Introduction
According to Mohammad Gharipour, gardens are imbued with a deep cultural symbolism in both Western and Eastern civilisations, supporting not just floral and faunal life, but also the social life of a city; Swapna Liddle and Madhulika Liddle reflect how the city of Delhi, often referred to as a ‘garden city’, owes much of its character to such gardens which are important architectural marvels in their own right.
In the Persian landscape, gardens also functioned as important sites for political and ideological metaphors. For the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals particularly, gardens were central to their renovation of the city; scholars such as Catherine Asher highlight their funerary-dynastic and religious association while Ebba Koch sees it as projecting the imperial message of the rulers.
Hayat Bakhsh
Located in the northeast corner of Shah Jahan’s palace complex, it is the largest and the only-Mughal era garden still standing inside the Red Fort; the name literally translates to ‘life-bestowing garden.’ According to Koch, it was highly unique not just in its form, but also how the formal design conveyed the symbolism of its positioning inside the palace. The garden was similar in its conception to the zanana gardens of Agra and Lahore.
The bagh was constructed to be self-sustaining with its own water channels and sunken hawz (tank) along with floral and faunal motifs decorating the walls and ceilings. According to the main inscription of the palace, “Hayat Baksh was to the building what the soul is to the body” thus indicating the central value of the garden in the architectural conceptions that Shah Jahan envisioned for his grand palace. It was also constantly symbolised as akin to a garden in paradise, further realising the heavenly metaphors used by court poets and chroniclers to describe the justice, generosity and prosperity of Shah Jahan’s rule.
Lodhi Garden
A well-known historical and leisure space in the modern urban city, the garden is located between the tomb of Safdarjung and Khan Market; although the current park itself was developed during the British period, it encompasses monuments that date back to the Sayyid, Lodi and Mughal periods. Some of these notable monuments include the Bada Gumbad and Shish Gumbad, Sikandar Lodi’s tomb as well as the tomb of Muhammad Shah Sayyid. The original name was Lady Willingdon Park after the then Viceroy’s wife, and changed to Lodhi Garden only after Independence.
The octagonal shapes of the tombs are said to have been inspired by the Dome of Rock in Jerusalem, thus implying the strong religious symbolism inherent in the Sultanate architecture, as also a beacon of loyalty towards the Caliphate. After Independence, the garden was significantly transformed by Joseph Stein, an American landscape architect, who added glasshouses, fountains and an artificial lake, and this is the design that has carried over to the present day.
Safdarjung Tomb
Similar to the enclosed garden tomb-style of Humayun’s tomb, the garden surrounding the tomb of Safdarjung (second Nawab of Awadh) follows the Charbagh style and happens to be the last one built under the aegis of the dying Mughal empire. Based on Persian aesthetics, it includes tree-lined pathways which section the garden into four parts with water channels and fountains along the middle of the pathways.
The sprawling tomb and its garden symbolises the rising regional powers that would inherit the legacy of the Mughal empire, before the British eventually took over. Safdarjung’s tomb, constructed by his son, reflects this grand ideal through its unique amalgamation of Indian, Persian and Afghan styles. Jyoti P. Sharma highlights how the funerary nature of the complex would eventually shift towards a public park with the British presence.
The British state saw these gardens as central to their urban preferences, but also as cultural assets which could be shaped according to their aesthetic and political tastes. The mood after 1857 was one of tension and a strong desire on the part of the British to immediately establish military supremacy in Delhi; several parts of the city’s historical heritage were systematically redesigned to reflect the new power governing the empire.
Mughal Gardens (now Amrit Udyan)
A unique example of the interaction between the Mughal and British architectural styles, the Mughal Gardens, located next to the Rashtrapati Bhavan in the present-day, portrays the politics of power intertwined within its design. Edward Lutyens, who was the primary architect for the new British capital in Delhi, had envisioned the renovated city as a compromise between the European classical styles and Indian decorative motifs. Patrick Bowe provides a detailed narrative of how a similar understanding was also followed for the Mughal garden, then known as the Viceroy’s garden.
The Mughal inspiration was especially favoured by the Viceroy’s wife, Lady Hardinge; this can be seen in the intricate horizontal pattern of water and stone, red and buff sandstone walls and paths with the grass, flowers and trees integrated in the Charbagh style. English concepts are reflected in the addition of subsidiary gardens, walled alley and the sunken circular garden whose tiers descend to central pool. Much of the work and ideas invested in the flora of the gardens was actually the work of William Mustoe who paid particular attention to the traditional Mughal style of planting.
The importance of gardens was considerably realised by the state after independence; as an important aspect of any urban plan, the state has since devoted significant funds to develop heritage parks and sprawling gardens around the city.
Sunder Nursery
One of the most well-known and well-visited parks, it is a part of a larger official programme to conserve the area which hosts over a hundred medieval structures, one of them being the Humayun’s Tomb. Designed by the architect M. Shaheer and as an urban conservation programme, it is also aimed at developing a micro-habitat zone to preserve the city’s rapidly declining biodiversity.
The site underwent severe deterioration over the course of the Mughal decline and colonial rule; under the Nizammudin Urban Renewal Initiative, the park was rejuvenated according to Mughal aesthetics and modern sustainability practices such as rainwater harvesting. The restoration of the central monument i.e. the Sunder Burj, the incorporation of the Mughal Charbagh style and wide open spaces such as an amphitheatre for public interactions point towards the efforts made for heritage and biodiversity preservation.
Conclusion
Image Source: The Tribune
Gardens in Delhi continue to function as vital cultural centers for families, tourists, and local communities. Their serene environments provide an opportunity for meditation and relaxation, offering an escape from the fast pace of urban life. The Lodhi Garden, for example, serves not only as a favourite site for picnics, but also as a cultural venue where individuals engage in activities such as group gatherings, photography, and the appreciation of nature. Many of Delhi’s gardens are associated with annual events and festivals; for instance, the Amrit Udyan is open to the public during the annual spring festival, showcasing the lush flora of the gardens, the most visited being the tulip festival, which is a popular tourist attraction.
In modern-day understandings of the urban space, the idea of the commons rests upon the existence of such gardens and parks, accessible and available to everyone irrespective of any socio-economic backgrounds; they provide an equalising space for the exercise of culture, leisure and recreation.
Sources
2. BOWE, PATRICK. “‘THE GENIUS OF AN ARTIST’: WILLIAM R. MUSTOE AND THE PLANTING OF THE CITY OF NEW DELHI AND ITS GARDENS.” Garden History, vol. 37, no. 1, 2009, pp. 68–79.
3. https://theprint.in/pageturner/excerpt/a-history-of-delhis-favourite-park-lodi-gardens/2120804/
4. Sharma, Jyoti P. “The British Treatment of Historic Gardens in the Indian Subcontinent: The Transformation of Delhi’s Nawab Safdarjung’s Tomb Complex from a Funerary Garden into a Public Park.” Garden History, vol. 35, no. 2, 2007, pp. 210–28.