Urban Water History of Shahjahanabad, Delhi (1639-1857): Situating Mughal Hydrology and Urbanism in the ‘Persianate World’ Iqtedar Alam Supervisor: Prof. Cameron A. Petrie Advisor: Dr. Jason Hawkes Department of Archaeology University of Cambridge, UK This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Churchill College May 2025 Declaration This thesis is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as declared in the preface and specified in the text. It is not substantially the same as any work that has already been submitted, or is being concurrently submitted, for any degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution except as declared in the preface and specified in the text. It does not exceed the prescribed word limit for the relevant Degree Committee. Iqtedar Alam May 2025 Abstract The Mughal Empire, founded by the Timurid prince, Babur, in 1526 has been predominantly studied as an Indian phenomenon, with their transregional connections and Turko-Mongolian ancestry not extensively explored. Drawing upon earlier empires of ‘Turko-Mongol’ origin in Iran & Central Asia, the thesis positions Shahjahan’s reign (5th Mughal Emperor; r. 1628-1658) and the Mughal empire as an extension of Central Asian political and sovereign practices, manifested through city building, architectural programs, and infrastructural projects. The thesis investigates the Mughal system of waterworks through hydrological landscapes shaped by the empire across South Asia, focusing on Shahjahanabad (1639-1857), the last Mughal capital. Using water as a ‘central element’, the thesis decodes patterns of socio-spatial organisation, religious engagements, and urbanism practices emerging from hydrological interactions. It presents infrastructural systems as cultural artefacts and explores contours of control, access, and use of ‘water’ in the capital region through a study of Shah Nahr, the Mughal canal. As a revivalist homage to antecedent water management practices in Central Asia & Iran, the Shahjahanabad model offers insights into societies that have historically managed water resources in arid/semi-arid areas of the ‘Persianate world’. The methodology incorporated archaeological records, textual records, and a systematic surface survey of the 150 km canal landscape between Karnal and Delhi, together with documentation of associated water features in the agricultural hinterlands, garden suburbs, inner city, and fort complex. GIS and Remote Sensing techniques were used to identify, survey, map, reconstruct, and evaluate the landform and comprehend the behaviour of water in gravity-based landscapes. to Amma & Abba Acknowledgement This thesis has been a journey, intellectually demanding, emotionally charged, and deeply rewarding. It would not have been possible without the unwavering support, wisdom, and generosity of many individuals and institutions, to whom I owe an immense debt of gratitude. First and foremost, I want to thank my supervisor, Prof. Cameron A. Petrie, for his steadfast guidance, intellectual clarity, and unrelenting encouragement. His trust in this project, even when it was still in its formative stages, was a constant source of motivation. Our conversations on landscape archaeology, the ways in which we read and interpret them, and his term lectures on the fluvial dynamism of the Indus were more than just academically enriching, they fundamentally shaped how I approached and understood my own work. I’m truly grateful for his steady presence and generous mentorship. I am also grateful to Dr. Jason Hawkes, my advisor, for his thoughtful advice, sharp attention to detail, and enduring belief in the value of this work. My sincere thanks also go to Dr. Roy Fischel and Dr. Susanne Hakenbeck for their thoughtful engagement with this research. Their insightful comments and generous feedback not only strengthened the arguments and structure of the thesis but also encouraged me to think more critically and expansively about its themes. A heartfelt thanks to my tutor, Prof. Benedikt Löwe, for the term-time gatherings full of great conversation and amazing food, always a much-needed reprieve, and for his timely help with funding extensions. This research was made possible by the full scholarship I received from the Cambridge Trust. I am also sincerely thankful for the generous financial support of the Smuts Memorial Fund and the University Fieldwork Fund (Archaeology) at Cambridge, without which fieldwork tracing Mughal hydrology in Delhi, Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, and Burhanpur simply wouldn’t have been feasible. Fieldwork in Delhi and beyond brought me into the lives of many who welcomed me with warmth, generosity, and extraordinary insight. My deepest thanks to Sikandar Mirza Changezi, whose intimate knowledge of Shahjahanabad’s historic buildings, archives, landscapes, and stories opened doors I wouldn’t have known existed. This research, especially the extensive fieldwork in the walled city, was only possible because of his kindness and commitment. I’m especially thankful to Ammi and Shaheen for their warm hospitality, which made every day of fieldwork in Shahjahanabad feel lighter. I am deeply grateful to Ashok Mathur, whose reflections on the city’s hydrological landscape and the syncretic relationships communities have built around water profoundly shaped the way I thought about my work. To Abhishek Jain, thank you for your architectural insights and reflections on the changing landscape of Shahjahanabad’s water systems. A special thanks to Alishah Ali, whose familiarity with the havelis and their private water sources was invaluable. Through her, I met Hari Mehra, whose support during the field survey in Katra Neel added great depth to the project. Together, they navigated bustling streets of Shahjahanabad with humour, patience, and boundless energy. The knowledge and generosity of Sohail Hashmi, MK Raina, Swapna Liddle, and Ataullah added much- needed historical and ecological depth. Conversations with Taiyaba Munawer, Hina Zia, Nisar Khan, and Manu Mahajan pushed my thinking further, helping me better understand the relationships between landscapes, infrastructure, and water. My research on the Red Fort and its surrounding sites owes much to Somi Chatterjee, Munazzar Ali (Delhi Circle, ASI), and Qaiser Reza for their insights and help in decoding the hydrological layout of the fort complex. For Agra and Fatehpur Sikri, I owe my thanks to Prince Bajpai (Agra Circle, ASI), whose guidance helped uncover significant patterns in Mughal hydrology. My gratitude also to Ramesh Bhole, Hoshang Hawaldar, and Yaqub Boringwala for sharing their deep knowledge on Burhanpur’s historic landscape. A special thank you to Yaqub, who accompanied me in documenting the city’s water systems, his insight proved invaluable. This project required tracing the long and winding path of the Shah Nahr. My gratitude to Vikas Dalal, a great photographer of Rohtak, and one with a great sense of the landform of the region. He was essential to mapping the Mughal canal. My heartfelt thanks also to his father, Jaipal Singh Dalal, a retired SDO from the Haryana Irrigation Department, whose lived experience and deep knowledge of the canal’s workings brought layers of meaning to my research. The time, care, and generosity they both offered in bringing this centuries-old system back into view, on foot, through conversation, and on maps, meant more than I can put into words. To my friends in Delhi, Nitesh Dogne, Intekhab Alam, Yogesh Bhardwaj, and Noman Khan, thank you for being such steady companions during long days of fieldwork across Mughal and pre-Mughal water sites. Whether it was navigating tricky terrain or just sharing a laugh mid-survey, you made the process of documentation feel lighter, easier, and always more meaningful. In the archives, I was fortunate to encounter scholars and archivists who were not just helpful, but truly generous. Thank you to Geetika Singh (Delhi State Archives), Rajmani Srivastava (National Archives of India), Muhammad Asghar (OR Section, National Archives of India), Faizan Ahmed (OR Section, National Archives of India), Mohammad Ahsan Abid, and Anuradha Vashishtha (Cartographic Division, National Archives of India) for their time, expertise, and dedication to preserving historical memory. I am especially thankful to Susan Gole for our discussions on Mughal cartography, they were a source of deep inspiration. My thanks as well to Dipti Khera (NYU) and Samira Sheikh (Vanderbilt University) for generously sharing the Ali Mardan Khan canal map, a key resource without which the study of the Shah Nahr would not have been possible. To those who helped me see Shahjahanabad not just as a city, but as a living archive of poetry, memory, and literature, thank you to Shama Mitra Chenoy, Saif Mahmood, and Ather Farouqui. My journey into Persian sources would have been impossible without the patient and generous guidance of Mobin Asgharnejad Tehrani (Iran Cultural Centre), who walked with me through the ups and downs of learning the language, and Chander Shekhar (Delhi University), whose summer schools opened the doors to the world of reading Mughal manuscripts. Thank you both for standing by me through every struggle, stumble, and breakthrough. I couldn’t have done it without you. I’m deeply thankful to the institutions whose time, resources, and collections gave this thesis shape: the Archaeological Survey of India, the School of Planning & Architecture (Delhi and Bhopal), Jamia Millia Islamia, Aligarh Muslim University, Institute of Town Planners India, Delhi Town & Country Planning Organization and INTACH. I’m also indebted to the British Library, the map and manuscript divisions of the University Library at Cambridge, the Ancient India & Iran Trust, the Faculty of Asian & Middle Eastern Studies, the Centre of South Asian Studies, and the University Library at York and SOAS, alongside the Delhi State Archives and the National Archives of India. A special note of thanks to the MAHSA project team at Cambridge - Rebecca, Junaid, Jack, Piet, Kuili, Vaneshree, Afifa, and Maria - for their help with the map repository, and for guiding me through SMTVI and MSRM methods. Your support with interpreting historical maps made a huge difference. To Shakeel Hossein, my mentor, my friend, and my pir, thank you for teaching me to see beyond the surface, to read into symbolism, and to find meaning in form and detail. Working alongside you opened my eyes to the subtle power of composition, design, and the ways in which objects shape and reflect the worlds we live in. Our conversations, ranging from the deeply philosophical to the wonderfully everyday, stayed with me throughout this journey. I carry your wisdom with deep gratitude. Surprisingly, cricket became part of my academic journey. I’m thankful for the three seasons I spent playing in Cambridge, it helped me stay grounded and brought me closer to the wider community here. Special thanks to my supervisor Cameron, whose batting remains as inspiring as his mentorship. And to Trishant and Aradhya for drawing me into college leagues. This thesis could never have been completed without the quiet strength and love of my family and friends. To my brothers, Ashfaque, Aftab, and Iftekhar, my sisters, Nikhat and Nishat, and my sisters-in- law, Namreen and Nasima, thank you for believing in me. To my nieces, Iqra, Afifa, Rida, and Adiba, you were my joy throughout this process. My mamu, Muzaffar Alam, whose insight into Mughal state formation, help with archival literature, especially the Padshahnama, deeply informed this work, thank you for your wisdom and for always inspiring me. My mamani Rizwana, for her warmth and cheer in tough phases. To my in-laws, Amma, for her guidance in staying organized and for the voice notes reminding me to take breaks. Abba, whose excitement with each new milestone was unmatched. And to Qudsia and Saad, thank you for always believing in me, and for showing up, especially when I couldn’t. To my friends in Cambridge, Aradhya, Kanad, Khadija, Nikita, Ranjini, Siddharth, Snigdha, and Trishant, thank you for not just believing in me, but for fully embracing me into your lives. Thank you for the Monday Mehfils, the comfort of good food, and for turning pickleball court into a sanctuary. This thesis quietly leans on all those moments. A heartfelt thanks to Reem, for being a steady listener when I was lost in thought, and to Snigdha, for your sharp eye and attention to detail, you both helped me in ways I didn’t even realise I needed. To my dear friends, Vikrant and Larah, thank you for being my anchors in Delhi. Your warm dinners during the chaos of fieldwork were moments of comfort and calm I’ll never forget. And for sending across my collection of books on Shahjahanabad, what a quiet act of care that was. Without your help, this research would have taken longer, and felt far less grounded. I’m so grateful to have had you both alongside me. And to my friend Qamar, in Kashmir, our conversations about everything but the thesis helped me stay sane and reminded me of a world beyond deadlines and drafts. The ghazals of Farida Khanum, Talat Mahmood, and Jagjit Singh were my constant background score, softening long nights and quiet moments of reflection. They made the solitude sweeter. And finally, to Farah, thank you for everything. You stood by me in joy and in doubt, in moments of clarity and when I lost my way. For reading my drafts, for talking through every stuck argument, for your steady presence and for living through every day of my thesis, I am endlessly grateful. This thesis wouldn’t exist without you. To all those mentioned here, and to the many more who go unnamed but remain deeply remembered, I offer my heartfelt thanks. Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Framing the Context……………………………………………………………………. 3 1.2 The Imperial Capital: A Background…………………………………………………….8 1.3 Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………………. 13 1.4 Research Question……………………………………………………………………….17 1.5 Research Design: Method and Approach………………………………………………... 17 1.6 Thesis Layout…………………………………………………………………………… 20 2.0 Waterscapes as Powerscapes………………………………………………….... 23 2.1 Empire and Ecology…………………………………………………………………….. 24 2.2 The Mughal Imperial Identity………………………………………………………….. 30 2.3 Water and the Turko-Mongolian Empires……………………………………………… 37 2.3.1 Watershed Empires: A Contextual Formation………………………………... 42 2.3.2 Religion and Water Governance………………………………………………51 3.0 Water Management Practices in pre-Mughal South Asia……………………... 58 3.1 Indic Water Management Practices: An Overview……………………………………….59 3.2 Water Management Practices of pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia……………………….. 66 3.2.1 Pre-Mughal Muslim empires of South Asia (ca. 977-1526)…………………... 68 a. Ghaznavid Empire (ca. 977-1186)……………………………………… 69 b. Ghurid Empire (ca. 1150-1215)………………………………………... 72 c. Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526)……………………………………………. 73 3.2.2 Pre-Mughal Delhi (9th c. to 1526): A Case Study……………………………. 80 3.3 Towards a Tripartite Urbanism Model in South Asia…………………………………… 84 4.0 Archaeology of Water Management in Mughal South Asia: An Overview…… 91 4.1 Water Management Practices in Mughal South Asia: Types and Techniques…………… 92 3.2.1 Sources and Methods………………………………………………………… 93 3.2.2 Saawan-Bhadon Landscape: Discussion on Types and Techniques of Mughal Waterworks………………………………………………………………... 98 4.2 Qila-Shahristan-Bagha’at: The ‘New Order’ of Urbanism……………………………….. 106 4.2.1 Agra………………………………………………………………………….. 108 4.2.2 Lahore………………………………………………………………………... 111 4.2.3 Fatehpur Sikri………………………………………………………………... 114 5.0 Shah Nahr: Mapping the Waterscape of the Mughal Canal…………………... 119 5.1 Canal in History: An Overview…………………………………………………………. 120 5.2 Representation of the Canal Landscape…………………………………………………. 124 5.3 The Past in the Present: Mapping the Mughal Canal…………………………………… 133 5.3.1 Georeferencing Process………………………………………………………..134 5.3.2 Canal Tracing Process………………………………………………………... 137 5.3.3 Field Survey…………………………………………………………………...140 5.4 Hydrology and Hydraulics……………………………………………………………… 147 5.4.1 Hydrological Landscape Modelling…………………………………………... 147 5.4.2 Hydraulic Techniques………………………………………………………... 155 5.5 Canal through Scale, Space and Time……………………………………………………156 5.5.1 Scale………………………………………………………………………….. 156 5.5.2 Space…………………………………………………………………………. 160 5.5.3 Time…………………………………………………………………………. 167 i 6.0 Water Map of Shahjahanabad and its Garden Suburbs……………………….. 172 6.1 City and Surrounds……………………………………………………………………... 173 6.2 Between Kuhi and Darya: Suburbs, City and the Fort of Shahjahanabad………………... 181 6.2.1 Garden Suburbs……………………………………………………………… 181 6.2.2 City of Shahjahanabad……………………………………………………….. 192 6.2.3 Delhi Fort or Qila-i Mualla………………………………………………….. 211 7.0 The Making of an Infrastructural Monument: Mapping Water, Mapping Empire in Shahjahanabad……………………………………………………………………. 231 7.1 Framing the Gaze: Staging Water in the Tripartite Urban Model………………………. 233 7.1.1 Water Display: Towards Space and Order (Shahristan and Qila)…………….. 233 7.1.2 Contours of ‘Engagements’ as Contours of ‘Segregation’…………………….. 239 7.1.3 Water in a Mediated Environment (Bagha’at)………………………………... 247 7.2 Re-Configuring a Landscape: Water and Imperial Identity……………………………… 251 7.1.2 Water and Work……………………………………………………………... 257 7.3 Water Management in a ‘Faith-based Environment’……………………………………. 260 7.3.1 Hosting ‘Water’ in a Sacred Geography……………………………………….264 a. Yamuna’s Sacredscape…………………………………………………... 268 b. Islam and Water Practices………………………………………………. 271 7.4 Towards a Watershed Empire……………………………………………………………274 8.0 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….. 278 8.1 Shahjahanabad: A Turko-Mongolian Water Urbanism Model………………………….. 282 8.2 Towards Preservation of ‘Infrastructural Systems’………………………………………… 289 8.3 The Way Forward………………………………………………………………………. 293 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………... 298 a. Reference List…………………………………………………………………………… 298 b. Archaeological Reports…………………………………………………………………... 325 c. Historical Texts………………………………………………………………………….. 328 d. Maps & Photographs……………………………………………………………………. 330 Appendix ii List of Illustrations Chapter 1 Figure 1.1: Water Stressed Districts of South Asia (after Jal Shakti Abhiyan 2019; Water Stress Levels, after WRI Aqueduct 4.0). The map also shows illustrates the precolonial empires (1206-1857) associated with these districts……………………………………………………………………….. 2 Figure 1.2: Illuminated frontispiece of Padshahnama with portraits of the Mughal Emperor Shahjahan and Timur (Source: Royal Collection Trust; RCINS 1005025.d and 1005025.e)……………………….. 4 Figure 1.3: River Yamuna and the Tughlaq (14th C), Mughal (17th C) and British Canal (19th C)……... 10 Figure 1.4: Map of Environs of Shahjahanabad (1807), showing the location of the city, Shah Nahr, and the villages (Source: Survey of India)……………………………………………………………………. 11 Figure 1.5: Research Design………………………………………………………………………………. 19 Chapter 2 Figure 2.1: Fortified City of Abhar, drawn by Nasuh Matrakchi (1533- 1536), Folio 38a [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]………………………………………………………………………….. 22 Figure 2.2: Turko-Mongolian Empires: Empire Boundaries after Blake (2013), Silk Road after Resource Library of National Geographic Society (2021), Badhshahi Sadak after Bihar Museum Archives & Google Maps (2021), and Climatic Regions after Koppen-Geiger system by Beck et.al. (2021)…………….. 31 Figure 2.3: Genealogical Seal of Shahjahan (1636) [Source: Gallop 1999:118]…………………………… 32 The central portion of the seal features the name of His Imperial Majesty Abu-al Muzaffar Shihab-al-Din Muhammad Sahib Qiran Sani Shahjahan Badshah, who is also known as Sahib Qiran Sani, Sahib Qiran II, or Timur II. The emperor's genealogy is inscribed in the outer circle, which consists of nine smaller circles. This genealogical record begins with the name of his father, Jehangir, located in the northeast, and concludes with Sahib-i Qiran Amir Timur in the north. Figure 2.4: Map showing the geographical extent of representatives in Shahjahan’s Court (after Eaton 2019:384)……………………………………………………………………………… 35 Figure 2.5: Turko-Mongolian Water Infrastructure (14th-18th c.)……………………………………….. 39 Figure 2.6: Conquest of Baghdad by Timur, Folio from a Zafarnama (Book of Victory) by Sharaf al-din ‘Ali Yazdi (1436) [Source: MET Museum, Acc. No. 55.121.17]………………………. 41 Figure 2.7: Timur before Battle, Folio from a Dispersed Copy of the Zafarnama (Book of Victories) of Sharaf al-din ‘Ali Yazdi (1436) [Source: MET Museum, Acc. No. 55.121.16………………………………. 41 Figure 2.8: Canal Network in Timurid Herat [after Allen (1983)]………………………………………... 44 Figure 2.9: The Four Books of Agriculture & Hydrology: Irshad Al-Zira’a (Safavid), Tariq-i Qismat-i Ab-o Qalb (Safavid), Bayaz-i Khushbui (Mughal), and Nuskha Dar Fanni-i Falahat (Mughal)……………. 48 Figure 2.10: Map of Kanuni’s Campaign to Safavid Iran [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]. The rectangular dashed- line box to the right indicates the geographical region under the control of the Safavid dynasty……...49 Figure 2.11: Fortified city of Hamadan, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]…... 50 Figure 2.12: Safavid City of Tabriz, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]………..50 iii Figure 2.13: Shrine located adjacent to rivers and streams; Ab-e Shirin, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]…………………………………………………………….. 52 Figure 2.14: Shrine located adjacent to the canal in the suburbs of Qasba Abhar, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]……………………………………………………….. 52 Chapter 3 Figure 3.0: A Baolee, near the old city of Delhi, 1801 by Thomas Daniell RA (Source: Object No. 18/2398; Royal Academy of Arts, London)……………………………………………………………………. 57 Figure 3.1: Map of Pre-Mughal Muslim Empires in South Asia (after Schwartzberg, 1978); Made with Natural Earth @naturalearthdata.com……………………………………………………………………….. 69 Figure 3.2: Garden Suburbs of the Assyrian capital of Nineveh fed by Sennacherib’s spring-fed Canal (Source: The British Museum, London; 124939,b)…………………………………………………. 71 Figure 3.3: Tughlaqabad Fort in Delhi (Image Source: Yogesh YK)………………………………………. 78 Figure 3.4 Firuz Shah Tughlaq Canal near Karnal………………………………………………………... 78 Figure 3.5: Medieval Cities of Delhi (after Hearn 1906); Land profile based on Survey of India ‘Delhi and Vicinity’ Sheet (1910-11), National Archives of India, Delhi (after Guerrieri 2017)………………... 81 Figure 3.6: ‘Tripartite Urban Model’ (Qila-Shahristan-Rabad) Cities of Iran & Central Asia (after Barthold 1984; Minorsky 1970; Sobti 2005)………………………………………………….. 86 Chapter 4 Figure 4.0: The Buland Darwaza at Fatehpur Sikri with the water-tank in foreground [Drawing by W. Simpson 1865; Acc. No. 1133-1869 V&A Museum, London]……………………………………… 90 Figure 4.1: Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (with Seasonal Rainfall data for Nov-Dec)……….. 94 Figure 4.2: Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (with Seasonal Rainfall data for Jan-Feb)………… 95 Figure 4.3: Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (with Seasonal Rainfall data for March-May)…….. 96 Figure 4.4: Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (with Seasonal Rainfall data for June-Oct)……….. 97 Figure 4.5: Mughal Water Features in the ‘Saawan Bhadon’ Landscape of South Asia based on Archaeological Excavations & Epigraphic Evidence…………………………………………………. 101 Figure 4.6: A single-drum Persian wheel water lifting technique (Source: National Museum of Asian Art, F1907.208)……………………………………………………………………………… 104 Figure 4.7: A pulley-based water lifting technique outside a Fort (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria & Albert Museum Collection, IS.2:85- 1896)………………………………………………………………… 104 Figure 4.8: Persian Wheel water lifting technique from a garden well at Bagh-i Wafa, Kabul (Source: Baburnama, Collection of National Museum, New Delhi)………………………………… 104 Figure 4.9: Double-wheel technique from a well at Fatehpur Sikri (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria & Albert Museum Collection, IS.2:86-1896)………………………………………………………….. 104 iv Figure 4.10: Saqia as a water lifting device employed in the construction of the Agra Fort (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria and Albert Museum Collection, IS:2:110-1896)…………………….. 105 Figure 4.11: A pulley-based water lifting technique employed by farmers to irrigate agriculture farmlands [Source: Padshahnama, Royal Collection Trust, RCIN 1005025, folio 156a]………………………. 105 Figure 4.12: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks across Settlement Scales……………………………….. 107 Figure 4.13: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Agra (1526-1857) …………………………………...110 Figure 4.14: Archaeological Remains of the Waterworks of Mahtab Bagh in Agra……………………….. 111 Figure 4.15: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Lahore (1526-1857)………………………………... 113 Figure 4.16: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Fatehpur Sikri (Babur-Akbar Period)……………….. 115 Chapter 5 Figure 5.1: A stretch of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal Map, a.k.a Shah Nahr or Nahr-i Faiz or Nahr-i Bihisht c.a. 1750 (Source: Andhra Pradesh State Archives, Hyderabad, India)………………………………. 118 Figure 5.2: Firuz Shah Tughlaq Canal [after Singh (1992)]………………………………………………. 121 Figure 5.3: 1823 British Survey Map of Delhi Villages depicting the Shah Nahr route (Source: F-02/40, National Archives of India)………………………………………………………. 123 Figure 5.4: 1857 Map of Shahjahanabad showing the Shah Nahr through the Garden Suburbs, Walled City & the Fort (Source: 1841-60-85A, National Archives of India)………………………………... 123 Figure 5.5: A section of the scroll map of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal or Shah Nahr, c.a. 1750 (Source: Andhra Pradesh State Archives, Hyderabad)……………………………………………….. 125 Figure 5.6: Hand-drawn Map of Shah Nahr (1750) showing water lifting devices, wells, and elephant as a standard of measurement of canal’s depth (for details refer to Appendix 4A)……………………. 127 Figure 5.7: Nahr-i Faiz landscape description in Route Map in Chahar Gulshan by Rai Chaturman Saksena Kayasth, 18th Century Gazettee (Source: National Mission for Mansucript, Dilli Kitab Ghar) …….. 128 Figure 5.8: Map of Chadjeanabad showing the Mughal Canal (Source: Gentil Atlas of India, Susan Gole, 1988)…………………………………………………………………………………... 128 Figure 5.9: Route Map of Delhi to Kandahar (Source: IO Islamic 4380, British Library)………………….129 Figure 5.10: The channel of Ali Mardan Khan’s canal at Karnal, with the encampment of the Raja of Patiala, Punjab on either side of it, by Sita Ram (Source: Add.Or.4786, British Library)……………………. 130 Figure 5.11: The Mughal Canal in Chandni Chowk by Sita Ram 1814-15; Chandni Chowk from the top of the Lahore Gate of the Red Fort (Source: British Library; also The Heritage Lab)…………………... 131 Figure 5.12: The view of Mughal Canal in Chandni Chowk, from Fatehpuri Masjid, 1857 (Source: The Illustrated London News, 1857)………………………………………………………. 131 Figure 5.13: Statistical Table showing details of Village Water Infrastructure within Delhi Territory in 1823-24…………………………………………………………………………………………... 134 v Figure 5.14: Map of Villages of Delhi (1823-24) with Geographical Coordinates of Settlements (red), Road Intersections (yellow) and Built Features (green), used for Georeferencing………………………….. 136 Figure 5.15: Georeferenced Maps of Villages of Delhi (1823-24) used for mapping the route of Mughal Canal: The Canal in Rural Landscape………………………………………………………………………. 137 Figure 5.16: Georeferenced Maps of Villages of Delhi (1823-24) used for mapping the route of Mughal Canal: The Canal within Urban Delhi………………………………………………………137 Figure 5.17: Present state of the Mughal canal (2023-24) as dry beds(A), seasonal waters(B), profile of agricultural land (C & D), marshy land (E), village pathways (f), and urban roads (G & H)………... 138 Figure 5.18: Georeferenced Map of Villages of Delhi (1823-24). The route of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal or Shah Nahr (in white) and the British Canal, also known as Western Yamuna Canal (in yellow). The canal bed has disappeared in the stretch shown by dashed line…………………………………..139 Figure 5.19: During the Reconnaissance Survey of the Shah Nahr near Kailana………………………….. 141 Figure 5.20: Linear ‘Eucalyptus’ Forests along the Mughal Canal stretch near Sheikhupura……………… 141 Figure 5.21: A page from the Fieldwork Booklet, Refer to Appendix I/A for Complete Booklet………….. 141 Figure 5.22: Shah Nahr Field Survey Points……………………………………………………………….144 Figure 5.23: Canal Section (Karnal to Shahjahanabad)…………………………………………………… 145 Figure 5.24: Hydrological Landscape of Shah Nahr (based on fieldsurvey & historical maps)…………….. 146 Figure 5.25: SMTVI & Drainage Map of the Canal Landscape…………………………………………... 149 Figure 5.26: Multi-Scale Relief Model (MSRM) of Canal Landscape…………………………………….. 150 Figure 5.27: Details of Multi-Scale Relief Model (MSRM) of Canal Landscape………………………….. 151 Figure 5.28: Paleochannels (based on MSRM, using TanDEM-X imagery)………………………………. 152 Figure 5.29: Shah Nahr & Paleochannels (based on MSRM, using TanDEM-X imagery)……………….. 153 Figure 5.30: Hydrological Landscape of Shah Nahr (based on fieldsurvey & historical sources)…………... 154 Figure 5.31: Rehat or Persian wheel attached to a well, to the North of Delhi, 1813 (Sketch by Col. Smith; Source I309, British Library)………………………………………………...156 Figure 5.32: Presence of water features in the Mughal hunting grounds. The image also indicates its location in a transition zone between the forest and cultivable lands. Image: Preparations for a Hunt, ca. 1680 (Acc. No. 2005. 235a), The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York……………………………….157 Figure 5.33: Hydrological Landscape Types: Nahr, Shahr & Darya………………………………………. 165 Figure 5.34: Mughal Canal Villages: Irrigated Area Map of Selective Villages…………………………….. 166 Figure 5.35: Sheet 53C of Survey of India (1914) shows the disused old Mughal Canal (referred here as ‘Disused Canal’ and ‘Old W.J. Canal’), along with the active British Canal shown in Blue. (Source MAHSA Repository, Cambridge)…………………………………………………………………… 170 vi Chapter 6 Figure 6.0: A section of Mazhar Ali Khan’s painting of Shahjahanabad (1840). It shows the Delhi Fort overlooking the walled-city and Jama Masjid, city’s sovereign mosque. Lal Diggi Reservoir is shown on the right. [Source: Losty 2012]……………………………………………………………………… 171 Figure 6.1: Site of Shahjahanabad as an Inner Frontier in South Asia…………………………………….. 174 Figure 6.2: Transportation of Iron Pillar to Firozabad on Yamuna (Source: Page 1937)………………….. 175 Figure 6.3: Navigation on the Yamuna: Stretch between Salimgarh Fort (in grey) & the Mughal Fort (in red) (Source: V&A Museum, IM.49-1923, ca. 1836)……………………………………………………. 175 Figure 6.4: Anang Tal (Reservoir) within Lal Kot (9th C); Satpula Dam & Reservoir within Jahanpanah (1334)…………………………………………………………………………………. 176 Figure 6.5: Satellite Imagery of present-day Shahjahanabad showing the location of Shrines in immediate environs…………………………………………………………………………………. 178 Figure 6.6: 1857 Map of Environs of Shahjahanabad (Supervised by Major General A. Wilson & Lieut. Col. R. Baird Smith)…………………………………………………………………………. 184 Figure 6.7: 1857 Georeferenced Map of Environs of Shahjahanabad……………………………………... 184 Figure 6.8: Reconstructed Digital Elevation Model of Mughal Period of the Garden Suburbs of Shahjahanabad (1639-1857)………………………………………………………………………… 186 Figure 6.9: Contour Map of Garden Suburbs during the Mughal Period (1639-1857)…………………… 187 Figure 6.10: Digitally Reconstructed Contours & Stream Network of the Garden Mughal Period (1639-1857)………………………………………………………………………………………….188 Figure 6.11: Garden Suburbs (Reconstruction), with associated water features; river, streams, bunds, and canals…………………………………………………………………………………………… 189 Figure 6.12: Garden suburbs (Reconstruction), with location of wells and tanks…………………………. 190 Figure 6.13: Reconstructed DEM showing location of shrines and religious structures, along with water features……………………………………………………………………………………….. 191 Figure 6.15: Traces of Hillocks within the Walled City: Pahadi Imli and Pahadi Bhojla…………………. 193 Figure 6.16: Landform Reconstruction of Mughal Shahjahanabad……………………………………….. 194 Figure 6.17: Pre-Shahjahanabad Structures on Reconstructed Landform (after Chenoy 1998)…………… 195 Figure 6.18: Draw-bridge at Lahore Gate of the Fort; 1840s Map showing the draw-bridge at Lahore Gate of the City; and Delhi Gate of the City…………………………………………………………196 Figure 6.19 & 6.20: Stream Network and Micro-Valley Formations based on Reconstructed Landform of Shahjahanabad (for details refer to Appendix III/5B)………………………………………………... 196 Figure 6.21: Map showing Imperial water features (canal & moat) together with the Fort & the Elite Mosques of Shahjahanabad (based on 1840s Map of Shahjahanabad)………………………………………… 197 vii Figure 6.22: 1840s Hand-drawn Map of Shahjahanabad. © British Library Board, X/1659, India Office Collection, London…………………………………………………………………………………..198 Figure 6.23: Map showing the location of Mosques & Gardens within Shahjahanabad (based on 1840s map of the city)………………………………………………………………………………………202 Figure 6.24: Extant Octagonal Wells of Shahjahanabad (for details refer to fieldwork booklet in Appendix I/B)……………………………………………………………………………. 204 Figure 6.25: Shahjahanabad: Field Survey Points…………………………………………………………. 205 Figure 6.26: Shahjahanabad: Extant Water Features……………………………………………………… 206 Figure 6.27: Documentation of Wells, Shahjahanabad…………………………………………………… 207 Figure 6.28: Documentation of Tanks/Cisterns, Shahjahanabad…………………………………………. 208 Figure 6.29: Map of Shahjahanabad showing mosques, gardens & all water features (based on fieldwork & 1840s map of the city)…………………………………………………………………………….210 Figure 6.30: The water channels leading to Zafar Mahal, within Fort complex. The surviving British barrack- yards can be seen in the background on either side of the Zafar Mahal……………………………… 212 Figure 6.31: Plan of Delhi Fort Complex before demolition by the British Empire (after Sanderson, 1914). Structures shown in red were demolished in 1857 as a measure of visual control by the colonial forces…………………………………………………………………………………213 Figure 6.32: Nahr-i-Bihisht within the Imperial quarters of the Delhi Fort Complex……………………... 214 Figure 6.33: Archaeological Excavation of the Mahtab Bagh conducted in 2014 by the ASI……………… 216 Figure 6.34: Delhi Fort: Field Survey Points ……………………………………………………………... 218 Figure 6.35: Delhi Fort: Floor Plan of Extant Structures (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914)………………………………………………………………….. 219 Figure 6.36: Delhi Fort: Stormwater Outlets & Storage Tanks…………………………………………… 220 Figure 6.37: Delhi Fort: Canal Network (Conjectural)…………………………………………………… 221 Figure 6.38: Water Map of Shahjahanabad……………………………………………………………….. 229 Chapter 7 Figure 7.0: A segment of the 1840s Hand-drawn Map of Shahjahanabad. © British Library Board, X/1659, India Office Collection, London…………………………………………………………………….. 230 Figure 7.1: ‘Water Display’ or Manzar of Chandni Chowk Street (top) and Faiz Bazaar Street (bottom). Both illustrations depict the Shah Nahr as the central element of the commercial axes. The presence of fountains on the main streets as well as within mosques contributed to the imperial ‘water display’ within the walled city. (Source: Five Plans of Delhi, AL.1 762, V&A Museum, London)………………….. 235 Figure 7.2: Elements of Water Display -Tanks & Fountains within Elite & Neighbourhood Mosques…………………………………………………………………………… 238 viii Figure 7.3: Neighbourhood Map of the 02 thanas of Shahjahanabad, with the Canal and the Havelis………………………………………………………………………………………….. 240 Figure 7.4: Map of Shahjahanabad (North) showing the location of religious institutions, gardens and water features within the two thanas of the walled-city……………………………………………………. 241 Figure 7.5: Map of Shahjahanabad (North) showing the location of different caste-based mohallas (neighbourhoods) with water features……………………………………………………………….. 241 Figure 7.6: Traces of the Badshahi Drain found during Chandni Chowk Redevelopment Project (Source: Sharma 2019: The Times of India)………………………………………………………... 243 Figure 7.7: Mughal-era Stormwater Drain in Red Fort (Source: Roychowdhury 2020; Hindustan Times)…………………………………………………………………………………………243 Figure 7.8: Badshahi Drain Network of Chandni Chowk Street (based on Appendix D of Robert’s Report of 1852)…………………………………………………………………………………….. 244 Figure 7.9: A well with platform located at a temple node; Public wells marked sacred by a statue of a Hindu Goddess; A platform-well on a neighbourhood street…………………………… 244 Figure 7.10: Map showing the distribution of public wells within the walled city, along with their Mean Catchment Area………………………………………………………………………………. 245 Figure 7.11: Direction of Water Movements in the Garden Suburb (Conjectural)……………………….. 250 Figure 7.12: River Yamuna & Mughal Canals……………………………………………………………. 253 Figure 7.13: The Jumna Canal near Meerut with soldiers and fortifications, by Robert Smith (Source: National Army Museum, London, Acc. No. NAM. 1971-08-16-1; also Chakrabarti, 2020:29)…….. 255 Figure 7.14: Capt. T. Oliver’s Survey Map of Shah Nahr (1823-24). The survey sheet shows the presence of rehats and sluices along the Mughal Canal (Source: F-02/40, Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India 1700-1900, National Archives of India)…………………………………………….. 258 Figure 7.15: The approach lane to the Shrine of Shah Turkman Biyanbani within Shahjahanabad………. 265 Figure 7.16: Temple Shrine adjacent to a Pond in the Canal Landscape………………………………….. 265 Figure 7.17: Water Saint -Khwaja Khizr’s Tomb in Sonipat (Courtesy: Shiekh Intekhab Alam)………….. 266 Figure 7.18: 1823-24 Survey Sheet of Shah Nahr showing the location of Temples & Tombs adjacent to the canal. (Source: F-02/38, Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India 1700-1900, National Archives of India)…………………………………………………………………………………… 266 Figure 7.19: Shrine of Sheikh Salim Chishti in Fatehpur Sikri by Yoshida Hiroshi (Source: Copy from C. A. Petrie’s Private Collection, Cambridge)……………………………………………………….. 267 Figure 7.20: Jahangir preferring a Sufi Shaykh to Kings (Source: St. Petersburg Album, F1942.15, Freer Gallery of Art; Wikimedia Commons)……………………………………………………………… 268 Chapter 8 Figure 8.0: Babur supervising the garden layout of Bagh-i Wafa at Kabul c.a. 1504 (Source: Acc. No. IM276A.1913, V&A Museum, London)…………………………………………………………… 277 ix Figure 8.1: Kuhi-Darya Urbanism Model of Samarqand, Herat, Mashhad, and Shahjahanabad (Base Map: Google Earth Satellite Imagery @2025)………………………………………………… 285 Figure 8.2: Tripartite Urban Model of Timurid Samarqand (after Brandenburg 1972), Herat (after Allen 1981), & Mughal Shahjahanabad…………………………………………………………………… 285 Figure 8.3: Shahjahani water tank at Ahu Khana, Burhanpur, India……………………………………… 297 x List of Tables 3.1 Order of Urban Settlements (Existing & New) in Pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia……... 88 4.1: Rainfall distribution on sites (127) with traces of Mughal Waterworks…………………. 99 4.2 Distribution of Mughal Waterworks based on Climatic Regions & Water Source………. 100 4.3: Distribution of Mughal Water Features across Settlement Scale………………………... 107 5.1: Place Names indicative of Water Features & Source……………………………………. 161 5.2: Access Techniques in the Mughal Hydrological Landscape of the Shah Nahr………….. 164 6.1: Listing of Feature Types for ANUDEM-based landform reconstruction……………….. 193 6.2: Water Features within the Walled City of Shahjahanabad……………………………… 201 8.1: List of Large-scale Water Infrastructural System in South Asia (11th to 19th c.)…………. 295 xi Note on Transliteration Many of the terms used for water features in the Indian subcontinent, particularly in present-day India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, have Persian origins. The transliteration scheme employed in this thesis adheres to a Perso-Indian style of pronunciation. It has been italicized but with no macrons and underdots. The standardized scheme primarily reflects the linguistic characteristics of North India, as well as certain regions of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Deccan India, particularly within the Urdu and Hindi-speaking belt. It is not intended to serve as a comprehensive representation of South Asia, a region characterized by significant linguistic diversity. Toponyms and names of water features are presented in an anglicized format and have not been italicized. xii Genghis Khan Borte Alamgir Aurangzeb Bahadur Shah ‘Zafar’ II [Mughal Empire was dissolved in 1857 by the British Imperial Forces] e Mughal Genealogy Shahjahan Jahangir Akbar Humayun [Founded Mughal Empire in 1526] Babur Jahangir Mirza IIMaham Begum Umair Mirza II Abu Sai’d Mirza Muhammad Sultan Umar Mirza IJahangir Mirza II Miran Shah Shah Rukh [Mongol: Founded Mongol Empire in 1206] [Turk: Founded Timurid Empire in 1370] Saray Mulk Khanum Qazan Khan Alghu Jochi Chagatai Khan Ogedei KhanYesulun Khatun Tolui Timur [r. 1628-1658] [established Shahjahanabad in 1648; construction began in 1639] [after Smart 1981; and Balabanlilar 2012] 1.0 Introduction Water. This symbol of life and prosperity; sacrament, cleanser and healer; devastator, and destroyer; is one of the most revered and feared elements in the South Asian landscape. It does not merely govern the banalities of everyday living but directs the forms of traditions, rituals, trade, defense, recreation, and infrastructure. In a geography marked sacred by the presence of saints and ‘traces of gods’ (Haberman 2012; after Eck 2012), it dictates settlement forms and often orients the movement patterns of its believers. It acquires a tangible presence in the landscape through damming, siphoning, and barraging of extensive rivers, as well as the construction of deep wells, stepwells, large reservoirs, and interconnected tanks. Historically, water has been pivotal in harmoniously shaping natural landscapes and built environments. However, in contemporary urban South Asia, the relationship between water and settlements has evolved into a form defined by haphazard growth and unplanned exploitation of resources. This, coupled with the burgeoning population, has resulted in numerous districts experiencing severe water stress. Within South Asia, already known to be one of the world’s most water-stressed areas, an overwhelming 74% of inhabitants are experiencing high levels of water stress (WRI 2023). As per Aqueduct 4.0 (WRI), India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh feature among the 17 highest drought risk nations of the world. Until 1947, most of South Asia formed a contiguous region of related hydrological practices and water management techniques. The homogeneity in hydraulic expressions across South Asia during the medieval and early modern phases can be attributed both to the shared cultural and geographical landscape in the region and to the Sultanate and Mughal state apparatus that dominated administration in the region from 1206 to 1857 (Husain 1963:1), succeeded by the British until 1947. The Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526), Mughal Empire (1526-1857) and Provincial Sultanates of Deccan, Malwa and Jaunpur played major roles in the growth of water-centric urbanism practices in medieval and early modern South Asia. From 12th to 19th century these regions witnessed cities shaped by water forms such as the darya (rivers; Herat, Kabul, Agra) nahr (canals; Hissar, Lahore, Delhi), qanat (subterranean channels; Bidar, Gulbarga, Burhanpur), jheel (lakes; Bhopal, Ajmer, Fatehpur Sikri) and hauz (reservoirs, cisterns; Siri, Mandu, Sialkot). Settlements were formed either close to water sources (Fatehpur Sikri, Mandu, Chanderi, Ahmadabad) or water was drawn over large distances through canals and subterranean channels to serve the urban centre (Bidar, Burhanpur, Lahore, Delhi). The Mughal Empire implemented extensive hydraulic systems in semi-arid regions of South Asia. However, they were not pioneers in this endeavour. The Tughlaq dynasty (1320-1413) had previously established monumental canals in the interfluve areas of northwest South Asia, extending into the arid regions of the Figure 1.0: Map of the Persianate World [after Eaton 2019] 1 empire to support agricultural communities (Zilli 2015:348; Welch 1996). In contrast, the Mamluk (Turks), Khalji (Turko-Afghan), and Lodi (Afghans) dynasties of Delhi focused their hydrological practices on constructing rainwater harvesting devices to redirect and store seasonal waters. The Tughlaqs also founded cities such as Tughlaqabad, Jahanpanah, Hissar (Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi of Afif 124), and Firozabad (Husain 1963), often under the guidance of architects and engineers from Iran and Central Asia (Irfan 2018:264-65). These structures represent some of the best examples of medieval water management. Under subsequent Sultanate dynasties, these cities experienced a decline when the capital shifted from Delhi to Badayun, and later to Agra. It was not until the advent of the Mughal Empire in 1526 that the water management systems in these cities were revitalised to serve the new state. Figure 1.1: Water Stressed Districts of South Asia (after Jal Shakti Abhiyan 2019; Water Stress Levels, after WRI Aqueduct 4.0). The map also illustrates the precolonial empires (1206-1857) associated with these districts. Recent research in the field of waterworks and drainage has focused on the colonial capitals of India (D’Souza 2006); however, there is little work on the water systems of the precolonial Sultanate and Mughal establishments (Alam and Subramanyam 1998). This research is placed at a time when 80% of 2 the 256 water-stressed districts in India sit on pre-colonial Mughal and Sultanate urban settlements (see Figure 1.1; also, Appendix II/1A). In addition, 30% of these overlap with derelict waterscapes in former settlements of the Persian Sultanates in the Deccan. Most of the medieval water infrastructure in South Asia was rendered dysfunctional following the introduction of the piped-water supply by the British Empire in the 20th century. The study of such deteriorated waterscapes is significant both locally and as an instantiated urban-regional hydrological model, inspired and influenced by multiple regions and empires. The historic waterscapes were designed in response to the degree of aridity, and learning from the success and failure of their historic models can provide a blueprint for the adoption and adaptation of the model, both on utilitarian and aesthetic grounds, across the parched landscape of present-day South Asia. Such a study can also inform urban conservation models and provide insights into evolving urbanisation patterns in South Asia. This thesis investigates the Mughal system of waterworks as a tool of empire consolidation and expansion through a study of their hydrological landscape experimentations across South Asia, with specific attention on Shahjahanabad, the last capital of the Mughal Empire (1639- 1857). As an empire with its ancestral roots beyond the South Asian geography, the learnings engraved in transregional flows of traditions, broadly, and hydraulics, specifically, has the potential to discern framework of ‘world’ and ‘order’ through ideas of representation and identity. 1.1 Framing the Context South Asia has consistently been at the centre of various types of transregional flow through its maritime connections (Seland 2014) and land routes (Neelis 2011), positioning it at the intersection of knowledge exchange between multiple cultures and geographies. Dalrymple (2024), in his recent book on The Golden Road, positions India (250BC-1200 AD) as the preeminent centre of Eurasia, contributing to the social and political landscape between Rome and China. This period also witnessed the exchange of transregional cultural production, with India as its centre, and is commonly referred to as the ‘Sanskrit cosmopolis’ (after Pollock 2009) due to the language’s contribution in shaping the ‘religio-politico cultural order’ (after Thompson 2012) in the geography between the two powerful imperial centres. Sanskrit extended beyond sacred spaces to become the literary and political language of South Asia and the greater connected world. It no longer remained a language of a place and had evolved into a ‘transregional language’ (Eaton 2019:9). With the advent of the Ghaznavids and Ghurids into South Asia in the 11th century, the region gradually transitioned to being a part of another language-based world, the Persianate world. Hodgson (1974:293) coined the term Persianate as a form of an independent cultural vehicle, with its inclination towards Islam, defining the traditions of the Iranian lands and Central Asia. It was an attempt to define a geographic region with Persian as its predominant force of cultural production (after Chida-Razvi 2019). 