal roads, one running between Ajmeri Darwaza and Lal Darwaza, and a second connecting Terha Darwaza with Agra Darwaza. A branch of the latter branched off from the Agra Gate and went straight to the eastern opening of the diwan-i am. Two other roads cut the township vertically. These roads were planned on a grid pattern and laid out with stone pieces dressed to wedge shape and set in mortar with their thinner ends projecting downwards. This setting allowed for a smooth surface and gave stability and strength to the road. The main arterial roads were 15.40 metres wide, with a packing thickness of between 34 and 50 centimetres. There were a number of secondary roads that emanated from these arterial roads, which were approximately 3.6 metres in width. Excavations revealed four roads, each with secondary lanes, emanating at right angles from the main road.
These intersecting roads divide the whole town into ten quarters, of which the central was reserved for the imperial establishments and bureaucratic offices. The area between the main roads was reserved for the higher nobility, while another was given to the ‘new’ township of Fathpur. The modern city of Fatehpur is also situated in the same zone. In the open spaces towards the periphery of the town and the banks of the lake were pleasure pavilions, open fields, and gardens. The commercial classes appear to have been settled in the zone where the main road between the Agra Darwaza and the diwan-i am was situated. This was also the area where the main shopping complex was situated.
When one compares the plan of Fathpur Sikri with the plan of the city of London as it existed until 1750, striking similarities emerge. In both the Mughal city and London, the middle class and professional residential quarters adjoined the aristocratic residential quarter. In both, the main shopping complex was situated within the city walls at a distance from the imperial quarters. In both, the industrial area and artisans’ dwellings were located at the farthest point from the imperial quarters, with the bulk of this area situated outside the city walls. At Fathpur Sikri, the areas of indigo cultivation, leather works, and abattoirs were situated either close to the city wall or outside of it. My survey of a structure excavated by the Archaeological Survey of India near the Dehli Darwaza revealed that it was an ironsmith’s cottage comprising two rooms and a masonry furnace. There are, however, points of variance: the amusement and vice area in London was situated adjacent to the aristocratic residential quarter, whereas the Shaitanpura or the brothels at Fathpur Sikri were constructed outside the city limits. Further, if one compares the colonial plan of Lutyens’ Delhi with that of Akbar’s Fathpur Sikri, one is struck by the similarity of the placement of the main shopping complex, Connaught Circus vis-à-vis Akbar’s palace at Fathpur, and the Mall at New Delhi with the broad road marked with shops between Ajmeri Darwaza and the Hathipol at Fathpur.
Residential structures could not but be near the markets. There are at least two residential neighbourhoods within the town mentioned by our sources and one outside its walls. The first of these is the area of Salim Chishti, also known as Shaikhpura or Nayabad, located behind the Jami Masjid. The second residential neighbourhood was that of Khwaja-i Jahan where Mulla Abdul Qadir Badauni used to live. Outside the city walls was the neighbourhood inhabited by the prostitutes known as Shaitanpura. We also hear of Khairpura, Dharampura, and Jogipura situated outside the city limits. We have the testimony of Abu’l Fazl that the residences of the Akbari nobles were situated on the summit of the hill, while the other residential structures were situated below it in the plains. Following the excavations by the ASI and the team from the Centre of Advanced Study in History, Aligarh, it was found that a large number of structures associated with the nobility were constructed on the northern ridge, between the so-called Tansen Baradari and the sarai near the Agra Darwaza. The discovery of clay tablets used by Shi’ites while praying (sijdagāh) in one of the excavated structures in this area suggests that this area was possibly inhabited by members of the Iranian nobility.
Thus, we see that the plan of Fathpur Sikri accords fairly well with that of the imperial encampment described by Abul Fazl. It also duly takes into account the contours of the site: the main mosque and the imperial palaces and offices were placed on the ridge. Water was supplied to this area by lifting it from the lake using a water wheel and then transporting it using aqueducts. The quarters of the civil population were assigned where the lake and wells provided direct access to water. The residences of the nobility and the lower strata were well separated. The planned construction of shops on long avenues, built obviously at imperial expenditure, and then presumably leased out to private shopkeepers is a very notable feature of the planned city, as is the construction of the caravanserais, built again under imperial aegis, to accommodate merchants and travellers. Not only was Fathpur Sikri, then, well planned, there was also a considerable investment of imperial resources in it to ensure that it fulfilled its proper functions as an imperial town of a new empire.
Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City
It was with Shah Jahan’s construction of Shahjahanabad that the Mughal imperial city reached its fullest and most self-conscious expression. In 1639, Shah Jahan decided to shift his capital from Agra to a new location in Delhi, and over the next decade, he oversaw the creation of a walled city that would serve as the ultimate symbol of Mughal sovereignty. As Stephen Blake has argued in his seminal study Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, this city embodied a new model of urbanism that Blake terms the “sovereign city” or “patrimonial-bureaucratic capital.” According to Blake, Shahjahanabad was not merely a collection of buildings but a carefully orchestrated urban environment designed to reflect and reinforce the absolute authority of the emperor. Drawing on Max Weber’s theory of patrimonial-bureaucratic empire, Blake argues that the city functioned as an “enormously extended household” at the micro-level and a “miniature version of the kingdom” at the macro-level. In this model, the palace-fortress stood for the city, and the mansions of great nobles for the provinces, districts, and other subdivisions of the state.
The physical layout of Shahjahanabad exemplifies this vision. At the city’s heart stood the Red Fort, an enormous fortress-palace complex that housed the emperor, his household, and the administrative machinery of the empire. The fort was situated on the banks of the Yamuna River, following the riverfront tradition established at Agra, but with a crucial difference: where Agra’s riverfront was a linear sequence of noble gardens, Shahjahanabad’s riverfront was dominated almost entirely by the imperial palace. The great nobles were not permitted to build directly on the riverfront as they had at Agra; instead, their mansions were located within the walled city, arranged along grand thoroughfares that led from the fort’s gates. This represented a significant centralization of imperial authority, with the emperor asserting exclusive control over the most prestigious waterfront locations. The city was enclosed by a massive stone wall, punctuated by fourteen gates, which served both defensive and symbolic purposes. Within these walls, the urban fabric was organized according to a clear hierarchy: major roads or bazaars formed the primary circulation network, with smaller public streets leading to residential blocks. Within these blocks, narrow lanes called kuchas, galis, or katras formed the basic units of neighbourhood organization, each with its own name and identity. These smaller units often clustered into larger quarters known as mohallas, which were typically structured around religious sanctuaries.
The commercial heart of Shahjahanabad was the Chandni Chowk, a grand boulevard running from the Red Fort’s Lahore Gate to the Fatehpuri Mosque. This was not merely a market street but a carefully designed urban space, lined with shops and caravanserais, that served as the city’s main commercial artery. According to the contemporary chronicler Shaikh Muhammad Waris, the monumental fortress palace, Jama Masjid, Akbarabadi Mosque, and Fatehpuri Mosque, along with the royal bazaars, formed the backbone of the urban master plan conceived and executed by the emperor with a team of dedicated experts. This emphasis on planning and expert knowledge marks Shahjahanabad as distinct from the more organic growth of Agra and the gradual, decree-driven development of Fathpur Sikri. The selection of the site itself was governed by rational criteria: abundance of water and a temperate climate were major considerations. The Yamuna River and the system of canals and reservoirs were vital to the landscape of urban life, and the existing waterways were used and transformed through the laying out of formal gardens into a sophisticated water system derived from the Nahr-i Bihisht.
The provision of water was central to Shahjahanabad’s urbanism. The Shah Nahr, or royal canal, was constructed to bring water from the Yamuna at Karnal, over 150 kilometres away, to the new capital. This canal fed the gardens, fountains, and water channels of the Red Fort and the nobles’ mansions, as well as providing water for public use. The infrastructure of water thus connected the imperial centre to the agricultural hinterland, the garden suburbs, the inner city, and the fort complex in a single integrated hydrological landscape. This sophisticated system, which required ongoing maintenance and imperial oversight, was both a practical necessity and a powerful symbol of the emperor’s ability to command nature itself. The relationship between the emperor and the nobility in Shahjahanabad was complex and carefully managed. Unlike at Agra, where nobles competed directly for riverfront plots, the nobles of Shahjahanabad were housed within the walled city, their mansions arranged along the major thoroughfares leading from the Red Fort. This spatial arrangement reinforced the emperor’s centrality: all roads led to the fort, and the nobles’ residences were positioned along these roads, symbolizing their dependence on and connection to the imperial centre.
