Talk:Sher Mandal

Source

• https://books.google.co.in/books?id=irplPWarTG8C&dq=sher%20mandal&pg=PA193#v=onepage&q&f=false

Polemical and poor style

This badly needs to be revised; parts of it read, not like an encyclopaedia article, but like someone's personal opinions, set down with no attempt at objectivity or balance.

Dispute about construction

The Turks even stole the design of sher sha Suri and even painted the red fort red to hid any evidence of Lodi and suri works. This was a war of jealousy that many people know nothing about. Even the Taj mahal is a copy of Suri tomb, so you can imagine how they tried to steal this building as well. This was built by sher sha Suri. The roles played by Sher Shah Suri and Humayun in the construction of the building (and the fort) are disputed.[5]

Sher Mandal was previously believed to have been built by Suri ruler Sher Shah Suri in 1541[6] as a pleasure resort.[2][1] The name was first used by the historian Abdullah, author of Tarikh-i Da’udi, who described it as being supposedly left incomplete by Sher Shah.[2][a] Catherine Asher, a specialist in Indian and Islamic art forms,[7] and others[who?] had initially posited that these passages allowed the Purana Qil'a to be equated with Sher-garh and that the Sher Mandal was constructed by Sher Shah. Historian Percival Spear deems it to have been constructed by Sher Shah.[citation needed]

However, others have noted a lack of corresponding archaeological and literary evidence to assert the linkage or connect the Qal’a-i Kuhna masjid with Sher Shah's mosque or the pavilion at the Purana Qil'a to be Sher Mandal.[8] Contemporaneous literary descriptions of the monuments at the palace do not support the idea that Sher Shah destroyed (and replaced) Din-panah, as implied by the theories associating Sher-garh with the Purana Qil'a.[8] Abu’l Fazl and Badaoni explicitly mention that Sher Shah established an extensive city between the fortress of Din-panah, which Muhammad Humayun Padshah constructed, and Firozabad.[8] Anthony Monserrate, who visited Delhi during the early 1580s, also recorded the existence of Din-panah.[8] Furthermore, the Qal’a-i Kuhna masjid nor the pavilion resemble any of the buildings of Sher Shah.[8] The rectangular plan of the mosque, for instance, with its five bays, inset colonettes and octagonal corner towers, is almost identical to the mosque of Jamali-Kamali, which was begun during the reign of Babur.[8] The double-story pavilion on the other hand, with its octagonal plan, rectangular decorative panels and large chhatri, closely resembles a number of palaces described by Khwandamir and Gulbadam Begam in their accounts of Humayun's architecture.[8] Most importantly, Badayuni, in his chronicle of Humayun's death, prominently mentions that the building was constructed by Humayun himself.[2] Ram Nath points to the architectural designs at Sher Mandal as evidence of a homogeneous construction that is consistent with Humayan's style.[9] Dispute about usage

Stephen Carr, writing in the state gazetteer of 1876, firmly rejected Sher Madal's use as a palace of any kind or even as a flank tower.[6] Ram Nath, too, noted the structure as lacking any minimal resemblance to an unfinished palace, as well as a lack of shelves, niches or any other feature that might have justified its use as a library.[2] Nath, in light of its geographical position and circumstantial literary corpus, proposed that it was used as an astronomical observatory and named Saur Mandal, which evolved into its current name based on the mistaken belief that Sher Shah had destroyed the entire fort-town.[2]

--146.90.33.190 (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)