3 Eaton (2019:380) posits that the period between the 11th and the 17th century witnessed a ‘quickening pace’ of exchange of statecraft and architecture between South Asia and Central Asia. The sub-continent was gradually developing into a major centre of the Persianate world (also Green 2019; Amanat & Ashraf 2019), especially the ‘mightiest empire’ of the Great Mughals. Akbar, the 3rd Mughal emperor, declared Persian the state language of the empire in 1582, and by the end of the 18th century, India emerged as the leading centre of Persian scholarship in the world (Eaton 2019:381). Shahjahan’s court was described by his imperial secretary to comprise representatives from all Persian-speaking world, signifying the dominance of the empire in the Persianate world of cultural traditions (Eaton 2019:384). Shahjahan is reported to have ‘perfectly resembled’ the world conqueror and Mughal progenitor, Timur, having been born under the same ‘auspicious conjunction’ (Habib 1996:294). Timur is widely regarded as one of the most influential emperors of the Persianate world, and following him, Shahjahan adopted the title Sahib-i Qiran Sani (Lord of the Conjunction II) or Timur II. Figure 1.2: Illuminated frontispiece of Padshahnama with portraits of the Mughal Emperor Shahjahan (left) and Timur(right). (Source: Royal Collection Trust; RCINS 1005025.d and 1005025.e) 4 Timur’s reign was defined by Hodgson (1974:49) as the ‘Persianate flowering’ period, designating it as the golden age in the Persianate world. As a significant world order of the ‘Chinggisid- style sovereignty model’ (after Zarakol 2022:57), the Timurid empire (first of the Turko-Mongols) and the subsequent Great Houses of Ottoman, Safavid and the Mughal contributed collectively to shaping the Persianate landscape of Iran and Central Asia. Zarakol (2022:18) identifies the model’s principal feature as the construction of a political genealogy that connected later empires to the Great Khan, Chingiz. This genealogical linkage functioned as a foundational source of legitimacy, a strategy also reflected in the Timurid model and acknowledged by the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals, who expressed reverence for Timur (Moin 2014:24). In addition, the model emphasized political centralization and legislative capacity, further reinforced by external recognition that projected an image of universal sovereignty. Significantly, legitimacy was not secured solely through dynastic succession or military strength but through hybrid strategies that integrated religious authority. Religion, particularly Islam in the Timurid case, became a crucial instrument for consolidating power. The model, therefore, provided a versatile and adaptive framework for imperial governance. While the Ottomans engaged less directly with this tradition, the Safavids, and the Mughals extended it substantially. Their shared practices helped integrate the Turko-Mongol Perso-Islamic world, illustrating how sovereignty was articulated through a blend of political, religious, and cultural claims. The Turko-Mongol paradigm represented a synthesis of Chinggisid and Turkic nomadic-military traditions with the sedentary administrative and cultural institutions of the Perso-Islamic world. Embedded within extensive trans-regional networks, this hybrid tradition provided both the ideological and structural foundations through which empires articulated sovereignty by merging Chinggisid notions of legitimacy with Islamic kingship and, in the process, fostering and patronizing Persianate cultural expression (after Steenbergen 2020:54).The thesis employs the concept of the Turko-Mongol as an analytical framework to examine imperial state formation and the enduring agency of this tradition in shaping urban and infrastructural practices. Most notably in the Mughal Empire, which extended these models from Islamic Iran and Central Asia into South Asia. Babur, a Timurid prince and the founder of the Mughal Empire (1526), introduced the imperial tradition to the South Asian political landscape and endeavoured to recreate his homeland through architectural and urban development projects in what he perceived to be a land with ‘no running waters’ (Beveridge 1922:486). The subsequent sovereigns of the House of Babur also contributed to landscape mediation measures, including Akbar, who constructed Fatehpur Sikri, the first Mughal capital, to be built entirely anew. His grandson, Shahjahan, oversaw the construction of the next, and last, capital to be built from the ground up, Shahjahanabad, during a period when the empire was at its zenith in terms of power and wealth. It functioned as the preeminent centre of Persian literature and scholarship. 5 The Persianate world facilitated the transmission of literary, philosophical, and cultural ideas across a geographically and ethnically diverse region, unified primarily through the Persian language, while accommodating multilingual and multi-ethnic contexts (Eaton 2018:70). In South Asia, this linguistic cohesion, Eaton asserts, was complemented by other shared markers, notably material culture and architectural practices. Examples include the Deccan citadels of Vijayanagara, Warangal, and Bidar, which drew inspiration from Timurid architectural vocabularies, reflecting the broader intercultural flows within the Persianate sphere. Imperial authority and identity were also articulated through the strategic deployment of titles, courtly dress, and architectural forms, functioning as instruments of intercultural communication (Green 2019:7) that reinforced a shared Persianate political and cultural idiom. These dynamics generated hybrid forms in which overarching Persianate frameworks interacted with the specific textures of local geography, culture, language, and architecture. Fisher (2019:225) emphasizes that the Mughal Empire’s capacity to synthesize Indic elements within a Persianate cultural matrix enabled the governance of a pluralistic society over more than two centuries (1526–1857). It contributed to the empire persisting even after the fragmentation of centralized authority following Aurangzeb’s death in 1707. Understanding this hybrid governance framework is particularly instructive for interpreting the empire’s hydraulic practices, which were implemented in a region with pre-existing, decentralized Indic water management systems. This thesis situates Mughal hydrological interventions within the broader Persianate world, drawing on lessons from the heterogeneous water management traditions of Iran and Central Asia. It contributes to scholarship by framing material culture and water management as shared responses to environmental challenges across the Persianate world. Recent scholarship has placed considerable emphasis on the Mughal Empire’s position within the wider Persianate world (Balabanlilar 2010; Anooshahr 2014; Moin 2014; Orthmann 2014; and Eaton 2019). The Mughals’ practices of kingship and strategies of dynastic legitimacy have increasingly been situated within Turko-Mongolian frameworks of cultural and political traditions (Wink 2024:4; also, Faruqi 2012:17). Moin (2014:19), for instance, highlights the ways in which Mughal sovereignty was articulated through a synthesis of sacred kingship and sainthood, a political idiom deeply informed by their Central Asian and Iranian encounters. He further argues that Mughal strategies of governance in a religiously plural South Asian environment drew heavily on the empire’s exposure to the heterogeneous conditions of Timurid and Safavid Iran. Similarly, Balabanlilar (2010:214) situates Mughal courtly practices within broader Turko-Mongolian continuities, underscoring the enduring transmission of cultural idioms and imperial norms from Central Asia to South Asia. Eaton (2019) interprets the Mughal state as negotiating between the semi-pastoral traditions of Mongol-Timurid rulership and the sedentary administrative and cultural practices of the Persianate world, a synthesis that became a hallmark of Mughal imperial identity. This hybridized model of kingship gained sharper definition under Akbar, who 6 incorporated Indic cultural forms into the structures of governance and drew the empire into closer association with Sufi orders (Fisher 2019). The hybrid quality of Mughal sovereignty is further evident in the religious and ideological practices of Humayun, whose patronage wove together philosophical, cosmological, and mystical traditions drawn from Iranian, Hindu, and Indo-Muslim contexts (Orthmann 2014:13). Such hybridity, rooted in transregional exchanges with Central Asia and Iran, extended beyond the ideological to shape material domains of governance, including water management, where imperial hydraulic projects were fused with indigenous systems. In this sense, Mughal imperial practices cannot be understood in isolation but must be situated within their broader Turko-Mongol and Persianate inheritances, refracted through the South Asian context. There has, however, been limited focus on the transregional relationships between city planning1 and water management in the context of the Mughal empire. Drawing upon the learning from the landscape of the earlier empires of Turko-Mongol origin in Iran and Central Asia, the findings from this thesis attempts to position Shahjahan’s reign, and the Mughal empire, as an extension of their Central Asian political and sovereign practices, manifested through city building - and expansion - practices, architectural programs, and large-scale infrastructural projects. Encompassing the philosophy, design, and management techniques of the Timurids, Safavids, and Ottomans, which, together with the Mughal Empire formed a shared Turko-Mongolian heritage (Blake 2013:21), this thesis defines Shahjahanabad as a Turko-Mongol urbanism model, utilising water as a central feature of the landscape. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the Mughal hydrological systems in South Asia cannot be reduced to a linear continuation of Turko-Mongolian precedents; rather, their effectiveness and durability lay in the empire’s capacity to embed local technologies of water management within an imperial framework, making hybridity itself a crucial foundation of Mughal governance and authority. In Iran & Central Asia, archaeological research on the distribution of water infrastructure has been instrumental in reconstructing urban layouts in historical contexts (Sobti 2005; Mantellini 2018; Campbell 2021; Rante 2020; and Tahmasbi et al. 2024). Building on such comparative frameworks, this thesis applies a similar approach to examine urbanism in Mughal South Asia. However, what sets South Asia apart from its western counterparts, however, is the pluralistic character of its society, shaped by the coexistence of deeply rooted Indic practices and the overarching authority of Muslim empires. Consequently, South Asian cities and their infrastructural regimes must be understood as products of intercultural synthesis rather than as expressions of a singular tradition. 1Sobti’s work on the comparative analysis of urban design principles and residential designs elucidates the relationship between Timurid and Mughal architectural practices, as demonstrated through examples of Samarqand, Shahr-i Sabz, Herat, Lahore, Agra & Delhi (1995). 7 Some pre-Shahjahanabad cities exemplified hybrid models of urban development. Hyderabad, established by the Qutb Shahi rulers in 1591, and Kakatiyan Warangal, remodelled by the Qutb Shahi, serve as two notable examples. Eaton and Wagoner (2013:220) interpret Hyderabad’s urban design as a hybrid form, drawing on the cosmological layouts of the Hindu Kakatiyas while simultaneously incorporating Persianate architectural elements of the Qutb Shahi dynasty. The case of Warangal further illustrates this hybridity: while its urban plan reflects Kakatiya legacies, it also absorbed Tughlaq interventions that carried abstracted imperial ideals of the Persianate world, thereby producing a layered synthesis of Indic and Islamic traditions. Similarly, the spatial organization of medieval Ahmadabad has been identified as embodying an amalgamation of Hindu and Islamic planning principles (Nanda 1994:45). Thus, cities such as Warangal, Hyderabad, and Ahmadabad resist reduction to either the Indic or the Persianate model; instead, they exemplify hybrid formations in which Indic planning traditions, including cosmological ordering and architectural motifs, interwove with Persianate imperial elements. Rather than positioning medieval and early modern Indian cities within mutually exclusive civilizational or religious frameworks, such evidence highlights the significance of hybrid urban models shaped through Sanskrit and Persianate cosmopolitan cultures (Eaton & Wagoner 2013:230). Advancing this line of argument, the thesis interprets the hydraulic infrastructure of Shahjahanabad as an exemplary instance of such hybridity. Its water management system integrated decentralized Indic practices of water distribution with centralized imperial infrastructures characteristic of Persianate governance. In doing so, it demonstrates how Mughal urbanism was not merely a transplantation of Islamic models but rather a negotiation between local Indic traditions and the broader imperial cosmopolitan order. Additionally, this thesis endeavours to attribute value and significance to historical infrastructural systems in the context of South Asia and discuss the gap in the preservation policies of the subcontinent, particularly India, concerning such large imperial objects. As cultural artefacts, infrastructural systems contribute to the understanding of the identities and associations of both the sovereign and its subjects. These systems possess significant technological value and stylistic importance, being architecturally committed not only to functionalism but also to the political representation of the empire in a ‘new landscape’ defined by its presence. As central elements of the imperial landscape, they contribute to discerning the expansionist means of the empire, its regional administrative measures, and the nature of land cover changes. 1.2 The Imperial Capital: A Background The fifth Mughal emperor, Shahjahan, was involved in building what was the last, and probably the greatest capital of the Mughal Empire, Shahjahanabad, with the magnificent Fort (now Red Fort) described, and etched, as ‘heaven on earth’ by contemporaries of the period (Kinra 2015:137; also 8 Necipoğlu 1993:317). Between the Dar-ul Khilafat (Seat of the Caliphate), Agra, and the Dar-ul Sultanat (Seat of the Government), Lahore, Shahjahan chose the site of his new capital on the banks of the sacred River Yamuna. Its construction began in 1639 (Waris, tr. by Dwivedi 2016:49). The site was close to the earlier short-lived Mughal capital Din Panah (presently known as Old Fort) and the ruined city of Tughlaq’s Firozabad. Necipoğlu (1993:318) identifies the inspirations for the construction of the fort and the city of Shahjahanabad as being derived from the framing and staging concepts inherent in the ‘display culture’ of Ottoman Istanbul and Safavid Isfahan (also Blake 1991; Asher 2008; Babaie & Kafescioglu 2017). Sharma (2018:102) characterizes these inspirations as Shahjahan’s endeavor to establish a middle ground between the Ottoman exclusivity and Safavid inclusivity frameworks of imperial architectural practices, thereby delineating the contours of accessibility between the ruler and the ruled. Moreover, Timuridity (after Golombek & Koch 2017:811) persisted as the central defining characteristic of the empire’s monumental architectural practices. Evidence of robust organizational links, drawing inspiration from the urban morphology of Timurid Central Asian and Iranian cities, became the identity markers of Shahjahan’s city planning principles. The architects and engineers involved in the design and construction of Shahjahanabad predominantly hailed from regions in Central Asia and Iran (see Appendix II/1B). Moreover, nobles in Shahjahan’s court hailed from the greater Turko-Mongolian landscape (after Maathir-ul-Umara, Beveridge 1979; see Appendix II/1B). They were allocated land within the city walls to build their havelis (mansions) during the initial development phase. This allocation indicates the pervasive influence of their native design philosophies on Shahjahanabad’s fabric. As a city configured with inspirations from multiple empires and geographies, Shahjahanabad emerged with a distinct texture underneath the veneer of a greater world system. “What a city it is, from which Cairo takes its cue, And the lore of its lanes is found even in in Herat It has such architecture and cultivation That there are a hundred Isfahans in its every alley” Chandar Bhan Brahman (d. 1670) in Chahar Chaman (125-26); after Kinra (2015:139-40) Waris, a historian of Shahjahan’s reign, documented the emperor’s ambition to establish lasting architectural landmarks in the South Asian region, particularly through the construction of grand waterworks and urban development initiatives (Dwivedi 2016:49). In response to the ‘crooked alleys’ (Necipoğlu 1993:312) of the congested city of Agra (Kambo tr. by Liaqat 2013) and its riverbanks, which featured deep ravines extending into the urban centre and causing considerable damage to buildings and infrastructure (Chenoy 1998:32), Shahjahan decided to shift his capital. The looming threat of further expansion along the river’s edge and the deteriorating condition of the city’s inner areas prompted the 9 emperor to select a site on a higher ground, adjacent to the same river, further north in Delhi, at a location where the Yamuna slows down because of a bend caused by the presence of the Aravalli Hills. Hydrologically, Shahjahanabad sits at the intersection of punj-ab (Indus-Satluj basin) and do-ab (Ganga-Yamuna basin), termed as ‘Satluj-Yamuna interfluve’ (Wahi 2012:273). Geographically, the site is located at the intersection of two extreme climatic zones: arid and humid subtropical, with the Thar Desert to its west and the fertile Gangetic Plains to the east. In the immediate environs, Shahjahanabad sits between the Aravalli ridge and the Yamuna River (Figure 1.4). The physical landform and the semi- arid climate fostered indigenous water management practices evident in extant water tanks, cisterns, reservoirs, wells, and ponds fed by seasonal streams from the ridge. Small villages on the selected site of the city had developed around existing landscape features and water elements which later became part of the city as mohallas (neighbourhoods). Significant examples are Bulbuli Khana, Karta Neel, and Ballimaran (Chenoy, 1998). Figure 1.3: River Yamuna and the Tughlaq (14th C), Mughal (17th C) and British Canal(19th C) 10 Figure 1.4: Map of Environs of Shahjahanabad (1807), showing the location of the city, Shah Nahr, and the villages (Source: Survey of India) The city plan was approved by Shahjahan himself, highlighting the emperor’s high degree of personal involvement in the creation of the new capital (Babaie & Kafescioglu 2017; Blake 1990:33). To the north of the site existed a framework of canals built initially by Firoz Shah Tughlaq, and later revived by Akbar (Yule 1846). The water for the city was drawn from the Firoz Shah Canal (Khan tr. by. Desai & Begley 1990:407; Chenoy 1998; see Figure 1.3) through a diversion branch created by Ali Mardan Khan2 called Shah Nahr, also known as Ali Mardan Khan Canal (Blake 1991; Burn 1937; Noe 1986; Khan 1990; Gupta 1986). This also presents a complex hybrid model of settlement studies, where long-range water movement practices of the Mughals functioned in conjunction with the seasonal water-capturing strategies of the villagers. Historians have outlined a schematic understanding of water flow across the city of Shahjahanabad. However, the operational mechanisms and functionality of the machinery involved have not been thoroughly investigated. It is indisputable that the 150 km long Shah Nahr was primarily 2 Ali Mardan Khan is credited with overseeing the waterworks in Shahjahanabad. Prior to his association with the Mughal court, he served as a Safavid governor. He was the son and disciple of Mir Ganj Ali Khan, a renowned Safavid governor known for his expertise in water architecture in Iran. The influence of this design tradition is evident in the hydraulic architecture of regions such as Kandahar, Kashmir, Kabul, Peshawar, and Lahore, where he held governorship. This practice was further refined and adapted to the specific context of Shahjahanabad. In addition to his mansion and garden, he designed and supervised the construction of the canal that supplied water to the city of Shahjahanabad. 11 intended to supply water to the royal fort complex and the paradise city-gardens (Khan tr. by Desai & Begley 1990:407). Nevertheless, it also served purposes such as irrigation of the agricultural hinterland, livestock sustenance, and meeting the daily needs of the populace. This system in Shahjahanabad was not a novel Mughal initiative. Similar practices had been implemented in Herat, Lahore, Samarqand, Isfahan, Shiraz, and Kashmir. The location of Shahjahanabad on the Badshahi Sadak facilitated the exchange of cultural practices and architectural influences between the subcontinent and Central Asia. Extending from Balkh Province in Afghanistan (on the major trade routes of Central Asia and Iran) to Sonargaon in Bengal, the trade route traversed significant Mughal cities, such as Kabul, Peshawar, Lahore, and Agra (Figure 2.2), across diverse terrains and landscapes. Its connection with major trade routes exposed the region to a broader exchange of ideas, practices, and traditions of the greater Turko-Mongolian landscape. Numerous built features along the Badshahi Sadak were supported by an infrastructure of wells, canals, streams, drinking fountains, reservoirs, and water tanks that were distributed along the trade route, reflecting the water management practices of these regions (after Khan 2021). This thesis also attempts to study the relationship between the Mughal political system and religious bodies as a means of negotiation and accommodation of managing water by the empire. In South Asia, religion has historically played and continues to play a pivotal role in regulating water access and utilisation. An exploration of water culture necessitates an examination of both the hydraulic tools and techniques employed to extract and transport water from its source, as well as the religious frameworks that host it. In the process of the ‘re-appropriation’ (Babaie & Kafescioglu 2017:862) of Delhi, a city that had previously served as the capital of earlier empires, it was crucial for the Mughal Empire to acknowledge the sacred features of the landscape. In a polycentric landscape marked sacred by the presence of the Yamuna River and the medieval Sufi shrines of the Chishti orders, forming a faith- based environment, the establishment of an imperial governance mechanism necessitated its relationship to the religious ‘knowledge’ of the landscape for the effective management of the land and its resources, especially water. Furthermore, in a vast landscape predominantly inhabited by non-Muslims, the Mughals found it necessary to adopt a ‘language’ (Alam 2004) that could legitimise their rule over a populace that did not adhere to the state religion of Islam (Faroqhi 2019:106). As such, this thesis also attempts to study the crucial role played by the ‘cross-cultural appeal’ (Alam 2021) of the shrines of Sufi saints in establishing a stable state and facilitating key decision-making processes within the empire. Shahjahanabad serves as a powerful iteration of the water architecture practices of the semiarid region of north India, and their continuities re-imagined in the context of the subcontinent as an assimilation of the finest skills, techniques, and technologies of Mughal practices. Water in the form of the Yamuna, Shah Nahr, and many reservoirs and fountains are vital central elements of the landscape in 12 this semi-arid region. It played a central role in staging imperial identity and establishing territorial consolidation, with aesthetic and monumental connotations. It also acted as a multi-scalar means of connecting the fort, city, garden suburbs, and agricultural hinterlands through production, transportation, and ritualistic engagements. The water management practices of the Mughal Empire indicate the formation of a regional order within South Asia encompassing the philosophy, design, and management techniques of the Timurids, Safavids, Khanates, and Ottomans, which, together with the Mughal Empire formed a shared Turko-Mongolian heritage (Blake 2013:21). 1.3 Theoretical Framework The core theoretical foundation of this thesis revolves around the idea that the Mughal waterscape’s conceptual framework was largely influenced by the Persianate World (Eaton 2019) and, more specifically, by the Timurids. It suggests that the way imperial identity and representation are framed and staged derives its significance from the empire’s transregional ties to its ancestral land (Suhrawardy 2023), extending beyond South Asia. Strategies of empire consolidation using large-scale infrastructural systems (after Rogers 2020) have been central to the discussion. The repurposing or introduction of monumental infrastructural systems as a significant visible marker, which persists in the collective memory of its subjects, was a key material strategy employed by the Mughal empire in South Asia. Within landscapes such as Shahjahanabad, constituting core areas and continuous territories, large-scale infrastructural systems, as a ‘multi-user physical network’ (Smith 2016:2), facilitate the analysis of power dynamics and their interrelations across multiple scales. Smith argues that such networks serve as a vehicle for imperial performance, enabling rulers to project authority and construct symbolic frameworks that embodied their political and cultural influence. The aim, however, is not solely to contextualise the argument within a top-down framework but also to evaluate the contributions of users in the development of the water system which is only possible when examining a system across contours of engagements (Morrison 2015:2). Morrison argues that investigating everyday engagement with water, across South Asia’s heterogeneous landscapes, provides insight into the formation of these systems, revealing their intersections with religious norms, developmental priorities, political authority, and landscape management strategies at multiple scales. These systems, collectively, constitute a knowledge-based representation (Sorlin & Wormbs 2018) of the dynamics between rulers and the ruled, incorporating technological tools, labour, and belief systems, thereby conceptualising landscapes as products of historical development. As a significant cultural vehicle, these infrastructural monuments were committed to the imperial brief and the social function for which they were designed, serving as a symbol of the collective force (after Sert et al. 1943) of the king and its subjects. 13 The thesis builds upon the concept of hybridity in context to Mughal South Asia, framing it as a strategic accommodation of differences (Silliman 2013:488) between rulers and the ruled, a method historically employed by empires in Iran and Central Asia across heterogenous populations (Moin 2014:19). Emerging from the interplay of cultural exchange and human agency, hybridity is positioned here as a balance between continuity and innovation in material forms. It is further understood as arising from the creative and experimental negotiation of difference of practice (Bhabha 1994:76); both dimensions being central to the argument. The Mughals’ hydraulic interventions in the environmentally and religiously diverse landscape of South Asia necessitated a profound engagement with Indic practices. The Mughals not only acknowledged but also incorporated decentralised Indic models of water management into their own centralised infrastructure systems. The convergence of these practices produced a distinctive form of interaction, an encounter of differences that generated new systems adapted to new landscapes. The thesis therefore encodes hybridity in water management as not merely a technical or cultural outcome, but as a deeply political and imperial strategy. Additionally, in the faith- based landscape of South Asia, the concept of hybridity extends beyond mere modes of production; it also manifests in the ways religious practices, objects, and rituals are employed, adapted, and reinterpreted in everyday life. This dynamic interplay highlights how tradition and imperial innovation coexist, shaping not only what is created but also how it is experienced, performed, and integrated into diverse social and spiritual contexts. The Mughal accommodation of local practices was tied directly to their broader goals of territorial expansion and imperial consolidation. Hence, in this framework, hybridity becomes more than cultural blending: it is a deliberate imperial instrument, crucial to achieving stability and harmony across a diverse region. A landscape characterized by an imperial presence entails an examination of the interplay between water and power, which carries both political and symbolic meanings (Holt 2018:2). This relationship is exemplified in the concept of ‘watershed empires’ (Russel 2005; after Camp 1963:23), wherein states exerted control over rich highland river systems and consolidated their floodplains to establish a comprehensive dominion over the region through extensive infrastructural systems. In analysing the process of state formation, it is essential to contextualise this argument within what I will refer to as the intention of consolidation by the empire, which involved the strategic control of river headwaters that fed the linear and nodal elements of water features, such as canals, reservoirs and cisterns, mills, and sometimes ponds and lakes, within the imperial landscape. Furthermore, within such a landscape, water is believed to oscillate between environmental and cultural practices (Hastrup 2015:7). The study of individual basins, as well as the broader collective watershed, through a societal lens can thus provide insights into its sociocultural engagement with the hydrological landscape. 14 Water, as an experiential medium that maps materiality and connectivity (Orlove & Caton 2010), has long served as a critical analytical lens for anthropologists seeking to understand its use, access, and control. This thesis seeks to extend such scholarship by exploring the intersections of religion, class, and caste (after Wutich & Beresford 2015:170; Fletcher 2008:65) within the South Asian landscape, thereby situating water as a socially and culturally embedded resource. It further builds on the concept of the social waterscape (Andersen 2015:162), which emphasizes the ways in which water shapes, and is shaped by, human interaction across varying spatial and temporal scales, from rivers to wells, serving as a common ground for holistic interconnectivity (Ballestero 2019:406). Analysing water through the lens of the social waterscape offers a multi-dimensional framework for understanding its significance beyond the purely ecological or utilitarian. Such a perspective illuminates environmental concerns (Woodson 2015), the complexities of land organisation (Keay 2014), and the processes underlying the emergence and growth of settlements, societies, and urban centres (Salomon 2014; Ur 2005). It also facilitates a deeper examination of hydraulic techniques and technologies (Farrington 1980), as well as the mechanisms through which socio-political powers regulate access, use, and control of water (Stride 2009). By integrating these dimensions, the thesis positions water not merely as a material resource but as a dynamic socio-ecological agent that actively structures human behaviour, societal hierarchies, and cultural landscapes. A study of the past hydrological landscape entails an analysis of historical landforms, which can aid in interpreting the contours of water sources and usage. The use of GIS & Remote Sensing for digital reconstruction contributes to the production of historical topographical data that can be easily made available (Leverington et.al. 2002) for landscape modelling and environmental analysis (after Mihu- Pintilie & Nicu 2019). In the case of Mughal Delhi, the philology of the canal water system provides deep insights into its landform. Unlike the Roman aqueducts, this system was rooted to the ground, working on the principle of gravity for its supply and distribution. The archaeological study has been conducted based on the understanding of water systems not only as functioning machines (Hodge 2002:4), where the typologies and their engagements with the society were pivotal, but also as a thinking tool to understand past relationships between ecology and empire (Krause & Strang 2016), through strategies of manipulation (Rogers 2020) and mediation (Parpia 2016) of the landscape. Further, the study of extant indigenous and Mughal water systems as an artefact provides insight into the cultural evolution of the techniques and methods of management practices (Gilman 1987) in the predominant semi-arid landscape of Mughal South Asia. The study was challenging as colonial hydraulic techniques (1803-1947) altered the Mughal hydrology radically (D’Souza 2006). Hence, the study period also incorporates the transformative phase between 1803-1857 when the British took over the reign of the hydrological landscape of Delhi and its associated benefits. 15 The objective is not to isolate the system from society but to build upon their historical and current interactions. Conservation practices should be oriented towards systems as ‘monuments of a city’ rather than focusing solely on a building-centric approach, as traditionally employed by the Archaeological Survey of India. Investigating the Mughal system of waterworks will contribute to developing a comprehensive social and environmental strategy for urban conservation in medieval and early modern cities of South Asia. This research can further inform a resilience-based approach to watershed management and the regulation of land resources ( Agarwal & Narain 1997; Chaturvedi 2018). As a significant cultural artefact, historical infrastructural systems across South Asia can provide insights into landscape history and the mechanisms for addressing climate change in a predominantly arid landscape. While Mughal water management practices reveal continuities with pre-Mughal Muslim empires in South Asia, their analysis further requires situating them within the framework of early modernity. This period (1500-1800), defined by South Asia’s continuous interaction with wider global processes, produced what Asher and Talbot (2006:2) describe as a ‘highly pluralistic human landscape’, shaped by the interplay of Central Asian ethnic traditions, Persian cultural forms, and Indic religious practices. Early modern period was marked by accelerated transformations in economies, technological changes, political regimes, and cultural exchange, alongside the circulation of people, objects, and ideas (Richards 1997:197; Bhargava & Nath 2023:11). Among the features that Richards (1997) identifies as characteristic of this era - establishment of oceanic routes, integration into a world economy, imperial consolidation, population growth, and agrarian expansion - the diffusion of new technologies across regions is particularly relevant for this thesis. This was fostered by the mobility of architects, artisans, and engineers, a phenomenon strongly evident in the Mughal empire (O’Hanlon 2013:771). Subrahmanyam (2008) further underscores dimensions of global exploration, struggles of nomadic and sedentary practices, and monarchs’ universalist claims, all of which resonate with Mughal practices and self- representations. Within this broader early modern frame, Mughal hydraulic systems emerge not simply as technical continuities from a medieval past but as dynamic products of cross-cultural assimilation and imperial strategy. These systems generated new technological landscapes, supported the consolidation of a large territorial state, transformed land use for agrarian expansion, and facilitated integration into expanding commercial networks. Accordingly, this thesis situates Mughal water infrastructure as a product of early modern practices, using it as a productive framework to analyse the empire’s hydraulic interventions. 16 1.4 Research Questions This thesis addresses the core research question: How can the typological and technological study of Shahjahanabad’s waterworks help evaluate Mughal hydrological landscapes as a microcosm of ‘Turko-Mongolian’ urbanism and water management practices? To answer this question effectively, it is necessary to address the following supporting questions: i. What kind of water management methods were devised by the Turko-Mongolian empires and what role did they play in the articulation and visualisation of their imperial identity? ii. What was the approach to water urbanism in Mughal South Asia? iii. What were the components and frameworks of the water management system in the Mughal settlements (esp. Shahjahanabad)? iv. What influences were derived from the ‘Turko-Mongolian’ landscape which shaped the pattern of water-centric practices in Shahjahanabad? v. What was the sociocultural context of Mughal hydrology, and how does this context inform the use, access, and control of water? Future direction vi. How can learning from engagements with historic water infrastructural systems inform the philosophy of reclamation, maintenance, and preservation of a system which is supranational but in scheme with subnational policies? 1.5 Research Design: Method and Approach The methodology employed a multifaceted approach, integrating archaeological research grounded in both archival and contemporary literature, field studies utilising non-invasive site prospection techniques, and GIS & Remote Sensing, to identify, survey, and evaluate the water system of Shahjahanabad. I attempted to look at multiple forms of evidence: archaeological, textual (epigraphic remains), morphological (land, water, and settlement), and distinctly cultural (shrines, mosques, and temples), centred around water features. Additionally, I studied the distribution of class- and caste-based groups to map the contours of social hierarchies, both within and outside the walled city, including the agricultural hinterlands. As a landscape archaeology approach, I incorporated historical maps alongside archaeological studies (after Petrie 2019), epigraphic evidence, and historical descriptions of landscapes and buildings derived from chronicles, imperial correspondences, and travel accounts to effectively map the Mughal waterscape. This process further entailed the reconstruction and analysis of historical landforms, offering 17 insights into the hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad. Geographic Information System (GIS) and Remote Sensing (RS) tools were employed to model landforms and develop a comprehensive water map of the study area. Topographic mapping of the historic district, along with its contextual surroundings, was crucial in assessing the landform and degree of integration of various water components, thereby facilitating an understanding of the flow direction, velocity, and water typologies constructed in response to the changing terrain and diverse usages. I also explored toponyms as indicators of landform and water features. The methodology involved reconceptualising historical maps as ‘archives’ of the landscape, highlighting spatial transformations, hydraulic modifications, and socio-environmental interactions. Historical maps of the study area were obtained from various archives in the UK and India, including the National Archives of India (Maps of Delhi Villages 1823-24), Andhra Pradesh State Archives in Hyderabad (1740s Map of Ali Mardan Khan Canal), British Library (Plan of the City), and Delhi State Archives (British Maps of Delhi 1807-1942). Additionally, archives from the Victoria & Albert Museum, University Library at Cambridge, the National Archives of the UK, Central Public Works Department, and Town & Country Planning Organization in New Delhi were consulted for sources specific to the water systems of Shahjahanabad, Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, and Burhanpur. Beyond historical maps, the methodology also involved a comprehensive review of archaeological reports3, reviews, and bulletins covering most of South Asia, including India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The thesis employed map repositories, specifically of the Survey of India Sheets, and analytical tools such as SMTVI4 and MSRM5, developed by the MAHSA6 project at Cambridge, in conjunction with the online resources of the National Archives of India, Delhi State Archives, India, and the British Library, UK. The application of these analytical techniques was integral to the thesis, facilitating the identification, survey, mapping, reconstruction, and evaluation of historical landforms, as well as the understanding of water behaviour and its evolving landscape. The study also examined comparative water management practices within the Turko-Mongolian landscape and the pre-Mughal Muslim empire experimentations in South Asia. Manuals on water and agriculture, along with chronicles of sovereigns commissioned by empires in Iran and Central Asia, were analysed to establish an account of water management practices in Samarkand, Bukhara, Isfahan, Shiraz, Kerman, Herat, and other principal 3 The following reports were reviewed: Archaeological Survey of India Reports (1871-1937); Indian Archaeology: A Review (1954-2015); Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India (1946-1973); Ancient Pakistan, Vol. I-XXX (1964- 2019); Pakistan Archaeology, Number 1-29 (1964-1996); Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (1969-1987); Refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B 4 Seasonal Multi-Temporal Vegetation Indices 5 Multi-Scale Relief Model 6 Mapping Archaeological Heritage in South Asia 18 settlements of the Persianate world. These cities are believed to have influenced the water design practices of the Mughals. For this thesis, I conducted systematic and intensive field surveys to document existing water features and the current state of the infrastructural system in Shahjahanabad, Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, and Burhanpur between 2023 and 2024. This also involved field documentation of the 150 km long Shah Nahr, along with surveys in the garden suburbs and the Delhi Fort. A detailed ground survey of standing water architecture, both functional and defunct, was undertaken, together with other surface traces. All the evidence was recorded and mapped. Measured drawings, together with photo documentation, were carried out on extant features in a field booklet (see Appendix I). The survey also involved ground- checking of features marked on historical maps. Furthermore, the condition and state of preservation of the Mughal water infrastructure were assessed as part of the survey. Secondary case studies of Turko- Mongolian water urbanism practices and their management techniques were also conducted, and their influences were discussed. The thesis adopted an inductive approach, developing patterns based on field and secondary studies. These patterns helped in constructing a framework of Mughal hydrology in South Asia and in studying its impacts and influences. The research design in Figure 1.5 enumerates the various scales and the associated water features, each of which was investigated in detail in the thesis. 1.6 Thesis Layout The crux of this thesis is to contextualise the practices of Mughal water management systems in South Asia within the broader framework of the ‘Persianate World’. This was achieved through a hydrological study of Shahjahanabad, the last capital of the Mughal Empire, and insights drawn from the Iranian and Central Asian waterscapes of the Turko-Mongolian empires. By employing water as a lens to comprehend Mughal imperialism, this thesis elucidates adaptations from the greater Persianate geography to the South Asian landscape. It contributes to the study of the tools and techniques of Mughal water management practices in South Asia, especially during Shahjahan’s reign. This thesis employs infrastructural systems as a framework for examining representations of imperial power and state geography. These systems hold substantial technological value and stylistic significance, being architecturally committed not only to functionalism but also to the political identity of the empire within a ‘new landscape’ shaped by its presence. Chapter 1 establishes the broader framework of medieval world systems with a focus on India, or where India later assumes a central role. The thesis is, thereafter, structured into five principal chapters (Chapters 2 to 6) which follows a multi-scalar approach to studying ‘empire and ecology’ through a framework of land, water and climate responsive strategies. Chapter 2 explores the expansive geography 20 that constituted the ancestral homeland of the Mughals. This chapter endeavours to contextualise the Mughal imperial identity within the lineage of their patrilineal ancestor, Timur, a distinguished Turko- Mongol, and discusses subsequent empires that adopted or inherited the Timurid ‘hydrological’ legacy. Chapter 3 focuses on the study of Indic water management practices prevalent across the subcontinent, establishing a foundational understanding of local hydraulic traditions. The chapter further constructs a chronological framework for the evolution of water management under pre-Mughal Muslim polities, tracing historical continuities through a detailed case study of early urban centres in pre-Mughal Delhi. It concludes by exploring the potential of a tripartite urban model comprising the qila, shahristan, and bagha’at, drawing on evidence from the spatial distribution of water features commissioned by sovereigns in pre-Mughal South Asia. Chapter 4 examines water management practices during the Mughal Empire, with particular attention to the types and techniques of Mughal water infrastructure. The chapter underscores the significance of pre-existing hydraulic features within the landscape and their strategic incorporation into the imperial system. It further addresses the emergence of a ‘new order’ of urbanism, articulated through the tripartite city model, as evidenced in the Mughal urban centres of Agra, Lahore, and Fatehpur Sikri. Chapters 5 and 6 focus on the study and documentation of Shahjahanabad, transitioning from the scale of canals to garden suburbs, the city, and the fort. Chapter 7 analyses the sociocultural framework of Mughal hydrology from the perspectives of monumentality, water display, and social hierarchies, drawing parallels with practices from the medieval Iranian and Central Asian landscapes. Chapter 8 concludes by situating the thesis findings within the context of the broader Persianate World, presenting urbanism models, staging techniques of imperial objects, and suggestions for the adaptation and regeneration of the waterscape in the contemporary water-stressed South Asian environment. The interaction of statecraft, urbanism, and water management across the Central and South Asian empires of the Persianate world constitutes an enduring analytical thread throughout this thesis. Chapter 2 situates water not merely as a natural resource but as a strategic instrument of power, governance, and socio-political control, particularly within the Turko-Mongolian empires. The chapter examines how rulers navigated and manipulated landscapes characterised by environmental variability, using hydraulic infrastructure and water management systems to consolidate authority, shape urban settlements, and sustain economic and social networks. By tracing the technological, administrative, and symbolic dimensions of water in these imperial contexts, the chapter establishes a foundation for understanding how hydraulic strategies informed both urban planning and state formation, setting the stage for subsequent analyses of pre-Mughal and Mughal water systems. 