Complementary but Distinct: Three Models Compared
If we now compare the three cities, their complementary but distinct characters become clear. Agra’s urban model was linear, terraced, and symmetrical, oriented outward towards the Yamuna. Water was its primary organizing axis and aesthetic medium. The city was designed to be viewed from the river, and the riverfront garden became the ultimate status symbol shared among the nobility. Commerce and finance, while present and significant, were accommodated behind the garden frontages. As Javed Hasan’s analysis of the plan and ghazal demonstrates, Agra was a well-laid-out township with separate localities for various professions, radial roads converging on the fort, and a left bank lined with gardens rather than habitations, all reflecting a conscious attempt to protect commercial importance and bring order to the visual chaos.
Fathpur Sikri, by contrast, was an inland city built on a ridge, oriented not towards a natural feature but towards the intersection of trade routes. Its plan was nucleated, enclosed within an oblong wall that contained the entire urban population. Where Agra’s planning was driven by the river and the chahārbāgh, Fathpur Sikri’s planning was driven by the Mughal encampment, with the palace as a stone transformation of the imperial camp. The city grew gradually through imperial decrees that encouraged voluntary settlement, suggesting a more organic and less rigidly enforced aesthetic regime. Most significantly, Fathpur Sikri’s economy possessed an autonomy that Agra’s never achieved, continuing to flourish as a commercial centre long after the court had departed.
Shahjahanabad represents a synthesis and transcendence of both earlier models. From Agra, it inherited the riverfront orientation and the integration of water as a central organizing principle. But where Agra’s riverfront was shared among the nobility, Shahjahanabad’s was dominated exclusively by the imperial palace, signalling a centralization of authority. From Fathpur Sikri, it inherited the concept of the walled city containing both imperial and noble residences, but where Fathpur Sikri’s walls encompassed a relatively dispersed settlement, Shahjahanabad’s walls enclosed a densely planned urban fabric organized along hierarchical principles. The street system of Shahjahanabad, with its gradation from major bazaars to dead-end alleys, represents a more sophisticated and deliberate approach to urban spatial organization than anything found at Agra or Fathpur Sikri. And the water management system of Shahjahanabad, with its canal bringing water from over 150 kilometres away, represents an unprecedented investment in urban infrastructure.
Conclusion: Mughal Urbanism as Adaptive Art
In conclusion, the town planning of Mughal India under Akbar and Shah Jahan cannot be reduced to a single model or described adequately by any single theoretical framework. Instead, what we find are three complementary but distinct urban models, each responding to different circumstances and embodying different priorities. Agra represents the riverfront garden city, a linear, terraced, and water-oriented imperial capital where aesthetic display along the Yamuna was paramount and where the nobility shared in the privilege of riverfront construction. Fathpur Sikri represents the encampment city, a nucleated, walled, and trade-oriented capital where commercial autonomy and gradual, decree-driven growth were characteristic, and where the city continued to thrive even after the court departed. Shahjahanabad represents the sovereign city, a planned, centralized, and hierarchically organized capital where the emperor’s absolute authority was inscribed in every aspect of the urban fabric, from the monumental Red Fort dominating the riverfront to the carefully graded street system and the sophisticated water management infrastructure.
The sources of Mughal urban design were multiple and varied: the hierarchical logic of the imperial encampment provided the basic template for the spatial organization of the city; the centripetal symmetry of the chaharbagh offered a modular grid for the division of urban space; and the architectural traditions of Timurid Iran, Gujarat, and indigenous India supplied the formal vocabulary for individual structures. At Fathpur Sikri, we see these sources combined in a unique synthesis, resulting in a city that was at once a stone encampment, a monumental garden, and a thriving commercial centre. The archaeological evidence from my surveys, including the identification of five markets, four serais, fourteen step-wells, and numerous residential structures, demonstrates that Fathpur Sikri was not merely an imperial capital but a fully functioning urban centre with a life of its own. The presence of masons’ marks and signatures on the stones of the city further reveals the human dimension of this grand enterprise, allowing us to glimpse the individual craftsmen who actually built Akbar’s vision.
