World Heritage Day last week was a reminder that Delhi is the repository of a large number of monuments, many of which are memorials to unknown people or have names inconsistent with their nomenclature. Take Bare Batashewala Mahal, which has been garishly renovated under the Aga Khan Trust for Culture within Humayun’s Tomb complex. It contains the grave of Mirza Muzaffar Hussain, maternal grandson of Mirza Kamran, Humayun’s wayward brother. Son of Gulrukh Begum, he was married to Emperor Akbar’s eldest daughter, Sultan Khanam. But why was it named Bare Batashewala Mahal? And its counterpart Chhota Batashewala Mahal? Was it because the original facade was decorated with Batashe (sweetball) type decorations? Chhota Batashewala Mahal, where an unknown dignitary lies buried, has “floral, geometrical and inscriptional decorations in incised plaster on the interior”, according to historian Y. D. Sharma.
There used to be a giant Batashe-ka-Tazia in pre-Partition days which was taken out with great difficulty through the narrow streets of Delhi during Moharram. Did the tazia have some association with these two mahals in name, size or decorations? There is also a Gali Batashan in the Walled City, famous for its Batashas from Shah Jahan’s time. Hilarious as it may sound, were the Mughals so fond of Batashas (distributed after Quran recitations at Id-ul-Milad and at the shrines of saints after Thursday devotions) that they named even mausoleums after them? One is really perplexed. And why were the two monuments named “Mahals” (palaces) and not Mazars? For that matter, Shah Jahan and Mumtaz Mahal are also buried in the world famous Taj Mahal. But the reason could be that the mausoleum was built in memory of Mumtaz Mahal and abbreviated to Taj Mahal or Crown Palace.
Now for some other monuments: The Chauburji Masjid near the Flagstaff Tower on the Ridge in North Delhi was not really a mosque but a part of Kuskhi-i-Shikar, a palace built by Feroze Tughlak, one part of which is known as Pir Gharib or the mausoleum of the vanished saint who had occupied the site long after the Sultan’s death. Malcha Mahal near Chanakyapuri is another Shikargah of Feroze. Like other hunting lodges, it too has traces of a baandh for collecting rainwater. Later occupied by Begum Vilayat Mahal and her children, it is said to have been named after the village of Malcha that once existed there. But legends associate it with a Malcha Begum, a village belle who is said to have become the sultan’s mistress. The Dadi-Poti tombs on the Hauz Khas road from Mehrauli are a similar enigma. Who were these grandmother and granddaughter? The tombs are also referred to as those of Biwi and Bandi (mistress and maid). In all probability, the tombs belong to the pre-Muslim period, but then why did they bury and not cremate these two? Biran-ka-Gumbad, Chhoti Gumti and Sakri Gumpti in the Green Park area tell their own tales. The first could be taken to mean Brother’s dome, the second small dome and the third narrow dome. But whom do they commemorate? Who was this brother after whom the main dome was named?
In South Extension-I are the Bade Khan-ka-Gumbad and Chhote Khan-ka-Gumbad. It is conjectured that the monuments, which now lie neglected, are memorials to a father and son, or master and pupil. There is no indication as to why these were built. In all probability they are buildings of the Lodhi period. Not far from them is Kale Khan-ka-Gumbad where lies buried Mubarak Khan, a nobleman of the time of Bahlul Lodhi, the founder of the dynasty. But there were two men of that name at that time. Which one’s is the body? The building has a square tomb, a distinctive style of Lodhi architecture. Some historians think that the tomb is of Mubarak Khan, father of Darya Khan. But why was he called Kale Khan? Was it because he was dark-complexioned? Not far from it is Bhure Khan-ka-Gumbad or the dome of the Fair Khan. In the Lodhi Gardens, there are a number of tombs, among them the Bara Gumbad, along with an attached mosque. Near it is the Shish Gumbad. This was once a glazed dome but nobody knows who rests under it. What was the purpose behind the anonymity one encounters in these cases? Was it deliberate or a latter-day development? Someone offered the explanation that this could have been the outcome of Partition years when the families which were the hereditary caretakers of these tombs migrated to Pakistan, taking away the identity documents. But this argument may be true only in some cases. Heritage Day is one occasion when such perplexity cries for an answer!