21 2.0 Waterscapes as Powerscapes The conceptualisation of water management practices in historical civilizations as a mechanism for consolidation by imperial powers has garnered considerable scholarly attention in recent research (Wilkinson 2010; Morrison 2015; McPhillips 2020; Mori 2020; Flaminio 2022). Archaeological excavations with a focus on ‘water and power’ in the Near East have uncovered extensive hydraulic systems in northern Mesopotamia, attributed to the Assyrians (Bonacossi 2018), which transported water from the Zagros piedmont (Stampoultzidi 2024) to urban centers through agricultural lands. Additionally, archaeological investigations on the opposite side of the Zagros, in Iran and Central Asia, have demonstrated the use of water infrastructure by the empires of the Achaemenids, Sassanians (Gholikandi 2013; English 1968), Samanids, Buyids, Ghaznavids, Seljuks (Saatsaz 2021), Timurids (Allen & Trousdale 2019), and Safavids (Sarga 2023) as a means of humanizing conquests in predominantly arid landscapes. The Sassanians were also credited with introducing watermills to the region (Saatsaz 2021), many of which were later revived by the Timurid and Safavid Empires (see Appendix II/2A). Manuals outlining the construction and maintenance of water and agricultural systems were integral to imperial practices in this region. Notable examples include Kitab-i Qani (Book of Qanats; English 1968, after Lambton 1953), Inbat al-miyah al-khafiya (The Extraction of Hidden Waters; after Ataie-Ashtiani 2020), Asar-wa Ahya, Risal-e Tariq-e Qismat Ab-o Qalb, and Irshad al-Zira’a (Books on Agricultural Practices; after Subtelny 1997). As the ancestral land of the Mughals (Suhrawardy 2023), the governance and hydrological models originating from this arid region, characterised by glaciated highlands, erratic short-duration heavy rainfall patterns, ‘standing’ rivers, and seasonal ‘running’ streams, significantly influenced the hydraulic practices of the empire in South Asia. In analysing the interplay between Mughal statecraft, urban development, and the climatic and environmental contexts in which these processes occurred, it is essential to account for a multiplicity of factors. While the Mughals of the House of Timur are often portrayed as an ‘Indian phenomenon’, their enduring ties to Transoxiana and broader Central Asia are central to understanding the empire’s political, administrative, and cultural practices (Balabanlilar 2007:2). Earlier scholarship has highlighted the relative neglect of the Mughal Empire’s genealogical foundations and its inheritance of Turko-Mongolian and Turko-Persian legacies (Alam and Subrahmanyam 1998; Balabanlilar 2015; Foltz 1998; Dale 1998; Subtelney 2007). More recent studies, however, situate the Mughals firmly within the wider Persianate world (Balabanlilar 2010; Anooshahr 2014; Moin 2014; Orthmann 2014; Eaton 2019) while emphasizing how their practices of kingship and strategies for dynastic legitimacy were informed by Turko-Mongolian cultural and political frameworks (Wink 2024:4; also, Faruqi 2012:17). These perspectives underscore the need to approach the Mughal Empire not merely as an isolated Indian polity Figure 2.1: Fortified City of Abhar, drawn by Nasuh Matrakchi (1533-1536), Folio 38a [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976] 23 but as a dynamic entity situated at the crossroads of Central Asian genealogy, Persianate cultural norms, and South Asian political realities. A comprehensive understanding of Mughal statecraft and urban development therefore requires integrating genealogical, cultural, and environmental dimensions, revealing how imperial practices were informed by a complex web of historical legacies, ecological conditions, and transregional interactions. These legacies extend beyond religion and governance to the foundation of empires, consolidated by the use of hydraulic tools, affecting the ways in which societies have historically managed and harnessed water resources. In this chapter, I will delve into the significance of ecological factors, particularly hydrological resources, in the establishment of long-term conquest - consolidation, and expansion - over a region by empires during the medieval and early modern periods in Iran and Central Asia. The focus will be on how these features impacted regional economic growth and established an imperial identity. Additionally, how were landscapes modified to benefit the state economy? What role did large-scale water infrastructural systems play in shaping the society? What part did religion play in the water management process? This chapter aims to answer these questions and explore the broader connection between the Mughals and their Turko-Mongolian ancestors employing the interrelationship between ‘water and empire’ as a framework for governance and consolidation of an empire. This chapter also employs historiography as a tool to examine landscape alteration, the expansionary impulses of empires over natural environments, and the construction of an imperial gaze. 2.1 Empire and Ecology The entanglement between empire and ecology demands sustained attention, particularly in relation to the ways imperial powers sought to control and reshape environmental features, especially hydrological units. In conceptual terms, empire and ecology occupy distinct but overlapping registers. Empire is expansive, mobile, and political, driven by the ambition to project authority across wide territories. Ecology, by contrast, is anchored in the specificity of place, concerned with the scientific and material processes that sustain particular environments (Griffiths 1997:1). Their encounter generated unique formations in which the imperial project of extension encountered the localized functioning of ecological systems. Empire, in this sense, can be understood as an assemblage of ecological units stitched together through political and economic processes. To interrogate how empires mobilized these units, whether as instruments of control, as foundations for consolidation, or as resources for expansion, is to probe the ecological underpinnings of imperial state formation. The historical co-constitution of empire and ecology has been highlighted across several influential strands of scholarship. One approach is the concept of ‘ecological imperialism’ (Crosby 1972), which shows how the trajectories of empires were shaped by the biological expansion of plants, animals, and humans. Other focuses on the deliberate manipulation of 24 landscapes and natural processes by imperial regimes (Beinhart & Hughes 2007). A further perspective emphasizes the transformation of ecological resources into commodities that sustained imperial economies (Griffiths & Robin 1997). What emerges from this body of work is not merely a parallel development but a mutually accelerating relationship. Contiguous ecologies enabled the consolidation and extension of imperial frontiers, while imperial structures in turn intensified and redirected ecological transformations through political and economic processes (Beinhart & Hughes 2007:12). Imperial expansion directly reshaped landscapes, leaving visible material and ecological modifications that archaeologists have used to study the strategies through which empires engaged with conquered societies (Morrison 2001:6-8; Smith 2001). The spatial distribution of settlements, agricultural systems, and material objects reveals not only the projection of political power but also the reorganization of ecological features to sustain imperial ambitions. Landscapes became arenas where authority was inscribed, whether through infrastructural projects, the redirection of resources, or the symbolic marking of territory. Imperial identities, furthermore, played a decisive role in structuring territorial scales, mediating relationships between city-states, and incorporating ethnically, religiously, and regionally diverse groups within imperial frameworks (Barfield 2001:29; also, Duverger 1980; Subrahmanyam 2001). Such inclusivity and negotiation were often tied to ecological diversity, as empires extended across multiple environments and ecozones. Their definition rested not only on the nature of conquest (Schreiber 2001:71) but also on the geographical scope of territories encompassing varied cultural and ecological regions (Subrahmanyam 2001:43). Empires were not only political and social constructs but also ecological actors, whose power was both expressed in and sustained by their capacity to manipulate and reorganize environments on a grand scale. In context of the early modern period, empire was a dynamic and expansive political entity that extended its authority across diverse territories and sociopolitical regions. At the core of empire formation lied the concentration of political activity, which generated structured patterns of control, consolidation, and expansion (Rosenzweig & Marston 2018:88). While these patterns often responded to local, place- specific conditions, they were simultaneously guided by overarching principles that transcended the immediate geography of the empire. This dual orientation produced governance and administrative practices with universalist aspirations, projecting imperial influence across broader spatial and conceptual horizons. Empires of the early modern period were distinguished by accelerated economic, technological, and cultural transformations that facilitated the circulation of people, objects, and ideas, enabling the consolidation of power, integration into global networks, and adoption of new technologies. Unlike previous empires and states, early modern empires, such as the Mughals, Safavids, and Ottomans, functioned not only as political and military structures but also as socio-cultural and economic networks 25 actively engaged with wider global processes. The mobility of skilled individuals, including architects, artisans, and engineers, played a pivotal role in transferring knowledge across regions, while rulers’ universalist claims reflected both local authority and transregional ambitions, defining the distinctive character of early modern imperial governance. It is also important to note here that the patterns of conquest in early modern empires were not merely military endeavours but complex processes that intertwined ecological management with religious and cultural frameworks. Empires mediated territorial expansion by adapting governance strategies to local environmental conditions while simultaneously engaging with the religious practices and beliefs of subject populations. This approach was particularly crucial in regions experiencing diverse ecological stresses, where everyday life was deeply informed by religious norms and rituals. By integrating ecological knowledge and religious understanding into administrative practices, empires were able to humanize conquest through legitimizing authority, facilitating local cooperation, and sustaining control over heterogeneous territories. Examining these patterns highlights how conquest in the early modern period extended beyond force, functioning as a structured, context-sensitive process that reinforced both imperial reach and socio-cultural integration. Defined as an act of supplanting societies (Day 2008) through a technology of acquisition (Winter, 2011), conquest has been a topic of theoretical discourse for scholars of human societies in territories affected by a forced action of military and political intervention (see Hasbrouck 1935; Hula 1941; Videla 1964; Bosworth 1993; van Houts 1995; Mole 2015). In his article titled Conquest, Winter (2011) discusses the disruptive and ordered aspects of imperial conquests. He posits that the process of a conquest involves the ‘overthrowing of an existing order’ to establish a ‘new and stable order’. Additionally, he recognised conquest as a process of legal claim to a territory, beyond military control and subjugation, through juridical institutions favouring a new political identity. The nature of conquests can vary depending on how societies throughout history have attempted to conquer new territories. Day (2008:26-55) in his book Conquest: How Societies Overwhelm Others introduces the tools used by expeditioners invading newer territories, such as legal claims, geographical mapping, and the naming of places and natural features, as conventional means of conquering. However, he noted that these may not be sufficient to ensure the invader’s status as ‘rightful owners’ of the conquered land. To establish ownership, Day (2008:159-162) argues that it is important to mark a ‘visible presence on the landscape’ which can be best achieved by ‘tilling the land’ and improving its agricultural health as a stable order of conquest. The maximisation of agricultural potential was made possible by the development of existing resources, including hydrological infrastructure, to transform unused lands into productive farms and gardens, indicative of a long-term conquest that is ecological in nature. Such infrastructures have been 26 termed as ‘imperial objects’ (Barfield 2001:31-32) which contributed to unifying and humanizing a conquest. Conquest, consolidation, and expansion of an empire was a fundamental political practice (Winter 2011) employed by rulers, characterised by their efforts to expand beyond their inherited domains and annex neighbouring territories in pursuit of honour and glory. While some of these endeavours, such as those of the Aztec, Ayyubid, Durrani, Afsharid, and Ghurid, were relatively short- lived, others, such as the Timurid, Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal, endured for more than two centuries. Conquest can be defined by its duration and the manner of its expansion. Short-term conquests are typified by swift military conquests, resulting in rapid expansion; however, they often lead to rapid collapse. Short-term conquests may encounter opposition, internal uprisings, political divisions, or civil wars if a strong bureaucratic framework is not implemented. The forced operation of military conquest is short-lived (Weisiger 2014) if not reinforced by political strategies and policies that humanise the method of conquest (after Hula 1941:136). The process of humanising a conquest involves employing tools such as trade and agriculture that serve the economic interests of the subjugated community, thereby reducing political hostility and contributing to a long-term conquest of the region. However, not all long-term conquest processes were necessarily devised with the intention of fostering the growth and prosperity of the indigenous community. Trade and commerce have been used in the past to establish enduring control over a region benefiting only the subjugator, with notable examples including the East India Company’s influence in South Asia (Wild 2000) and the Portuguese’s ‘pepper monopoly’ along the spice route (Casale 2006) which facilitated colonisation between the Cape of Good Hope and the East Indies, establishing a seaborne empire (Hamilton 1948:37; Subrahmanyam 1993). Consolidation strategies, however, benefitting the ruled, are crucial for the longevity of empires across successive rulers (Sinopoli 1994). In a recent article on empire expansion strategies, Rogers (2020) delineated seven approaches to imperial consolidation, including elimination, displacement, and marginalisation techniques employed by empires in the Turko-Mongolian landscape. Although predominantly forceful, the process of ‘manipulation of continuity’ closely resembles the practices of the Mughals in South Asia in the context of their hydraulic experiments. The repurposing or introduction of monumental infrastructural systems as significant visible markers, which persisted in the collective memory of its subjects, was a key material strategy employed by the Empire in South Asia. These monumental ambitions (Sinopoli 1994) played a significant role in adding a ‘veneer of normalcy’ (Rogers 2020:311) through the integration of state projects within the indigenous framework of multiple cultural traditions. Rogers (2020) asserted that such practices also contributed to the historiography of apical lineages. Contextualising the imperial practices 27 of the Mughals in relation to their patrilineal ancestors thus becomes important in situating their strategies within the context of landscape manipulation through imperial action in the Timurid heartland. Also, within landscapes constituting core areas and continuous territories, large-scale infrastructural systems as a ‘multi-user physical network’ (after Smith 2016) facilitate the analysis of power dynamics and their interrelations across multiple scales. The aim is not solely to contextualise the argument within a top-down framework, but also to evaluate the contributions of users in the development of the system which is only possible when examining a system across the contours of engagements. These systems constitute a knowledge-based representation of the dynamics between rulers and the ruled, incorporating technological tools, labour, and belief systems, thereby conceptualising landscapes as products of historical development (after Sorlin & Wormbs 2018). Archaeologists in South Asia have long been captivated by the idea of nature, and this interest was further ignited in 1924 with the rediscovery of what was named the Indus Civilisation. The mapping of the environmental setting of civilisation led archaeologists to several discoveries about signature landscapes (Green & Petrie 2018; after Wilkinson 2003), urbanism practices (Petrie & Lynam 2019; Vidale 2010), and insights into their adaptation to variable environments (Petrie et. al. 2017; Possehl 1997). In the later period, the Mauryans’ conquest of forest lands for war elephants (Trautmann 2015), the Guptas’ acquisition of iron-ore and coal rich terrains for steel longbows (Trautmann 2015), the Pallavas’ seizure of the Kaveri river delta for agrarian economy (Fisher 2018), the Marathas’ takeover of forest lands for shipbuilding (Grove 1993), and removal of tree cover from hills by the Vijayanagara Empire, for strategic purposes (Guha 2023) are some examples of empire-ecology interrelationships in pre-Mughal South Asia. The clearance of forestland and its societies to establish a stable agrarian order (Mandala 2015) was also evident during the Mughal period, such as the afforestation of the Sind by the ruling Amirs between 1770 and 1840 (Lambrick 1952). The utilisation of water as a means of consolidation through large-scale hydraulic practices in the region has been attributed to several historical entities. The Tughlaqs in Punjab are noted for commissioning long-distance canals from the Himalayan foothills to the Thar Deserts (Saxena 1995). In the Cauvery region, the Cholas are recognised for their construction of anicuts (Michell & Bhabha 1999:26). The queens of the Kakatiyas in Telangana are credited with developing extensive irrigation tank networks (Lakshmi 2024), while the Bahmani Sultanate is known for implementing a large-scale karez system in the Deccan (Govindakutty 2016). A comparable practice was subsequently adopted by the British, in the post-Mughal period, in an effort to implement perennial irrigation; however, contrary to the purportedly harmonious nature of expansion by their predecessors, their expansionary nature of canals, for agricultural intensification, significantly contributed to the reduction of forest cover and 28 environmental alterations, which were considered ‘obstructions to agriculture’ (Gadgil & Guha 1993:120) across South Asia. This approach precipitated a substantial shift from small-scale community- led irrigation practices supported by indigenous water features to large-scale state-controlled agrarian practices facilitated by canal infrastructure, anicuts, and tank systems. The history of an empire is intrinsically linked to its environmental resources, and the political process of conquests plays a crucial role in shaping the ecological conditions of a region. Bhattacharya (2019) argued in The Great Agrarian Conquest about the nature of agrarian colonisation by the British in South Asia and its impact on the environment. He suggested that the process of environmental imperialism involved colonisers altering the landscape to such an extent that they appropriated and changed the rural environment, reworking and reordering it, and reconfiguring the relationships that societies had with the greater environment. Herbert’s book Flora’s Empire (2011) explored the ecological conquest of South Asia by the British as a marker of a ‘visible stamp of a civilization.’ The adoption of foreign techniques and technologies in the ‘tamed land’ has influenced future generations of ecological practices in the region, such as gardening, forestry, and agriculture. This transformation of natural resources into commodities has significantly impacted global environmental change, indigenous societies, and traditional knowledge systems (Beinart and Hughes 2007). Investigating the impact that consolidation of empires had on settled human societies is equally important. The redrawing of ecological features based on the interests of the empire alters and reorients the settled community’s engagement with these features. Notable instances from South Asia include the selective commercialisation of species within forest regions and the displacement of wildlife by the British Raj in India, which affected cultivators on arable lands adjacent to these forests (Mandala 2015). This phenomenon has been described as the colonial-ecological encounter (after Guha & Gadgill 1989). During this period, there was also an increased focus on commodity crops in the agrarian sector, resulting in the reduction of forestland, which in turn caused erosion. The introduction of canals by the British did not adhere to the gravity-based system of its predecessors, leading to waterlogging and ‘poisonous salinity’ of soils (Ludden 1999:183), adversely affecting the health of the region’s inhabitants. The implementation of a new system also contributed to the disappearance of traditional knowledge systems among forest and agrarian communities (Beinart & Hughes 2007). In Iran, the introduction or expansion of qanat or karez systems by empires led to a reorientation of agrarian field systems (Bonine 1989) towards new water sources, reshaping the contours of engagement of the people with the land. This thesis examines the way societies interacted with or were impacted by the reoriented ecological features to gain insight into their cultural evolution (Gilman 1987). There is a lack of research on both the imperial and local dimensions of water management in Central Asia, Iran, and India, either considered separately or in comparison. To 29 gain insight into the social and cultural ties surrounding water-based practices across current political borders, it is crucial to concentrate on regions with analogous environmental, and political conditions of the past, that were reliant on ecological features. This approach necessitates an examination of the imperial identity of the Mughal Empire, including its inspiration and adaptations of hydrological practices from ancestral Central Asian lands to South Asian geography. 2.2 The Mughal Imperial Identity The identity of an empire is characterised by two major factors, one of ‘internal’ political sovereignty which defines its status as a state and the other of ‘external’ conquest and hegemony which contributes to its territorial expansion (after Morrison 2001). Expansion has a direct impact on the landscape, and evidence of its modification, including the spatial distribution of objects, has been employed by archaeologists to study empires and their engagement with conquered societies, supported by the historiography of the period (Morrison 2001:6-8; also, Smith 2001). Imperial identities have often contributed to establishing territorial scales, city-state relationships, and the empire’s inclusiveness of ethnicities, religious, and regionally diverse groups (Barfield 2001:29; also, Subrahmanyam 2001; Duverger 1980). Empires have been defined by the nature of their conquest (Schreiber 2001:71), the geographical scale of its territory including ‘multiple cultures and ecozones’ (Subrahmanyam 2001:43), the presence of a large populace under a centralised administrative system (Barfield 2001:29-30) contributing significantly to the state treasury (Subrahmanyam 2001:42), and advanced communication networks to establish military and economic control over the conquered territory from the imperial capital. Most importantly, the introduction of ‘imperial objects’ as a unifying factor in the subjugated region (Barfield 2001:31-32). The practice of introducing ‘imperial objects’ provided an identity to the empire, and its success and failure determined the timeframe of its existence. It included customs, rituals, art, and fashion as markers of an imperial presence, aiming to establish their own cultural system (Barfield 2001). As a tool of wider participation among its subjects, imperial objects extended beyond architectural styles and measurement systems to include large-scale agrarian practices supported by imperial hydrological initiatives to establish long-lived empires. Some of these objects died with the collapse of the empire, and some, especially large-scale interventions, continued to serve multiple empires, albeit every time with a new resurrected identity and at times stronger than the previous one. Alcock (2001:370) in her article on The Afterlife of Empires discussed about two dominant expressions of the imperial afterlife, one of emulation and copying, where empires run in ‘bones and minds’ of other empires, and the other where long-term representations continue to be shaped by imperial formations. The political and genealogical identity of empires and rulers have contributed extensively to the ‘empires of nostalgia’ (Alcock 30 2001:371). The political identity of the Romans for Carolingians (Moreland 2001:405) and Incas (MacCormack 2001:422); the Mauryas for the Satvahanas (Sinopoli 2001:155); and the Turko- Mongolians for the Timurids, Safavids, Uzbek Khanates, and Mughals (Blake 2013). The Mughals also claimed a genealogical identity with Chingiz Khan and Timur and represented a phase of the Turko- Mongolian afterlife in South Asia. Figure 2.2: Turko-Mongolian Empires Empire Boundaries after Blake (2013), Silk Road after the Resource Library of the National Geographic Society (2021), Badshahi Sadak after the Bihar Museum Archives and Google Maps (2021), and Climatic Regions after the Koppen-Geiger system by Beck et al.. (2021) In present-day Mongolia, two nomadic groups emerged, the Mongols and the Turks, who were observed to move their flocks to habitual grazing grounds in the steppe ecological zone (Aubin 2000:736). These groups maintained regular contact with sedentary landscapes, primarily for trade and commerce, which served as their primary source of wheat and clothing (Barthold 1962:17-18). The harsh environment in which these nomads lived led them to become combative and willing to fight under a charismatic leader (Aubin 2000:737). Chingiz Khan (1162-1227), and later Timur (1336-1405), emerged as such leaders, leading the nomadic civilization into the sedentary landscapes of Central Asia and Iran. As Turko-Mongolian conquerors, the Chingisids initially, and thereafter the Timurids, worked towards expanding their empire and, in the process, adapted to the sedentary cultural sphere of the lower altitudes. The ideology and practices of these powerful and charismatic leaders gave rise to multiple conglomerate empires, some genealogically related and some as ‘shadow empires’ (Barfield, 2001), sharing a common Turko-Mongol political identity (Steenbergen 2020:30) such as those of the Safavids, Ottomans, Uzbek Khanates, and the Mughals (Blake 2013:21). The Turko-Mongolian empires from the mid-14th century, beginning with the Timurids in Central Asia and Iran, persisted until the Mughals in South Asia in the 31 mid-19th century, exercising control over the extensive territory defined by the formidable Alburz, Zagros, Hindukush, and Himalayan Mountain ranges, with the Persian Gulf to the south and the Zeravshan River Basin to the north (see Figure 2.2). Shahjahan, the fifth Mughal Emperor and the builder of Shahjahanabad, adopted the title of ‘Sahib-i Qiran Sani’, or Sahib-i Qiran II, after Sahib-i Qiran, Timur (see Figure 2.3). Shahjahan, as Timur II, was a proud inheritor of his Turko-Mongolian lineage (after Suhrawardy 2023) and not only his state and military policies but also his hydrological and architectural experiments in the South Asian landscape were inspired by the ‘world empire’ practices of Central Asia (Balabanlilar 2007:1). Dale (1998) argues that Shahjahan’s rule represented a phase of the ‘South Asian Timurid Renaissance,’ in which he attempted to revive Timurid practices of bureaucratic organization, socioeconomic reorientation, and cultural tastes (Subtelny 2007:57; Suhrawardy 2023) based on learnings from Timur’s biography, the Timur-nama (after Frost 1998:25). Figure 2.3: Genealogical Seal of Shahjahan (1636) [Source: Gallop 1999:118] The center of the seal bears the name of His Imperial Majesty Abu-al Muzaffar Shihab-al-Din Muhammad Sahib Qiran Sani Shahjahan Badshah Gazi, who self-identifies as Sahib Qiran Sani or Sahib Qiran II or Timur II. The genealogy of the emperor is listed in the outer circle, comprising nine small circles, commencing with the name of his father, Jehangir, in the northeast and concluding with the Sahib-i Qiran Amir Timur (north). The Mughals lived in a constant nostalgia for the Central Asian landscape (Suhrawardy 2023), which for them, together with South Asia formed ‘one world’ and they wished to rule over the complete entity (Frost 1998:154). From Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire, to Shahjahan, all kings initiated multiple efforts to take over their Central Asian homeland (Dale 1998:46), including Samarqand (Figure 2.2), the capital of the Timurid Empire, and Timur’s burial site, from Safavids and Uzbeks, but with no 32 success. Although the Mughals were never able to conquer Samarqand, they always sent ‘money and manpower’ (Frost 1998: xxviii) for the annual restoration of Timur’s grave, the Gur-i Amir. Balkh (Figure 2.2) was the maximum extent to which Shahjahan managed to expand his empire, though briefly from 1646 to 1647 (Frost 1998:16-17; also Figure 2.4). Balkh held great ritualistic significance for the Mughals, as it was the coronation site of Timur and the ground of their ancestral cemetery (Dale 1998:46). Popularly known as the Hazdah Nahr region, after the 18 canal systems (Paul 2018:316), Balkh lies between the Hindukush Mountain range and the Amu Darya. This constitutes a regional settlement pattern that resonates with those of later Shahjahani cities in South Asia. There is a central urban core with garden suburbs and agricultural hinterlands served by monumental canal systems, forming a hydraulic continuum. This pattern was evident during the Shahjahan period in Lahore, Kashmir, Burhanpur, Agra and Shahjahanabad. The Mughals’ adaptation to the South Asian landscape followed an amalgamation of nomadic and sedentary practices of ruling, which was an essential attribute of the Turko-Mongolian dynasties, as is evident in the great empires of the Timurid, Safavid, Uzbek, and Ottoman. Together, these empires constituted a landscape of shared traditions, knowledge, and cultures unifying Central and South Asia, often referred to as the ‘tripartite conception’ of ‘Iran-Turan-Hindustan’ together forming a socio-cultural region as ‘one world’ (Frost 1998:154). All these empires were deeply rooted in the Mongol vision of the ‘world empire’ (Balabanlilar 2007:1). This vision was achieved by a combination and balance of the nature of ‘Turko-Mongolian steppe life’ and the ‘Perso-Islamic sedentary society’ (Dale 1998:45), one which Subtelney (2007) describes as ‘centrifugal’ and ‘centripetal’ tendencies of governance, respectively. The centrifugal nature of the Mongol ‘decentralized patrimonial system’ and the centripetal Persian ‘bureaucratic tradition.’ Although highly contrasting in their philosophies, this pragmatic mergence was made possible by Timur through his successful adaptation to Central Asian traditions (Subtelny 2007:17). This was later adopted by other Turko-Mongolian and Turko-Persian dynasties (Balabanlilar 2007:4), evolving into their own set of diverse practices rooted in a common ancestry (Frost 1998:12) of ‘religio- cultural identity’ and ‘politico-ideology’ (Subtelny 2007:28). The Chingisid Mongols were predominantly nomadic, who conquered, and plundered cities and civilisations, with little or no investment back into these settlements for their social, cultural, and economic growth. They thrived on the ‘booty economy’ (Subtelny 2007:55). Timur, the Turkic son-in-law of Mongols, followed the same trajectory. However, while both the Mongols and Timurids shared a Turko-Mongol lineage, the Timurid dynasty developed a distinctive court culture that was markedly hybrid, integrating nomadic-Turkic traditions with urban- Persianate elements. When the Timurids expanded to the Perso-Islamic landscape, they encountered a sedentary civilisation with their own set of attributes, which demanded a different kingship approach. 33 Although nomadic in nature, they learned to adapt to this sedentary landscape and began investing in its economic, social, and cultural growth. The Timurid experience demonstrates how nomadic rulers transitioned into sedentary sovereigns without relinquishing their steppe heritage. By selectively appropriating the administrative, cultural, and symbolic practices of the Perso-Islamic world, the Timurids fashioned a courtly and political culture that was at once hybrid and adaptive. This synthesis profoundly shaped the urban environments they patronized, producing models of city-making that would later be echoed in Mughal urbanism. Yet even as they invested in sedentary infrastructures, the Timurids continued to perform their nomadic ancestry through material and ritual forms. Tents and awnings set within gardens and meadows, frequently represented in Timurid miniature painting, evoked the steppe traditions of mobility and conquest, and became central to the performative projection of sovereignty (Wilber 1979:129; O’Kane 1993:252). These encampments, often described as mobile capitals, operated as theatrical spaces (Golombek 1995:141) in which the ruler’s authority could be staged at the juncture between nomadic and sedentary modes of life (Gronke 1992:19). Court rituals, festivals, and ceremonial gatherings were held within such spaces, underscoring the persistence of steppe traditions within an increasingly urban context. The tent, described as the ‘abode of the khan’ (Golombek 1995:141), remained a powerful emblem of imperial legitimacy, linking Timurid sovereignty to the Chinggisid model. This symbolic repertoire was subsequently inherited by the Mughals, who likewise deployed tents and encampments as markers of continuity with their Turko-Mongol ancestry. Such practices served not merely as cultural survivals but as active strategies of legitimation, rooting Mughal authority within the political genealogy of Chinggis Khan. As Zarakol (2022:18) has argued, the Chinggisid model rested on the construction of genealogical continuity, whereby later dynasties grounded their authority in claims of descent from the Great Khan. For both the Timurids and the Mughals, this genealogical linkage functioned as a foundational source of imperial legitimacy, even as it was rearticulated within the Perso-Islamic and Indic landscapes in which they ruled. By Timur, the Mughals called themselves Guregeniyya or the ‘son-in-law’ dynasty of the Mongols (Balabanlilar 2007:6; also, Suhrawardy 2023) and wrote and commissioned writings on their Turko- Mongolian ancestries in the form of Chingiznama (History of Chingis Khan), Timurnama (History of Timur), and Tarikh-i-Alfi (History of Chingisids and Timurids). Their seals (see Figure 2.3) and coins also illustrate this connection. From the very beginning, the Mughals’ political, cultural, and aesthetic traditions were rooted in their Turko-Mongolian ancestry. The practice of the ‘Mongol-Timurid’ system of royal appanages or dynastic/princely appanages was also highlighted in letters written by Babur to his son Humayun (Balabanilar 2007:112; after Baburnama, tr. by Thackston 2007:741-43). The Sunni 34 religious fiqh [legal] scholarships of the Mughals were inspired by the Central Asian works of hedaya, while the political philosophies were adapted from the Mongolian yasa and tamgha, and the Timurid Akhlaq-i-Nasiri (after Balabanlilar 2007:20-23; also Suhrawardy 2023). The layout of the Mughal camps and their hunting pattern followed the Mongol model (Blake 1991:146). Akbar’s ranking system for land allotment was based on the Chingisid canon or tura. The Mongol titles ‘Tarkhan’ and ‘Chagatay’ were also bestowed on the favorites of the empire by the Mughal emperors (Frost 1998:25-37). Figure 2.4: Map showing the geographical extent of representatives in Shahjahan’s Court (after Eaton 2019:384) During the period following the Safavid establishment of Shi’ism in Iran, South Asia experienced a significant influx of Sunni Persian culture. This era is frequently characterised as ‘brain drain’ (Frost 1998:2) or a ‘society in motion’ (White 2023), marked by the migration of Central Asian artists, poets, architects, and engineers to the Mughal court. This movement also facilitated the transfer of ecological knowledge and construction techniques from the native landscapes of Central Asia. Shahjahan’s court was notably described by his imperial secretary as comprising representatives from the entire Persian-speaking world (Eaton 2019:384; see Figure 2.4). The following section endeavours to contextualise Mughal hydrological practices by drawing on the empire-building methodologies of the Turko-Mongolian/Turko- Persian traditions. It further aims to examine water-related infrastructural systems that were pivotal to the 35 imperial strategy of manipulating the landscape and the ruled to consolidate territories across environmentally diverse regions. However, to cast the Mughal Empire primarily as an extension of Central Asian or Islamic traditions risks obscuring the ecological and cultural embeddedness of their rule in the Indian subcontinent. While Central Asian and Islamic legacies shaped Shahjahan’s kingship, his strategies of legitimation, ritual, and architecture demonstrate a profound engagement with Indic practices. This engagement was neither peripheral nor defensive; it constituted a central dimension of how Mughal sovereignty was embodied, performed, and inscribed onto the South Asian landscape. Moin (2012) contends that Shahjahan’s reign exhibited sustained interaction with Indic traditions, practices, and cosmologies. His modes of sovereignty reflected continuity with the Indic- inflected ecumenism of his predecessors. The designation of Dara Shikoh, renowned for his interest in Sufi-Vedantic synthesis, Indic metaphysics, and Hindu-Muslim dialogue, as his heir underscores Shahjahan’s receptivity to intellectual and spiritual traditions beyond a narrowly juristic Islam. Architecture and ritual performance further attest to this Indic orientation. Shahjahan’s adaptation of the jharoka darshan merged Timurid notions of sacral kingship with Indic concepts of divine authority and the sovereign’s visibility as a deity-like presence. The orientation of his audience halls toward the rising sun and his ritual participation in solar and lunar weighing ceremonies embedded Indic cosmologies within the Mughal court. Similarly, Mughal art and architecture frequently incorporated solar symbolism, echoing Akbar’s engagement with Sanskritic solar worship. Moin concludes that Shahjahan’s choices illustrate that Mughal sovereignty cannot be reduced to a rigidly ‘Islamic political culture’. Instead, it manifested through a dynamic synthesis of Timurid legacies and Indic traditions. Consequently, analyses of Mughal practices, particularly under Shahjahan, must move beyond singular narratives of Turko- Mongolian continuity. The empire emerged as a consciously hybrid system, a composite corpus drawing upon indigenous experimentation while integrating techniques circulated through trade, migration, conquest, and diplomacy. Building on this framework, the thesis situates Mughal hydraulic practices as a deliberate effort to bridge Turko-Mongolian and Indic traditions of water management and distribution. The following section examines the relationship of Turko-Mongolian empires with water, focusing on its use as a tool of control, consolidation, and expansion. Equally critical is an understanding of Indic practices, discussed in Chapter 3, which details the gradual codification of pre-Mughal Muslim adaptations of indigenous water management techniques in South Asia and their eventual incorporation by the Mughals. 36 2.3 Water and the Turko-Mongolian Empires The nomadic Mongols are believed to have expanded to sedentary lower attitudes, for need of ‘water and grass’ (Fletcher 1986), because of the ‘Little Ice Age’ that acted as a climatic push from the Northern Hemisphere (Kim & Pianciola 2019:529; Chen 2022). The ‘mobile pastoralist’ Mongols were able to adapt constantly to the land, seasons and environment because of their nomadic nature. Historically, the reed banks of major rivers served as an appealing location for nomadic groups to establish winter camps, particularly when they maintained trade relations with the settled populations of the region for supplies of wheat and clothing (Barthold 1962:17-18). These groups recognised the value of fluvial landscapes and the advantages they provide for sedentary populations. In their efforts to become integrated into the cultural sphere of Central Asia and Iran they and their later conglomerate empires quickly realised that ‘sedentary agriculture’ was the key economic contributor for a stable political state (Kim & Pianciola 2019:530; Subtelny 2007: 111-130). Watering the land-based empires was used as a means of consolidation by the Turko-Mongolian empires. Most large cities in Central Asia and Iran experience very low precipitation levels (Gaube 2008:159). The region can be classified as an arid area that experiences less than 250 mm of rainfall and a semi-arid zone with a maximum rainfall of 400 mm. Such low rainfall is unable to support the cultivation of many grain species (Kim & Pianciola 2019:526). Large-scale agricultural practices require substantial amounts of water, particularly for commodity crops, to prioritise economic growth. Moreover, cultivation had to be intense in areas near large urban settlements because of the increased demand for food and trading. One of the key attributes of good kingship in the Central Asian region was the development of new irrigation networks, the expansion of existing ones (Subtelny 2007:121), or resurrecting the old systems (Kim & Painciola 2019:539) to form agriculturally oriented settlements around urban areas. As such, urban centers with rural hinterlands together formed what is considered an important attribute of medieval Islamic settlements, the ‘rural-urban continuum’ (Subtelny 2007:135-138). As the Central Asian landscape is predominantly semi-arid, it had to be regularly irrigated to make it agriculturally productive. A recent study by Chen et.al. (2022) on the streamflow reconstruction of rivers, originating in the Central Asian mountains, highlights the importance of access to water by the Timurid and Uzbek Khanate empires in establishing military and political control of the region in a period of fluctuating pluvial pattern. These semi-desert regions could not be rain-fed; hence, water from rivers was drawn to fields with the help of ‘monumental’ canals or nahr. The saucer-shaped landscape of the region because of its surrounding mountains (kuh) –Kuh-i Zagros, Kuh-i Alburz, and Kuh-i Hindukush- the central plateau and the rolling desert (Spooner 1974:689) has an interior-basin drainage (Fisher 1928:302; Polybius 1927) facilitating construction of subterranean channels, qanats or karezs, to 37 draw water from the snow-covered mountain peaks, rich streams, springs and surface runoff towards the valleys (Cressey 1958). These qanats or karezs collectively contributed to increasing the carrying capacity of the foothills and the plateau region, thereby contributing to empire-led economic expansions (Spooner 1974:694). This resulted in large-scale urbanisation of the foothills, as evident in the location of most cities (Gaube 2008:160). The kuhi (mountain) and the darya (river) together led to the emergence and development of cities in the Central Asian landscape during the Timurid, Safavid and the Uzbek Khanate periods. Notable examples of kuhi-darya cities include Shiraz, Tehran, Yazd, Kashan, Herat, Qazvin, Mashhad, Nishapur, and Qandahar. Additionally, cities such as Isfahan, Kirman, and Samarqand also drew water from the adjoining mountains in an intramontane basin (Spooner 1974; Bichsel 2013). Wells were dug to extract water from subterranean sources, and distribution channels were created to flow from these wells to fields and orchards (Schade 2011). Dams, bunds, and reservoirs were constructed on rivers to store water during dry seasons (Subtelny, 2007:138). In some parts, dead lands were reclaimed to form a ‘single agrarian continuum’ with multiple feeder canals and water from subterranean sources (Subtelny 2007:144) resulting in what Spooner (1974) terms as an ‘irrigation civilization’. It is important to note that this should not be confused with Wittfogel’s concept of a ‘hydraulic society’ (1957), for besides the state-controlled apparatus in the region, irrigation was also being practised at smaller scales through private investments, commonly referred to as ‘hydroagriculture’ using qanats, seasonal streams and wells (Subtelny 2007:140; also Spooner 1974:705). Gaube (2008), in his work on Iranian cities, argues that the hydrological consolidation of the region led to the initiation of large-scale land-road constructions and other communication channels for the administration and control of the region and its trade. Water acquired a tangible presence in the landscape through these networks and associated activities. It dictated the geometry of settlements, streets, gardens, and palaces shaping urban structures and their rural hinterlands (Montalbano 2008:692). I conducted a comprehensive listing of water-related infrastructural systems and their sources, which were introduced and revived by the Turko-Mongolian empires in Iran and Central Asia (see Appendix II/2A). The study focused on three major empires: the Timurids, Safavids, and the Uzbek Khanates. Information was derived from published archaeological reports, textual and cartographic sources, as well as chronicles and manuals commissioned by the empires. A total of 442 water-related infrastructures were collectively identified as constructed by these empires. This included 129 river-fed canals, 172 irrigation channels, 10 dams, 53 qanats, 30 water mills, 39 reservoirs, and four aqueducts. Additionally, the empires revived six canals, 16 qanats, 442 water mills, and 13 aqueducts in the region between Iran and Central Asia. 38 Figure 2.5 The revival of abandoned water infrastructures by the Turko-Mongolian empires illustrates their adaptive engagement with sedentary landscapes. Rather than imposing exclusively nomadic strategies of control, these empires demonstrated a pragmatic sensitivity to existing hydrological practices. The restoration of derelict canals, qanats and water mill systems represented not only an acknowledgment of the ecological realities of arid and semi-arid regions but also a conscious effort to legitimize conquest through acts of renewal and provisioning. In regions characterized by extreme water stress, such investments functioned as a means of humanizing imperial expansion while simultaneously embedding nomadic rulers within the socio-ecological fabric of sedentary polities. This period of Turko-Mongolian expansion coincided with significant climatic fluctuations associated with the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age (1250–1850), which were marked by extreme weather events and heightened ecological vulnerability (Djamali et al. 2025:2). Against this backdrop, the development and rehabilitation of hydraulic systems catalysed large-scale socio-economic transformations. By weaving imperial interventions into existing decentralized water management traditions, Turko-Mongolian rulers crafted a consciously hybrid and adaptive model of sovereignty (Subtelny 2007:140; Spooner 1974:705). Water infrastructure enabled new settlement patterns, facilitated agricultural intensification, and contributed to infrastructural urbanism in Iran and Central Asia. The strategic placement of hydraulic features within the landscape was not merely functional but also performative: qanats, canals, and dams simultaneously served local populations while operating as monumental symbols of imperial power and legitimacy. Mapping of these water-related infrastructural features reveals their concentration predominantly in areas around mountain foothills, which are fed by glacier-melting streams and rivers, as illustrated in Figure 2.5. Large-scale infrastructural systems, comprising canals, qanats, and aqueducts, functioned as mechanisms linking urban centers to agricultural hinterlands, thereby creating a rural-urban continuum. All canals and aqueducts were found to draw water from rivers, which were further distributed through irrigation channels. Qanats transported water from foothills over long distances to irrigate lands in the arid lowlands and to serve their urban centers. A series of watermills, fed by streams and qanats, regulated water through stone gates and sluice boards (Harverson 1993). Stream-fed watermills were predominantly located in mountain valleys, utilizing fast-moving glacier or rain-fed systems. Conversely, watermills fed by qanats were situated in the arid plains of the landscape. The hydraulic construction of large-scale infrastructure projects by the Turko-Mongolian dynasties in Iran and Central Asia demanded an extensive understanding of water engineering. A team constituting the best designers and architects who were natives of the region and well-versed with terrain and water grammar were enlisted to undertake such large projects. Some of these architects and engineers also formed part of the Mughal team when they were trying to recreate Central-Asian hydrological 40 practices in South Asia. Notably, Ali Mardan Khan [Safavid], Mirak Sayyid Ghiyath [Uzbek, Timurid, Safavid], Muhammad Sayyid Ghiyath [Uzbek, Timurid], Isa Effendi [Ottoman], Muhammad Sharif [Timurid, Uzbek], and Ata Muhammad [Uzbek] (after Frost 1998:87). In Iran and Central Asia, cities such as Herat, Kerman, Isfahan, Shiraz, Samarqand, Bukhara, Merv, and Mashhad in the Khorasan region have survived these large-scale infrastructure projects. Timur himself, as the ‘good king’, commissioned several ‘monumental’ canals in the region, such as the Nahr-i Barlas, Nahr-i Baylaqen, Nahr-i Asan Jandar, Nahr-i Aqbuqa, and Nahr-i Alo Malik (see Appendix II/2A). After his death, his son Shahrukh expanded the irrigation network to Merv, Herat, and Mashhad, forming ‘agrarian patronage states’ (Subtelny 2007:140-144). In his effort to increase agricultural influence and promote involvement in farming, he even waived tax collection for the initial five years in Qazwin, Azerbaijan, and Iraq-i Ajam (Aka 1996:13). Figure 2.6: Conquest of Baghdad by Timur, Folio from a Zafarnama (Book of Victory) by Sharaf al-din ‘Ali Yazdi (1436) [Source: MET Museum, Acc. No. 55.121.17] Figure 2.7: Timur before Battle, Folio from a Dispersed Copy of the Zafarnama (Book of Victories) of Sharaf al-din ‘Ali Yazdi (1436) [Source: MET Museum, Acc. No. 55.121.16 Timurids expanded their empire along existing fluvial patterns in the region, which they later expanded for irrigation and livestock. They followed a river-to-river profile in the landscape when conquering new territories, often camping at riverbanks before crossing to conquer more land (see Figure 2.6 & 2.7). These rivers and rivulets served as edge defining elements of the conquered territory, even if they were not as significant as major rivers like the Murghab (Herat), Zeravshan (Samarqand), or 41 Zayandeh (Isfahan). The Timurid army’s camping sites before the attacks are detailed in Timur’s biography (Yazdi, tr. Darby 1723), with many examples found at riverbanks, such as Rahmet, Yam, Toum, Balangan, Termed, Gihon, Ghez, Acihe Caden, Oxus, Caoun, Abeile, Murghab, Ourous, and Cor. The inter-fluvial nature of conquest highlights the significance of river, and its basin, to the Turko- Mongolian empires and it would be appropriate to classify them as ‘watershed empires’ given the ecological gaze they possessed towards a long-term conquest of the region. 