When one compares the plan of these Mughal imperial towns with the plan of the city of London as it existed until 1750, striking similarities emerge that challenge the notion of a uniquely “Asiatic” urban form. In both the Mughal cities and London, the middle-class and professional residential quarters adjoined the aristocratic residential quarter, while the main shopping complex was situated within the city walls. In both, the industrial area and artisans’ dwellings were located at the farthest point from the imperial quarters, with the bulk of this area situated outside the city walls. The Mughal preference for what Rapaport has termed “dispersed capitals” in contrast to “compact capitals” may have reflected the mobile, militaristic character of the empire, as well as the personalistic nature of Mughal sovereignty, where the emperor’s presence rather than any fixed location constituted the true centre of power. When Shah Jahan finally fixed the capital permanently at Shahjahanabad in 1648, he was in effect making permanent what had previously been fluid, transforming the nomadic sovereignty of the earlier Mughals into a settled, monumental, and architecturally codified imperial presence. Together, these three cities demonstrate that Mughal urban planning was not a monolithic or unchanging practice but a flexible and adaptive art, capable of producing radically different yet equally sophisticated models of the imperial city, each integrating commercial vitality with imperial symbolism in its own unique way.
References:
Primary Sources
· Abul Fazl. Ain-i Akbari. Nawal Kishore, Lucknow, 1882.
· Abul Fazl. Akbarnama. Ed. Agha Ahmad Ali and Molvi Abdur Rahim. 3 vols. Calcutta, 1873-87.
· Badauni, Mulla Abdul Qadir. Muntakhab ut Tawarikh. Ed. Ali Ahmad and W. Nassau Lees. 3 vols. Calcutta, 1864-9.
· Babur, Zahiruddin Muhammad. Baburnama. Tr. and ed. A.S. Beveridge. London, 1921 (reprint Delhi, 1970).
· Faizi, Abul Faiz. Insha-i Fayzi. Ed. A.D. Arshad. Lahore, 1973.
· Finch, William R. “Travels of William Finch.” In Early Travels in India: 1583-1619, ed. W. Foster. London, 1921.
· Gilani, Hakim Abul Fath. Ruqa’at. Ed. M. Bashir Husain. Lahore, 1968.
· Jahangir, Nuruddin Muhammad. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri. Ed. Saiyid Ahmad. Ghazipur and Aligarh, 1863-4.
· Lahori, Abdul Hamid. Badshahnama. Ed. K. Ahmad and Abdur Rahim. Calcutta, 1867.
· Monserrate, Father Anthony. The Commentary of Father Monserrate, S.J. Tr. J.S. Hoyland and S.N. Banerjee. London, 1922.
· Mundy, Peter. Travels in Europe and Asia, 1608-1667. London, 1907-36.
· Pelsaert, Francois. Jahangir’s India or Remonstratie. Tr. W.H. Moreland and P. Geyl. Cambridge, 1925 (reprint Delhi, 1972).
· Qandhari, Arif. Tarikh-i Akbari. Ed. and annotated Muinuddin Nadwi, A.A. Dihlavi, and Imtiyaz Ali Arshi. Rampur, 1962.
Secondary Sources
· Bailey, Gauvin Alexander. “The Conquest of Catholic Art: The Mughals, the Jesuits, and Imperial Mural Painting.” Art Journal, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring 1998), pp. 24-30.
· Blake, Stephen P. Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639-1739. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
· Brand, Michael, and Glenn D. Lowry (eds). Fatehpur Sikri: A Source Book. Cambridge, MA, 1985.
· Gaur, R.C. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri. New Delhi, 2000.
· Hasan, Javed. “Mapping the Mughal City of Agra.” Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Vol. 51, 1990, pp. 241-245.
· Koch, Ebba. The Complete Taj Mahal: And the Riverfront Gardens of Agra. Thames & Hudson, 2006.
· Petruccioli, Attilio. “The Process Evolved by the Control Systems of Urban Design in the Mogul Epoch in India: The Case of Fatehpur Sikri.” Environmental Design, No. 1, 1984, pp. 18-31.
· Rezavi, Syed Ali Nadeem. Fathpur Sikri Revisited. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2013.
· Rezavi, Syed Ali Nadeem. “Uniqueness of the Eastern ‘Imperial City’? Testing the Model with Fathpur Sikri.” In Reason and Archaeology, ed. Krishna Mohan Shrimali. University of Delhi.
· Rizvi, S.A.A., and V.J.A. Flynn. Fathpur Sikri. Bombay, 1975.
· Trivedi, K.K. Agra: Economic and Social History of a Mughal City. Primus Books, 2014.
Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi
ASHA: Blast From The Past 