History of Indian and Eastern Architecture — Inside the Classic

The Benares Debate

Fergusson devotes considerable space to the case of Benares, the 'sacred city, par excellence, of the Hindus.' He notes that no vestige of an ancient Hindu temple exists within its precincts, despite the city's long history. He cites the work of James Prinsep and Major Kittoe, who 'drew and measured everything' yet found nothing ancient. Fergusson dismisses the theory that buildings around the Bakariya Kund are ancient, insisting they were erected by Muslims and that any reused stones came from deserted monasteries. He concludes that the absence of ancient temples is due more to the 'non-building instincts of the Brahmanical Aryans' than to 'iconoclastic bigotry.' This argument is central to his broader thesis about the development of Indian architecture.

Evidence from Gwalior and Other Sites

Fergusson extends his argument to Gwalior, a rock that was 'one of the earliest conquests of the Moslems' and held for five centuries. He points out that Muslims built palaces and mosques there, but does not find evidence of widespread destruction of earlier temples. He also discusses the reuse of Jaina temple columns at Ajmir, Delhi, and Canouge, noting that this was practical rather than wanton. The astylar temples of Siva or Vishnu, he argues, could only serve as quarries. This pattern of evidence—specific sites, named scholars, and material traces—grounds his claims in observable data, even when his conclusions are contentious.

Method and Scope

The work is structured as a comprehensive survey, with 47 text sections and extensive illustrations. Fergusson's method relies on personal observation and comparison of architectural forms across regions. He frequently cites other scholars, such as Prinsep and Kittoe, and engages with competing theories. The catalog subjects—'Architecture -- India' and 'Architecture, Asian'—accurately reflect the content, but the excerpts show that Fergusson's focus is often on religious and historical debates rather than purely formal analysis. Readers should expect a mix of descriptive cataloging and argumentative historiography, shaped by the author's Victorian perspective.

Fergusson's work rewards readers who approach it as a historical document of late-19th-century scholarship. His arguments about temple destruction and Brahmanical practices are specific to his evidence and should be weighed against more recent research. The detailed site descriptions and illustrations remain valuable, but the interpretive framework reflects the author's own biases and the limits of contemporary archaeology.

Fergusson’s careful argument—that Hindu silence in Benares was less demolition than choice—stayed with me, a quiet correction to easy blame. That gentle untangling of built history brought to mind a small volume on North Carolina’s old homes, where similar patience shapes every veranda and brick. Different worlds, yet both whisper that we must read absence gently. A memory of Colonial Homes in North Carolina — Themes and Context felt like a familiar echo.