2.3.1 Watershed Empires: A Contextual Formation The term ‘watershed empires’ was first coined by Camp in his 1963 book, The Ancient Engineers (Camp 1963:23). He noted that river systems form a vast watershed that enables the creation of irrigation networks. When controlled by a central authority, such a watershed can be considered a watershed empire, as seen historically in the cases of the Nile, Mesopotamia, Indus, and Hwang-ho. However, he also noted that large-scale governance was never considered due to the risk of revolts, revolutions, and civil wars, leading to the emergence of multiple small empires in one large watershed. Russel (2005) later expanded Camp’s definition by providing three examples from China (Ch’ins), the Middle East (Assyrians), and Peru (Incas) in his article, The Watershed Empires. He explained how these states controlled rich highland river systems and also conquered their floodplains to establish total control over the region. The Ch’ins built large-scale irrigation canals, expanding the rivers, making them the wealthiest state in China, the nomadic tribe of the Assyrians emerged as a powerful empire between Euphrates and Tigris and it was only possible because of its ‘favourable location’ in the interfluve region, the Incas focussed on war and agriculture but lacked ‘technological inventions’ in irrigation practices (Russel 2005:127-138). The gaze of watershed empires, based on the work of Camp and Russel, indicates one of internal in nature. They all settled in a region and then proceeded to expand it inside-out with the river as its central feature. They probably never saw the region as a watershed until they settled in these areas, and thereafter began expanding the resources available to them. In examining the process of state formation, it is crucial to expand the definition of watershed empires by including the ‘intention of consolidation’ of the empire which involved the strategic control of river headwaters that fed the nodal elements of water features, such as wells, mills, ponds, and lakes, within the imperial landscape. Additionally, the role of religion as a tool for water governance in the region warrants consideration. The Turko-Mongolian gaze of the sedentary Perso-Islamic landscape was characterised by its inter-fluvial nature of movement and conquest, where the region to be conquered was viewed as a collection of micro- and mini-watersheds, with a river as the central defining element. The prosperity and control of these regions were governed by river systems and their multiple expansions along the contours of the land within the watershed. The river system never expands beyond the ridge lines, 42 limiting resources to its watershed. Even where river water was not being used for irrigation, qanats or karezs were used to bring water from the inclined planes of the mountains, springs, and streams within the watershed boundaries. A composite system of techniques and technologies was incorporated to harvest, store, dam, and distribute water across the watershed, all governed by a central empire and shaped by the religious homogeneity of water management practices. It is imperative to analyse the hydrological landscape of Central Asia in terms of watershed empires that are characterised by rivers as their central feature. These waterways were significantly altered to meet the ambitions of the empires and establish dominance over the region. They were embanked, dammed, siphoned, and canalised, serving as a means of long-term conquests. Furthermore, empires constructed qanats or karezs to transport water from the highlands of river basins to valleys. In this context, the case of three significant river basins in Central Asia has been discussed in the following section, highlighting how the water features were utilised as a tool of consolidation by the Turko- Mongolian empires. It is important to note that Turko-Mongolian empires, namely the Timurid and Safavid Empires, functioned as ‘ecological zones’ (Gustafson and Speer 2022:61) defined by their mountainous surroundings and internal drainage basins. These empires survived and prospered on their agricultural wealth which was made possible by the expansion of the river systems to the extents of the empire. The ecological zones were designed as non-porous militarily and politically, however economically they transcended multiple empires as evident in the broad connection the empire had with both South Asia and the Near East in the form of ‘goods, pilgrims, migrants and money’ (Gustafon and Speer 2022:63). Murghab and Hari Rud Basin (Herat and Merv): In the Herat and Merv province, where the precipitation level is below 100mm, the Murghab River, which originates in the Paropamisus mountains, serves as the primary water source for settlements in the Badgiz region (Nagheeby 2019). As a result of low rainfall, agriculture in the region was only possible using river water, which was transported to the far ends of the Murghab interfluve region, with Amu Darya and Hari Rud, through canals and from the hills through karezs or subterranean channels. Recent archaeological exploration in the Murghab Delta has uncovered the presence of hundreds of Bronze Age and Iron Age sites and an extensive hydrological system that supported irrigation and other occupations (Markofsky 2017). Cerasetti (2002) mentions that the Achaemenids built two fortress lines in the delta region to protect the Sultan-ab canal and the Dzhar irrigation system from enemies who sought to control the course of the river and its distributaries to gain territorial control over the region. 43 Hari Rud (River) Juy-i A lingan Juy-i Engil Juy-i Gagartan Juy-i Sefid-e R avan Juy-i Bolondshahi Juy-i Noubadan Juy-i Engil Juy-i Bosuran Juy-i G agartan Juy-i N ou Juy-i Udvan Juy-i Sadi Bare Juy-i Kartabar Juy-i Ciri Juy-i Nou Bagh-e Zagar Juy-i Soltani Juy-i Kabarzan Juy-i K art ab ar Juy-i Tizan Juy-i Talab Bagh-e Sefid Juy-i M alan Bagh-e Mirgani Juy-i Nou-ye Juy-i Malan Bagh-e Mohtar Juy-i Ziyaratgah Juy-i Natare-ye Malek HERAT Walled City N Canal Network in Timurid Herat Elevation in metres Bagh-e Jahanara Baghs [after T. Allen (1983)] Figure 2.8 Many centuries later, the Timurids (14th to 16th century) followed a similar trajectory of conquest and built a vast canal system on the Murghab and Hari Rud (see Figure 2.8 for map on canal networks in Timurid Herat; after Allen 1983) that extended from the foothills of the Hindu Kush in Herat, passing through the desert, to the river’s delta zone in the Merv province. Timur sought to bring all suitable land for agriculture within the region under cultivation, which required the expansion of the canal system from the Murghab and the Hari Rud to the edges of the Herat floodplain (Aka 1996:10-11). Timur himself supervised the construction of 20 canals in Herat, while his son, Shahrukh, later built 22 canals in the Merv region on the Murghab River (refer to Appendix II/2A). The 20 canals commissioned by Timur were mostly built by his nobles and are named after them, such as Omar Tabbam, Aqbuqa, Alaoddin, and Daoulatah. Women of the empire also participated in the building of the canals. The most notable being Timur’s sister, Qutlug Terken Aga. The 22 Shahrukhi canals, built to expand the Murghab River in Merv province, were named after the settlements they served, including Adine Masged, Sahsarar, Dastgerd, Bahsur, and Kankaran. Additionally, some of the hamlets in Merv province were named after Timur, such as those near Nur, Qovat, and Balh (Krawulsky 1982). The extensive expansion of the Murghab River led to the formation of ‘agrarian patronage states’ (Subtelny 2007:140-144) in the Central Asian region, using river water as a means of control and conquest. Wells, qanats, and water mills were also built to serve the parched landscape (Harverson 1993, also see Figure 2.5 and Appendix II/2A) and as a tool of economic stability in the sedentary landscape. During the Qazaqliq period, there was no significant agricultural activity in the region between Jajarm and the Murghab River until Timur and Shahrukh commissioned the construction of large feeder canals and restoration of dams in the Murghab (Subtelny 2007:65). This led to a substantial influx of people into the area, and the basin experienced a marked increase in the number of villages. The building of feeder canals and subterranean channels enabled large-scale reclamation of dead lands in deserts and plains. The canals contributed to food production in the region and acted as a source of power for mills. As a by-product, canal banks were used for growing trees, gathering stubble as fuel, and brickmaking in the Murghab basin (McChesney 1991:25). McChesney (1991) also mentions a study by R.E. Peacocke on the distribution of ethnic communities along the canals. The Pathans occupied the canal heads, followed by Uzbeks and Arabs, and the Arsari Turkomens occupied the outlying villages indicating the relationship between political power and the spatial distribution of ethnic hierarchies in the hydrological landscape. Zayanadeh Rud Basin: The Elburz and the Zagros are the primary mountainous regions of Iran (Beaumont 1974:418). These two ranges play a significant role in the water availability of the region by contributing extensively through streams, rivers, and springs. The Zagros range is home to one of the 45 longest rivers in Iran, Zayandeh Rud, which supports several important cities, including Farsan, Daran, and Isfahan. During the 16th and 17th centuries, the Safavid dynasty under Shah Tahmasp I and later under Shah Abbas I gained control of the region by using irrigation as a tool for land tenure and land administration. They regulated and expanded the Zayandeh River system, which was one of many systems, as a means of conquest. A total of 109 madis (canals) originated from the Zayandeh Rud (Ghasemi 2019:41). The first order canal originating from the Zayandeh river was called ‘madi’, the second distributary was called ‘jadval’, and the smallest irrigation channel was called ‘jouy’. Shaikh Baha’i’s tumar7, written during the reign of Shah Tahmasp I, described the regulation of water distribution and discharge of the Zayandeh, from its origin in Lenjan, to its end in Gav Khuni. The manual also explains the regulation of water to settlements and agricultural lands within its basin and the construction of madis or canals to draw water from the river. Lambton’s 1938 seminal work on the translation of the Persian document and its later discussion in her book Landlord and Peasant in Persia (1953) forms the basis of the discussion of the Zayandeh system, its tributaries and distributaries, and its use as a tool of consolidation by the Safavids. Because of the seasonal variation in the volume of water in the Zayandeh River, Safavids created a system to regulate water flow to the land and settlements within its basin. After irrigating the settlements of Il Babadi and Sudegan, the river released 10% of its water to feed the ten villages in the Faridan boluk. It then proceeded to Lenjan and Aydoghamesh before crossing the Kalle Bridge. Beyond the bridge, the regulation followed three different rules based on location and season, called the azad, mokhtass, and moshtarek. Azad (December to early June) meant that the water was free from regulation during these months. Mokhtass was effective in June and November to focus on wheat irrigation, reserving water for the final irrigation of crops on a rotating basis. Water was made to flow in the irrigation canals and all land under cultivation was watered. Moshtarek referred to the water distribution in the remaining period on a rotating system of 15 days to each of the blocks between Lenjan and Gav Khuni for summer rice irrigation. Mir-ab, the water superintendent, and madisalars, the canal regulators, oversaw the distribution and discharge of water from the river, streams, and canals. The efficient water distribution network, which transported river water through irrigation canals, suggests that the Safavids had a strong grip on the agricultural system and the development of their territories. Not only was the river water regulated, but the qanat water was also allocated and distributed among the lands and settlements on a rotational basis, including Ardistan, Kashmar, Aliabad, Giv, and Ma’sumabad (Lambton 1953:218). Isfahan, the most significant city of Safavid Iran and its capital during the reign of Shah Abbas I, had a system of large canals constructed to draw water from the Zayandeh River. The city was supplied with water through four major canals: Nahr-i Fadan, Nahr-i Farshadi, Nahr-i Niyasarm, and Juy-i Shah. These canals were 7manual on the distribution of river water of the Zayandeh Rud 46 further divided into smaller canals to irrigate large urban complexes such as Masjid-i Jum’a, Masjid-i Sah, Naqs-i Jahan, and Maydan-i Atiq (Duva 2019:95-96). Nahr-i Fadan and Nahr-i Farshadi supplied water to the city. Juy-i Shah formed the ceremonial axes of the city, while Nahr-i Niyasarm was used to irrigate the city suburbs (Mahmoudian, 2017). Zeravshan Rud Basin: The Zeravshan basin is surrounded by piedmont zones, in present-day Uzbekistan, which relies on seasonal streams and rain-fed agriculture because of the low precipitation levels in the region. To achieve large-scale agricultural production in the region, skillful water management practices were implemented by the Timurids and Uzbek Khanates, including the construction of wide canals, dams, dykes, reservoirs, water-lifting wheels, cisterns, and other devices (Mantellini 2018). These measures allowed for the expansion of the river system in the arid belt and encouraged habitation and agriculture along the perennial river or near newly introduced water devices. The canals, including the Dargom, Abbas, and Karaunnas (Uljaeva & Mamatova 2012:173) were several kilometres long and several hundred meters wide, reaching the driest part of the region and promoting habitation and agriculture. Additionally, the emergence of large-scale urbanism in the fertile-foothill fans of Central Asia was facilitated by the rivers emerging in the snowy mountains carrying large amounts of silt and other rich minerals. As the river reached the foothills, it slowed down and formed multiple braided streams depositing alluvium, resulting in the formation of mineral-rich fans suited for agriculture. These mineral-rich fans, suitable for agriculture, became the location of long-term habitation, such as the cities of Samarqand, Bukhara, and Qaraqol in the Zeravshan Rud Basin. The region is dominated by the cities of Samarqand and Bukhara and two of its largest canals, Dargom and Bulungur, which connect the Zervashan River to Akdarya and Karadarya, forming doab regions within the valley. This makes it one of the most significant oases in Central Asia (Stride, 2009). This region has also been referred as multiple ‘Mesopotamias’ of Central Asia (Mantellini 2001 & 2016; Stride 2009) because of its location between multiple channels, natural and artificial. Each of these have their unique ecological and environmental characteristics (Mantellini 2008). Zeravshan Rud which originates in the Hissers Mountains in Tajikistan and ends in Uzbekistan (Olsson 2012) was used a tool for extensive irrigation by the Timurids and later by the Uzbek Khanates (refer to Figure 2.5 and Appendix II/2A). Mantellini (2001) describes the Middle Zeravshan Basin as an ‘articulated hydrographical’ region shaped by the introduction of the multiple irrigation canals- large (nahr), middle and small(aryks)- formed by natural and artificial watercourses, adding to the existing hierarchy of the river system. Mantellini (2008) investigated the evolution of the hydrological landscape of Samarkand Oasis and identified the challenges of identifying historic ‘natural’ canals. He found that the on-ground integrated approach of natural courses and artificial sections were indistinguishable, making it difficult to determine which sections were natural and which were artificial. He concluded that the canals built 47 during the Turko-Mongolian period, such as the Dargom Canal, followed a composite pattern where natural courses were also canalised and joined by artificial channels. Figure 2.9: The Four Books of Agriculture & Hydrology;(from left to right) Irshad Al-Zira’a (Safavid), Tariq-i Qismat-i Ab-o Qalb (Safavid), Bayaz-i Khushbui (Mughal), and Nuskha Dar Fanni-i Falahat (Mughal) The degree of acculturation of the Turko-Mongols to Perso-Islamic sedentary practices is evident not only in the hydraulic projects within the watershed but also in the hydrological and agricultural manuals commissioned for the management of the agrarian landscape (Figure 2.9). These manuals were written to establish uniform set of practices across the region through the introduction of a standard record-keeping process and accounting techniques (Subtelny 2007:22). These manuals also included details of the soil type, annual meteorological cycle, types of fertilisers, agronomic practices of growing trees, plants, and vegetables, and garden layouts. Two of the notable manuals of the period were Irshad al- Zira’a and Risal-e Tariq-e Qismat Ab-o Qalb, both written by Qasim ibn Yusuf Abu Nasri Haravi, under Safavid ruler, Shah Esmail. Timurid and Safavid manuals were adopted by the Mughals and inspirations were drawn from these to develop the hydrological landscape of South Asia, especially that of Lahore, Peshawar, Kashmir, Agra, Burhanpur, and Shahjahanabad. Agra and Shahjahanabad were both capitals of the Mughal Empire, the latter until the British colonial forces eventually took over in 1857. A notable work that requires attention is the manuscript known as Beyan-i Menazil-i Sefer-i Irakeyan-i Sultan Suleyman Han or ‘The Stages of the Magnificent Sultan Suleyman’s Campaign in the two Iraks’ by Nasuh Matrakchi. Matrakchi was a multifaceted individual who served as an architect, artist, cartographer, historian, geographer, mathematician, engineer, and knight in the Ottoman Empire (Safa and Soufi 2021). He accompanied Sultan Suleyman Kanuni on his first Persian campaign (1533- 1536) during the reign of the Safavid emperor Shah Tahmasp I. The Safavids had embraced Shi’ism, which the Ottoman king saw as an attempt to corrupt the Hanafi sect and law, and as an opposition to the four Caliphs and the Prophet. Kanuni thus decided to put an end to the Safavid rule and marched towards Tabriz (Yurdaydin 1976:158). Matrakchi, who accompanied Kanuni, wrote a travelogue, also 48 referred to as Menzil Namey, which included a detailed description of the journey from Istanbul to Tabriz, as well as detailed drawings of all halting points with place names, their topographical information, and respective distances, in miles. Yurdaydin (1976) developed a map of the campaign route (Figure 2.10) based on the descriptions in Matrakchi’s travelogue. While the manuscript covers a vast geographical area, I would like to draw particular attention to drawings of cities and landscapes that fell within the boundaries of the Safavid Empire. Figure 2.10: Map of Kanuni’s Campaign to Safavid Iran [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]. The rectangular dashed-line box on the right indicates the geographical region under the control of the Safavid dynasty. Existing studies on Matrakchi’s drawings have primarily focused on the architectural plans of cities (Gabriel 1928; Denny 1970), styles of ‘architectural stenography’ used to document building materials along the campaign route (Yurdaydin 1976), size and distribution of settlements, their locational characteristics, and community institutions (Johnston 1971), as well as the ‘image of the city as image of the state’ (Ebel 2008) and how it reflects the empires’ gaze. A series of 31 drawings produced between Hamadan and Tabriz, including Abhar (see Figure 2.1; also Figure 2.11 & 2.12), present a unique topographic description of the 16th century Safavid landscape. The drawings showcase the prominent presence of both natural and man-made water channels, which serve as defining characteristics of the region. In his analysis of Matrakchi’s drawings in Safavid Iran, Johnston (1971) noted that 95% of the drawings depicted rivers (darya), streams, and canals. Furthermore, 45% of the drawings depicted the proximity of mountains (kuhi) to settlements, highlighting the prevalence of the kuhi-darya urbanism typology in the region. The widespread presence of streams and canals in both rural and urban areas suggests the extensive intervention of Timurid-Safavid hydrological efforts in the development of the region. All the illustrations depict a thriving countryside characterised by abundant crops, flowering trees, and lush grass-covered mounds weaved by a network of streams and canals. Notably, these depictions also highlight the proximity of religious shrines to water features, underscoring their importance in water management within the arid Iranian landscape. Figure 2.11: Fortified city of Hamadan, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976] Building on the Turko-Mongol strategies of infrastructural adaptation, the following section turns to the role of religion in shaping water governance across the Perso-Islamic world. For dynasties such as the Timurids, Safavids, Uzbeks, and later the Mughals, religion provided both a legitimating discourse and a regulatory framework for managing water resources. Religious authority sanctioned not only the construction of canals, reservoirs, and gardens, but also the governance of natural features such as rivers, riverbeds, alluvial fans, lakes, and ponds. By embedding water management within a sacred-legal order, these empires were able to reinforce stability, consolidate authority, and integrate diverse ecological zones into a coherent imperial system of rule. Figure 2.12: Safavid City of Tabriz, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]. 50 2.3.2 Religion and Water Governance In a region deeply affected by climatic volatility during the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, water assumed heightened significance in Iran and Central Asia, making its regulation indispensable to both imperial consolidation and long-term stability. The management of this critical resource required regulatory mechanisms that were not only locally grounded but also capable of providing a standardized framework across vast and ecologically diverse territories. Religion offered precisely such a system. As Oestigaard (2021:1) observes, water is central to nearly all major religious traditions, valued not only for its practical utility but also for its symbolic and ritual dimensions. By embedding water governance within religious frameworks, empires were able to sacralise control over rivers, canals, and reservoirs, transforming hydraulic management into a domain of both political authority and spiritual legitimacy. In arid and semi-arid environments, the integration of faith-based norms into water regulation, whether through sharia, religious endowments (waqf), or ritual practices, provided a powerful means of standardizing resource distribution, mediating access, and reinforcing imperial sovereignty through sacralised authority. Drawing on visual sources from the Ottoman period alongside literary sources from the Timurid and Safavid periods, this section examines the ways in which religion was instrumentalised by Turko-Mongolian empires to regulate water resources within their territorial domains. Mongols, along with the other steppe-tribe, the Turks, (Herrin 2006) embraced Islam as the state religion under the influence of the sufi-shaykhs, associated with important shrines in Iran and the Central Asian region such as Mashhad, Karbala and Baghdad, who were able to draw parallels between the Mongolian semitic concepts of the universe and Allah as the universal god (after Fletcher 1986). Islam played a crucial role in water management practices of Central Asia and Iran. It acted as a tool of centralized control. The religious homogeneity across the geographical region helped establish manuals and laws governing water use within an environment of ‘shared ecological constraints’ (Gustafson and Speer 2022:63). Hydraulic management in arid zones requires strict regulation of the flow, distribution, and discharge of water. Islam recognises the importance of water as a vital resource and how it cannot be considered a commodity. However, the right to use water for irrigation, livestock, and daily purposes can be sold, as per Islamic shari’a law. This law governed the use of resources such as qanats, canals, and wells (Lambton 1991:210) based on their proximity to these features. The closer one was to the source, the greater their right to access water. Settlements situated along the banks of streams, such as Turuq near Mashhad, Kurdistan, Abrud, and Abianeh near Kashan, had exclusive rights to water from these streams. Communities located far from water sources were supplied by qanats on a rotating basis (Lambton 1991:212). 51 Figure 2.13: Shrine located adjacent to rivers and streams; Ab-e Shirin, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976]. Figure 2.14: Shrine located adjacent to the canal in the suburbs of Qasba Abhar, drawn by Matrakchi (1533-1536) [Source: Yurdaydin, 1976] Islamic religious institutions across the Turko-Mongolian landscape endorsed water-distribution and sharing systems (Subtelny 2007:138). Building canals were coupled with shrine construction in many parts of Central Asia. These shrine bodies had members who, besides formulating religious laws on water, checked water consumption and management by keeping an account of water usage in the region regarding irrigation, livestock, and everyday needs. This acted as a religious control or sanction over the use of available water as a scarce resource in the semiarid region. A significant number of shrines have been recorded in the Timurid and Safavid regions adjacent to water features (see Salikuddin 2018; Canby 2009; Kondo 2018; Moin 2018), which highlights the dominant influence of these religious institutions on water management practices. The depictions of Iranian landscapes by Matrakchi also demonstrate the prevalence of shrines in the vicinity of water features (see Figure 2.13 and 2.14). While the term ‘shrine- states’ (McChesney 1991) may be appropriate in describing these hydrological landscapes, it is essential to recognise that the shrines were responsible for major policy decisions, accounting, and maintenance. Together, this resulted in water and its sources acquiring a sacred attribute in the local traditions of the parched landscape (Alemi 2008:536). The upkeep of the rivers was the duty of the imam, the head priest, of the central mosque in the city or region where the river flowed, and they were financially supported by the state treasury (Lambton 1991:213). The involvement of the chief qazi (judge of the Sharia court) of Bukhara and Khorasan, the sadr (religious scholar) of Isfahan, and nazir (overseer of Sharia) of Herat 52 (Subtelny 2007:138-140) in the design of the water-distribution system reasserts the role of Islam in water governance. One of the salient features of the Islamic water law is the ‘care’ and ‘endowment’ (waqf) of the water source for public use (Hussein 2003). Zoe (2022) describes waqf as a powerful tool for maintaining ‘stable land regime’ in a region lacking major environmental resources. To this day, waqf helps in the management and conservation of water resources by the benefiting community. The community availing benefits from the resource becomes the guardian of the resource and is required to protect it from any form of pollution. Communities of farmers are waqf to the canal, rivers, and streams for its produce; urban neighbourhoods are waqf to the well they draw the water from for their household needs; villages are waqf to the tanks and lakes their livestock drinks and bathes in. In Islam, humans have been appointed as the khulafa or stewards of the resources which govern human-environment interactions and dependencies (Amery 2009:484; Faruqui 2001; Gudorf 2010:23). The land in the Perso-Islamicate world was predominantly divided into two categories: waqf (endowed lands) and khaliseh (crown lands) (Lambton 1991:230). As per Islamic law, waqf lands had an administrator or mutawalli who was responsible for the upkeep of the land’s resources. The administrator was paid ten percent of the revenue generated from the land. The Safavid State derived its name from Shaykh Safi al-Dīn Ishaq, a prominent Sufi saint of the Safaviya order in Ardabil (Talib 2016). The Safaviya order exerted a substantial influence on the religious beliefs of the empire, a fact substantiated by the multitude of waqf deeds (waqfiya) issued by its kings and nobles. A notable waqf document of the Safavid period of the Madarsa-i Sultani (The Royal School) mentions agricultural fields, gardens, and irrigation canals as endowed properties to the religious school complex (Moazzen 2011:85). Moazzen (2011) argues that water as an ‘indivisible share’ was conveyed to waqf as canals, irrigation channels, wells, tanks, cisterns, reservoirs, water mills, and other water devices built to benefit the people. The document lists, among other important properties, 35 subterranean channels, 02 public baths, 03 mills endowed to the madarsa complex. Therefore, the trustees of the complex were responsible for the maintenance of the waqf properties and an official, wazir-i sarkar-i halal, was appointed to oversee the maintenance of canals, subterranean channels, agricultural fields, orchards, and gardens. Additionally, the shares of revenue generated by a qanat in Kashmar (Khorasan) were waqf to the shrine of Imam Riza’s brother at Bagh-i Nizar. Similarly, qanats in Kerman and Tehran were waqf to the Shi’i shrines of the region (Lambton 1991:235). Gawhar Shad, the wife of the second Timurid king, Shahrukh, was involved in public works in Herat, Mashhad, Tus, and Jam. Her endowments aimed to revive abandoned lands, hydrological systems, and increase agricultural production (Mahendrarajah 2018:825-852). In Central Asia, it was common 53 practice to endow thriving city shops with important buildings and infrastructure. For example, Shad’s waqf deed mentions the endowment of 61 shops to the cistern of Khwaja Nizam-ul Mulk in Tus near Mashhad, as well as three shops to the hammam in Hasanaw. Furthermore, the maintenance of large irrigation canals and feeder channels was the responsibility of the nobles who were allocated land in the city suburbs. Land allocation followed geographical features such as riverbeds, streams, and abandoned lands. A share of the revenue generated from the allocated lands was spent on the upkeep of the water infrastructure. Similarly, shares from watermills, dams, canals, subterranean channels, and riverbed farming were also featured on the waqf deed. Specifically, half of the hamlet of Fayani was waqf to the qanat flowing through it, the entire hamlet of Murghanan to the canal of Kan-Bist, and all small dry farms of Quzghan to the water channels in the area. Additionally, villages in Jam were waqf to the canals, dams, and water mills of the district. In Herat district, the waqfiya of Timurid Mir Ali Shir lists the Injil canal and several other irrigation canals, besides agricultural fields as endowed properties to the madarsa (religious school) and khanqah (shrine) complex, consisting of a mosque, bath, and a hospital (Subtelny 2007:168-169). Sultan Husain’s wife Afaq Begim’s waqf deed also lists irrigational canals, karez of Muhammad Darvish Afradi, karez of Sultan Shah Asas, qanat of Shalayin, qanat of Amir Sultan Muhammad and water shares in the provinces of Badghis, Jam, Sarakh, Tizhin, Balkh, and Tizan as endowed properties to her tomb complex in Herat. Begim’s waqfiya illustrates the extent of endowed properties beyond the provincial boundaries of Herat and presents a regional order of endowment practices within the Timurid Empire. Other notable Timurud waqf deeds related to water features include Sufi Shaikh Zain al-Din Khwafi which lists ‘qanats and shares in qanats’ as endowed to the shrine complex in Darvishabad in Herat. In Mashhad, irrigation canals, water mills, and agricultural properties were endowed to a madarsa complex as listed in the waqf deed of Parizad Khanim. In addition, the Masjid-i Jami complex in Yazd lists the Khairabad canal and its irrigation outlets as endowed properties in the waqfiya of Amir Chaqmar besides water mills endowed to a paired royal madarsa complex in Samarqand (Subtely 2007:236-254). Furthermore, waqf documents of the shrine of Hazrat Ali in Mazar-i-Sharif, and other waqf deeds as mentioned by Hafez-e Abru and Mohammad Mo’min’s Jadida, of Sultan Husain Bayqara’s period, were related to the discharge and distribution of water from the Balkh-Ab, Nahr-i-Balkh, Nahr-i Shahi (McChesney 1991) and the Palaspush canal in the Balkh region (Wordsworth 2018). The Uzbek Khanate emperor Shaybani Khan also used waqf as a tool to restore agriculture and reclaim fallow lands (Mukminova 2003:40). Similar to Timurid practices, the land and water resources of the suburbs were endowed to public buildings within urban areas. A share of revenue was spent on the upkeep of a madarsa in Samarqand and a dam on Zeravshan Rud. Across the Uzbek Khanate empire, waqf properties such as water mills, canals, and agricultural lands were exempted from taxes as a strong 54 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/query?q=Author:%20%22Mukminova,%20R.G.%22&sf=sf:* economic basis for religious power (Dazheng 2003:190). Mutawallis were appointed to oversee the maintenance and upkeep of the ‘eternal’ waqf properties, including cleaning of canals and irrigation channels (Annanepesov 2003:71). Sufi shrines in the Bukhara Khanate were also endowed with large waqfs, such as the Shrine of Sayf-al Din Bakarzi, Baha-al Din Naqsband, and Kobrawi Shaikhs (Bregel 1980). The role of Islam in the water management practices of the Turko-Mongolian empires, through shrine complexes and waqf deeds, helped to exert control over hydrological systems in arid regions, further contributing to the practice of consolidation by empires in Iran and Central Asia. The implementation of religious controls helped establish stable empires in the Perso-Islamic landscape. Not only did these controls involve the construction of water features, but also the governance of natural features, such as rivers, riverbeds, fertile fans, lakes, and ponds, all under shari’a law, to effectively manage individual watershed regions. Turko-Mongol kinship practices served as an impressive organizational feature, effectively quelling internal uprisings within the family and preventing the allocation of power to individuals outside of the family. Each watershed, regardless of size, was controlled by individuals who were related to the central empire, forming collectively a large ‘watershed empire’. The interrelationship of empire, ecology, and religion emerges as a defining feature of the Turko- Mongolian imperial formations. The water management strategies adopted by the Timurids, Safavids, and Uzbeks reveal a governing framework in which these three elements: environmental adaptation, religious legitimisation, and imperial authority, were equally critical to state formation and sustainability in regions marked by extreme climatic variability, diverse landscapes, and heterogeneous populations. These dynamics not only shaped the political ecology of Iran and Central Asia but also resonate strongly with the practices of the Mughal Empire in South Asia. Central to this continuity was the codification of pre- existing water infrastructures into imperial systems, the recognition and incorporation of indigenous management practices, and the mobilisation of religion and faith in the organisation, hosting, and governance of hydraulic networks. Such strategies demonstrate a deliberate and sensitive approach to hybridity, balancing nomadic heritage with sedentary sovereignty. What is particularly significant, however, is the conceptualisation of these polities as watershed empires. This category shifts the focus from conventional territorial, military, or purely dynastic explanations of imperial durability toward an ecological-hydraulic perspective. By foregrounding rivers, canals, and subterranean water systems as imperial arteries, the notion of the watershed empire illuminates how state power was inseparable from the management, distribution, and symbolic framing of water. Monumental projects such as dams, canals, and reservoirs, were not merely utilitarian infrastructures; they 55 were also ritualised landscapes where religion, sovereignty, and ecology intersected. Moreover, conceiving these polities as watershed empires allows for a comparative framework across Central and South Asia. It provides a structured lens through which to assess how revenue systems, land allocations, and imperial frontier-making were organised in relation to fluvial geographies. In the case of the Mughal Empire, for instance, riverine landscapes formed the backbone of the imperial treasury, enabling not just economic benefits but also cultural integration across a heterogeneous population. The category of watershed empire therefore offers a critical analytical tool: it highlights the ecological underpinnings of sovereignty, reframes the territorial logics of empire in hydraulic terms, and opens up broader comparative insights into how early modern states engaged with and redefined their environments. This thesis advances to present how the ecological knowledge and hydraulic strategies inherited from the Mughals’ ancestral homelands (Suhrawardy 2023), in the ecologically constrained landscapes of Central Asia, were adapted and reconfigured within the environmentally diverse and water-stressed regions of South Asia. It investigates the forms of hybridity that emerged as Indic traditions of water management were incorporated, negotiated, and transformed within the Mughal imperial framework, situating these processes within broader questions of cultural synthesis, technological adaptation, and statecraft. Central to this enquiry is the role of imperial objects such canals, reservoirs, and dams, not only as functional infrastructures but also as instruments of symbolic authority, legitimising Mughal rule and facilitating the processes of state formation and territorial consolidation. By examining these artefacts alongside textual, visual, and archival sources, the thesis demonstrates how material culture and hydraulic systems were mutually constitutive of imperial power. The study further foregrounds the relational dynamics between rulers and the ruled, showing how hydrological infrastructures structured patterns of governance, resource distribution, settlement planning, and ritual observance. Such an approach highlights the centrality of ecological and hydraulic management to both the legitimacy and the operational durability of the Mughal state. Methodologically, the thesis contributes to emerging debates in environmental history, political ecology, and Mughal studies by conceptualising the empire as a hydraulic polity, where the management of water resources was inseparable from strategies of political authority and cultural integration. The research focuses in particular on Shahjahanabad, the last imperial capital, as a critical site through which the intersections of water, power, and religion can be examined in their full complexity. By doing so, the study offers not only a detailed understanding of Mughal hydrological systems but also a broader framework for analysing the interactions between ecological constraints, imperial strategies, and social hierarchies in early modern South Asia. 56 Drawing of a Baolee, near the old city of Delhi, 1801 by Thomas Daniell removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Royal Academy of Arts, London. 3.0 Water Management Practices in pre-Mughal South Asia The geographical region encompassing the punj-ab literally ‘land of five rivers’ (including the Indus), and the do-ab, ‘land between two rivers’ (Yamuna and Ganga), is characterised by a hydrological regime shaped by multiple fluvial systems and a monsoon cycle marked by irregular and unpredictable rainfall patterns (Petrie 2019). Within this complex ecological framework, diverse Indic traditions of water management developed over centuries. These indigenous systems were neither static nor insular; rather, they evolved through a process of continual adaptation and interaction. By the medieval and early modern periods, they had been further transformed through sustained exchanges with hydraulic practices from the Iranian plateau and the Turanian steppe. This confluence of traditions produced a hybridised model of water control and distribution that blended local ecological knowledge with technological and administrative influences from the greater Persian world. It is essential to emphasise that the water management systems of the Indus-Ganga basin cannot be understood as purely endogenous innovations of the South Asian milieu. Instead, they constitute a composite corpus of techniques, drawing upon indigenous experimentation as well as cross-cultural transfers facilitated by trade, migration, conquest, and diplomacy. Prior to analysing Mughal-era water management, it is therefore necessary to first examine the pre-existing hydraulic practices of the region, specifically, the ways in which they accounted for highly variable rainfall patterns and how the geomorphology of the landscape itself served as an organising principle for the design of water control technologies. This chapter is structured into three interrelated sections. The first offers a comprehensive survey of Indic water management traditions in South Asia, with particular attention to the micro-hydrological zones of the Indus-Ganga basin. The second establishes a chronological framework for understanding water management under pre-Mughal Muslim polities, tracing the historical continuum through a case study of early urban centres in pre-Mughal Delhi. The third section examines the possibility of a tripartite urban model of qila, shahrestan, and bagha’at, drawing on evidence from the spatial distribution of water features commissioned by the sovereigns of pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia, a configuration that would later inform the urbanism of Mughal cities. This framework serves as a foundation for the subsequent analysis in Chapter 4 on Mughal hydraulic systems in the region. The hydraulic strategies of the Mughal Empire did not emerge in isolation; rather, they were shaped through a process of selective adaptation and refinement, drawing extensively upon the well-established practices already present in the region as well as the institutional and technological precedents set during the Delhi Sultanate. This continuity underscores the composite nature of Mughal hydraulic policy, in which innovation was grounded in a deep engagement with both indigenous traditions and earlier administrative models. Figure 3.0: A Baolee, near the old city of Delhi, 1801 by Thomas Daniell RA (Source: Object No. 18/2398; Royal Academy of Arts, London) 58 3.1 Indic Water Management Practices: An Overview In South Asia, where water scarcity and erratic rainfall patterns create persistent challenges, decentralized infrastructures such as tanks, cisterns, bunds, wells, ponds, and lakes have long provided critical means of rainwater harvesting and groundwater management. These features inherently call for localized and community-based governance, reflecting traditions of decentralized water management deeply embedded in the region’s history. Yet, the effectiveness and longevity of these systems have often been reinforced by the presence of centralized control, as broader regulatory or administrative frameworks provided coordination, standardization, and support. The relationship between decentralized infrastructures and centralized regulation emerged as a mutually reinforcing dynamic, in which local autonomy and central authority operated in tandem to sustain water security across diverse ecological and social contexts. Some of the earliest examples include the Mauryan administration’s establishment of regulatory frameworks and mechanisms of coordination to oversee local irrigation structures; the Gupta polity’s formalization of institutional arrangements for the upkeep of wells and tanks; and the Chola rulers’ extensive investments in large-scale tank systems while simultaneously reinforcing village-level management practices (Sharma et.al. 2024:2). Kautilya’s Arthashastra, one of the earliest extant treatises on statecraft and political administration in the Indian subcontinent (Mathur 2008:786), provides a systematic framework for the centralized control of decentralized hydrological units. Written in a region frequently exposed to climatic variability, the text outlines strategies through which a central authority devised and enforced water-related regulations for locally managed features situated within broader watershed systems. Scholars argue that this emphasis on hydraulic management was largely shaped by the prolonged aridity of the subcontinent in the 4th century BCE (James et al. 2013:24). The treatise (tr. Shamasastry 1951) catalogues a range of water features such as reservoirs fed by seasonal or perennial flows, interconnected tanks, wells provisioned for clusters of households, embankments with sluices, and irrigation channels, as integral decentralized units embedded within distinct rainfall regions. This classification, which also incorporated rainfall regimes (Singh et al. 2020:4695) and soil types (James et al. 2013:24), represents an early attempt to systematize the hydrological landscape of the subcontinent. Moreover, the text articulates a revenue framework linked to seasonal rainfall variations, infrastructure construction timelines (with initial tax exemptions), proximity to water sources, and technologies of water lifting, while also recognizing the fiscal significance of riverine inundation. What emerges clearly is the dual acknowledgement of decentralized water units as critical to agrarian sustenance, and their subordination to centralized control through the appointment of superintendents of agriculture, rivers, and forests for each climatic region. Situating the Arthashastra within this context is crucial to understanding early South Asian water governance, particularly in light of the absence of large-scale hydraulic infrastructure in the region. 59 Unlike the later traditions of centralized oversight over decentralized water units, the Indus Civilization (c. 3000–1300 BCE), which flourished nearly a millennium before the composition of the Arthashastra, demonstrates a model of water management that was distinctly decentralized and governed through localized control. Unlike many later South Asian polities, the Indus world is not marked by evidence of large-scale, centrally administered hydraulic infrastructure. Instead, its urbanism was polycentric in form (Petrie 2013:92), reflecting a system of governance that appears to have lacked overarching control of the entire riverine landscape. The ecological diversity of the Indus domain, spanning distinct hydrological regimes, meant that responses to climatic variability were necessarily localized (Petrie 2017:7). Findings from the Land, Water and Settlement Project (University of Cambridge, 2008-14) underscore this pattern. As Petrie et al. (2017:16) demonstrate, Indus water management relied not on monumental engineering, but on small-scale, adaptive interventions. Even before the rise of urban centers, agricultural communities deployed flexible strategies: some relied solely on rainfall, while others utilized modest devices such as bunds, narrow canals, ponds, and wells to regulate runoff, flooding, and stream flows. Crucially, there is no compelling evidence of extensive, centralized irrigation networks. Settlement patterns reinforce this interpretation: communities were dispersed across landscapes, often situated away from major river channels, and dependent on decentralize hydrological resources rather than engineered systems. This dispersed settlement ecology exemplifies a society that optimized local environmental variability through decentralized adaptation, rather than through centralized hydraulic control. While Casana and Wright (2023) have suggested the presence of large-scale canal systems in the Punjab dune fields, García-Molsosa et.al. (2023) demonstrates that these features, when assessed within their geomorphological context, were more plausibly small-scale channels, situated close to rivers and constrained by dune morphology. Thus, rather than an exception, they reinforce the broader pattern: the Indus Civilization was characterized by decentralized, locally managed water systems, embedded within diverse ecological niches and governed without centralized oversight. This distinctive model of decentralized adaptation provides an instructive contrast for examining the Indus-Ganga basin, where practices reflected a more complex interplay between centralized and decentralized modes of control. The riverine landscape of the Indus-Ganga basin, defined by a network of micro- and macro- watersheds, encompassed distinct hydrological zones, each with its own terminology and associated agricultural potential. It is a landscape defined by the nature of water availability: dabar referring to water derived from upland or hilly sources, bangar denoting water accumulation in natural depressions and elevated tracts with limited flood exposure, and khadar described by alluvial tracts nourished by seasonal or perennial river flooding. Indigenous hydraulic strategies sought to maximise the productivity of each of the command areas, defined here as the land irrigated or supplied by a single water source, through tailored techniques that optimised both water capture and distribution. Such strategies included the 60 construction of small-scale diversion channels, the use of earthen embankments, and the integration of natural drainage patterns into agricultural planning (Agarwal and Narain 1997: 22). Historical records suggest that India possessed approximately 35 distinct rainwater harvesting systems distributed across diverse ecological zones, including the ahar-pynes of the Eastern Highlands, guhis of the Western Himalayas, eri of the Eastern Coastal Plains, and keres of the Deccan Plateau (Altieri & Koohafkan 2008: 38). The present discussion, however, centres on indigenous water management practices in the semi-arid tracts of the Indus-Ganga basin, also the location of the Mughal capital, Shahjahanabad. In particular, it examines hydraulic techniques developed in response to the dynamic interplay between landform, hydrology, and water availability across three distinct micro-ecological zones: dabar, bangar, and khadar in the semi-arid belt. This tripartite ecological division not only informed local agrarian practices but also provided a spatial and functional template later adopted by the Mughals in structuring their revenue regimes. As will be discussed in section 5.5.2, Mughal fiscal codification systematically linked the source of water supply and the specific lifting techniques employed to the assessed productivity of each tract. It is equally important to recognise that these indigenous hydraulic strategies were not merely technical responses to environmental conditions; they were embedded within, and reflective of, broader socio-cultural and religious frameworks (Hegewald 1998:14). The hydrological landscape of the Indus-Ganga basin is fundamentally shaped by meltwater from the Himalayan snowfields, which sustains its major rivers along with their extensive networks of tributaries and distributaries. This perennial glacial supply is complemented, and at times challenged, by spatially and temporally erratic rainfall patterns. Such variability in water availability fostered the evolution of adaptive and resilient water management strategies among local communities, strategies that were subsequently codified, expanded, and standardised under the authority of the Delhi Sultanate and, later, the Mughal Empire (see Chapter 4). Early water management systems in the region were initiated by local communities employing relatively simple mechanisms to harvest surface runoff, divert river flows, and extract groundwater. Over time, particularly with the advent of Mughal rule, these modest systems evolved into larger and more intricate networks supported by advanced hydraulic technologies (Chaturvedi 2018:283). This transformation marked a gradual shift from a decentralised framework of water governance to a more centralised model. The resilient localised units were integrated into the expanded centralised system; nevertheless, in the absence of centralised provision, they retained the capacity to operate autonomously (see hydroagriculture, Chapter 5). These indigenous systems were inextricably linked to the religio-cultural context of their respective localities, which determined the parameters of control, access, and use of water resources. Across different settings, the selection, adaptation, and application of hydraulic techniques were carefully calibrated to the basin’s topographical 61 and geomorphological characteristics, illustrating a nuanced interaction between environmental constraints of each micro-ecological zone and their socio-political structures. The dabar ecological zones are characterised by steep slopes, which promote the formation of seasonal streams primarily fed by episodic rainfall events. Such hydrological features are typically associated with the upland or piedmont areas of the watersheds, where runoff is both rapid and spatially concentrated. In response to these conditions, local hydraulic traditions developed a series of interventions aimed at capturing and regulating the flow of seasonal waters. Among the most notable features were bunds, which are earthen embankments constructed across slopes or drainage lines to impede surface runoff, thereby enabling a controlled diversion of water. These structures are specifically designed to retain water flowing from ‘behind’, rather than ‘within’, thus functioning as containment reservoirs (after Morrison 2009:86). Often constructed in series along the contours of upland slopes, bunds served a dual function: they acted as protective barriers for foothill settlements against the destructive force of flash floods, while simultaneously enabling agricultural practices that relied on controlled submersion and immersion of fields. By slowing and diverting runoff from seasonal streams through sluice gates, bunds facilitated both soil moisture retention and the gradual recharge of local aquifers. In some regions, pynes (drainage channels) were constructed by local communities to direct water from hills to storage tanks (Agarwal and Narain 1998:86). Complementing these structures were large, shallow tanks, integral components of the rainwater harvesting system, engineered to capture and store seasonal waters for use during extended dry periods. These tanks or dryland reservoirs had a distributary function (Morrison 2009:88) and were typically designed with expansive catchment areas to optimise water collection during the short but intense episodes of monsoonal rainfall, reflecting an acute understanding of the hydrological dynamics of high-intensity, short-duration precipitation events. States and empires have employed reservoirs as imperial objects in South Asia (Morrison 2009:87) with some significant examples in Indus-Ganga basin being of the Bundelas, Panduvamshis, Ghamsis (Chakravarty 2006:xxiii), Tomars, and Chauhans (Cunningham 1871:141-156). Collectively, the integration of bunds and reservoirs represents a sophisticated and spatially coordinated approach to flood mitigation, water storage, and agricultural sustainability within the variable climatic regime of the region. A structurally and functionally related storage system was the kund, which, although similar to a tank in its role as a water reservoir, differed in its primary source of supply. Unlike tanks that typically collect surface runoff, kunds are predominantly fed by ground aquifers (Hegewald 1998:125). Architecturally, kunds are frequently characterised by a series of concentric or radial steps descending to a central, well-like depression. This stepped configuration not only facilitates access to water at varying 62 depths but also ensures usability throughout extended dry periods, when water levels recede significantly. Some of the cisterns are also rock-cut and are termed as kundis (Chakravarti 2018: 284). Significant examples of kund construction can be found Kaman, Mathura, and Benares. In certain regional contexts, the term kund is also applied to embanked enclosures designed to retain river water temporarily, with controlled release for agricultural purposes in accordance with crop water requirements (Agarwal & Narain 1998: 74). Johads, also referred to as check dams, constituted another distinctive feature of the dabar ecological zones within the semi-arid belts of the Indus-Ganga basin. Constructed along drainage lines, these earthen embankments were designed to capture and store surface runoff, often arranged in a series such that surplus water from one johad flows into the next. In certain locales, such as Kandhla, johads are hydraulically interconnected and, in some instances, supplemented by canal diversions to sustain extensive agrarian irrigation networks (Agarwal and Narain 1998: 83–84). Beyond their surface storage function, johads acted as percolation ponds, thereby enhancing active groundwater recharge (Husain et al. 2014: 240). Their construction, typically undertaken through community initiative, relies on locally available materials and voluntary labour (Singh 2021:29), making them cost-effective and socially embedded interventions. Water stored in johads was traditionally accessed using the dhenkli technique, an ancient counterpoise-lift device consisting of a long wooden lever pivoted on a vertical support, with a counterweight at one end and a bucket at the other (Agarwal and Narain 1998: 84). Operated manually, the dhenkli enables the lifting of substantial volumes of water with minimal physical exertion, facilitating irrigation in nearby fields and ensuring water availability for domestic and livestock needs. As decentralised, low-cost, and environmentally adaptive systems, johads, together with their associated extraction technologies, embody the resilience and sustainability of indigenous water-harvesting practices in semi-arid environments. The bangar ecological zone represented a complex interaction between water accumulated in natural depressions of the landscape and the engineered water management systems supplied by both hill- fed sources and fluvial networks. While this zone predominantly relied on indigenous constructions in the form of wells (kuan, kohar – community wells) and stepwells (baoli/jhalars), which are primarily dependent on groundwater, it also depended significantly on lake (jheel) and pond (talab/pokhar/nadi) formations situated within topographical depressions where rainwater accumulated through surface runoff. Furthermore, these water bodies were consistently supplemented by canal networks (nallahs) sourced from nearby riverine systems, utilizing a gravity-based mechanism for their operation. 63 Archaeological excavations conducted between 1977 and 1986 by the Archaeological Survey of India at Sringaverapura, in present-day Uttar Pradesh, revealed a complex system of three interconnected water tanks extending approximately 250 metres. These tanks were hydraulically supplied with canal water diverted from the Ganga River (Baswal 2025). The first tank in the sequence functioned as a sedimentation basin, allowing suspended matter to settle before the water was channelled into the subsequent tanks. Such smaller reservoirs, replenished by canal water, are also known as dighis (Agarwal and Narain 1998: 80). In hydrological terminology, these are classified as ‘system reservoirs’, structures dependent on perennial sources such as rivers and river-fed canals, in contrast to ‘non-system reservoirs,’ which are replenished primarily by seasonal runoff (Sharma 1990:20; also Morrison 2009:87). Wells constituted the principal source of irrigation, with water often lifted using the rati technique, a pulley-based mechanism that employed pots to draw water. Complementary manual lift- irrigation methods included the use of dhenklis (a lever-based system) and charas (a leather bag apparatus operated by animal power), both of which served to irrigate agricultural fields and provide water for livestock (Sharma 1959:7). Wells were classified according to the treatment of their barrel walls: impervious lined, pervious lined, or unlined (kachcha) wells. The irrigation capacity of each well type was determined by its construction, with corresponding variations in their duty, as discussed in Section 7.X. The khadar ecological zone represents the most dynamic segment of the landscape, defined by its continual interaction with swelling rivers and their inundation channels. As a perennial source of water, river systems constitute the dominant natural feature of this zone. Among the most prominent manmade interventions are embankments, which serve the dual purpose of channelling water into agricultural fields and diverting excess flows away from flood-prone settlements. Enriched with nutrient-laden alluvium, khadar soils are the most fertile within the floodplain, historically sustaining intensive cultivation. Communities have long engaged with this landscape to maximize agricultural productivity, often accepting the recurrent risk of seasonal floods as an inherent aspect of its exploitation. Recognizing both its exceptional fertility and its economic potential, the administrations of the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal Empire systematically incorporated khadar lands into high-assessment revenue schedules. In parallel, they invested in hydraulic infrastructure, particularly embankments and regulated irrigation networks, to stabilize yields and mitigate flood-related losses (see Yamuna’s khadar lands; Chapter 5). Historically, dams have been constructed along river courses to store and regulate water, ensuring its availability during dry seasons. Water contained by these structures was frequently channelled into canal networks, enabling its diversion to arid tracts and thereby facilitating agricultural intensification. Such dams attained a monumental status, both in terms of their scale and their indispensable role in 64 sustaining agrarian economies in an arid/semi-arid belt. They often formed part of extensive reservoir systems, in some cases interlinking over a hundred tanks in sequence (Chakravarty 2006: xxii). Sutcliffe’s (2011) study on historical water sources in South Asia records the presence of large-scale dams in Khajuraho and Chanderi, constructed under the Chandela rulers. These hydraulic works were integral not only to expanding agricultural productivity but also to serving as strategic infrastructure that reinforced the power and cohesion of regional polities and empires. In certain contexts, wells, locally known as beris, were additionally constructed within riverbeds with high water tables (Chakravarty 2006: xxii). The significance of indigenous water-centric built features in the region was amplified by their deep association with religion. As Morrison’s work on the Daroji Valley demonstrates, water structures themselves were conceptualised as temples, embedded within a sacred landscape and integral to the religious life of local communities (Morrison 2009:116). Applying this interpretive framework to the Indus-Ganga basin necessitates examining such structures through a religious lens, recognising that their functional and symbolic dimensions were inseparably intertwined. Like many other parts of South Asia, this region is characterised by a dense network of sacred rivers, often personified as goddesses, in which all forms of water are understood to possess an intrinsic sacred quality. Consequently, water structures, whether tanks, stepwells, canals, or reservoirs, acquired a religious connotation and were frequently integrated into ritual practices and pilgrimage routes (Hegewald 1998: 17). Eck (2012: 4–5) conceptualises this ‘sacred everyday geography’ as a living landscape in which ecological features are intimately connected to deities, their significance shaped and sustained by the devotion of believers. Within this framework, each hydraulic feature is not merely a utilitarian artefact but a symbolic entity, imbued with narratives of divine origin, and moral obligation, thereby reinforcing the social and spiritual value of water in sustaining both human and cosmic order. In the semi-arid zones of the basin, where water is an inherently scarce and unpredictable resource, its association with religious meaning assumes critical importance. Beyond its obvious economic and ecological value, water in such contexts becomes a deeply charged cultural and spiritual entity, embedded within systems of belief that both sanctify and regulate its use. By framing water as a sacred element, communities not only recognise its indispensable role in sustaining life and livelihoods but also establish a moral and ritual framework for its management. Within this framework, water operates as a powerful ritualistic tool, delineating the boundaries of control, determining the conditions and limits of its use, and shaping the contours of social access. Sacred attribution transforms water from a mere commodity into a shared trust, often governed by temple authorities, local councils, or religious custodians, whose legitimacy derives from spiritual as much as from political authority. In this way, ritual sanctification serves both as a conservation mechanism, ensuring careful stewardship in times of scarcity, 65 and as a means of reinforcing social hierarchies and communal identities within the semi-arid landscapes of the basin. Chapter 7 further develops this argument by illustrating the central role of religion in shaping the use, access, and governance of water within the semi-arid belt of Shahjahanabad. The indigenous water management systems of the Indus-Ganga basin in pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia were progressively codified by sovereigns who, from the 11th century onwards, extended their dominion from Khorasan into Hindustan. This process involved not only the pragmatic adoption of locally evolved hydraulic practices, but also their systematic reconfiguration and redistribution through a centralized administrative apparatus, particularly in the arid and semi-arid tracts of the subcontinent. What had traditionally functioned as a largely decentralized network of community-managed irrigation and storage systems was thus integrated into a more formalized and hierarchically managed framework. These hydraulic installations, ranging from dams and canals to stepwells and reservoirs, were strategically embedded within the landscape in ways that reflected the spatial and city layout principles of Iranian and Central Asian planning traditions. Their placement was not merely functional, ensuring the equitable dispersal of water across territories, but also symbolic, projecting state authority and articulating the imprint of transregional urban models within the South Asian environment. These models gained further prominence and sophistication with the advent of Mughal rule, as will be examined in the subsequent chapter. 3.2 Water Management Practices of pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia Babur, a Timurid prince, established the Mughal Empire in 1526 (Fisher 2018), with Islam as its state religion (Alam 1997:107). However, prior to the Mughals, the subcontinent witnessed a series of Muslim sovereigns, beginning in the 10th century. The initial sovereigns were predominantly from Afghanistan and Eastern Iran, namely the Ghaznavids (977-1186) and the Ghurids (1150-1215); however, the formation of the Delhi Sultanate, with the Mamluk dynasty, in 1206 led to a more stable form of governance in the region, with Delhi as its capital. This section provides a chronological overview of the succession of rulers in pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia, with a focus on their approaches to water management and urban development. It offers an in-depth analysis of the Delhi Sultanates’ efforts to codify the existing water management practices in the region. To contextualize the emergence of the Delhi Sultanate, it is essential to first examine the urban practices and water management initiatives introduced by the Ghaznavids and Ghurids. Although these polities were primarily based in Eastern Iran and Afghanistan, their expansion brought northwestern South Asia, especially Punjab and Sindh, into their political orbit. In these regions, they established garrison towns and appointed bandagan (military slaves) as governors, thereby laying the institutional groundwork for the Delhi Sultanate (Kumar 2021: 571). These formations also played a decisive role in initiating the Persianization of northern South Asia (Wink 66 1997: 112; Anooshahr 2021; Kumar 2021:571). Moreover, they facilitated the transmission of the tripartite urban model from Khorasan to Hindustan (see Table 3.1). While this model’s influence was initially gradual, its presence became more pronounced under the Delhi Sultanate, and later under the Mughals. An event that marked a significant turning point was the period immediately after the invasion of Timur in 1398, which led to the increased proliferation of political, spiritual and city-building ideas from Central Asia to South Asia. The models of experimentation of state building, territorial expansion, and water infrastructural systems were largely confined to the learnings from the geographical extent of South Asia in pre-Timur Muslim South Asia; however, the post-Timur period witnessed a rise in transregional exchange of city building practices and hydrological management situating ‘Hindustan’ in what the Mughals conceptualised later as ‘one world’ of Muslim Asia. To comprehend the dynamics of urban and regional development of pre-Mughal and Mughal ‘Muslim’ South Asia, it is, therefore, essential to situate it within the broader context of the ‘Iran-Turan-Hindustan’ framework, and the shared cultural and intellectual heritage that transcended political boundaries. The knowledge derived from the greater geography (discussed in Chapter 2) is crucial to the articulation of the model of governance, urbanism, and water management practices of South Asia. Timur invaded South Asia in an attempt to prevent state formation in the region (Digby 2014). South Asia was a major adjacent territory of the Timurid Empire, and the formation of a stable empire in Delhi would have posed a substantial threat to Timur’s Central Asian regime. When Timur invaded South Asia, traversing the mighty Indus, the Tughlaq sovereigns held power in Delhi. His invasion resulted in the collapse of Tughlaq rule and was followed by a period of disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate. The Tughlaqs were significant developers of large-scale water infrastructure in the region, especially Firuz Shah Tughlaq, who constructed canals with headworks in the Yamuna, Satluj, Ghaggar, and Kali Rivers (after Habib 1982:49). The implementation of large-scale water infrastructure by Muslim empires in South Asia commenced with the Ghaznavid and Ghurid forces, primarily in the regions of Punjab and Sindh (Kumar 2021), but assumed a structured form with the establishment of the Mamluk dynasty under ‘Sultan’ Iltutmish. Subsequently, during the reigns of the Khaljis (1290-1320) and Tughlaqs (1320-1414), the region experienced major agrarian projects supported by engineered water infrastructure in South Asia. This period can be characterised as the ‘high’ phase of the Delhi Sultanate. Timur’s invasion led to the establishment of the Sayyid sovereigns in Delhi (1414-1441), who functioned as Timurid vassals and possessed ‘weak royal authority’ (after Moreland 2011:66) to implement centralised infrastructural systems. They were succeeded by the Lodis (1451-1526), who predominantly remained a North Indian 67 phenomenon and were excessively preoccupied with internal conflicts and ‘rebellious Chiefs’ (Moreland 2011:70) than to focus on public welfare systems. The historical records of the Khalji and Tughlaq dynasties demonstrate significant experimentation in water infrastructure systems and urban development practices. These endeavours primarily drew upon the knowledge and practices prevalent in the South Asian landscape. The expansionist policies of the Mongol Empire under Genghis Khan significantly limited South Asia’s interactions with its immediate geographical surroundings. South Asia occupies a unique geographical position, bordered by the Hindu Kush and Himalayas from the northwest to the northeast and the Indian Ocean to its south (see Figure 3.1). Hindu Kush formed the primary land frontier in the western periphery, through which Mongol forces entered South Asia up to the Indus. However, they retreated ‘on account of heat’ and the ‘climate situation’ of the region (Sen 2023:828). Their presence at the frontier, nonetheless, ‘snapped the ties’ (Kumar 2021:572) between the Delhi Sultanate and the Central Asian landscape. Sen (2023), however, posits that maritime connections between South Asia and the Chinggisid empire persisted, contributing to the exchange of ‘shipbuilding and navigational skills’. Post-Timur South Asia experienced increased exchange with Iran and Khorasan following the establishment of Timurid tributary sovereigns in South Asia (1414-1451). After Timur Left (Orsini & Sheikh 2014) provides a comprehensive overview of the transitional nature of governance and linguistic traditions in the unstable political landscape of South Asia’s ‘long fifteenth century’ (Digby 2014 & Kumar 2014). The book also plays a significant role in positioning post- Timur South Asia as a period of intensification of mystic traditions. This era witnessed the emergence of cross-cultural secular teachings of ‘Ramanand, Kabir, Nanak, Raidas, Mira Bai, and Surdas’ (Orsini & Sheikh 2014:4) and the expansion of Sufi silsila networks, including ‘Chishti, Qadiri, Suhrawardi, and Kubrawi shaykhs’ (Orsini & Sheikh 2014:37). In his article Before Timur Came, Digby (2004) provides a detailed study of the Sufi diaspora, who migrated from Central Asia and Iran to South Asia. He also emphasised the disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate during this period and the role of provincial states in contributing to the rise of mystical groups in the region. It is crucial to note that these secular institutions were subsequently employed by the Mughals to host large-scale water management systems in South Asia (see chapters 5 and 6). 3.2.1 Pre-Mughal Muslim Empires of South Asia (ca. 977-1526) Prior to the Mughal and the Delhi Sultanate, South Asia was governed by two significant Muslim empires, namely the Ghaznavids, who hailed from Ghazna/Bust (977-1186), and the Ghurids, who originated from Ghur/Firuzkuh (1150-1215), both of which were in the Khorasan region. A noteworthy aspect of 68 Ghazna, Ghur, Kabul, and Bust was their strategic location at the ‘ecological and cultural’ confluence (Thomas 2018:37) and trade crossroads of the eastern Islamic region of Iran and Khorasan, with Hindustan, which earned them the designation of ‘merchant’s resort’ or ‘entrepot’ (Bosworth 1961:124). The Ghurids played a pivotal role in establishing the Mamluk (military slave) dynasty in Delhi (after Jackson 2009:83), ultimately leading to the creation of the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Sayyids, and Lodis succeeded the Mamluk dynasty. The Lodis were ultimately defeated by Babur in 1526 and it followed by the formation of the Mughal Empire in ‘Hindustan’ (South Asia). The subsequent sections are primarily organised around urban planning and architectural practices, including water features, of the sovereigns of the Muslim empires. The reference to agricultural management practices has been incorporated to elucidate the role of water management by the empire or landholders in ensuring stable crop production. Figure 3.1: Map of Pre-Mughal Muslim Empires in South Asia (after Schwartzberg, 1978); Made with Natural Earth @naturalearthdata.com a. Ghaznavid Empire (ca. 977-1186) The Ghaznavids, a Turkish dynasty and lineage with origins traced to Samanid slavery, emerged as one of the largest Muslim empires in Asia following the Abbasid period (Bosworth 1963:4, also Petrie 2021:85). They successfully integrated themselves into the Persian administrative system and expanded their rule to 69 encompass areas of western Iran to parts of Ganges Valley in Hindustan, with their capital in Khorasan in Ghazni (Figure 3.1). The period of the Ghaznavids is widely regarded as the beginning of the medieval Islamic empire in India (Anooshahr 2021:441) and a time of significant ‘civilizational and religious’ expansion (Mill 1817; after Anooshahr 2021:442). The empire’s growth into South Asia is largely attributed to Mahmud b. Sebuktigin (998-1030), also known as Mahmud of Ghazni (Bosworth 1968:33, also Petrie 2021:85). Despite its brief existence, the Empire made substantial contributions to the expansion of an integrated system of imperial administration across challenging geographical and topographical features in South Asia. Bosworth (1968) attributes the ‘Samanid way of administration’ to the expansion of the Ghaznavids where focus was on collecting taxes from agricultural produce and industries from their ‘conquered territories’ besides the revenue from long-distance trades within and across the region. They are also believed to have contributed to the shifting of world trade from inner Asia to the Indian Ocean (Anooshahr 2021:442). The Ghaznavids played a significant role in the expansion of the ‘tripartite urban model’, prevalent in Iran and Central Asia (Allegranzi 2021:5), to Khorasan, and later Hindustan (South Asia). The model is defined by the presence of a walled citadel (qila), an inner city (shahristan), and the suburbs (rabad), which later during the Islamic period transformed to garden suburbs or bagha’at (after Rante 2008:189). One of the earliest references to the tripartite model of urban development is exemplified by the Assyrian capital city of Nineveh, where Sennacherib constructed a monumental spring-fed canal to supply the newly established garden suburbs of his imperial seat (see Figure 3.2). The city expanded beyond the citadel and the inner city to include ‘parks and gardens’, a model which advanced from his earlier ‘bipartite’ capital of Dur Sharrukin, built by Sargon II (Jacobson & Lloyd 1935:31). Within the medieval Iranian and Central Asian landscapes, the urban development model initially adhered to the bipartite structure of qila and shahristan, and subsequently expanded to incorporate a third section, the suburbs, termed rabad, following the Arab invasion of Central Asia in the 7th century (Sobti 2005). Numerous references to the Samanid, Seljuk, and Ilkhanate governance mechanisms by the Muslim empires in South Asia necessitate an examination of their potential role in the reconfiguration of existing cities and the establishment of new ones (see section 3.3). The inclusion of rabad led to the formation of the ‘tripartite urban model’’ within the Islamic world. Initially, rabad functioned as an economic and political space supporting trade, military, and migrant populations from the hinterland (see Sobti 2005:20; Saadati et.al. 2021:217; Whitcomb 2020; Mottahedeh 2020), however, with the rise of the Turko-Mongolian forces post-12th century, the rabad assumed a new form – that of garden suburbs (bagha’at) – as a representation of their native and nomadic steppe landscape patterns in 70 the sedentary regions of Iran and Central Asia, serving as a manifestation of their ‘sovereign image’ (after Roberts 2024:7; for a detailed discussion section 3.3 & 8.1). Figure 3.2: Garden Suburbs of the Assyrian capital of Nineveh fed by Sennacherib’s spring-fed Canal (Source: The Trustees of the British Museum, London; 124939,b) The Ghaznavids adopted the model previously employed by the Samanids. It is noteworthy that the Samanids functioned as representatives of the Arabs in the Central Asian region (Sobti 2005:19), and consequently incorporated the tripartite model within their urban planning practices. Ghaznavid adoption was evidenced in the work of Alptigin, the master of Sebuktigin (founder of the Ghaznavid empire), who constructed ‘royal palaces, large-scale gardens, serais, and hammams in Khorasan and Transzania’ (Raza 1996:877). Like the Samanids, the Ghaznavids implemented the iqta system of land revenue model, allocating land to governors and soldiers (Raza 1991:234). The iqta system gained prominence as a landholding system in the 10th century and played a significant role in the development of urban centres (see Kaur 1990). In this system, the landholders who were granted land by the empire were responsible for remitting taxes from the surplus rather than the farmers. This arrangement resulted in increased responsibility for landholders to implement water management systems, particularly in areas distant from rivers, which would contribute to stable agricultural production. 71 Ghazni, the capital city, witnessed large-scale development in the form of construction of roads, royal palaces, forts, and city walls, markets, mosques, madarsas, hospitals, workshops as well as building of canals, bridges, dams, water mills, cisterns, hammams and gardens (Allegranzi 2021:4-5; also, Raza 1996:877-78). Other notable features of Ghaznavid city development, evident in Balkh, includes the presence of hunting grounds outside the city, the construction of extensive wall-gardens, the use of canal- fed irrigation systems in the garden suburbs, and the extension of these systems within the walled city to support the garden and the fort (Wordsworth 2018:202-03). Other cities where Ghaznavid gardens can be found include Nishapur (Bagh-i Khuramak and Bagh-i Shadyakh), Herat (Bagh-i Adnani) and Lashkari Bazar at Bust (Raza 1996:878-81). Lashkari Bazar was supplied water through a canal and had stepwells (Pugachenkova et.al. 1996:568-69). Khusrau Shah, who ruled from 1157 to 1160, relocated the capital of the Ghaznavid Empire to Lahore, where he constructed a fort and laid the groundwork for a new city. During his reign, he also oversaw the construction of various palatial buildings, including gardens such as Bagh-i Nusrat and Bagh-i Hazara, as well as three hammams, mansions, and mosques throughout the city (Raza 1996:884). b. Ghurid Empire (ca. 1150-1215) A Shansabani clan of Tajik origin (Patel 2007:36), Ghurids belonged to the city of Ghur. Located in a challenging terrain in present-day Afghanistan it is fed by four significant rivers – Hari Rud, Farah Rud, Rud-i Ghor, and Khash Rud (Leshnik 1968:37). The area was charaterised by steep mountains, seasonal streams, and lush meadows. Early Ghur was renowned for its agrarian landscape, fortifications, and towers, as well as the production of military equipment (Bosworth 1961:117-20, also Nizami 1998:193). Established by Qutub-ud-Din Muhammad, the empire expanded to conquer Khorasan, encompassing cities such as Nishapur, Merv, and Murghab, as well as parts of Iran, including Kerman, and large areas of North India (after Petrie 2021:89; see Figure 3.1). The expansion of the Ghurid Empire towards India is largely attributed to the nephew of Qutub-ud Din, the founder of the Ghurid Empire, Muizz-ud Din Muhammad (1173-1206), also known as the Muhammad of Ghur. This led to the ‘chronological beginning’ of the Delhi Sultanate and the process of ‘Islamization and Persianization’ of South Asia (Kumar 2021:571). The death of Muhammad of Ghur led to the foundation of the Mamluk dynasty in Delhi in 1206, with Shams al-Din Iltutmish as its first sovereign. The Ghurid, and Ghazanavid, Empire is often associated with destructive tendencies, however, their role in Hindustan is considered highly constructive in the introduction of Persian culture and literature, acting as a medium of ‘intellectual heritage’ that flowed from Iran and Khorasan to Hindustan (Nizami 1998:195). The Ghaznavids, though were successful in conquering a vast region, were not successful in uniting Iran, Khorasan, and Hindustan under a single state. However, the Ghurids later achieved this goal, albeit only for a brief period and with ‘loose ties’ (Patel 2007:36). The Delhi Sultanate subsequently strengthened this unification through the 72 sharing of culture, ideas, and technologies with Iran and Central Asia. A very short-lived empire of two generations, the Ghurids, eventually fell victim to the powerful Mongol conqueror Ghengis Khan in 1222 (Leshnik 1968:36). Like the Ghazanavids, the Ghurids also employed the iqta system, a method of revenue assignment, to manage the territories they had conquered, with the help of both military slaves and tributary kings (Nizami 1998:193), encouraging maintenance and development of water management systems to support stable agricultural production. Limited research has been conducted on the role of the Ghurids in urban development and hydraulic projects, making it challenging to determine whether they adhered to the ‘tripartite urban model’ of development. Among the prominent cities in the Ghurid Empire, as identified by Thomas (2018), were Ghur, Jam/Firuzkuh, Herat, Bamiyan, Ghazni, and Bust. Of the existing cities, Herat, Ghazni, and Bust were already following the ‘tripartite urban model’ (qila- shahristan-rabad), which the Ghurids continued to expand by constructing public buildings, mosques, and madrasas in Ghazna. They also built the fortress and the city in Firuzkuh, and more fortresses in Ghur, Garmsir, Gharchistan, Herat, and Wadawajzd (Nizami 1998:194). Ghurid madrasas or schools have also been found in Gharchistan, following the same architectural and building style as in Khorasan, Sistan, and Central Asia (Nizami 1998:195). While their impact on architecture is rather limited in Iran and Khorasan, they are credited with introducing a few decorative styles, such as the ‘brick mosaic’ and ‘monumental calligraphy’, which can be seen in the buildings of Khorasan and Zuzan (Patel 2007:37). A study conducted by Thomas (2007) on the urban pattern of Firuzkuh during the Ghurid Empire reveals a nomadic nature of city development with separate summer and winter capitals. Upland areas of the city served as summer capitals, while lowland river areas functioned as winter capitals in the Ghurid Empire’s heartland. Furthermore, the study also suggests that the cities might have been continuously occupied, although they were often fragmented and defined by hilltop forts. The research conducted by Thomas (2007) also uncovered a multifaceted approach to urban development in Jam. Archaeological evidence of fortifications, urban and river defences, and religious buildings, such as the minaret of Jam, was discovered. The suburb displayed indications of industrial activities and administrative structures (rabad) categorising it within the post-Arab ‘tripartite urban model’ of Central Asia. c. Delhi Sultanate (1206-1414) The Delhi Sultanate comprised five successive regimes, beginning with the Mamluks (1206-1290), continuing with the Khaljis (1290-1320), followed by the Tughlaqs (1320-1414), the Sayyids (1414- 1451), and lastly the Lodis (1451-1526) (Kumar 2021:573). Each of these dynasties had their principal 73 centres of power primarily located in Delhi, hence the designation Delhi Sultanate. These dynasties built new citadels and city boundaries within the extent of present-day Delhi, creating a new seat of governance with every subsequent sovereign. Mamluks or Turkish bandagans Qutubuddin Aibak, who reigned from 1206 to 1210, was the first of the three bandagans (slave) in South Asia and successor to Muhammad of Ghur in Delhi. Following Aibak’s demise in 1210, his slave, Iltutmish, ascended to the throne as the inaugural sovereign ruler of the Delhi Sultanate, with a ‘mandate of authority’ of ‘Sultan’ bestowed upon him by the Abbasid caliphs of Baghdad (Petrie 2021:90). The reign of Iltutmish was marked by numerous obstacles. He encountered significant opposition from the local Hindu kingdoms, as well as hostility from other Turkish generals of the Ghurid empire, including Qubacha and Yildiz, the other two bandgans of Muhammad of Ghur. Additionally, he had to contend with the emergence of the Mongols under Chingiz Khan (Islam and Bosworth 1998:275). Despite these challenges, Iltutmish was able to establish a stable empire based in Delhi, which paved the way for future regimes to establish and maintain control over major parts of South Asia. Two other prominent kings of the Mamluk dynasty were Nasir al-Din Mahmud, who ruled from 1246 to 1266, and Ghiyath al-Din Balban, who ruled from 1266 to 1287. The Mamluk administration was characterised by the iqta system, similar to the land allocation practices of the earlier Ghaznavid and Ghurid empires. Balban is believed to have introduced a reform in this administrative system, replacing iqta with cash payments (Islam and Bosworth 1998:275). Kumar (2021:577) argues that the period of Balban witnessed a revival of Sassanian kingship practices, with ‘social hierarchies’ and ‘courtly rituals and pomp.’ The architectural contribution of the Mamluks is apparent in the construction projects they undertook in the existing walled towns of Lal Kot and Qila Rai-Pithora in Delhi (see Figure 3.5). One of the most prominent examples is the Qutub Minar, a four-story minaret in Delhi connected to a mosque known as Qubbat-ul Islam. According to some accounts, the construction of Qutub Minar was inspired by victory towers in Jam (Ghurid) and Ghazni (Ghaznavid). Additionally, the tomb of Iltutmish is also located adjacent to the mosque complex, which is believed to be part of a larger palatial precinct, known as ‘White Palace’ (Welch and Crane 1983:124). In Delhi, Iltutmish built a large reservoir called Hauz-i Shamsi near the shrine of Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki in present-day Mehrauli. The Mamluks also constructed three structures in Badaun, a secondary administrative town to the southeast of Delhi that were similar in design to those in Delhi. These structures were Hauz-i Shamsi, Jama Masjid, and Shamsi- Idgah. Another significant architectural contribution of the Mamluks was the construction of the Arhai di ka Jhonpda, a mosque in Ajmer. Furthermore, a city gate in Nagaur called Atarkin ka Darwaza and a temple in Bayana called Ukha Mandir are also attributed to the Mamluks. Lal Mahal, situated in present- 74 day Nizamuddin, is also widely believed to have been constructed by Balban as his opulent residential complex. The architectural style was reminiscent of those prevalent in the Islamic cities of Iran and Central Asia, and it was thought to be a continuation of the Sassanian tradition of construction (Brown 1944:14-15). Mamluk nobles are also believed to have built lakes and reservoirs in arid areas of the empire as in Bari Khatu and Budau (Siddiqui 1986:55) The Mamluk contributions to architecture were primarily focused on existing cities outside Delhi, and there are no records of them establishing a new city, except for one built by Kaiqubad, Balban’s short- lived successor, on the banks of the Yamuna River in Delhi towards the end of the Mamluk period. This city, known as Shahr-i Nau or New City (see Figure 3.5; also known as Kilokhri), is described in detail by Haider (2014), using Barani’s account in Tarikh-i Firuzshahi (1357). The city was believed to have a grand palace and a large garden and was home to a diverse population of nobles, traders, and aristocrats. The city was structured in a bipartite format, with the citadel and the inner city serving as distinct sections. It is unclear where the gardens were located, which makes it difficult to determine whether the city followed the Persianate tripartite model of city development. Khaljis The Khalji dynasty succeeded the Mamluks in Delhi defeating Kayumars, the last and the weakest Mamluk sovereign (Qureshi 2008:8). The Khaljis were believed to have originated from an Afghan village called Khalj and were of Turkish-Pathan descent (Lane-Poole 1963:77). They ruled from 1290 to 1320, with six sovereigns, the most prominent being Alauddin, who expanded the empire from the Indus to Bengal and Himalayas to the Vindhyas. During his reign, he also fought parallel battles against Mongol invasions from the Oxus River to the Indus River (Lane-Poole 1963:80). Initially, Khaljis continued with the same model of administration and revenue collection as the Mamluks, following similar hierarchies and ‘produce-sharing systems’ (Islam and Bosworth 1998:278). Alauddin introduced a new agricultural land and revenue model that differed from the earlier ‘bata-i’ system, which was favoured by peasants and was based on a tax directly proportionate to the produce. The new model implemented revenue bands based on the proximity of agricultural land to the urban centre of the imperial capital. The revenue band for land closer to the urban centre was higher, whereas that for rural areas and regions facing climatic disasters was lower. This suggests that urban areas and their surroundings may have a higher concentration of water infrastructure and resources, and the revenue model was in accordance with the supporting irrigation system. It is worth noting here that Alauddin reinstated the iqta system of land assignments 75 after it was abolished by Balban. However, the iqta system was later replaced by khalisa (state lands), and all administrative authorities were under the control of the imperial state. Brown (1942:19) asserted that the Khaljis were instrumental in the revival of Seljuk architecture in India, albeit in a version that was distinctly Indian. One of the most significant contributions of the Khaljis was the expansion of the Qutub Minar complex. Additionally, the first storey of the incomplete Alai-Minar was constructed during this time, as was the Alai Darwaza, the Jamaat Khana mosque in Nizamuddin, the Ukha Masjid in Bayana, and the bridge in Chitor. These structures serve as a testament to Khalji’s architectural achievements in India. Their involvement in city planning was evidenced by the construction of the circular city of Siri in Delhi (see Figure 3.5), comprised of seven gateways and a massive reservoir known as Hauz-i Alai or Hauz-i Khas (Grover 1981:28). This city was situated on the Aravallis range in present-day Delhi and served as a fortified military camp to protect against the invasion of the Mongols (Welch and Crane 1983:124). The area surrounding the Hauz-i Khas featured a royal mosque, Jama Masjid, madarsas or religious schools, and the tomb of Alauddin. Additionally, the city included bala-band-i Siri, a massive dam designed for storing rainwater. Khaljis also constructed dikes and tanks in Bengal to divert river water for irrigation purposes (Siddiqui 1986:53). They placed a strong emphasis on developing irrigation systems to increase agricultural productivity, including the construction of tanks and lakes. Furthermore, they built artificial canals in Multan and Dipalpur and revived old canals such as Ju-i Nasirwah, Ju-i Qutbwah, and Ju-i Khidrwah in the region (Siddiqui 1986:70). Tughlaqs A half-Turkish, half-Hindu ghazi (warrior) from Multan, Ghiyas-ud Din Tughlaq, was the founder of the Tughlaq dynasty and is credited with expanding the empire to the southern regions of South Asia through his syncretic approach of governance (Welch and Crane 1983:124). This approach not only defined Tughlaq culture in South Asia but also facilitated its expansion. Ghiyas-ud Din’s rule also saw the reversion to the bata’i model of revenue collection, which his son and successor Muhammad bin Tughlaq later experimented with, adjusting revenue rates, crop rotation, and loan schemes for peasants. However, Muhammad’s decision to shift capital from Delhi to Daulatabad and then back to Delhi resulted in significant internal unrest and disrupted the administrative process. Firuz Shah Tughlaq eventually stabilized the situation by establishing a steady system of agricultural growth monitoring, reverting to the ‘produce-sharing’ model, and constructing large-scale canal projects in the arid and semi-arid regions of South Asia (Islam and Bosworth 1998:282). Among the eleven sovereigns of the Tughlaq dynasty that ruled from 1320 to 1414, three were notable for their city-building projects. These included the dynasty’s founder, Ghiyas-ud Din Tughlaq, 76 who built the fortified city of Tughlaqabad (Figure 3.4 & 3.5); Muhammad bin Tughlaq, who constructed the cities of Jahanpanah (Figure 3.5) and Daulatabad; and Firuz Shah, who was the most prolific builder of all, having constructed the fortress cities of Hissar, Hansi, Fathabad, and Firuzabad (Figure 3.5). Tughlaqabad, comprising the citadel and the inner city, was constructed in the lower Aravallis with the aid of a system of bunds that collected seasonal rainwater. Additionally, a series of baolis and wells were present. These bunds, regulated by sluice gates, also contributed to the formation of a large lake adjacent to the fort, which served as a moat for the fort and the city. The bund system also facilitated irrigation in the surrounding areas of the city. The mausoleum of Ghiyas-ud Din was constructed on a small rocky outcrop across a lake. The complex was supported by a series of deep wells (Welch and Crane 1983:128; Gupta 2020). Muhammad bin Tughlaq initially built the Adilabad Fort near Tughlaqabad on a rocky outcrop. He also constructed another fort called Nai-ka Kot to the east of Adilabad. Subsequently, he commissioned the construction of his capital city in Daulatabad, present-day Maharashtra, which consisted of neighbourhoods based on occupation. The city boasted markets, hammams, mills, and tanneries and was fortified with a citadel and a moat. He briefly relocated the capital to Daulatabad before returning to Delhi, where he built another city, Jahanpanah. This new city was an effort to combine the previous cities of Lal Kot and Siri. A massive city wall with 13 gates was erected to enclose these previous cities. The city featured a citadel called the Bijai Mandal and the Friday Mosque, which is now known as Begumpuri Masjid (Welch and Crane 1983:128-29). Tarikh-i Firuzshahi mentions the construction of four fortress cities by Firuz Shah1 and the construction of large-scale canal systems (Figure 3.4) that drew water from the Satluj and Yamuna Rivers in Northern India. This water supply system not only benefited cities, but also reached the desert regions of the empire. The canal’s construction facilitated the formation of villages along its banks by people who were previously nomads and moved in search of water (Zilli 2015:348). Sharb or Water tax was imposed on village clusters using water from the state infrastructure (Cherian 2004:45). Additionally, Firuz Shah is recognised for having constructed numerous towns, mosques, schools, public buildings, gardens, baths, reservoirs, dams, bunds, and bridges throughout South Asia (after Grover 1981:36). According to a report at the Delhi State Archives on Bunds of Delhi, 30 bunds from the Firuz Shah period were identified in the Aravalli Range in Delhi. Cherian (2004:45) posits that the mechanism of ‘bundh-hauz-bagh’ connected the city and its suburbs, and he asserts that all previous walled cities of Delhi, including those from the Tughlaq period, followed the natural stream network to determine their boundaries. The bund networks were thereafter created following the stream order to build reservoirs. Although it suggests a three-tier model of urban development, it only partially aligns with the Central Asian tripartite model. Even the highly advanced city of Firuzabad, located on the banks of the Yamuna River, exhibited a bipartite layout 1 Hissar, Hansi, Fathabad and Firuzabad 77 consisting of a citadel and an inner city. Although there are references to garden construction, its precise location remains unclear. The urban pattern, therefore, remains inconclusive owing to the absence of clear mapping and information on the urban components of the Tughlaq period. (Left) Figure 3.3: Tughlaqabad Fort in Delhi (Image Source: Yogesh YK); (Right) Figure 3.4 Firuz Shah Tughlaq Canal near Karnal Sayyids and Lodis The Tughlaq Empire was followed by a brief invasion of Timur in 1398. It led to large-scale destruction of cities and buildings in northwest South Asia, including Delhi, leading to a disintegration of the empire (Brown 1942:27). Khizr Khan (1414-1421), the founder of the Sayyid dynasty in Delhi, claimed to be the ‘viceroy of Shah Rukh’, Timur’s son and successor. The period marked a series of internal conflicts and rebellions in South Asia, reducing the regime of the Sayyids to a very small region of South Asia compared to the Tughlaqs. Although regions in northwest South Asia were part of the Sultanate, several areas to the east of Delhi, such as Kannauj and Etawah, and most parts of the Gangetic region were lost (Srivastava 1966:229). The Sayyid dynasty was governed by four sovereigns, including Mubarak Shah (1421-1434), Muhammad Shah (1434-1445), and Alauddin Alam Shah (1445-1450), during a short-lived regime. Historical records indicate that Khizr Khan established his capital, Khizrabad (Figure 3.3), in Delhi along the banks of the Yamuna River. Although no traces of the city remain, there is a mauza (settlement fed by bund waters; Cherian 2004:41) with the name of Khizrabad (Nath and Nath 2018:12). Similarly, Mubarak Shah founded the city of Mubarakabad in Delhi (see Figure 3.3), which was believed to be located along the banks of the Yamuna River (Haig 1928:220; also, Habib and Nizami 1940:656). After supervising the building of a fort and inner city, he was assassinated. The present location of the city is uncertain as no archaeological remains are available. However, it is believed that the location could be the present-day Kotla Mubarakpur or Mauza Mubarakpur Reti (Nath and Nath 2018:12-13). Historical records from the Sayyid dynasty indicate a bipartite model of urban development, characterised by the selection of sites at the junctions of streams and facilitated by the construction of bunds. 78 The Lodis were Afghans who initially served under the autocratic governance of the Khaljis and Tughlaqs, and later the Sayyids. Three significant sovereigns of the regime comprised Bahlul Lodi, the founder of the Lodi dynasty, Sikandar Lodi, and Ibrahim Lodi. Ibrahim Lodi was defeated by Babur in the battle of Panipat in 1526, thereby paving the path for the establishment of the Mughal Empire in India. Despite Delhi remaining the capital of the Lodis, their major contributions were in the development of Agra and Sikandra. Agra, believed to be commissioned by Sultan Sikandar Lodi (after Halim 1939:843) on the banks of the river Yamuna, was located on an elevated terrain between villages Pya and Basih. The city featured a fort, an inner city with market lanes dedicated to different crafts, businesses, and workshops, including those of ironsmiths and stonecutters (Farkhi 2015:6). Near Bayana, Sikandar Lodi constructed another walled city known as Sikandra, which featured a fortification wall on one side and hills on the other three sides. The city also boasted a Jama Masjid or sovereign mosque, two water tanks, baoli, a series of wells, and an Idgah and mosque located outside the city walls. The city’s description highlights a bipartite model with a citadel and an inner city within the fortified walls. Although certain activities were introduced beyond the walled city, they did not appear to connect the city to its suburbs. During the period of the Delhi Sultanate (1206–1526), South Asia witnessed significant transformations in water management, reflecting both continuity of indigenous practices and innovations introduced under successive dynasties. The harnessing, storage, and distribution of water were not merely technical endeavours but integral components of statecraft, urban planning, and agrarian expansion. Indigenous systems of water harvesting, long rooted in the subcontinent’s ecological knowledge, provided the foundation upon which Sultanate rulers sought to build. From the Mamluks to the Khaljis, rulers gradually expanded and adapted these systems, responding to the demands of growing populations, shifting urban centers, and the political imperative of consolidating authority through the control of vital resources. This process reached its most ambitious articulation under the Tughlaq dynasty, particularly during the reign of Firuz Shah Tughlaq (r. 1351–1388). His reign was marked by the execution of extensive regional hydraulic projects that integrated large-scale engineering with traditional water management wisdom. Notable among these were his interventions in the Yamuna and Satluj watersheds of North India, where canals and reservoirs were constructed to both augment agricultural productivity and supply water to newly founded or expanded urban settlements. Such undertakings underscored the Sultanate’s vision of hydraulic infrastructure as central to state power and economic stability. 79 However, the trajectory of water management under the Delhi Sultanate was neither linear nor uninterrupted. It was profoundly disrupted by the catastrophic invasion of Timur in 1398, which not only destabilized the political order but also impacted the administrative apparatus responsible for sustaining hydraulic infrastructure. The subsequent periods of rule under the Sayyid (1414–1451) and Lodi (1451–1526) dynasties were characterized by fragmented authority, diminished fiscal capacity, and weakened institutional mechanisms, severely constraining the oversight and maintenance of extensive networks of canals, reservoirs, and stepwells established by earlier rulers. As a result, routine maintenance declined, and many of these systems fell into disrepair, leaving both urban and rural populations increasingly vulnerable to water scarcity. This period coincided with the onset of the Little Ice Age (c. 1550–1850), which introduced heightened climatic variability, including intensified winter monsoons, alternating episodes of severe flooding and extreme drought, and irregular monsoon patterns (Hussain et al., 2025:6). Collectively, these developments underscore the critical dependence of medieval South Asian hydraulic systems on centralized political stability and resource coordination, while also revealing the fragility of decentralized water infrastructures when overarching administrative support was weakened. The city of Delhi, which served as the seat of power for the sovereigns of the Delhi Sultanate, provides a particularly illuminating case study of these dynamics. The following section presents the multiple cities of Delhi, ranging from Lal Kot and Siri to Firozabad, not only as political centers but also laboratories of hydraulic experimentation. Each sovereign who established or reconfigured the capital sought to codify, expand, or reimagine water management systems, embedding them within broader experiments in city planning and governance. The placement and distribution of tanks, canals, stepwells, and baolis within these urban landscapes reveal not only an evolving response to ecological conditions but also deliberate attempts to project authority, sustain populations, and experimented with models of urbanity suited to the Sultanate’s changing political and economic realities. 3.2.2 Pre-Mughal Delhi (9th c. to 1526): A Case Study The earliest archaeological evidence of medieval Delhi identifies Lal Kot as the first historically documented city in the region. While some historical accounts suggest that Delhi remained uninhabited for nearly eight centuries prior to its establishment, J.D. Beglar (1874:5) noted the presence of smaller, thriving settlements in the vicinity. These settlements were often overlooked in historical narratives due to their subordinate political status and geographical separation from other major South Asian urban centers. 80 Figure 3.5: Medieval Cities of Delhi (after Hearn 1906); Land profile based on Survey of India ‘Delhi and Vicinity’ Sheet (1910-11), National Archives of India, Delhi (after Guerrieri, 2017) 81 Founded in the 9th century by Anang Pal, ruler of the Tomar dynasty, Lal Kot was situated on the southern-central ridge of the Aravalli range, corresponding to present-day Mehrauli (Cunningham 1871:141). The city was designed with water infrastructure as a central organizing principle. A defining feature of Lal Kot was the construction of Anang Tal, a 40-foot-deep reservoir measuring 169×152 feet, aligned with the cardinal directions. During the same period, another significant hydraulic work, the Suraj Kund, was constructed further south in the village of Anangpur. Built of local quartzite stone (Agarwal & Narain 1997:75), this reservoir reflects the cultural and ritual significance of water, as kunds were typically associated with temple complexes. The topography of Aravalli’s southern ridge, characterized by its bowl-shaped depressions and limited access points, contributed to both the security of settlements and the conservation of water resources (Chakrabarti & Lahiri 1987:110). Seasonal drainage channels originating from the Aravalli hills were dammed to supply the city’s reservoirs, thereby ensuring a sustainable water supply. Archaeological surveys conducted by Chakrabarti and Lahiri (1985-86) identified 43 Lower Palaeolithic and Microlithic sites in the Delhi region, with a significant concentration in the Southern Ridge, illustrating the enduring relationship between water-abundant landscapes and human habitation (Singh 1999:16). The Chauhan conquest of Delhi in 1151 A.D. (Cunningham 1871:156) resulted in the expansion of Lal Kot into Qila Rai Pithora, delineated by a fortified wall approximately 7 km in perimeter. The city's defensive ditch, with a width ranging from 60 feet to 150-200 feet, was integrated with water systems. Noteworthy hydraulic features included an arcade baoli on the eastern ditch (Beglar 1874:7-8) and a bridge spanning a rivulet uncovered by General Cunningham (Beglar 1874:61). Anang Tal, along with wells, remained a crucial water source. With the establishment of the Mamluk dynasty, the existing fort enclosure was preserved, while the waterworks underwent significant expansion. Sultan Iltutmish constructed Hauz Shamsi in Mehrauli, in proximity to the shrine of Hazrat Bakhtiyar Kaki, with dimensions measuring 200×125 meters and a depth of 50 feet (Agarwal & Narain 1997:75). The Gandak ki Baoli, another project attributed to Iltutmish, complemented a dense network of wells and stepwells that sustained the city. During the Khilji dynasty, Alauddin Khilji founded the third city of Delhi, known as Siri, which was centered around the monumental Hauz Khas. This square reservoir measured 600 meters on each side and had a depth of 2.2 meters (Alam 2020:65). Encompassing 70 acres, Hauz Khas was referred to as daryacha, or small sea (Ali 1986:39). The Khilji water management strategy reflected earlier practices, as 82 both Hauz Khas and Hauz Shamsi were situated outside the main settlement boundary, with protective buffer zones (harim) in place to safeguard water quality and regulate streamflow. The Tughlaq rulers further advanced the integration of hydraulic systems within urban planning. Tughlaqabad featured seven major tanks, which were established by damming drainage lines (Cunningham 1871:213; also Ali 1986:40), in addition to three baolis and numerous deep wells (Agarwal & Narain 1997:76). The fifth city, Jahanpanah, encompassed earlier urban centers within its extensive walls and depended on a network of reservoirs, namely Shamsi, Khas, Rani, and Tal, which were augmented by the Satpula embankment, a seven-arched dam that impounded seasonal flows near the present-day Khirki village (Ali 1986:41). The establishment of the sixth city, Firuzabad, by Firuz Shah Tughlaq, signified a pivotal transition towards the integration of fluvial systems, utilizing water directly sourced from the Yamuna via an intricate network of canals and reservoirs (Chenoy 1998:22). Cherian (2004) has documented the construction of at least 15 historic bunds in the Aravalli hills during the Sultanate period (1210-1526), highlighting the significant interdependence between hydraulic infrastructure and settlement patterns. This also introduces a hybrid model that integrates water resources from both the Aravalli hills and the Yamuna river, an approach that was subsequently refined by the Mughals in Shahjahanabad, where the proximity to these two geographical features facilitated such practices. The historical trajectory of Medieval Delhi demonstrates that its urban morphology, political resilience, and cultural vitality were inseparable from its hydraulic foundations. From the Tomar-period Lal Kot and its precisely engineered ridge-top reservoirs to the Sultanate-era networks of monumental hauz, baolis, bunds, and canals, each successive polity both inherited and reconfigured a deeply embedded water-management tradition. The siting of cities in geomorphologically advantageous locations, such as the bowl-shaped depressions of the Southern Ridge or the floodplains of the Yamuna, was not incidental, but a deliberate choice that aligned defensive imperatives with hydrological efficiency. The capacities of these reservoirs, through its dimensions, reveal an advanced understanding of seasonal variability, catchment hydrology, and the necessity of protecting water from contamination through spatial buffers and regulated access. Crucially, the evidence suggests that water was not a passive backdrop to Delhi’s urban history, but its primary organising axis, structuring the location of settlements, shaping their architectural and defensive features, and sustaining their socio-political order. The integrated systems of tanks, canals, and embankments, maintained and expanded over centuries, speak to a continuity of hydraulic knowledge that transcended dynastic change. This relationship between water infrastructure and urban survival underscores that the endurance of Delhi through cycles of conquest, expansion, and 83 environmental fluctuation was as much a product of its mastery over water as of its military or administrative strength. The configuration of water infrastructure within the many cities of Delhi also reflects broader experimentation with urban models, particularly the bipartite arrangement of qila (fort) and shahristan (inner city), as well as the more complex tripartite conception of qila, shahristan, and bagha’at, which included the garden suburbs. While the fully developed articulation of the bagha’at as a distinct urban feature is generally associated with the Mughals, preliminary experiments with similar ideas are discernible as early as the reign of Firuz Shah Tughlaq. His integrated model of bandh-hauz-bagh, an ecological triad of dam, reservoir, and garden, not only managed water resources but also served to spatially and symbolically connect the fortified city with its surrounding suburban landscape. Understanding these models requires situating them within the wider circulation of urban forms and hydraulic traditions across Iran and Central Asia. The proliferation of bipartite and tripartite urban frameworks into South Asia during the Delhi Sultanate reflects the transmission and adaptation of architectural and ecological concepts from Iran and Central Asia, processes that intensified with the rise of transregional polities. With the Mongol conquests, and later under the Timurids, these models acquired new formal and symbolic dimensions, which were subsequently refined and institutionalized by the Mughals in the South Asian context. The following section seeks to situate the tripartite model of urbanism within this larger interregional framework that spanned Iran, Turan, and Hindustan. It examines how ecological management, political authority, and urban aesthetics were intertwined in shaping cities, a model that the Mughals ultimately drew upon and reconfigured these precedents to establish their own enduring vision of urban order. 3.3 Towards a Tripartite Urbanism Model in South Asia The study of urbanism in medieval and early modern South Asia highlights a historical trajectory characterized by the transformation of spatial configurations, reflecting both practical and symbolic imperatives inherited from Central Asia and Iran. In the pre-Islamic context of Central Asia and Iran, urban settlements were predominantly organized according to a bipartite model, comprising a fortified citadel and an inner city. This dual structure simultaneously accommodated administrative authority and economic life, while also conveying cosmological and ideological meanings through city form and axial organization. Archaeological and textual evidence from the Sasanian period demonstrates the persistence of this framework across circular and rectilinear city layouts, emphasizing the centrality of fortification, spatial hierarchy, and integrated hinterlands. Although Sasanian cities largely lacked developed suburbs, the subsequent Arab conquest of the Samanids and the introduction of the rabad marked the beginnings 84 of a more complex, tripartite urban organization. This later acquired a more tangible role in the form of bagha’at with the rise of the Mongols and the Timurids. By tracing these developments, physical and symbolic, we can situate the emergence of a tripartite urbanism model within broader regional continuities and transformations, providing a critical lens for understanding the evolution of urban forms in South Asia. The urban landscape of Central Asia and Iran during the pre-Islamic period was largely structured around a bipartite model, comprising the ark/qila/kohandezh (citadel) and the shahristan (inner city) (Simpson 2017; Maroufi 2019; Karimian 2010). In this configuration, the citadel functioned as the locus of political and administrative authority, while the inner city served as the hub of commerce and daily urban life. Both components were fortified, reflecting the defensive priorities of Sasanian urbanism. Sasanian cities (224–651 CE) are frequently characterized as defensive settlements, featuring robust walls encircling the inner city (Simpson 2017:21). Yet, their circular-concentric layouts also conveyed cosmological symbolism. As Ardalan and Bakhtiar (1973:87) argue, cities such as Ctesiphon and Firuzabad were designed as manifestations of the cosmic circle, with the fire temple occupying the central axis. Similarly, Marouf ’s archaeo-historical analysis of Sasanian urban planning (2020:1071) demonstrates that city construction proceeded from the center outward, echoing regional cosmological principles in spatial organization. Beyond the city walls, agricultural hinterlands predominated, although traces of suburban gardens have been documented at sites such as Qasr-i-Shirin (Moradi 2024:1), Mohammadabad-Baghdasht (Ghasemi 2024:305), and Qaleh Kharabeh (Rekavandi et al. 2008:154), albeit insufficiently developed to constitute distinct suburban districts. Consequently, a recognizable suburb was largely absent in Sasanian cities, a condition that changed following the Arab conquest in the 7th century, which facilitated the emergence of the rabad as the city’s economic and political periphery. Archaeological and historical analyses reveal that while Sasanian cities evolved in plan, from circular forms, exemplified by Ardashir Khurrah (Firuzabad), Veh-Ardashir, and Darabgird, to rectilinear layouts, as seen in Bay-Shapur, Gonde-Shapur, and Eyvan-e Karkha, but the fundamental bipartite urban model persisted (Simpson 2017; Karimian 2010; Barthold 1984:158; Gaube 2008:162). The rectilinear adaptation reflected both imperial expansion into Roman-influenced landscapes and the implementation of large-scale hydraulic projects engineered in part by Roman specialists, which supported agricultural intensification. Despite changes in overall city geometry, the spatial logic of a fortified citadel paired with an organized inner city remained central to Sasanian urbanism, underscoring the enduring significance of the bipartite framework in shaping the region’s pre-Islamic cities. Following the Sasanian precedent, the Samanids (819–999) largely maintained the same urban model in the region, up until the transformative impact of the Arab invasions. 85 The impact of the Arab invasion on the Samanids (819-999) played a significant role in the expansion of the tripartite urban model of qila-shahristan-rabad in the Central Asian and Eastern Iranian landscape, with the city expanding to form zones of administration and governance (Sobti 2005:47; also, Barthold 1984). Sobti (2005) posits that the formation of the rabad led to a reorientation of the city toward its suburbs, thereby contributing to intensive urbanization and trade. Hudud-al Alam (Tr. by Minorsky 1937; 1970), one of the most significant works on Persian geography, compiled in 982 C.E. for the Guzganan empire, provides a detailed account of towns of the world regions, including Khorasan, Transoxiana, and Iran. The text describes a series of towns and the tripartite nature of their development, comprising qila/hisar, shahristan, and rabad. It describes the cities of Nishapur, Herat, and Sistan in Khorasan (Minorsky 1970:102, 103, 110), Samarqand, Kish (also Taieh 2024), and Nukath in the Transoxiana region (Minorsky 1970:113, 117), and Pasa in Kerman (Minorsky 1970:128) to have defined suburbs enclosed by walls, forming the third subdivision of the city. The text also notes the presence of ‘running waters’ within Nishapur, Herat, Sistan, Samarqand, and Kish, sourced through qanats, canals, waterwheels from rivers, and springs, as a common feature connecting the three components of the city. Figure 3.6: ‘Tripartite Urban Model’ (Qila-Shahristan-Rabad) Cities of Iran & Central Asia (after Barthold 1984; Minorsky 1970; Sobti 2005) Barthold’s work on the Historical Geography of Iran (1984; Ed. by Bosworth) examined the function of the newly formed rabad (suburbs) in towns post the Arab invasion. Using examples from Bukhara (also Sobti 2005; Petruccioli 2008), Samarqand, Merv (also Herrmann 1997), Sistan, Nishapur, 86 Ray (also Saadati 2021), Hamadan, Kerman, Shiraz, Herat, and Jiroft, Barthold (1984) emphasized the rabad as the new economic centre supporting trade and commerce. The rabad, according to Barthold (1984), gained prominence with the decline of the ‘landed aristocracy’ during this period, as all major activities shifted to the suburbs supported by artisan communities, workshops, and markets. Recent archaeological studies on Aktobe (Klesner et. al. 2021), Kuik-Mardan (Dawkes et.al. 2016), and Zaranj (Gaube 2008:175) have also revealed a qila-shahristan-rabad model. A substantial transformation in this model occurred with the rise of the Mongols and, subsequently, the Timurids in Iran and Central Asia. The shahristan and rabad potentially merged to form the new shahristan, whereas the gardens (bagha’at) formed new suburbs. This period witnessed the emergence of the qila-shahristan-bagha’at model, which was formally introduced in South Asia with the establishment of the Mughal Empire. The Turko-Mongol rulers were believed to have adapted and modified the garden suburbs as sites of encampment, qualifying them as ‘mobile cities’ of ‘Chaghatai tribes’ (O’Kane 1993:250), linking these gardens to the ‘nomadic heritage’ of their native steppe lands (Gronke 1992:19). Research on the distribution of Mughal gardens in the South Asian landscape has attempted to situate these mediated landscapes as elements of ‘territorial conquest’ and Mughal ‘imperial identity’ (after Wescoat Jr. 1991), as sites of ‘coronation and camping grounds’ of Mughal rulers (Sharma 2012), and as ‘administrative centers’ of the empire (Parpia 2016; discussed later in Chapter 6). Table 3.1 presents an analysis of urban practices employed by pre-Mughal Muslim empires in South Asia, highlighting the evolution and selective adoption of the tripartite urban model. The Ghaznavids and Ghurids, for instance, developed cities within their conquered territories, such as Balkh, Nishapur, and Herat, following the tripartite framework of qila, shahristan, and bagha’at. These urban interventions were heavily informed by precedents established in major Central Asian centers, including Merv, Murghab, Kerman, Yazd, Samarqand, and Herat, as illustrated in Figure 3.6. Despite the clear model provided by these antecedent cities, the tripartite structure was not systematically adopted in South Asia until the rise of the Mughal Empire, which undertook both the development of pre-existing urban centers and the foundation of entirely new cities. The table demonstrates that, prior to Mughal consolidation, the tripartite model’s proliferation remained largely confined to Iran and Khorasan, reflecting its limited transmission into the subcontinent. An important, though isolated, pre-Mughal attempt to operationalize a similar urban-economic logic is found in Firuz Shah Tughlaq’s initiative to create contiguous economic zones through the bundh-hauz-bagh model (Cherian 2004:45). Stretching from Hissar to Firuzabad and extending from the Himalayan foothills to the Thar Desert, this project represents a significant, albeit temporary, experimentation with integrated urban and hydraulic planning in the South Asian context. 87 Table 3.1 Order of Urban Settlements (Existing & New) in Pre-Mughal Muslim South Asia Empire Sovereign Urban Centres (Existing & New) Qila (Citadel/Fort) Shahrestan (Inner City) Bagha’at (Garden Suburbs) Ghazanavid (capital: Ghazni) Mahmud of Ghazni Ghazani X X X Balkh X X X Nishapur X X X Herat X X X Bust X X X Khusrau Shah Lahore X X - Ghurid (capital: Ghur and Firuzkuh) Muhammad of Ghur Ghur X X - Firuzkuh X X - Herat X X X Bamiyan X X - Ghazni X X X Bust X X - Delhi Sultanate (capital: Delhi, Daulatabad, Agra) Kaiqubad Shahr-i Nau X X - Alauddin Khilji Siri X X - Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq Tughlaqabad X X - Muhammad bin Tughlaq Adilabad X - - Jahanpanah X X - Daulatabad X - - Firuz Shah Tughluq Hissar X X - Hansi X X - Fathabad X X - Firuzabad X X X (Fort-Inner City & Agricultural Belt) Mubarak Shah Mubarakabad X X - Sikandar Lodi Sikandra X X - *X denotes presence of the urban layer It was under the Mughals (1526–1857), the most significant empire in South Asia following the Delhi Sultanates, that large-scale water infrastructure experienced a decisive revival. This revival was not merely technical but strategically institutionalized, often anchored in waqf- and shrine-centric management systems that ensured the sustained operation and maintenance of hydraulic works across the empire. The Mughal period also witnessed an unprecedented circulation of literature, philosophy, and technical knowledge within Muslim Asia, with Persian serving as the lingua franca that facilitated the rapid exchange of ideas, design principles, and infrastructural techniques. Through the movement of architects, engineers, and landscape designers across the Turko-Mongolian world, water management practices in Mughal Hindustan were intimately connected to those of Iran and Turan, creating a transregional hydraulic tradition that fused inherited expertise with local innovation. Ultimately, the Mughal engagement with water infrastructure exemplifies how empire-building, knowledge exchange, and landscape manipulation were inextricably linked, reflecting a sophisticated strategy of governance, control, and cultural synthesis. 88 Understanding Mughal waterworks, therefore, requires positioning them within the wider transregional currents that linked the political and cultural landscapes of Muslim Asia. The tripartite paradigm of Iran-Turan-Hindustan profoundly shaped both the technical design and the spatial logic of Mughal hydraulic systems. Analysing the distribution of these water features provides a valuable lens through which to interpret the urbanism models that evolved in the subcontinent under Mughal rule. The following chapter advances the argument that Mughal hydraulic systems were the product of deliberate hybridity: the empire absorbed and restructured partially codified indigenous practices inherited from the Delhi Sultanate, while simultaneously embedding transregional techniques and planning principles. In this synthesis, durable, decentralized community-managed systems coexisted and interacted with centrally administered imperial infrastructure. The resulting configuration reflects a distinctive mode of hydraulic governance in which local resilience and imperial centralisation were mutually reinforcing, an arrangement that both anchored the Mughal state in regional traditions and extended its authority across diverse ecological and cultural terrains. 89 4.0 Archaeology of Water Management in Mughal South Asia: An Overview ‘…it is impossible to describe political authorities independent of the landscapes they created: the regions they united, the cities they built, the inspirations evoked in the monuments they raised, and the cartographic desires they inflamed’ - Adam T. Smith [The Political Landscape: Constellations of Authority in Early Complex Polities, 2003, p. 29] The assertion that political authorities cannot be divorced from the landscapes they shape underscores the intricate interplay between power, geography, and culture. As discussed in Chapter 2, this relationship was strongly evident in the practices of the Turko-Mongolian Muslim empires in Iran and Central Asia. Imperial forces of the Timurid employed infrastructural systems as means of territorial expansion, state control, and as a central component of the agrarian revenue model in the sedentary ‘Central Islamic Lands’ (Kumar 2021). They also devised mechanisms of integrating the water management system with ‘shrines’ as a primary tool of monitoring, supervision, and record keeping. Furthermore, ‘manuals’ were commissioned to establish uniform set of practices for standardisation of water consumption and taxation in the arid political landscape of Iran and Khorasan. With the rise of the Mughals in 16th century South Asia, the ‘Iran-Turan’ framework of ‘one world’ Muslim Asia expanded to encompass ‘Hindustan’ and form the tripartite paradigm of ‘Iran-Turan-Hindustan.’ This chapter examines the water management practices of the Mughals in South Asia, structured into two broad sections. The first focuses on the types and techniques of Mughal water infrastructure, emphasising the significance of pre-existing hydraulic features within the landscape and their appropriation into the imperial system. Through this process, the Mughals developed a hybrid model of water management that combined resilient local traditions with planning principles and engineering influences from Central Asian contexts. The second section addresses the emergence of a ‘new order’ of urbanism, articulated through the tripartite model of Mughal cities, examined here in the cases of Agra, Lahore, and Fatehpur Sikri. The spatial distribution of water infrastructure in these cities was not incidental but the outcome of a deliberate urban strategy informed by precedents from Iranian and Turanian urban traditions. The analysis draws on archaeological excavation reports produced in the subcontinent since the establishment of the Archaeological Survey of India in 1871, as well as extensive fieldwork undertaken between 2023 and 2024. This research further employs QGIS to map the distribution of water features and overlays these datasets with historical rainfall patterns, enabling an assessment of how Mughal hydraulic systems responded to environmental constraints and climatic variability. Figure 4.0: The Buland Darwaza at Fatehpur Sikri with the water-tank in foreground [Drawing by W. Simpson 1865; Acc. No. 1133-1869 V&A Museum, London] 91 4.1 Water Management Practices in Mughal South Asia: Types and Techniques ‘I always thought one of the chief faults of Hindustan was that there was no running water’ -Babur (r. 1526-1530) in The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor (Thakston 1996:363) When Timurid prince Babur established the Mughal Empire in 1526, his domain extended from Kabul to Agra (Dale 2018:137). In addition to the mighty rivers of the Indus and Yamuna, Babur encountered a series of dry rivulets in this geography, which he characterised as a ‘desolate’ landscape devoid of ‘running water’ (Thackston 1996:363-4; Beveridge 1922:486). He referred to the rivers of Hindustan as ‘standing waters’, whereas his concept of ‘running waters’ predominantly pertained to the swift-moving streams of the mountainous terrains of his ‘homeland’ of Osh and Asfara in the Farghana Valley and those of Kabul (Beveridge 1922:4,7, 208, 519n). In the Baburnama, he discussed the potential for excavating channels to convey water to settlements and agricultural fields in the ‘level land’ of Hindustan. There are also references to ‘laborious and filthy’ water-lifting devices he observed in Lahore, Dipalpur, Agra, Chandwar, and Bayana. He noted the significant reliance of settlements in northwestern India on wells and rainwater harvesting tanks in a landscape cognizant of the summer ‘Saawan & Bhadon’ and the occasional winter ‘Pus & Magh’ rains (Beveridge 1922:486-7; Fol 273b & 515;288b). Intrigued by the absence of walled gardens in Hindustan, Babur initiated the construction of a series of baghs in the newly established Mughal capital, Agra. These were supported by ‘running water’ facilities from wells, and the Yamuna River, lifted through a series of Persian wheels. This endeavour represented the first of numerous attempts by the Mughal emperors to introduce running waters in the arid/semi-arid landscape of Hindustan. Numerous references to waterworks in the Mughal chronicles (see Appendix II/3B) prompted me to undertake a surface survey of water features in Delhi, Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, and Burhanpur. The findings from my fieldwork provided empirical evidence of the widespread presence of Mughal waterworks in diverse climatic regions of the country. This empirical observation catalysed a comprehensive investigation into the broader phenomenon of Mughal water feature distribution throughout South Asia, with particular emphasis on discerning the typology of these hydraulic structures and the methodologies employed for water storage and distribution, particularly in regions characterised by low rainfall. What kinds of waterworks were introduced by the Mughals to adapt to the varying climatic conditions spanning the arid plains of Agra to the more humid landscapes of Central India? Considering the scarcity of rainfall in certain parts of South Asia, how did the Mughals address the challenge of water scarcity? Were specific innovations or technologies employed to store and distribute water efficiently in these regions? This section attempts to answer these questions and develop a framework for the types and techniques of Mughal waterworks in South Asia. 92 4.1.1 Sources and Methods The process of documenting the distribution of Mughal water features in South Asia involved a series of field investigations, encompassing the study of the surface distribution of archaeological remains I conducted, in India, between 2023 and 2024. The primary objective of this research was to examine the distribution of water infrastructure and analyse patterns to gain insights into models of urbanism. However, during the field surveys, another pattern emerged: technique variations based on the scale of water deficiency. This observation led to an investigation of the role of climate and its relationship with the introduction of water features by the Mughals. Subsequently, I carried out a comprehensive examination of archaeological reports8, reviews, and bulletins encompassing most of South Asia, including India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh (see Appendix II/3A). Moreover, the scholarly work of R.C. Gaur (2002), W. Bell, F.R. Allchin, and N. Hammond (2019) was critically reviewed for evidence of Mughal waterworks. Through this comprehensive approach, combining desk research, field studies, and analysis of historical chronicles, the distribution of the Mughal water infrastructure across South Asia was identified and spatially documented. The GIS mapping process, as an initial step, involved the plotting of settlements where remains of Mughal waterworks were discovered, based on archaeological and epigraphical evidence, including those identified during fieldwork (see Figures 3.6-3.9). This process further encompassed the mapping of sites based on information from Mughal chronicles as an indicator of locations with potential remains of the imperial infrastructure. A detailed listing of the water infrastructure introduced by the emperors from Babur to Aurangzeb was created by reviewing the relevant literature (see Appendix II/3B). Some chronicles of the Mughal period were also reviewed besides a detailed review of archaeological reporting of S. Crowe (1972), J. Wescoat Jr. (1985), E. Koch (1991), and S. Fatma (2012). Thereafter, I attempted a river mapping exercise to examine the distribution of waterworks in relation to their proximity to perennial water sources. This indicated that some settlements were situated directly on riverbanks, while others were located at a greater distance with no direct connection to the river or its distributaries (Figure 3.6). This phenomenon also highlighted the dependence of waterworks on seasonal precipitation and subterranean aquifers. To assess the climatic dimensions of Mughal water management, I superimposed a series of rainfall isohyets onto a map of South Asia. For this purpose, I employed four seasonal rainfall maps of colonial South Asia from the Imperial Gazetteer Atlas of India (1909). Although produced approximately fifty years after the fall of the Mughal Empire, these represent the earliest systematically compiled rainfall 8 The following reports were reviewed: Archaeological Survey of India Reports (1871-1937); Indian Archaeology: A Review (1954-2015); Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India (1946-1973); Ancient Pakistan, Vol. I-XXX (1964- 2019); Pakistan Archaeology, Number 1-29 (1964-1996); Epigraphia Indica Arabic and Persian Supplement (1969-1987); Refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B 93 Figure 4.1 (For details on individual sites refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B) Figure 4.2 (For details on individual sites refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B) Figure 4.3 (For details on individual sites refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B) Figure 4.4 (For details on individual sites refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B) datasets for the region. While they cannot provide exact reconstructions of Mughal-period climate, they offer a reasonable proxy for prevailing precipitation patterns, enabling a comparative analysis of the spatial distribution of Mughal-era water features. In the absence of comprehensive historical climatic records for this geographically heterogeneous region, these maps have been used to conjecture rainfall variability during the Mughal period. Evidence suggests that the Mughal era coincided with significant climatic fluctuations, notably the transition from the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) to the Little Ice Age (LIA; c. 1550–1850). The LIA, which overlapped substantially with Mughal rule, is believed to have brought extended periods of intensified winter monsoons, alternating episodes of severe flooding and extreme droughts, and irregular monsoon patterns (Hussain et al. 2025: 6; Houghteling 2023; Appleby 1980; Khera 2019; Ray 2016). Such instability is further underscored by recorded disruptions to irrigation infrastructure, including the drying of the Mughal canal in 1707, 1740, 1753–1760, and 1820, as documented in Yule’s 1846 report. Ray’s (2016: 22) discussion of the act of ‘seeing water’ in Mughal visual depictions of the Braj region provides an important interpretive lens for understanding how the empire perceived and responded to these fluctuating environmental systems. His analysis draws attention to shifting river courses, eroding banks, and expanding floodplains, phenomena emblematic of the climatic extremities of the LIA. Similarly, studies of solar activity during Shah Jahan’s reign suggest prolonged episodes of reduced rainfall (Uberoi 2012). The integration of local hydraulic traditions with a centrally coordinated imperial infrastructure can thus be seen not merely as an exercise in governance, but as a deliberate climatic adaptation strategy. The Mughal water management system was structured, expansive, and responsive, and reflects both the preparatory foresight of the empire and its capacity to adapt to a volatile South Asian waterscape. Saawan and Bhadon, two months in the Hindu calendar, experience intense summer precipitation, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, whereas certain areas of South Asia also experience brief periods of intense winter rainfall (Pus & Magh). This overlapping phenomenon contributed to elucidating the significance of sites of Mughal waterworks in different climatic zones across South Asia (see Figures 4.1-4.4). The spatial distribution of waterworks in the landscape also provided insights into the extent of urbanization practices in Mughal South Asia. 4.1.2 Saawan-Bhadon Landscape: Discussion on Types and Techniques of Mughal Waterworks Evidence of 242 Mughal waterworks was found in 133 settlements of South Asia. Of these, 127 settlements were located within the region for which rainfall data were available from colonial era maps. 98 Table 4.1 presents summative statistics showing the quantity of rainfall at the 127 settlements, categorised across different temporal periods of the year. More than 75% of these 127 settlements, which provide evidence of Mughal water systems, are situated in regions that primarily experience summer rainfall, especially during the Hindu calendar months of Saawan and Bhadon. The remaining settlements receive rainfall in smaller amounts (0-2.0 in), spread across the months of January to May. Table 4.1 Rainfall distribution on sites (127) with traces of Mughal Waterworks (see Annexure II/3A & II/3B) Rainfall (in inches) Nov-Dec Jan-Feb March-May June-October 0.0 -0.5 76 (60%) 29 (23%) 6 (5%) - 0.5-1.0 30 (24%) 37 (29%) 41 (32%) - 1.0-2.0 21 (16%) 38 (30%) 50 (39%) - 2.0-5.0 - 23 (18%) 27 (21%) 1 (1%) 5.0-10.0 - - 3 (3%) 3 (3%) 10.0-20.0 - - - 27 (21%) 20.0-50.0 - - - 95 (75%) 50.0-100.0 - - - 1 (1%) A significant climatic phenomenon is the winter rainfall pattern, ranging from 2.0 to 5.0 inches, which was observed across 23 of the 127 settlements identified. Distinguished from the prevailing climatic trends in other locales of South Asia, the particular geographical region collectively known as punj-ab, which spans the five rivers and includes the formidable Indus, witnesses a distinctive precipitation regime during the Hindu months of Magh and Phagun. It is during this temporal span that the region attains its highest rainfall recorded throughout the calendar year. Additionally, this region exhibits weaker summer rainfall in approximately 12 out of the 23 settlements, further accentuating the peculiarities of its rainfall dynamics. Given this limited, uneven, and ‘unpredictable’ rainfall (Petrie et al.. 2017), prioritising practices of harvesting, storing, and managing water resources becomes essential (Habib 1999; Sutcliffe et.al. 2011; Morrison 2015; and Shanmugasundaram et.al. 2017) as evidenced by distribution of the Mughal waterwork structures Types: .The following types of water features practiced by the Mughal emperors were identified: Chah (Well); Hauz (Reservoir/ Cisterns/ Pools/ Tanks); Causeways, Drains, and other Water Conduits; Fountains, Cascades, & other Ornamental Features; Hammam (Bath House); Bagh (Gardens with associated water features); Nallah (Irrigation Channels); Nahr (Canal); Pul (Bridge); Bunds (Dam); Baoli (Stepwell); Moat; and Qanat (Subterranean Water Channel). Plotting these water features in relation to the summer rainfall distribution map of South Asia reveals their concentration in the Saawan-Bhadon landscape, which otherwise remains parched during other seasons (see Figure 4.5). The spatial distribution of the water features in arid areas was primarily determined by the water source, and accordingly, hydrological adaptations were implemented by the empire. 99 Table 4.2 examines the distribution patterns of Mughal waterworks across various climatic regions of South Asia, highlighting that the empire required diverse hydrological strategies and adaptation techniques to occupy different locations. The study revealed distinct patterns in the distribution of the Mughal waterworks. Settlements located in arid and semiarid regions exhibited a higher concentration of water features, which predominantly relied on groundwater and rainwater harvesting techniques. Groundwater-based systems accounted for 38% of the identified waterworks, while rainwater harvesting constituted 50%. Additionally, approximately 12% of the water management infrastructure in these regions were connected to river systems and canals, facilitating the efficient distribution of water resources. Table 4.2 Distribution of Mughal Waterworks based on Climatic Regions & Water Source [refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B] Annual Mean Rainfall/Climatic Regions Settlements (127) No. of Mughal Waterwork Attestations Groundwater Dependent Rainfall Dependent Rivers/Canals Dependent Arid 9 24 7 (29%) 14 (58%) 3 (13%) Semi-Arid 54 355 168 (47%) 146 (41%) 41 (12%) Tropical Wet/Dry 14 48 22 (46%) 10 (21%) 16 (33%) Subtropical, Winter Dry 44 66 46 (70%) 11 (17%) 9 (13%) High Altitude 6 14 2 (14%) 2 (14%) 10 (72%) In regions where the Mughal waterworks relied on river systems and canals, such features served a larger area and coexisted with indigenous micro-hydro systems, such as wells, stepwells, and rainwater cisterns, as evidenced in urban centres like Delhi, Lahore, Kashmir, and Mirzapur (see Appendix II/3A & 3B). Similarly, in climatic zones characterised by diverse rainfall patterns and predominant reliance on rivers, evidence suggests the introduction of wells and stepwells alongside reservoirs for storing rainwater and river water to meet the demands of dry seasons. Furthermore, at higher altitudes, where fast-moving streams and rivers are the primary water sources, settlements exhibited hydrological adaptations in the form of dams, sluice gates, bridges, and sedimentation tanks, harnessing the swift nature of water to meet the demands of the local population and garden systems. The examination of Mughal waterworks underscores the Empire’s sophisticated and regionally nuanced strategies for managing water across the varied climatic zones of South Asia. Rather than relying on a uniform model, the Mughals adapted their hydraulic systems to local ecological conditions, integrating diverse water sources to sustain the citadel, the inner city, suburbs, and the agricultural hinterland. This capacity for adaptation not only reflects a high degree of technical ingenuity but also reveals a broader imperial vision that sought to align environmental management with urban growth, agricultural expansion, and political stability. 100 Figure 3.10 (for details on individual sites refer to Appendix II/3A & II/3B Mughal Water Features in the ‘Saawan Bhadon’ Landscape of South Asia. based on Archaeological Excavations & Epigraphic Evidence Rainfall data based on Figure 3.9 Figure 4.5 Farah Yameen Highlight Farah Yameen Line The hybrid and evolving character of Mughal hydrological practices is highlighted by Wescoat Jr. (2022), whose study of labour and water management in Mughal landscapes systematically analyses visual evidence from the Baburnama, Akbarnama, and Padshahnama. Through this comparative approach, Wescoat Jr. demonstrates how depictions of canals, irrigation channels, and other hydraulic infrastructures grew increasingly prominent as the empire progressed from Babur to Shah Jahan, reflecting both the expanding scale of hydraulic intervention and the symbolic role of water management within imperial ideology. It is important to recognize, however, that the Baburnama, originally composed in Turki by Babur, was translated into Persian and illustrated with seventy miniatures only later, under Akbar’s patronage in 1589 (Beveridge 2010: xxvii). As such, the visual program of these manuscripts must be situated within the artistic, ideological, and cultural milieu of the late sixteenth century. These illustrations should not be read as literal or historically accurate depictions of Babur’s time; rather, they represent reconstructions shaped by the aesthetics and political imperatives of Akbar’s court. Nevertheless, Wescoat’s broader argument is significant in tracing the trajectory of Mughal hydraulic innovation across successive reigns. By the time of Shah Jahan, the Padshahnama presents a visual repertoire in which irrigated fields and complex waterworks appear with striking frequency, underscoring the centrality of hydraulic infrastructure to both the symbolic and material articulation of imperial power. Taken together, these depictions illustrate not only the evolution of Mughal hydraulic practices but also the growing importance of water management as a defining feature of the empire. The Mughals also placed greater emphasis on constructing reservoirs, cisterns, and water tanks in response to the scarcity of rainfall in the arid landscape regions of South Asia. It is plausible that the Mughals acknowledged the significance of the two monsoon months, Saawan and Bhadon, of the Hindu calendar, as evidenced by the construction of several pavilions named after these months in locations such as Lahore, Kashmir, Delhi, Deeg, and Agra. Categorising the Mughal landscape, however, solely based on their reliance on a single water source, may oversimplify the nuanced hydrological strategies employed by the Empire as they adopted a hybrid approach to water management, incorporating elements from all three primary sources: groundwater, rainfall, and rivers. Techniques: In addition to examining archaeological reports from India and Pakistan to discern techniques of water lifting and its distribution, I also examined paintings from the Mughal period to identify water lifting techniques. Additionally, I studied drawings from the Colonial period that depicted Mughal water- 102 lifting devices in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the techniques involved. The paintings found in the Mughal manuscripts of Babur, Akbar, Shahjahan, and later Mughals were accessed online from the collections of The Walters Art Museum, the Victoria and Albert Museum, Royal Collection Trust, and the National Museum of Asian Art, Smithsonian, Drawing from archaeological reports on the Mughal waterworks, several techniques for lifting, distributing, and managing water were identified. These included the utilisation of saqia or Persian wheels to lift water from wells (Shahjahani Hammam, Lahore); employing a network of irrigation channels (nallahs) to maintain consistent water flow to khana baghs or house gardens (Haram-sara & Residential Units, Fatehpur Sikri); and the installation of water breakers to impede water flow, especially in areas witnessing significant topographical changes (Fatehpur Sikri). Furthermore, structures such as stepped series of water tanks were introduced, serving as sedimentation tanks, as seen in Takht-i Akbari in Kalanur, Tomb Garden of Ali Mardan Khan in Lahore, and city tanks in Burhanpur. In arid and semi- arid areas, storm water drains were built which were connected to cisterns for rainwater harvesting (Khan-i-Khanan’s Palace, Fatehpur Sikri). Walled gardens utilised various kinds of water conduits, including terracotta pipes (Mahtab Bagh, Agra), earthenware pipes (Tomb Garden of Itmad-ud Daula, Agra), and stoneware pipes (Taj Mahal in Agra) for water distribution. Aqueducts atop walls, connected to wells, delivered water at high pressure to scalloped cascades, fountain pipe lines, and causeways leading to tanks in walled-gardens (Jaswant Rai ki Chhatri, Agra). A large aqueduct system drawing water from the Yamuna River using the pur system was found in the Khan-i Alam Bagh adjacent to the Taj Mahal complex (Maynihan 2000:133). Copper and earthenware pipes were employed to regulate water temperatures in hammams or bathhouses (Hammam in Agra). On a regional scale, dams and sluice gates were utilized to manage canal water at headworks and irrigation channels, as seen in Lahore and Delhi. Embankments regulated river edges, as seen in Agra, and bridges were constructed to safeguard areas against floods, as seen in Garhi in Delhi. The noria or dulab system, which uses hydropower to lift water, was used to draw moving water using wheels from surface level waterbodies (Siddiqui 1986:66n; also Fatma and Fatma 2012:1269) and was employed in rivers, streams, and large canals, also functioning as water mills in some areas. 103 (Left) Figure 4.6: A single-drum Persian wheel water lifting technique (Source: National Museum of Asian Art, F1907.208); (Right) Figure 4.7: A pulley-based water lifting technique outside a Fort (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria & Albert Museum Collection, IS.2:85- 1896) (Left) Figure 4.8: Persian Wheel water lifting technique from a garden well at Bagh-i Wafa, Kabul (Source: Baburnama, Collection of National Museum, New Delhi); (Right) Figure 4.9: Double-wheel technique from a well at Fatehpur Sikri (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria & Albert Museum Collection, IS.2:86-1896) 104 (Left) Figure 4.10: Saqia as a water lifting device employed in the construction of the Agra Fort (Source: Akbarnama, Victoria and Albert Museum Collection, IS:2:110-1896); (Right) Figure 4.11: A pulley-based water lifting technique employed by farmers to irrigate agriculture farmlands [Source: Padshahnama, Royal Collection Trust, RCIN 1005025, folio 156a] The methods for raising water in the artwork from the chronicles of Babur, Akbar, Shahjahan, and later Mughals primarily consisted of vertical water lifting, such as from wells and stepwells. The use of the saqia or Persian wheel was the most prevalent technique for extracting water from wells, as depicted in all three manuscripts (Baburnama, Akbarnama & Padhshanama; see Figure 4.6-4.11). It is a mechanically operated device that functions through a pin-drum gear system and employs pots or buckets on a continuous belt to scoop water. The belt system comprises two components: a vertical belt that lifts the water and transfers it to a horizontal belt, which then directs the water into channels connected to fields or reservoirs. The study of the Mughal water management system in South Asia presents a multi-scalar approach to address water-stressed situations in the arid landscape of South Asia. The implementation of water features by the empire demonstrated a pattern of centralised and decentralised water distribution systems, wherein large-scale infrastructure dependent on perennial sources coexisted with indigenous systems of seasonal water harvesting techniques. The centralized control of canals, qanats, bunds, and river systems contributed to the growth of urban centers. What can the distribution of these water features reveal about the patterns of urbanism within the Mughal landscape? The following section attempts to analyse the distribution pattern and the role it played in the formation of urban models of development within Mughal South Asia. 105 4.2 Qila-Shahristan-Bagha’at: The ‘New Order’ of Urbanism Petruccioli (1984:18) characterizes the latter half of the 16th and 17th centuries as a crucial period for urban development in South Asia under the Mughal Empire. During this period, two new cities– Fatehpur Sikri and Shahjahanabad–were added to the existing list of historical cities. Overall, the existing cities gained a ‘new order’ of monumental quality beyond their citadel-centralities and became recognised through urbanism practices centred around water and its associated features. Additionally, cities began to expand beyond their city walls to garden suburbs and agricultural hinterlands, with notable examples being Kabul, Lahore, Sirhind, Burhanpur, Aurangabad, and Agra. The water-centric urbanism practices had an imprint of Turko-Mongolian traditions of city building as evident in the ‘tripartite urban model’ (qila-sharistan-bagha’at) of Samarqand, Bukhara, Herat, Balkh, and Isfahan. This section expands upon the concept introduced by Petruccioli (1984), through an analysis of the distribution of Mughal waterworks in major cities to decipher the urban model employed in their construction, and expansion, in South Asia. Table 4.3 and Figure 4.12 depict the distribution of Mughal waterworks across various settlement scales, encompassing citadels (qila), inner cities (shahristan), suburbs, and villages. Notably, these illustrate the frequency of each water feature introduced by the Mughals within these scales. Of particular significance is the marked emphasis on the introduction of water features in the suburbs, extending beyond the confines of citadels and city walls. This expansion underscores the evolution of cities to incorporate suburbs within their spatial boundaries, representing a shift in the city’s monumental character. This phenomenon is evident in both the expansion of existing cities like Lahore, Agra, Burhanpur, including settlements in the Kashmir region, and the establishment of new cities, such as Fatehpur Sikri and Shahjahanabad. In this period, the suburbs functioned not as peripheral zones but as vital extensions of the Mughal city, embodying the empire’s political and territorial ambitions. Archaeological evidence (see Appendix II/3A), chronicles (see Appendix II/3B), and field surveys I conducted in Agra and Fatehpur Sikri consistently reveal that the densest concentration of Mughal waterworks and landscape features lay beyond the fortified urban core. These included 45 hauz (reservoirs), 31 causeways, 22 fountains, and 79 gardens (bagha’at), many of them walled and incorporating running water. The deliberate design of these gardens, drawing on Persian and Central Asian models (Stuart 1913:18), demonstrates their role as instruments of imperial ideology, strategically placed to materialize authority across newly consolidated spaces. Far from being passive suburban retreats, these gardens were active sites of political performance. The Mughals adapted and redefined the suburban garden as a space of encampment, creating what scholars describe as ‘mobile cities’ reminiscent of Chaghatai tribal formations (O’Kane 1993:250). This mobility reinforced the dynasty’s nomadic heritage from the Central Asian steppe (Gronke 1992:19), 106 Table 4.3: Distribution of Mughal Water Features across Settlement Scale Citadel (Qila) Inner City (Shahristan) Suburbs Villages Water Features a b a b a b a b Chah (Well) 9 1 10 61 20 81 50 7 57 56 56 Hauz (Reservoir/Cistern/Pools/Ta nks) 38 3 41 28 17 45 37 8 45 2 2 Causeways, Drains and other Water Conduits 27 2 29 4 1 5 29 2 31 Fountains, Cascades and other Ornamental Features 7 2 9 2 1 3 20 2 22 Hammam (Bath House) 17 17 2 2 4 3 1 4 Bagh (Gardens with associated water features) 22 5 29 8 42 50 24 55 79 Nallah (Irrigation Channel) 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 Nahr (Canal) 2 1 3 1 7 8 1 8 9 2 3 5 Pul (Bridge) and Bunds (Dam) 2 1 3 8 4 12 7 3 10 Baoli (Stepwell) 3 3 14 3 17 1 1 20 20 Qanat (Underground water channel) 1 1 1 1 1 1 a = based on Archaeological Excavation Reports (1871-2014) & Fieldwork (2023-24) b = based on Mughal Chronicles (1526-1857), with no overlaps with ‘a’ Figure 4.12: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks across Settlement Scales 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Citadel Inner City Suburbs Villages Bagh Chah Hauz Causeways Fountains & Ornamental Features Baoli Puls & Bunds Qanat Hammam N o. o f W at er F ea tu re s & G ar de ns Nahr 107 while simultaneously rearticulating it as an imperial strategy within the South Asian context. In this light, the gardens functioned as more than aesthetic landscapes: they became tangible markers of conquest, projecting Mughal sovereignty onto newly occupied terrain and asserting continuity with ancestral modes of rule. The spatial distribution of Mughal gardens, whether in newly founded urban centers (Fatehpur Sikri) or in pre-existing cities reshaped under imperial directives (Agra and Lahore), fulfilled a range of political functions. These landscapes operated as powerful symbols of territorial expansion and imperial identity (Wescoat Jr. 1991), as ceremonial arenas for coronations and imperial encampments (Sharma 2012), and as administrative nodes integrated into the empire’s governing apparatus (Parpia 2016). Taken together, the suburban gardens of the Mughals must therefore be understood not as ornamental retreats, but as strategic instruments of statecraft, as sites where architecture, landscape, and political authority were deliberately intertwined to extend, consolidate, and legitimize imperial rule. Excavations and explorations carried out after the establishment of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 1871 have revealed significant evidence of water features both within and beyond the walled precincts of Agra, Lahore, and Fatehpur Sikri. These three cities are examined here as case studies to illustrate two distinct categories of Mughal urbanism: pre-existing cities, such as Agra and Lahore, which were adapted to serve imperial urban agendas, and a newly founded city, Fatehpur Sikri, which offers a remarkably clear expression of how the Mughals envisioned urban form, drawing inspiration from Central Asian and Iranian models. As all three functioned as capital cities, Agra and Fatehpur Sikri as Dar al-Khilafat (seats of the Caliphate) and Lahore as Dar al-Sulṭanat (seat of the Sultanate), they constitute some of the most compelling examples of the high phase of Mughal urban planning, a trajectory that later culminated in the grandeur of Shahjahanabad. The present mapping and analysis are grounded in ASI’s documentation of water infrastructures and attempt to interpret them through the conceptual lens of the Mughal ‘tripartite urban model’ of qila (fortified citadel), shahristan (urban settlement), and bagha’at (suburban gardens). In doing so, this study seeks to reconstruct the ‘new order’ of urban design and hydraulic management that defined the Mughal approach to city-making in South Asia. 4.2.1 Agra Agra served as the initial illustration of the ‘new order’ of urban development, which was characterised by garden suburbs and tomb enclosures situated beyond the citadel’s perimeter. This new monumentality was distinguished by a highly efficient water management system that connected the city’s central region 108 to its agricultural lands, creating a continuous development unit defined by planned features. The expansion of the city beyond the citadel was now shaped by new morphological indicators, introducing a structured approach to urban development practices in South Asia. Babur introduced a series of Timurid-Persian walled gardens (Koch 1991:34) on the opposite side of the river Yamuna, away from the citadel. In the process, he also defined a new extent of the city beyond the river, and the Lodi-era fort, transforming the landscape on both sides of the river. One of the initial systems that Babur developed in Agra was a network of water management techniques, which included saqia or Persian wheels, chah or wells, wa’in or chambered stepwells, and hauz or tanks (after Fatma and Fatima 2012:1268-69). Following this, he established a series of gardens, mirroring his earlier endeavours in Kabul. Besides functioning as tools of territorial expansion and control, the purpose of these endeavours was also to ‘reconstruct’ and to ‘reproduce’ the Central Asian landscape in South Asia (Wescoat Jr. 1991:109). Babur was initially buried in Agra in one of the gardens he created, but later reinterred in the ‘running water’ landscape of Kabul. The introduction of large-scale well diggers, construction of reservoirs to tap water from springs and seasonal streams, and creation of gardens and hammams were also observed in satellite towns around Agra, including Sikri, Firuzpur, and Dholpur. Babur’s garden construction practices in the city were subsequently adopted by latter Mughal emperors, particularly Akbar and Shahjahan. An early 18th century map of Agra, located at the Jaipur Museum, provides insight into a network of 42 riverside gardens established between the reigns of Babur and Shahjahan (Koch 1997:143). The city and its garden suburbs, as revealed by archaeological excavations conducted in 1871-72, showcased significant water management features predominantly positioned along the riverbanks, shielded by embankments (see Appendix II/3A & 3B). These excavations, supplemented by epigraphic evidence, unveiled various structures, including nine ancient wells and a stepwell in Chahar Bagh, oblong-shaped cisterns replenished by river water in Achanak Bagh, a 94-foot square tank containing 60 wells, of which nine remains, connected to the garden and its subterranean tanks via masonry conduits within Zahara Bagh, as well as a sizable well and stepwell identified in Ladli Bagh. Furthermore, the discoveries encompassed bathing tanks furnished with a series of three water apertures each lined with copper, recognised as Hammam, alongside features such as moats and reservoirs within the Agra Fort, square tanks coupled with earthen water channels linked to wells within the Itmad-ud Daula’s Tomb complex, reservoirs adjoining the Moti Masjid, and tanks linked to wells at Chini ka Rauza. Later explorations in 1902-03 disclosed garden pathways connecting to fishponds at Anguri Bagh, ablution tanks integrated with subterranean drainage systems at Fathpuri Masjid, and a central causeway equipped with stoneware conduits linking to the Khan-i Alam Bagh aqueducts facilitating water flow from the river to three tanks, 109 subsequently irrigating the central gardens within the Taj Mahal complex. Subsequent excavations in later years brought to light a six-storey baoli within the Akbari Mahal, a large well situated at Ibrahim Palace, stormwater drainage systems within the Jahangir Mahal, latrine courts featuring advanced drainage mechanisms within the Agra Fort, a garden complex incorporating elevated aqueducts atop walls conveying water from wells to basins and tanks within the garden via a scalloped cascade at Jaswant Rai ki Chattri, as well as earthen pipes, brickwork drains, and two wells within the Ram Bagh. Moreover, discoveries included a large well at Kanch Mahal and Kali Masjid and a hauz at Hijdon ki Masjid and Akbari Masjid. Figure 4.13: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Agra (1526-1857) 110 Figure 4.14: Archaeological Remains of the Waterworks of Mahtab Bagh in Agra The Mughal water management system developed in Agra exemplifies a carefully calibrated balance between decentralization and centralization. Individual garden units were equipped with independent water systems, yet these were simultaneously linked to the Yamuna River, which functioned as a centralised arterial source. This dual arrangement reflects an integrated design strategy, whereby localised hydraulic autonomy was embedded within an overarching framework of imperial control. Such a configuration not only ensured the reliable distribution of water but also operated as a spatial mechanism for territorial expansion and administrative consolidation. The arrangement of water features across the landscape further reveals a conscious progression toward the formation of suburban garden complexes. This spatial logic built upon the earlier bipartite model of the qila (fort) and shahristan (inner city) established under the Lodis, but under the Mughals it was transformed into a tripartite urban subdivision that included extensive garden suburbs. The dense concentration of water-dependent infrastructure required to sustain these gardens underscores the central role of bagha’at in restructuring the urban fabric of Agra. Far from being peripheral embellishments, the gardens constituted a defining element of the Mughal urban order, materializing both aesthetic ideals and imperial authority in the shaping of the city. 4.2.2 Lahore The district of Lahore, as depicted in Ain-i Akbari (Jarrett 1927), a text written during the reign of the third Mughal Emperor, Akbar, is characterized as being composed of several doabs. Located in the Bari Doab, which is formed by the Ravi and Beas Rivers, the city of Lahore is situated on the banks of the Ravi River. The water supply system of Lahore is modelled in a similar fashion as that of Shahjahanabad, and the city gained prominence during the Mughal period with contributions to its design from Babur to Shahjahan. They remodelled and refortified the city (Noe 1982:307), contributing to its urban layout and 111 water management systems, drawing inspiration from the ‘happy recollections of Ferghana’, the land of the ‘house of Timur’ (Quraeshi 1988:69; also, Wescoat Jr. et.al. 1991:1). Shahjahan’s contribution was significant in the form of the Shah Nahr canal, which carried water from the river Ravi to the walled city of Lahore. This canal, built by Persian engineer Ali Mardan Khan, travelled 86 miles to Shalamar Bagh and served both the agricultural hinterlands and the garden suburb zone. Irrigation channels were designed to carry water from the canal to the agricultural belts which were earlier dependent on wells (Jarrett 1927:316). Shahjahan ordered a series of spacious gardens in the suburbs with impressive hydraulic systems that drew water from the canal. The garden suburb planning technique employed in Lahore is analogous to that used in earlier Mughal cities, such as Agra, Sirhind, and Srinagar. This technique relied on water storage and distribution through wells, canals, and harvested seasonal rainwater. Shahdara and Shalamar are two prominent garden complexes located in the suburbs of the city. While Shalamar was designed along the canal route of the Shah Nahr, Shahdara is situated across the river from the fort complex and served as a camping ground for the Mughals enroute to Peshawar, Kabul, or for hunting in Sheikhupura (Brand 1996:5). Shahdara, built by Shahjahan, comprises three significant Mughal tombs. The complex is home to the tombs of the fourth Mughal emperor Jahangir, his wife Nur Jahan, and his brother-in-law Asaf Khan, resulting in the formation of three Mughal gardens. An archaeological excavation conducted in the Shahdara complex in1921-22 at the Asaf Khan Tomb complex in the garden suburb revealed the presence of brick causeways, small water tanks, wells, axial waterways, and aqueducts feeding fountains (ASI Annual Report 1921-22 and Pakistan Archaeology Number 25). The construction of a series of water tanks, each fed by earthen pipes, was observed in Ali Mardan Khan’s tomb (ASI Annual Report 1923-24). The Shalamar Garden, located in the suburbs, received water from a canal through irrigation channels. It also had two large wells, one in the east and the other to the west. The east well supplied water to the hammam via masonry channels and to the reservoir (Pakistan Archaeology Number 10-22:265). In the suburbs, the Wazir Khan Baradari had a tank and central fountain (Pakistan Archaeology Number 11 1987-88:240). A fountain tank within the Akbari Serai, masonry water channels, and fountains in the Jehangir tomb enclosure served by nine wells were also found in the Shahdara complex (Mir et.al. 1996:5-32). The walled city had its own system of water management, serving gardens, hammams, mosques, and the imperial fort complex. Archaeological excavations conducted by the ASI in 1902-02 and 1925-26 within the Fort revealed the presence of wells and tanks. In addition, a circular well from which water was raised using Persian Wheel systems and terracotta pipes embedded in walls carrying water from a roof 112 tank were discovered in the Shahjahani hammam (bath), located within the Fort complex. The Akbari hammam (bath) also had a system of water tank and masonry channels. Other features such as wells, fountains, pools, water channels, and bathing chambers were also found within the Fort complex (Mir et.al. 1996:45-65. A sunken water tank was discovered during the 1904-05 excavation by the ASI at the Dai Angah mosque in the city, along with an impression of another water tank used for ablution purposes. Figure 4.15: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Lahore (1526-1857) The emerging ‘new order’ in the city was defined by a set of interrelated infrastructural and urban innovations that collectively reinforced imperial authority. Central to this transformation was the construction of a grand canal, Shah Nahr, which not only facilitated water supply but also structured the city’s spatial and territorial logic. Complementing this hydraulic intervention was the establishment of garden suburbs on both banks of the river, which functioned simultaneously as aesthetic landscapes, sites of social display, and instruments of urban governance. The introduction of the sovereign mosque, the Badshahi Masjid, further articulated the symbolic presence of imperial power within the cityscape. Equally significant was the implementation of an effective underground drainage system within the walled city, reflecting a sophisticated approach to urban hygiene, resource management, and civic control. Together, these features were integrated through an extensive network of water systems linking the city to its suburbs, thereby extending Mughal authority into the surrounding landscape. This 113 hydraulic connectivity served multiple functions: it enabled territorial expansion, facilitated agricultural production, and materially embodied the Mughal capacity to organize, control, and symbolize dominion across both urban and suburban spaces. 4.2.3 Fatehpur Sikri Fatehpur Sikri, located 40 kilometres west of Agra, was the only other Mughal capital constructed from scratch besides Shahjahanabad. It was built during the reign of the third Mughal emperor, Akbar, in the second half of the 16th century (Brand and Lowry 1985:1). The city was constructed on an elevated rocky terrain adjacent to a massive lake, which was one of the primary sources of water for the city, the drying of which ultimately led to its abandonment. The city served as a capital for a brief period of fifteen years before Akbar shifted the capital to Lahore (Brand and Lowry 1985:2). A huge reservoir (2 × 05 miles) was constructed adjacent to the lake to store water for the city. It was regulated by barrages, consisting of 13 and 52 sluice gates on its eastern and western edges, respectively (Rezavi 2013:134). According to Rezavi (2013:139), the city had a substantial number of wells and baolis (stepwells). He lists 14 baolis which were evenly distributed throughout the city. Additionally, hauzs (water tanks) were present in the city for use by the palace complex and residents. These tanks also utilized the contours of the elevated terrain to harvest rainwater. All courtyards of the city were designed to optimise rainwater harvesting by leveraging the natural topography of the site. The flow of water was managed across the palace complex and the city to guide it towards tanks situated at lower elevations. These tanks then supplied water to garden channels and pools (Davar 1975:796). Some of these tanks were connected to wells and stepwells to provide a continuous water supply to the city’s inhabitants. Massive aqueducts were also constructed to carry water from large reservoirs to residential units (Rezavi 2013:149). A major archaeological excavation was undertaken in the Fatehpur Sikri palace complex during 1985-86 by RC Gaur, which unearthed various water features, including water tanks, hammams, stormwater drains, water breakers, fountains, reservoirs, causeways, soak-pits, refuse water-pits, an extensive network of irrigation drains, and a series of interconnected water tanks linked to wells, baolis, and hauzs. A significant feature of the palace complex was a square tank of size 96 feet called the Anup Talao (Sharma 2008:96-100). The three-yard deep tank, with multiple levels, served as a centre for recreation and meetings by the emperor (Brand and Lowry 1985:75; also, Ahmad 1905:10). The city was surrounded by several gardens and baradaris (pavilions) that were constructed in response to the arid nature of the location (Ahmad 1905:7). Petruccioli (1992) documented 14 gardens in the suburbs of the city (Rezavi 2013:128), which were supplied with water from wells built either within or adjacent to the garden complex. Two significant gardens were present within the palace complex, which have been preserved. These included the Diwan-i Aam garden, measuring 65m x 30.6m, and the zanana (woman) 114 garden, also known as the Bagh-i Mariam. The latter featured a central hauz (tank) connected to water channels for irrigation purposes, as mentioned by Koch (1997:146). Figure 4.16: Distribution of Mughal Waterworks in Fatehpur Sikri (Babur-Akbar Period) The ephemeral city of Fatehpur Sikri possessed a remarkable system of water design that was unfortunately dependent on a diminishing lake and a depleting groundwater table. A notable aspect of the city’s design was its efficient rainwater harvesting technique and decentralised units of water sources, characterised by wells and stepwells. As a newly constructed city, the distribution of water features within an urban form predominantly defined by the fort, the inner city, and the garden suburbs facing the lake renders Fatehpur Sikri as a significant example of the ‘new order’ of urban development in Mughal South Asia. To conclude, a critical analysis of the spatial distribution of Mughal hydraulic infrastructures underscores the emergence of a distinctly ‘new order’ of urban development in South Asia, exemplified by cities such as Agra, Lahore, and Fatehpur Sikri. This urban transformation was not merely functional; it represented a deliberate revival and adaptation of antecedent water management practices rooted in the Mughal ancestral landscapes of Central Asia (see Chapter 3). The enduring influence of these Central Asian precedents is particularly evident in the hydraulic features of the empire’s last capital, 115 Shahjahanabad (1639-1857), including the monumental Shah Nahr, as explored in detail in Chapters 5 and 6. Such interventions reflect a conscious integration of inherited techniques with locally adapted urban strategies, signalling both continuity and innovation in Mughal approaches to city-building and landscape management. The study of Mughal water management in South Asia demonstrates that hydraulic infrastructure was never a neutral or purely utilitarian enterprise; rather, it was a calculated instrument of imperial domination. By absorbing resilient indigenous water systems into their own framework and overlaying them with monumental canals, reservoirs, and interconnected works, the Mughals not only secured ecological adaptability but also projected authority into the very structure of the landscape. This integration forged a hydraulic order that transformed essential practices of survival into visible emblems of sovereignty, embedding political control within the flows and storage of water itself. In arid and semi-arid environments where rainfall was scarce and erratic, water carried heightened political value. The Mughal capacity to impose regionally tailored hydraulic templates (Table 4.2) across diverse climates reflected an empire acutely aware of the strategic stakes of resource management. What might superficially appear as practical adaptation to ecological uncertainty was, in effect, a form of territorial consolidation: the canal, the reservoir, and the garden became instruments of centralization, binding disparate regions into a singular imperial geography. In this sense, Mughal water management must be read not only as a response to environmental volatility but as a deliberate technology of power - an infrastructure of conquest that inscribed imperial presence onto the land itself. The territorial expansion of the Mughal empire was inseparable from its control over water. Beginning with Babur’s consolidation of the Indus-Yamuna geographical region, and extending through the expansive reigns of Akbar and Shah Jahan, the trajectory of conquest followed the course of rivers (see empire boundaries in Figure 3.9). Imperial boundaries frequently aligned with river systems, stretching in some cases from their sources to their termini, thereby transforming the empire into what may be described as a ‘watershed empire’. The strategic occupation of these fluvial corridors allowed the Mughals not only to secure territorial edges but also to dominate the arteries of settlement, agriculture, and movement. Central to this strategy was the large-scale redirection and distribution of water. Canals were constructed to carry river water into dry zones, while monumental works such as dams, reservoirs, and embankments rendered imperial power visible in the landscape. Water was thus given tangible presence through its monumentalization, ensuring that ecological necessity was simultaneously a medium of political expression. Similar to the Timurids, the Mughals extended their empire along existing riverine patterns, subsequently expanding these networks for irrigation, livestock, and transport. Rivers and rivulets became the edge-defining elements of imperial territory, natural boundaries that were appropriated, reshaped, and incorporated into the cartography of conquest. 116 The Mughal vision of expansion can therefore be understood as distinctly inter-fluvial. Regions were approached not as abstract territorial units, but as collections of micro- and mini-watersheds, each defined and structured by its river system. Prosperity, settlement, and political authority were in turn governed by these rivers, whose multiple distributaries extended Mughal presence along the contours of the land. Conquest was achieved not only by seizing land but by mastering the hydrological systems that sustained it. To maintain such control, the empire deployed composite system of techniques: harvesting, storing, damming, and distributing water across watersheds under a centralized authority. These interventions reshaped entire landscapes, transforming rivers into imperial instruments. Embanked, dammed, siphoned, and canalized, waterways became enduring infrastructures of domination. They became channels through which the empire secured long-term conquest, economic stability, and political consolidation. It is thus imperative to situate the Mughal hydrological landscape as that of a watershed empire: an imperial formation in which rivers were not peripheral but central to conquest and governance. By aligning expansion with fluvial systems, the Mughals embedded their authority into the natural geography of South Asia, ensuring that water itself became a medium of imperial rule. The following chapter examines the Mughal canal of Shahjahanabad, the Shah Nahr, not merely as an imperial object but as a dynamic hydraulic system that intersected with and reshaped existing local water management practices. Rather than functioning in isolation, the canal operated within a wider network of indigenous wells, tanks, lakes, ponds and seasonal streams, thereby embedding imperial authority into everyday ecologies of water use. The following chapter further positions the Shah Nahr as a critical lens through which to understand the watershed-centric approach of the Mughal empire. By channelling and redistributing water across multiple terrains, the canal illustrates how Mughal hydraulic infrastructure linked different scales of the landscape into a coherent system of control and representation. The Shah Nahr was not simply a technical achievement; it was an instrument that symbolically and materially integrated the empire’s territories. At the same time, the canal was encoded with religious and cultural meanings that reflected the sacred attributes of the land and its people. Flowing water carried associations of purity, abundance, and divine blessing, qualities that infused the canal with ideological weight beyond its material utility. As such, the following chapter also presents the Shah Nahr as both an infrastructural artery and a cultural symbol: a hydraulic construction that articulated imperial authority while resonating with local cosmologies of water. By approaching the canal through this dual lens, as system and as a symbol, the following chapter underscores its role in weaving together the ecological, territorial, and spiritual dimensions of Mughal statecraft. 117 Map of Ali Mardan Khan Canal removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. 5.0 Shah Nahr: Mapping the Waterscape of the Mughal Canal As elaborated in Chapter 2, historically, waterways have been extensively modified to fulfil the ambitions of empires in asserting dominance over regions. Waterways were embanked, dammed, siphoned, and canalised, serving as visual markers in the landscape that staged the imperial presence in the arid and semiarid regions of Iran and Central Asia. This facilitated the empire’s consolidation strategies in areas characterised by significant water scarcity. Furthermore, these modifications played a crucial role in augmenting the state treasury through revenue generated from agricultural intensification strategies supported by monumental canals that extended into the driest parts of the region. A study of the archaeology of canals leads to a broader understanding of environmental issues (Woodson 2015), land organisation complexities (Keay 2014), the emergence and growth of settlements and societies (Salomon 2014) and urban centres (Ur 2005), hydraulic techniques and technologies (Farrington 1980), and the role of socio-political powers in the use, access, and control of water (Stride 2009). With Shah Nahr, the Mughal canal leading to Shahjahanabad, as the central design element of the Imperial layout, hydrology, and state economy, a philological study10 of the same provides insights into the regional landform and its role as a functioning machine (Hodge 2002:4). This chapter focuses on the study and documentation of the Shah Nahr from 1639 to 1857 based on sources - literary, cartographic, and artwork – of the Mughal and Colonial Period, and a detailed fieldwork of the canal and its associated water features I conducted to document its present state and use, between 2023 and 2024. Geospatial tools were used to map and analyse the landscape. The documentation process encompassed a comprehensive mapping effort, extending beyond the monumental Mughal canal to include a diverse array of water-related structures and features. This extensive survey incorporated streams, dams, sluice gates, bridges, watermills, lifting mechanisms, irrigation outlets, wells, tanks, and ponds situated in various contexts, such as farmlands, orchards, hunting grounds, and garden suburbs. Additionally, the study examined the water management practices associated with temples, mosques, and public buildings. The primary objective was to elucidate the interconnected nature of water management strategies implemented at multiple scales throughout the region. For the study, the canal was divided into regional, micro-regional, and urban scales with emphasis on the study of associated landscapes and water features, landcovers and land uses, societies and communities, and techniques and technologies. The discussions focused on typological and technical classification of the hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad, landscape experimentations, garden networks, use, access, and control of canal waters, and the agency of water in sacred landscapes associated with Hinduism and Islam. 10 The design language and configuration of the canal as a response to the historical landform, based on historical sources. Figure 5.1 : Section of the Map of Ali Mardan Khan Canal, also known as Shah Nahr or Nahr-i Faiz or Nahr-i Bihisht, c.a. 1750. (Source: Telangana State Archives, Hyderabad, India) 119 5.1 Canal in History: An Overview ‘…and to leave permanent marks of the greatness of my Empire, by digging canals, and founding cities, by which too the revenues of the Empire will be increased.’ Akbar, 3rd Mughal Emperor (1568)11 The 17th century walled city of Shahjahanabad (1639-1857), the last capital of the Mughal Empire, was witness to a major hydrological project undertaken by Shahjahan, the Shah Nahr or the Royal Canal. The canal’s construction was contemporaneous with the building of the Delhi Fort by the Mughals. The walled city and its garden suburbs were later developed around the canal in response to Shah Nahr’s alignment and local topography. Also known as the Ali Mardan Khan Canal, this perennial canal was a prototype of the Lahore Canal and followed the same layout principle of drawing water from the river upstream, watering the agricultural hinterlands and garden suburbs before branching into the walled city to serve the elite quarters and the fort, eventually draining into the same river source. Hydrologically, Shahjahanabad sits in the liminal area between punj-ab (Indus-Satluj basin) and do-ab (Ganga-Yamuna basin), termed as ‘Satluj-Yamuna interfluve’ (Wahi 2012:273). Firuz Shah Tughlaq (1351-1388), the 3rd ruler of the Tughlaq Empire, was the first to introduce large-scale hydrological projects involving canals in north-west South Asia. His capital, earlier Hissar and later Firuzabad, sat in the same interfluve as Shahjahanabad, and was served by an extensive network of canals drawing water from Satluj and Yamuna. Singh (1992; see Figure 5.2) traced the path of the Firuz Shah Canal (built in 1355) based on the descriptions in Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi12 and Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi13. According to Singh (1992:50), the canal was fed by a series of streams and seasonal rivers originating from the Himalayan foothills near Sirmaur and Manduati and flowing to a reservoir in Bhadra via Jind, Hansi, and Hissar (see Figure 5.2). Singh also mentions the construction of Rajab-wah and Ulughkhan-ni14 (wah and ni means canal) by Firuz Shah Tughlaq to connect the streams and riverbeds, including the old bed of the Yamuna River (Singh 1992:50n; also see Figure 5.2). As per the sanad (deed) of Akbar Badshah, the third Mughal emperor, Firuz Shah Canal had its headworks at the foothills of the Himalaya near Khizrabad, and it flowed through Kythal to Hansi and Hissar (Yule 1846:214; see Figure 4.2). In an attempt to revive the canal after it had become defunct due to siltation from its tributaries, Akbar ordered a deeper excavation of the same canal, collecting water from 11 Akbar on the renewal of the Firuz Shah Tughlaq Canal in 1568, as mentioned in ‘A Canal Act of Emperor Akbar’ translated by H. Yule (1846). 12 History of Firuz Shah Tughlaq, written by Shams Siraj Afif 13 History of Mubarak Shah, written by Yahya Sirhindi 14 Rajab was the father of Firuz Shah Tughlaq, and Ulugh Khan was the princely title of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, Firuz’s cousin and former sovereign of the Tughlaq dynasty (Singh1992: 50n) 120 nalas and seasonal streams, and connecting the Sonb River to Chitang Naddi15 (Yule 1846:215; see Figure 5.2). This description of Firuz Shah’s Canal exhibits a composite style of canal building that connects large streams and small rivers through constructed linear channels in the landscape. Following the renewal of the Firuz Shah Canal, it was known as Shaikhu-ni or Shaikh Nai, after the name of Akbar’s son. Ni and nai refer to canals in the local Hindustani dialect (Yule 1846:215). The renewal process was supervised by Tarkhan16, who was also the Mir-ab (Water Superintendent) of the region. Tarkhan oversaw the desilting of the canal, widening and increasing its depth, and the construction of bridges and dams (bunds) on its course. He also supervised the distribution of water for irrigating the agricultural fields and imperial gardens enroute to Hansi and Hissar (Yule 1846:216). Fruit trees were planted on both sides of the canal, serving as a means of providing shade for its waters in a manner similar to that of Paradise (Yule 1846:217). Figure 5.2: Firuz Shah Tughlaq Canal [after Singh (1992)] Large-scale water distribution in the semi-arid region, inherited by the Mughals from their Turko- Mongolian ancestors (Blake 2013:21 also Subtelny 2007:124), was facilitated by the Mughal emperors Akbar, and thereafter Shahjahan (Wahi 2012:73). In Medieval Central Asian traditions, the state was seen 15 Chitang Naddi was a seasonal river and was referred as the ‘river of Hansi’ (after Singh 1992: 49) 16 The Shahjahan Nama of Muhammad Salih Kambo mentions Shihabuddin as the Mir-ab during Akbar’s period (Liyaqat 2013: 441) 121 as a ‘garden cultivated by peasants’ and governance and religion as ‘twin brothers’ where decisions of the king related to the state were dictated by Islamic law (Subtelny 2007:105). Shahjahan, a proud inheritor of his Central Asian traditions17, followed the same principle of kingship practices in South Asia (Fisher 2018). As per Timurid practices, it is imperative for the state to protect its water sources, regulate the flow, and provide water to drought-affected areas by digging irrigation canals and extracting groundwater (Subtelny 2007:106). Ali Mardan Khan, on the instructions of Shahjahan, designed and engineered the 150 km long Shah Nahr (Blake 1991; also, Burn 1937; Dayal 1982; Noe 1986; Gupta 1986; and Khan 1990), drawing water from the 100km long Firuz Shah Canal at Safidun, near Karnal (Begley & Desai 1990:407; also, Liyaqat 2013:441), to serve the last capital of the Mughal Empire, Shahjahanabad. Shah Nahr has also been referred to as Nahr-i Faiz or Nahr-i Bihisht in certain Mughal cartographic sources. The Firuz Shah Canal received additional water input from minor rivers and substantial streams, supplementing its primary source, the Yamuna River. Consequently, the Mughal Canal experienced significant water flow in the region between Karnal and Shahjahanabad, sustaining agricultural hinterlands, garden suburbs, the walled city, and the fort (see Figures 5.3 & 5.4). Nevertheless, the Mughal Canal also underwent periodic intervals of aridity, notably in 1707, 1740, and 1753-1760. Despite these challenges, the canal was restored and continued to flow until the 1800s. In 1820, the British attempted to restore the canal, briefly bringing water back into the city, as noted by Yule (1846:223). The restoration of the canal system was undertaken between 1819 and 1820, overseen by Lieut. Blane. During this time, emphasis was placed on the clearing and restoration of the canal, including seasonal streams and small rivers near Jhydari and Burya (Colvin 1833:112-114). The description highlights the composite approach to canal construction, which involved connecting existing seasonal streams and riverbeds to create extensive infrastructure. Colvin’s report (1833) also mentioned the presence of dams, sluice gates, irrigation channels, watermills, and tax collection and maintenance depots on the Shah Nahr (Colvin 1833:127). However, the introduction of the modernised Western Jamuna Canal by the British Empire during 1870-1882 (Bhaduri 2010:11) alongside Shah Nahr rendered the Mughal canal obsolete and unusable. The Firuz Shah canal marks one of the earliest attempts at large-scale hydraulic infrastructure in pre-Timurid South Asia. Undertaken by the Tughlaqs, it drew upon Indic traditions of water management defined by streams and tanks, reconfiguring them into a centralized system. This hybrid form of Indic and imperial engineering transformed local water units into a coordinated framework intended for regional stability and long-term sustenance. The canal connected the Himalayan foothills, a water-rich zone, with 17 Shahjahan was referred as Timur Saani or Timur, the Second (in Shahjahan Nama: Inayat Khan) 122 Figure 5.3: 1823 British Survey Map of Delhi Villages depicting the Shah Nahr route (Source: F-02/40, National Archives of India). Figure 5.4: 1857 Map of Shahjahanabad showing the Shah Nahr through the Garden Suburbs, Walled City & the Fort (Source: 1841- 60-85A, National Archives of India) 123 the arid landscapes of the Thar. In doing so, it created corridors of ecological continuity and enabled the consolidation of urban settlements. This was more than irrigation: it was infrastructural urbanism, where hydraulic design actively shaped the geography of habitation and power. The Mughals inherited and extended this model. Their canal systems were supported by imperial authority and reinforced by religious institutions. The following section depicts the Mughal Canal, in contemporary visual sources of the period, revealing its adaptive and evolutionary nature. It was engineered to manage seasonal fluctuations and recurrent droughts, and it anchored the imperial presence in the semi-arid terrain. Visual depictions of the canal provide critical insights into its political and symbolic dimensions. They map the hydraulic landscape, show how imperial outposts and religious shrines were anchored to the water infrastructure, and record how design responded to changing land profile. At the same time, these images help in constructing an imperial gaze. They framed infrastructure not merely as a tool of survival but as a visible assertion of the empire’s power to order, sustain, and reimagine the dry landscapes of northern India. 5.2 Representation of the Canal Landscape As discussed in Section 4.1.2 of the previous chapter, water features and their lifting techniques, as a means of leaving a lasting impression on the landscape, were prominently featured in paintings commissioned by Mughal emperors, emphasising the importance of these features not only for the community but also for the empire and its nature of governance. Indigenous maps produced during the Mughal era convey details about landforms, land usage, land cover, settlements, directions, and scales. Indigenous maps embody a composite of cultural knowledge (Strang 1997:216) and can serve as a means of deciphering the engagements (Morrison 2015) between water features and their users in the imperial landscape. The portrayal of Shah Nahr and Shahjahanabad, including its garden suburbs, in paintings and maps constitutes a collective vision (Raad 2020) that can aid in understanding water as a thinking tool (after Krause and Strang 2016) and a multi-scalar medium for interpreting its hydrological landscape. The representation of an imperial landscape can be understood as a means of interpreting the gaze of the empire and comprehending the assembly of its components shaped by the state. Shah Nahr was pictorially represented in the form of maps and drawings during the Mughal Period. The earliest known and most comprehensive visual representation of the Shah Nahr is a 1250 cm long scroll (43 cm in width) housed at the Telangana State Archives in Hyderabad, India. Susan Gole (1989:106-107) published a copy of the hand-drawn map of the canal in a series of 09 map-leafs in Indian Maps and Plans. Though the map is not dated, I believe it to be of Muhammad Shah’s period (1702-1748). My inference is drawn from observations of the built structures and gardens mapped along 124 the canal. Based on the year of construction of all the gardens and mansions marked on the map, those of Haveli18 Abdul Majid Khan and Haveli Roshan-ud-Daulah were the latest to be built. The mansions of these two amirs (nobles) of the 7th Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah were built in the mid-18th century (after Chenoy 1998:74-78). This paper on cloth map titled Ali Mardan Khan Canal (see Figure 5.5; for details see Appendix III/4A) is the most informative map available on the orientation of Shah Nahr in its landscape. It traces the path of the canal from its beginning in Naya Bans (a village), up the Yamuna River in the north of Shahjahanabad, to its termination on the same river after serving the walled city. The canal entered the city from the northwest Kabuli Gate and ran through the city and citadel before emptying into the Yamuna River (Stephen 1876:244-245; see Figure 5.4 above). The map plots the settlements along the canal, with their respective distances from the canal, indicating the pargana (province) or chowki (administrative unit) of these settlements. Important landmarks along the canal, to the north of Shahjahanabad, are also mentioned, such as the dams in Karnal, the shrines in Karnal and Panipat, and the gardens between Panipat, Sonipat, and Delhi. Figure 5.5: A section of the scroll map of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal or Shah Nahr, c.a. 1750 (Source: Telangana State Archives, Hyderabad) The map also indicates the changing flora and fauna along the canal. Besides cattle animals such as cows, goats, and buffaloes, the map also depicts tigers and leaping deer, particularly in the Karnal region, from where the Mughal Canal originates, 150 km north of Shahjahanabad (see Figure 5.5; for details refer to Appendix III/4A). The presence of tigers and deer can be attributed to the proximity of the Mughal hunting ground or Shikargah between Safidon and Karnal (Rezavi 2010: 1110). Like gardens, hunting grounds had recreational value. However, shikar or hunting excursions were also used as a tool to ‘project kingship and good governance’ (Parpia 2016:171) and were a vital component of the landscape that required maintenance. This ensured a continuous supply of water to these grounds. I have attempted to translate the place names from Persian to English and identify the water features on the map, including 18 mansions 125 Map of Ali Mardan Khan removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. the mapping of garden irrigation channels and water-lifting devices along the stretch of the canal, as shown in Appendix III/4A. As per the hand-drawn map of Shah Nahr, the construction of the canal extending between Naya Bans and Karnal, which is believed to have been initiated by Firuz Shah Tughlaq, the third ruler of the Tughlaq empire, does not display a significant number of associated water features, except for a dam situated opposite Khizrabad. This dam quite close to the canal’s headworks, on an outlet that converges with the Yamuna River (see Appendix III/4A.i). The land adjoining the stretch from the headworks to Karnal is portrayed using sharp, wavy lines, representing an uneven topography. Near Ladwa, the drawing shows two irrigation outlets that diverge and flow back into the same river source. Prominent aspects of the map start to appear from Karnal, the location where water from the Firuz Shah Canal was diverted from the Mughal canal to Shahjahanabad. The map indicates two important shrines, one in Ladwa dedicated to Shah Sharaf and the other in Karnal dedicated to Bu-Ali Qalandar Shah, depicted as ‘gazebos’ on either side of the canal. In Karnal, the map also shows the Mughal bridge, as well as the presence of four dams equipped with iron shutters or sluice gates (see Appendix III/4A.ii). The distance between Gharonda and Panipat is illustrated through a network of irrigation channels that supply water to both settlements and agricultural fields. The map depicts three main irrigation canals located to the west of the main canal, which connected the waterwheels of five villages to the Shah Nahr. In addition to the irrigation channels for agricultural and settlement purposes, the drawing also shows garden irrigation channels that provided water to the gardens of Lutfullah Khan Sadiq and Sher Afghan Shah in the Panipat suburbs (see Appendix III/4A.ii). A total of 44 Nallahs, or irrigation channels, are shown between Karnal and Panipat, along with three bunds and five waterwheels that connected 23 settlements to the canal. This stretch also indicates the presence of one Persian wheel or rehat, which is a type of water-lifting device located near Sithana. The area is also characterised by the presence of a hunting ground, as indicated by the depiction of tigers and deer (see Figure 5.5; also see Appendix III/4A. ii). The stretch of canal from Panipat to Samalkha comprised 94 irrigation channels sourced from the Shah Nahr, with 23 directly connected to settlements and the remaining catering to agricultural fields. A total of 30 settlements are supported by the canal in this section. Additionally, the number of water-lifting devices increases along the stretch, including 10 rehats between Imam Shohdah and Jataul, 05 between Jataul and Binjhol, 01 rehat and 02 dhenklis between Dewana and Bursham, and 11 rehats between Khukhrana and Lohari. Furthermore, there were four water-lifting devices between Bhadar and Bhadana. A total of 33 water lifting devices were distributed throughout the stretch from Panipat to Samalkha (see Appendix III/4A.i-iii). The map also indicates the presence of five wells near Naultha (Figure 5.6). The canal served 59 settlements through 169 irrigation outlets, including two garden irrigation channels, 33 126 water lifting devices, and one water mill (Chak Sheikh Lal) in the stretch between Samalkha and Sonipat. This section is also marked by the presence of hunting grounds near Dodwah and Rolad. Figure 5.6: Hand-drawn Map of Shah Nahr (1750) showing water lifting devices, wells, and elephant as a standard of measurement of canal’s depth (for details refer to Appendix 4A) In the area between Sonipat and Bawana, the canal distributed water through 318 irrigation channels primarily connected to agricultural fields, which served a total of 84 settlements. This section was also characterised by the presence of 39 water-lifting devices and five wells. Notably, the depth of this section of the canal was measured using the unit of an elephant (Figure 5.6), with the elephant’s height denoting its depth. The final stretch between Bawana and Shahjahanabad was primarily defined by the presence of 57 garden irrigation channels that fed royal gardens in the suburbs of the city. Additionally, this stretch included 127 nallahs that served the agricultural fields, as well as seven water-lifting devices that served a total of 34 settlements before entering the walled city of Shahjahanabad to feed its gardens and the Fort complex. This area was also marked by the presence of hunting grounds near Barwala and Rithala. The Shah Nahr, or Ali Mardan Khan Canal, extended from Karnal to Shahjahanabad and served a total of 230 settlements. Before entering Shahjahanabad, the canal passed through eight dams, 816 nallahs, 113 water-lifting devices, and six water wheels (see Appendix II/4B). It is worth noting that as the canal approached the walled city, the names of villages gave way to those of gardens and orchards (Gole 1989:104). In addition to the hand-drawn map of 1750, there existed subsequent maps from the Mughal era in which the canal was depicted as a prominent feature. An 18th Century Gazetteer (c.a. 1759) sourced from the National Mission for Manuscripts in Delhi, known as the Chahar Gulshan (Four Gardens) by Rai Chaturman Saksena Kayasth, has a route map in one of its four sections (see Figure 5.7). The section 127 Map of Ali Mardan Khan removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. on ‘Musafat-o Manzil’ contains this map and outlines the journey and stopping points from Lahore to Shahjahanabad. The map depicts the Mughal Canal, referred to as Nahr-i-Faiz, running between Karnal and Shahjahanabad. Additionally, the road map identifies the Mughal Bridge as Serai Pul near Karnal and lists the settlements of Gharaunda, Panipat, Samalkha, Gannaur, Sonipat, Narela, Badli, and Shahjahanabad as being served by the Royal Canal. The Gentil Atlas of India, created in the third quarter of the 18th century (1770) by Colonel Jean- Baptiste-Joseph Gentil, a French ensign stationed in the Mughal Empire (after Gole 1988), comprises a map of the Shahjahanabad district, referred to as ‘Chadjeanabad.’ The map (see Figure 5.8 below) illustrates the Shah Nahr, referred here as Canal, which originates from the River Gemna (Yamuna) and travels through settlements such as Karnal, Panipat, Barana, Safidon, Sonipat (located on a mound), Sarpata, and Narela before entering the walled city of Dely or Delhi. The map further highlights a dense concentration of trees near Karnal, Safidon, and Palam which were Mughal hunting grounds (after Parpia 2016). Another significant representation of the canal is in a route map drawn in 1805. The Asiatic Annual Register of 1806 (46-57) provides a detailed description of each of the 75 halting points between Delhi and Kandahar. The Map (IO Islamic 4380, British Library, Figure 5.9) illustrates various important landmarks between these two cities, such as river crossings (Satluj, Ravi, Chenab, etc.), settlements (Delhi, Karnal, Sirhind, Lahore, etc.), caravan serais (Badli, Mehrparwar, Narela, Aazimabad, Nizamabad, etc.), (Right) Figure 5.7: Nahr-i Faiz landscape description in Route Map in Chahar Gulshan by Rai Chaturman Saksena Kayasth, 18th Century Gazettee (Source: National Mission for Mansucript, Dilli Kitab Ghar) (Left) Figure 5.8: Map of Chadjeanabad showing the Mughal Canal (Source: Gentil Atlas of India, Susan Gole, 1988) 128 gardens (Shalimar, Aazimabad, Sirhind, etc.), and forts (Khizrabad, Ganjpura, Lahore, Rohtas, etc.). The drawing also depicts elevated terrains using triangular hill-like features. The Mughal Canal is referred to as Nahr-i-Faiz in this drawing. It is shown emerging from the foothills of the Himalaya, traveling through the settlements of Mukhlispur, Karnal, Panipat, Samalkha, and Sonipat before reaching the Kabuli Gate of the walled city of Shahjahanabad (described in eight stages in the memorandum of the route map). The land to the east of the canal from the Himalayan foothills to Karnal is shown as undulating. This uneven landform then switches to the west of the canal from Karnal to Gannaur, indicating that the canal engineers had to cut through an elevated terrain after Karnal, close to Gharaunda. Figure 5.9: Route Map of Delhi to Kandahar (Source: IO Islamic 4380, British Library) Gardens along the canal have also been depicted near Samalkha, Sonipat, and Baoli Tehrkhan. In addition, Shalimar Bagh, Qudsia Bagh, Bagh Afroz Khan, and Bagh Mahaldar Khan have been shown built along the canal in the suburbs of Shahjahanabad. Running almost parallel to the trade route between Delhi and Karnal, the canal cuts through the trade route at two places, as indicated by the Bridge of Nahr- i-Faiz, near Karnal, and the Sirhindi Bridge, near Shahjahanabad. Small patches of green ground cover are shown between Panipat and Sonipat, and later between Shalimar Bagh and Qudsia Bagh, likely indicating agricultural fields. The shrines of Qalandar Shah and Bu-Ali Qalandar are also shown adjacent to the Canal in Karnal and Panipat, respectively. Furthermore, another shrine, referred to as Takia Faqir, is located next to the Sirhindi Bridge, indicating the revered nature of the canal landscape, along with the sacred Yamuna. Another representation of the Mughal Canal was in the watercolor album of Sita Ram, a painter who accompanied Lord Hastings, the Governor General of Bengal, during his journey from Calcutta to Delhi in 1814-15 (Figure 5.10). This drawing is referred to as the Ali Mardan Khan Canal, and it portrays 129 Route Map of Delhi to Kandahar removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is British Library. the Mughal Canal in Karnal as the central feature of the landscape. It also shows the encampment of Raja of Patiala adjacent to the canal. The drawing illustrates that the canal had an earth bed and was wide enough for a retinue with elephants to walk on it comfortably. The canal was dry during this period (also mentioned in the Colvin 1833 report). The drawing shows that the canal had sloping edges as embankments, which were higher than the adjacent ground. The canal had a gradual slope, moving from a higher terrain to a lower elevation. To the left of the canal, there is a depression that might have been used to represent the Yamuna River in the canal landscape, although in actuality, the river is approximately 10 km away from the canal. To the right of the canal, there are two built structures: one domical and the other with a tall minaret. The domed structure resembles the shrine of Qalandar Shah, and the minaret structure could be a mosque meant for travellers, as it falls on the trade route connecting Delhi to Kandahar. Figure 5.10: The channel of Ali Mardan Khan’s canal at Karnal, with the encampment of the Raja of Patiala, Punjab on either side of it, by Sita Ram (Source: Add.Or.4786, British Library; Wikimedia Commons) In 1815, another painting by the same artist depicted the canal (Figure 5.11) within the walled city of Shahjahanabad. The painting portrays the canal flowing through the center of a market street, known as Chandni Chowk, with the Jama Masjid, a sovereign mosque, situated to the left and the Royal Garden or Begum ka Bagh to the right. This frame was drawn from the top of the Mughal Fort in Shahjahanabad, looking westward towards Fatehpuri Masjid. The canal in this stretch boasted a pakka 130 bed, likely constructed of lakhori bricks, with a series of fountains and water chambers, as it neared the fort complex. On either side of the mosque were rows of arcaded corridors, with the Fatehpuri Masjid situated at its axial end. Figure 5.11: The Mughal Canal in Chandni Chowk by Sita Ram 1814-15; Chandni Chowk from the top of the Lahore Gate of the Red Fort (Source: British Library; also The Heritage Lab) Figure 5.12: The view of Mughal Canal in Chandni Chowk, from Fatehpuri Masjid, 1857 (Source: The Illustrated London News, 1857) 131 In a different perspective view of the canal within the city walls, depicted in a wood engraving from 1857 (see Figure 5.12), the drawing is oriented eastward from the Fatehpuri Mosque towards the Fort along Chandni Chowk Street. The canal is situated in the center of the scene on a pakka bed that is partitioned into multiple water chambers across the length of the canal. The visual sources of the Shah Nahr provide a compelling account of the canal’s evolutionary trajectory from the mid-18th century until 1857, revealing both its material and symbolic transformations. These sources trace the canal’s progression from an earthen bed, in the agricultural hinterland, to a brick-paved channel within the city and suburbs, culminating in a marbled bed within the Fort complex. This illustrates the empire’s commitment to both functional and aesthetic engineering. The integration of the canal with the surrounding landscape underscores its monumental presence in the semi- arid region, while the diverse flora and fauna depicted along its course reflect the Mughal administration’s active engagement with, and enhancement of, the agricultural hinterlands. The challenging topography, carefully rendered in these visual representations, emphasizes the technical ingenuity required to construct and maintain the canal, further reinforcing the Mughals’ mastery over difficult terrains. Moreover, the strategic placement of imperial outposts and religious shrines along the canal’s course highlights its role as a critical component of the empire’s institutional and socio-religious framework. These visual depictions not only convey the canal’s practical utility but also its function as a powerful instrument of imperial ideology, shaping the spatial and cultural orientation of the land and its inhabitants. While the absence of contemporary visual sources from Shah Jahan’s period limits our understanding of the canal’s initial conception and operational phases, later depictions allow us to situate the Shah Nahr as both a necessary infrastructural lifeline and a deliberate symbol of imperial grandeur. Ultimately, the canal emerges as an enduring testament to the Mughals’ sophisticated integration of engineering, landscape design, and imperial authority, reflecting the inseparable relationship between environment, infrastructure, and governance. Building on insights from visual sources, the following section presents an extensive field-based investigation of the canal landscape. Conducted between 2023 and 2024, this fieldwork aimed to examine the canal’s behaviour across seasonal variations. Complementing this empirical study, a landform reconstruction exercise for the Mughal period was undertaken to elucidate the evolving profile of the terrain and to assess the empire’s responsiveness in shaping it. Data from textual, cartographic, and visual sources were integrated to analyse the Shah Nahr and its surrounding landscape. Additionally, the mapping of indigenous features, including wells, ponds, lakes, streams, and rainwater harvesting 132 structures, was carried out to highlight the hybrid processes involved in the canal’s creation, operation, and management. 5.3 The Past in the Present: Mapping the Mughal Canal This mid-18th century map (see Figures 5.1 & 5.5; also Appendix III/4A), discussed in the previous section, along with other cartographic sources of the late Mughal period, and the extant traces of streams and canal beds in the regional landscape of Delhi and Haryana were used to identify the route of the historic Shah Nahr. The Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India (1700-1900)19 at the National Archives of India mentions a series of village maps of District Shahjahanabad20 (corresponding to present- day districts of Delhi, Sonipat, Panipat and Karnal) which were prepared in 1823-24 using chain surveying techniques, to a scale of 1’ = 40 chains. The survey, supervised by Capt. T. Oliver (Prasad 1974), was undertaken to document the location of settlements and the extent of agricultural land in the region north of Shahjahanabad, also indicating the existing water resources used for irrigation. These maps indicate the locations of ponds, pakka (lined) wells, irrigation canals, irrigation outlets, seasonal streams, dams, and water-drawing wheels. On the reverse, these maps have statistical tables with the name of the village, its boundary, population, agricultural produce, livestock and animal husbandry details, and a list of water resources (see Figure 5.13). A total of 08 maps were identified from this collection which had the canal-path schematically documented21 and were used for the purpose of georeferencing. The canal landscape of Delhi and Haryana, similar to other regions of South Asia, witnessed a major change post two significant incidents in history: the first war of Independence in 185722 (also known as Sepoy Mutiny), and the partition of India in 1947, which led to the formation of Pakistan. As a result of the Mutiny, several settlement de-densification strategies by the British were introduced which included clearing-out portions of settlements, and at-times entire settlements, to establish visual control of the region (Lahiri 2003:42). The partition, on the other hand, led to large-scale mass migration, causing the abandonment of settlements and infrastructure. In 1911 the Coronation Durbar of King George V was held to the north of Shahjahanabad, on the foothills of the Aravalli, which also led to drastic changes in the landscape (a reconstruction of the area has been shown later in this report). With such dramatic changes in the landscape, the archaeological prospection of the pre-1857 (Mughal Period) canal landscape was made possible using cartographic sources of the late 18th and early 19th century, supported by 19 Edited by S.N. Prasad (1974), the series comprises of 7949 maps of the Survey of India drawn between 1700-1900. The catalogue is available at https://zenodo.org/record/3596387#.YvD7dOzMLUI, Accessed on 8th April, 2022 20 F02 Series on p. 1-2, in ‘Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India (1700-1900), Edited by S.N. Prasad (1974). 21 F02-02, F02-04, F02-05, F02-10, F02-14, F02-38, F02-40 and F03-15 from ‘Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India (1700-1900), Edited by S.N. Prasad. These maps were downloaded from https://zenodo.org/record/3596387#.YvD7dOzMLUI, Accessed on 8th April, 2022. 22 which also led to the fall of the Mughal Empire. 133 https://zenodo.org/record/3596387#.YvD7dOzMLUI https://zenodo.org/record/3596387#.YvD7dOzMLUI historical writings and chronicles of the Mughal court. QGIS, an open-source geographic information system (GIS) application, was used for georeferencing these 08 maps to trace the canal route from Karnal to Shahjahanabad. Figure 5.13: Statistical Table showing details of Village Water Infrastructure within Delhi Territory in 1823-24 5.3.1 Georeferencing Process: The georeferentiation process carried out for this exercise followed the approach introduced by Petrie et.al (2019) when georeferencing the Survey of India 1’=1 mile series. In the absence of graticules, the geographical coordinates of extant features in the study area were plotted on historical maps using the WGS84 coordinate system. Coordinates of features, such as settlement locations, road intersections, seasonal streambeds, bridges, tombs, and shrines, were identified and plotted on the map (Figure 5.14). The canal geography was categorised into three broad types: abadi23 (water-based settlements), linear elements of the landscape (roads and streams) and point elements of the landscape (historic built structures), with their corresponding geographical coordinates used as Ground Control Points (GCPs). The georeferencing process was carried out as a 3-step process. 23 Abadi is derived from the Persian word ‘ab’ which translates to ‘water’. Abadi are settlements that grow and prosper because of the presence of water (Mitchell 2010: 59, after Kumar 2002). Though abadi is used as a blanket term for all kinds of settlements these days, I use the term ‘abadi’ in a specific context for settlements in the canal landscape which are surrounded by water resources such as ponds, lakes and wells. 134 Step 1: The first step involved georeferencing the map based on the location of the abadi areas along the canal. The size and shape of these settlements have undergone massive transformation, posing challenges to identifying physical features in the present-day abadi structure that have a continued existence from the period under study. This uneven growth of settlements is also attributed to the construction of the British Canal. The Western Jamuna Canal (WJC) was introduced by the British in the late 19th century between Yamuna Nagar and Delhi as a water system parallel to the Mughal Canal. The new canal was separated from the old Mughal Canal by an average distance of four kilometres. However, it also intersected with the Mughal Canal at certain places (see Figure 5.18) because of the nature of the topography in the region. Shah Nahr was rendered derelict and degenerated in the absence of any effort to modernise it. This is also reflected in the growth patterns of the abadi areas. Irregular maintenance and siltation led to a shortage of flow in the old canal, forcing the settlements to orient themselves towards the British canal system. After the introduction of the WJC, the settlement pattern based on their proximity to the old and new canals changed accordingly. A study of toponyms24 in the canal landscape indicates the presence of a unique settlement typology: pair-settlements. The pair-settlement typology is quite common in the Mughal landscape across South Asia. Settlements are classified into two segments based on area or population and are termed Kalan and Khurd. Kalan and Khurd are Persian terms which translates to ‘big’ and ‘small’ respectively. The pair-settlement place names share a common first name, the second name is indicative of the size of the settlement for e.g. Holambi Kalan and Holambi Khurd. All Kalan settlements were found to be located close to the Mughal Canal, with the Khurds acting as satellite villages to its pair, located on the hind side. The proximity to the Shah Nahr contributed to the growth and prosperity of the settlements, increasing in area and population, forming a series of Kalan settlements. A close observation of the pair-settlement typology indicates a significant change in its growth factor over the last 200 years, indicating an inverse growth pattern, contrary to the Mughal Canal landscape (see Appendix II/4B). In certain instances, because of the design layout of the British Canal, Khurd settlements were positioned at a lesser distance from the new canal. As a result, the Mughal-era Kalans along the old canal shrank in size and the Khurds prospered along the British Canal. The settlement form of the Khurds changed from discoidal to elongated, with one edge extending towards the new canal. The dynamic growth of settlements complicated the identification of exact coordinates corresponding to the present-day settlement structure. Hence, I focused on identifying the historic core and plotted the corresponding coordinates for georeferencing. The resultant georeferenced map did not sit exactly on the satellite imagery; however, the process helped in locating, orienting, and scaling the map approximately to its geography. 24 Toponyms have also been used as ‘informal georeferencing technique’ to locate geographical objects using local references. (Hackeloeer 2014: 61). 135 Step 2: Although linear elements of the landscape, such as roads and streams, have been affected by human intervention and topographical action, respectively, the changes in their forms are not drastic. The Badshahi Sadak of the Mughal Period was an important trade route connecting Shahjahanabad to the major trade routes of Central Asia. The historical route was identified as passing through Sonipat, Panipat and Karnal, as were several other roads branching from the Sadak. Georeferencing based on arbitrary points along the road would have led to orientation errors in the map; hence, road intersections were identified, and the corresponding coordinates were used as GCPs to locate the map with more accuracy. In addition, the coordinates of extant seasonal stream crossings and junctions were also used as GCPs. The discrepancies in chain survey drawings because of human-errors such as inefficient ranging and straightening cannot be ignored, particularly when mapping linear elements. Such discrepancies often lead to minor distortions in the map which was evident when comparing the distance between two points on the map and the ground. Georeferencing of linear elements was carried out considering these factors. The resultant georeferenced map led to a more accurate location and scaling with better orientation. Figure 5.14: Map of Villages of Delhi(1823-24) with Geographical Coordinates of Settlements (red), Road Intersections (yellow) and Built Features (green), used for Georeferencing Step 3: The third and final step of the georeferencing process involved the use of coordinates of extant built features in the landscape. The stretch between Delhi and Karnal is revered as a blessed land owing to 136 the presence of shrines of significant Sufi saints of South Asia such as Hazrat Ali Shah Qalandar (14th C, Karnal), Hazrat Bu Ali Shah Qalandar (13th C, Panipat), Hazrat Shah Turkman Biyabani (12th C, Delhi), and the footprint of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) at Qadam Sharif25(Shrine of the Holy Foot, Delhi). These sacred sites are believed to provide the ‘channel to God’ by the ‘grace of the dead’ (Ephrat 2021:115). As a result, being buried in proximity to shrines is an attempt to attain forgiveness from God through the grace of the saint from the ill deeds committed in life. Kings and subjects both wished to be buried in the sacralised landscape. The eight maps identified for the process of mapping the historic Mughal canal are dotted with tombs and shrines in the regional landscape. The geographical coordinates corresponding to these delimited built features were plotted and used as the last step to georeference the map to as high an accuracy as possible on grounds of scale and location. Second-Order Polynomial transformation was used to georeference all the 08 maps of the series, resulting in an average residual error of 4.5 metres (Figures 5.15 & 5.16, also Figure 5.18 for all georeferenced maps). Figure 5.15 & 5.16: Georeferenced Maps of Villages of Delhi (1823-24) used for mapping the route of the Mughal Canal: (Left) The Canal in Rural Landscape and (Right) the Canal within Urban Delhi. 5.3.2 Canal Tracing Process: The tracing of the Shah Nahr and the mapping of the irrigation system followed the process of typological identification of water resources from the georeferenced maps. These maps were overlaid on Google Earth satellite imagery, and the path of the 150 km26 long canal was mapped on the present-day landscape. The canal-bed (see Figure 5.17), mostly dry (A), was found in fragments consisting of wet beds (B) in certain segments, with some turning into linear patches of marshy 25 Qadam Sharif was built as a tomb by Firuz Shah Tughlaq in the 14th century for his son Fateh Khan. A tablet with the footprint of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), brought from Mecca, was added to the shrine, hence the name Qadam Sharif. 26 from Karnal to Kabul Gate, Shahjahanabad. The canal was registered flowing in the city as late as 1876 (Carr Stephen 1876: 244-248). 137 land (E). The canal appears to have occupied the elevated terrain, as no seasonal stream were found to intersect or overlap with the canal bed. Unlike the British Canal with a cemented bed, the Mughal Canal consists of a porous trench which is now mostly covered with silt of the river water that once flowed through the imperial canal. Up to 1/3rd of the canal has disappeared, mostly due to urbanisation (around 25 km) in the garden suburbs of Shahjahanabad (G & H), and in small sections in the rural landscape, taken over by pathways and roads (F). At places, identification of the missing canal was possible following Figure 5.17: Present state of the Mughal canal (2023-24) as dry beds(A), seasonal waters(B), profile of agricultural land (C & D), marshy land (E), village pathways (f), and urban roads(G & H) 138 Figure 5.18: Georeferenced Map of Villages of Delhi(1823-24). The route of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal or Shah Nahr (in white) and the British Canal, also known as the Western Yamuna Canal (in yellow). The canal bed has disappeared in the stretch shown by dashed line. Karnal Sonipat Panipat Shahjahanabad Yamuna Nagar 139 the profiles of agricultural lands (C & D) which were in alignment with the route in the historical survey drawings. 5.3.3 Field Survey: The process of surface-surveying the 17th century Mughal Canal involved dividing the 150 km stretch into sections for fieldwalking. As the canal mostly lies in the rural landscape and only enters the urban area as it approaches Delhi, where it has now disappeared (see above, Figure 5.17, G & H), no permission was required to walk the canal stretch. However, permission was obtained from the Archaeological Survey of India to study the canal within the Fort complex of Shahjahanabad. A preliminary research study was conducted based on archival, literary, and cartographic sources (discussed above in sections 5.1 and 5.2) before initiating the ground-truthing process, which helped in dividing the survey stretch into five sections following the halting points mentioned in the Chahar Gulshan route map of 1759 (see Figure 5.7). These sections were [i] Karnal to Panipat, where the canal enters the agricultural belt and travels to Panipat on farmlands; [ii] Panipat to Samalkha, where the canal mostly travels through agricultural fields and some settlements; [iii] Samalkha to Sonipat, a rural stretch; [iv] Sonipat to Bawana, also rural; and [v] Bawana to Delhi (Shahjahanabad), which is highly urban because of its proximity to the capital city. Thus, the stretch from Karnal to Bawana lies in the rural agricultural zone, while the section from Bawana to Delhi forms a huge urban agglomeration. Following an initial reconnaissance of the canal stretch from Karnal to Panipat, a clear understanding of the nature of the canal stretch was gained. The choice of this particular stretch was based on the results of the georeferencing process and the study of the canal from Google Earth satellite imagery. It was observed that this stretch of the canal was the only one where the remains of the canal were mostly visible compared to other stretches where it had been lost to agricultural fields or roads. Additionally, starting from Karnal allowed for a systematic survey along the canal, following its path towards Shahjahanabad. The reconnaissance involved traversing uneven terrains, urban and rural settlements, agricultural and forest lands, and different areas of the canal (wherever they existed), including built materials and water features such as irrigation outlets, bridges, wells, ponds, seasonal streams, and tax collection points. Furthermore, since the canal was situated in a rural area, crops growing in adjacent fields were also documented. It was observed that the canal was in a highly damaged state in many places, with no signs of preservation. All these factors were taken into account when designing the survey, which was used to conduct the fieldwalking exercise (see Figure 5.21 below). The documentation process also entailed the use of photography and measured drawings of the existing canal as well as sketching of the canal and its adjoining area. It was discovered that in many areas, the land along the canal was owned by the forest department, where they cultivated commercial trees, 140 (Left) Figure 5.19: During the Reconnaissance Survey of the Shah Nahr near Kailana; (Right) Figure 5.20: Linear ‘Eucalyptus’ Forests along the Mughal Canal stretch near Sheikhupura Figure 5.21: A page from the Fieldwork Booklet, Refer to Appendix 4F for Complete Booklet 141 including short and long rotation species, primarily eucalyptus - a rapidly growing agro-forestry species (Ahmed 2008:167)–creating linear forests in the landscape, a highly visible element in an almost flat agricultural area (see Figure 5.20). A total of 100 survey points were identified along a 150 km stretch of the canal, with an average distance of 1.5 km between each survey point (see Figure 5.22, Also Appendix III/4C). The survey points were selected based on factors such as the changing profile of the canal bed, whether it contained water, the built material of the canal, and its associated features. Each survey point was assigned a unique survey code, and the coordinates of all 100 survey points, as well as information on the nearest settlement and immediate landform, were recorded. The canal was found to exist mostly in the form of a ditch or trench in its immediate landscape, although in some areas it climbed gentle elevated terrains and fell to connect to seasonal streams. Appendix I/A comprises a comprehensive survey and documentation booklet for the Shah Nahr. The canal is no longer connected to its source, the Yamuna River, and is now mostly dry. However, in some stretches, the canal bed overlapped with existing seasonal streams, which now act as a source of water for the canal. Therefore, the canal had both perennial and seasonal supply sources. Additionally, the 75-100 feet wide canal has been reduced to a width of between 3 and 15 feet27 in most stretches, lined with brick (SN/03/010), and connected to the functioning British Canal, now known as the Western Yamuna Canal, to water agricultural fields. The British Canal also overlapped with the Mughal Canal at certain sections near Karnal (SN/01/005), Sitawali (SN/03/08), and Khera Kalan (SN/06/004). These stretches had abundant water because of the active British Canal. Measured sectional drawings were made for all survey points, and these drawings were later redrawn using AutoCAD, along with the profile of the original canal (based on historical sources, as discussed in section 5.1), to document the changing form and nature of the canal (see Figure 5.23). The following locations were found to have traces of irrigation outlets: Rasin (SN/01/011), Kailana (SN/03/003), Tihara Khurd (SN/04/002), and Thana Khurd (SN/05/009, SN/05/010, SN/05/012). Mughal-era bridges, built in lakhori bricks, were discovered in Karnal (SN/01/006), Jattal- Sutana (SN/02/005), Khukhrana Branch near Naultha (SN/02/010), Dahat (SN/02/012), and at the intersection of the Sahibi River with the Shah Nahr near Wazirpur (SN/06/008). British-era bridges and tax-collection points were also found in Bal Jattan (SN/01/016), Sithana (SN/02/003), Sardhana (SN/02/016), and Thana Khurd (SN/05/002). Other water features, such as wells (SN/04/004, SN/04/005, SN/04/006, SN/04/007, SN/04/015, SN/04/016) and ponds (SN/01/010, SN/02/14, 27 Sections of the Mughal Canal that intersected with the British Canal maintain their 75-100 feet width, particularly in Karnal, Khukhrana, and Sitawali (see SN/01/003-007,009, 013, 02/003, 03/008-009). Certain segments of the Mughal canal have been reduced to sub-irrigation channels and currently exist in widths ranging from 3 feet to 15 feet (see fieldwork booklet, Appendix I/4F). 142 SN/03/015), were located in close proximity to the canal. The ponds were situated near settlements, which indicates a depression in the ground and an elevated nature of the settlement site, often on a mound with a religious structure, such as a temple or shrine, at the highest point. In certain sections, the canal passed through settlements, including Karnal (SN/01/001, SN/01/002), Bhatgaon (SN/03/16), Jharoth (SN/04/011), Thana Khurd (SN/05/004, SN/05/005), Jatola (SN/05/14), and Bawana (SN/06/001). These settlements have grown dynamically over the past two centuries from a discoidal to an elongated form, and there is a possibility that the canal may have been constructed adjacent to the settlements for the use of livestock, rather than passing through them. The total distance of 150 km between Karnal and Shahjahanabad has been affected by various factors, such as the conversion of agricultural lands (SN/03/007), forest lands (SN/06/003, SN/06/006), roads (SN/03/005, SN/04/008), religious buildings (SN/02/005), and urban expansion (SN/01/003, SN/06/010), leading to a loss of over 1/3rd of the canal. Following the completion of the field survey, the generated route map for the Shah Nahr from Karnal to Shahjahanabad was thoroughly examined, and all relevant information was compiled (see Figure 5.24, also Appendix III/4D), as mentioned in sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.2. The location of the irrigation outlets was determined from Oliver’s survey of the canal in 1824. In the absence of information on the irrigation path, conjectures were made based on the Mughal-era map of the Shah Nahr discussed in section 5.2. The conjecture of the irrigation channel bed was based on the assumption that pathways were built along canal and irrigation channels to monitor their flow and desilting process (Wahi 2012: 276- 277). The map also indicated the location of various hydraulic features, such as bunds (dams), rehats and dhenklis (water lifting devices), and chak (watermills and waterwheels), including chahs (wells), puls (bridges), and information on shikargah (hunting grounds), which were all added to the map as seen within rectangular boxes. Additionally, the detailed use of nallahs (irrigational channels), including their use for agriculture, livestock, and gardening, was also compiled on the map, as indicated within rectangular boxes. Information from the georeferenced Survey of India sheets, sourced from the MAHSA28 project based at the Department of Archaeology at the University of Cambridge, UK, was used to extract data on the location of water features, such as wells, ponds, seasonal streams, and rivers. These sheets, specifically numbers 53B, 53C, 53D, 53F, 53G, and 53H, were utilized to create a comprehensive map of the Shar Nahr. As the canal lies within a ‘faith-based landscape’ that includes the Yamuna River and the shrines of Qalandar Shah (Karnal), Bu-Ali Qalandar (Panipat), and Qadam Rasool (Delhi), data on the 28 The Mapping Archaeological Heritage in South Asia (MAHSA) project is dedicated to the identification and mapping of archaeological sites in South Asia using remote sensing, machine learning, and site survey techniques. The project has utilized the Survey of India sheets, as well as other cartographic sources, to remotely identify these sites. The goal of the MAHSA project is to create a comprehensive database that stakeholders can utilize to manage archaeological sites and endangered heritage regions. 143 Figure 5.22 Sec 14, KARNAL Sec 14, KARNAL Transport Nagar, KARNAL Madhuban, KARNAL Mughal Bridge, KARNAL SN/01/001 SN/01/002 SN/01/003 SN/01/005 SN/01/006 SN/01/007 SN/01/008 SN/01/009 SN/01/011 SN/01/012 SN/01/013 SN/01/014 SN/01/015 SN/01/017 SN/01/018 JHINWERHERI JHINWERHERI RASIN RASIN PHULAK RAIPUR JATAN KUTANA BAL JATTAN SITHANA SITHANA SN/02/001 SN/02/001 SN/02/003 SN/02/004 SN/02/006 SN/02/007 SN/02/008 SN/02/009 SN/02/011 SN/02/013 SN/02/017 SN/02/018 SN/02/019 NOHRA ASSAN KALAN KHUKHRANA JATTAL - SUTANA BHADAR BHADAR BHADAR BHADAR NAULTHA DAHAR SARDHANA KHUBRU - NAYA BANS KHUBRU - NAYA BANS SN/04/011 SN/04/012 SN/04/013 SN/04/014 SN/04/016 SN/04/010 SN/04/009 SN/04/003 SN/04/001 TIHARA KHURD KHERI DAHIYA JHAROTI JHARONT JHAROTH JHAROTH JHAROTH KANWALI THANA KHURD SN/05/003 SN/05/004 SN/05/005 SN/05/006 SN/05/011 SN/05/013 SN/05/014 THANA KHURD THANA KHURD THANA KALAN TARAKPUR MANDAURI SN/05/007 JATOLA JATOLA MANADURI SN/05/008 SN/05/010 SN/05/009 SN/06/007 SN/06/005 SN/06/004 SN/06/002 SN/06/001 BAWANA [depth=16 feet, after Baker (1849); cited by Sanderson (1929)] BAWANA KHERA KALAN KHERA KHURD BADLI - Shalimar Bagh AZAD NAGAR at ARAVALLI HILSS [depth=30 feet, after Colvin (1833)] at MUGHAL PARA [depth=25 feet, after Francklin (1798)] THANA KHURD [depth=12 feet = Elephant's Height, after Canal Map (1750)] SN/03/013 SN/03/014 SN/03/015 SN/03/012 SN/03/011 SN/03/010 SN/03/009 SN/03/008 SN/03/007 SN/03/006 SN/03/005 SN/03/004 SN/03/003 SN/03/002 SN/03/001 JATOLA SN/05/015 SN/05/016 SN/05/017 SN/05/018 JATOLA JATOLA JATOLA MADIPUR MAJRA - TEWARI MADIPUR MAJRA KAILANA KAILANA MOI - SITAWALI MUHAMMADPUR MAJRA MOI - KAILANA SITAWALI MAHARA JUAN BADSHAHPUR MACHHRI JAJI LOHARI TIBBA BHATGAON BHATGAON - MALIAN 55' 90' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' [depth=16 feet, after Afif's Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi (Husain, 1891) and Akbar's Canal Act (Yule, 1846)] 90' 100' 90' 100' 90' 100' 80' 90' 60'-7" 80' 80' 75' 70' 45' 30' 80' 75' 70' 21' 90' 100' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 16' 80' 90' 24' 16'-6" 80' 3' 60' 120' 90' 72' 15' 62' 70' 17' 80' 14' 60' 12' 60' 15' 9'-6" 70' 9' 60' 13'-7" 80' 14' 70' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 70' 12' 54' 74' 17' 12'-6" 60' 30' 66' 40' 76' 60' 14' 7' 60' 100' 100' 21'-6" 66' 14'-6" 68' 25'-6" 68' 10'-6" 60' 12'-2" 60' 7'-2" 60' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 77' 21'-6" 9'-6" 60' 30' 90' 17' 90' 24' 66' 12' 14' 66' 10'-6" 70' 10' 70' 12'-6" 66' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 60' 90' 22' 80' 70' 10'-6" 20'-6" 60' 18' 60' 16' 60' 20'-6" 60' 12' 14' 70' 14' 12' 70' 16' 60' 16' 60' 12'-6" 60' 18' 80' 20'-6" 70' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 1 2 ' 28' 70' 70' 29' 40' 70' 45' 70' 35' 70' 45' 70' 70' 70' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 1 6 ' 3 0 ' 2 5 ' CL CL CL CL CL CL CANAL SECTION (Karnal to Shahjahanabad) based on Field Survey (depth of original Canal is based on historical sources, width of the Canal is based on the survey conducted in 1823-24 by T. Colvin) from KARNAL to SITHANA Canal Section from NOHRA to NAYA BANS Canal Section from TEWARI to MALIAN Canal Section from TIHARA KHURD to THANA KHURD Canal Section from THANA KHURD to JATOLA Canal Section from BAWANA to SHAHJAHANABAD Canal Section at Chandni Chowk, SHAHJAHANABAD [depth=7.5 feet, after Greathed (1852)] 17' 7 '6 " SN/03/010 JUAN Name of the Nearest Settlement Survey Code (Please refer to Canal Survey & Documentation Booklet in Appendix) Existing Section of Shah Nahr (based on Fieldsurvey) Existing Water Level in the Canal Original Profile of Shah Nahr (Conjectural: Based on Mughal-Era Canal Maps & Literary Sources) Ground Line Figure 5.23 Figure 5.24 various burial and cremation sites located in close proximity to the canal were also extracted from the Survey of India sheets to provide a complete representation of the area. 5.4 Hydrology and Hydraulics 5.4.1 Hydrological Landscape Modelling: The archival research examining the Mughal canal’s formation and the fieldwork conducted at the site demonstrate the composite nature of its development, involving the connection of various seasonal stream beds through artificial linear channels across the landscape. To explore the canal’s path and determine whether the complex nature of its creation could be further, I carried out a Seasonal Multi-Temporal Vegetation Indices (SMTVI) analysis of the study area. This method was introduced by Orengo and Petrie (2017) using Google Earth Engine (GEE) based on Landsat 5 imageries. They applied the technique to identify palaeo-rivers by examining vegetation intensity, which is influenced by water availability, through long-term multi-temporal imagery analysis. The vegetation index technique has been employed in the past to study land cover (Silveira 2007), distribution of archaeological sites (Ranjani 2011), and changes in land use and biomass variations (Priya 2023) using decadal data. However, the method introduced by Orengo and Petrie (2017) entails long- term imagery analysis, which encompasses the years beyond the implementation of the Western Yamuna Canal modernisation project between 1999 and 2003 (Bhaduri 2010:11). The canal landscape underwent significant transformation after the introduction of the modernisation project. Their assessment was based on the period from 1983 to 2014 (Orengo and Petrie 2017:5). By applying the same technique, I sought to identify the landscape hollows, which tend to have higher water availability and consequently higher vegetation indices. The code developed by Orengo and Petrie (2017) was employed to generate the SMTVI of the study region (Figure 4.25). The only modification in the algorithm script29 was the alteration of the geometry variables of the canal landscape followed by the selection of the SMTVI layer from the map panel. This pattern is characterized by the presence of large hollows, which are depicted in green. A concentration of these green pixels is observed adjacent to Panipat and, at times, cutting through the canal bed near Karnal and Sonipat. Interestingly, the hollows move further away from the canal in the stretch between Sonipat and Delhi. In the region around Delhi, higher terrains, shown in brown, indicate the presence of Aravalli hills. The Mughal canal initially occupied the hollows of the landscape before turning sharply towards the south, close to Safidon. Unfortunately, during the construction process, Ali Mardan Khan mistakenly followed a hollow that led to the destruction of a nearby town called Lalpur, near Rohtak (Colvin 1833). To prevent any further large-scale damage, he subsequently redirected the canal to 29 Available at www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/9/7/735/s1. 147 https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/9/7/735/s1 follow the ridge, avoiding hollows in the rural landscape towards Delhi. After initially heading south towards elevated terrain, it is found to climb and descend the landform alternatively, occasionally intersecting with seasonal streams. The drainage pattern indicates a similar behaviour. A majority of the streams are observed to originate from areas near the canal bed, which suggests that it is situated on an elevated terrain. However, there are instances where streams intersect and overlap with the canal bed, indicating the composite nature of the canal design. The SMTVI exercise was followed by a morphological analysis of the canal landscape using the Multi-Scale Relief Model (MSRM) to further investigate the composite nature of canal formation. Introduced by Orengo and Petrie (2018), MSRM analyzes landforms and visualises subtle topographic changes in the landscape. The process builds on the local relief model technique (LRM) introduced by Hesse (2010), which focused on visual enhancement of shallow changes in the landform to identify archaeological features. The MAHSA project, at Cambridge, has developed a tutorial for generating MSRM and SMTVI models. I used the same tutorial to generate the MSRM model for the canal landscape using Google Earth Engine (GEE) and QGIS to study the subtle variations in the landform of the study area. The GEE process involved using the algorithm script introduced by Orengo and Petrie (2018), also part of the tutorial manual, on TanDEM-X imagery of the canal landscape, made available through MAHSA. As earlier, the only change was made in the geometry variables corresponding to the study area. Choosing a scale factor of 2 with a maximum feature size of 500 and a minimum size of 50, an MSRM was generated (see Figure 5.26). The resultant MSRM image was then transferred to QGIS to conduct a Hillshade terrain analysis, which further enhanced the visibility of subtle variations (Figure 5.27). Additionally, georeferenced Survey of India (SOI) sheets, obtained from MAHSA, were imported onto the same file to examine changes that have occurred in the past 100 years. These SOI sheets also contain information about topographic variations in the landscape. By combining data from these sources, a series of palaeo-river and stream beds were extracted (see Figure 5.28). The resulting extraction suggests the palaeo-bed of the Yamuna River, illustrating how the river likely flowed through the landscape, altering its course to reach its current bed. The canal is found to follow the old bed of Yamuna until Karnal and parts of Panipat district, where it is locally referred to as ‘Budhi Yamuna’ or old Yamuna. Some of the palaeo-beds also intersect or overlap the canal bed indicating its composite formation (see Figure 5.29). The canal begins to occupy elevated terrains as it approaches Shahjahanabad. Colvin (1833) mentions that the canal near Delhi was carved into the Aravalli rocks to a depth of 60 feet, with a series of underground channels connecting to gardens and mansions within Shahjahanabad. 148 Figure 5.25 Figure 5.26 Figure 5.27 Figure 5.28 Figure 5.29 01 Water Lifting Device Karnal Sectional Proíle 26 Water Lifting Devices 8 Water Lifting Devices 11 Water Lifting Devices + 1 Water Mill 13 Water Lifting Devices 16 Water Lifting Devices 6 Water Lifting Devices 8 Water Lifting Devices 12 Water Lifting Devices Garden Suburbs Shahjahanabad Figure 5.30 The archival research conducted on the Mughal canal’s development, fieldwork conducted at the site, and computational analysis of the landscape have demonstrated the complex nature of its creation, involving the connection of various seasonal stream beds through artificial linear channels across the terrain. Thereafter, a longitudinal section of the canal bed was created based on depth information provided in historical sources. The MSRM offered an indication of the changing terrain of the canal bed. The elevation data from the TanDEM-X file were taken for the bed-section and plotted for the 150 km stretch of the Shah Nahr on AutoCAD. Moreover, the spring levels were noted based on reports from the British era (see longitudinal section in Figure 5.30; also, Appendix III/4E). The passage delineates seven minor segments of the canal, where it gradually ascends a slope in the surrounding landscape. These locations are situated near Rasin, Sithana, Jataul, Mahara, Harewali, Sirispur, and within the Aravalli, before reaching Shahjahanabad. The canal descends to an average height of 100 feet or 30 meters from Karnal to Shahjahanabad. 5.4.2: Hydraulic Techniques: The 1750 hand-drawn map of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal identifies various techniques for raising water from the monumental canal (see Appendix III/4A; for information on techniques, see rectangular boxes in Appendix III/4.3). The two most prominent water-lifting devices are the rehat and dhenkli. The Persian wheel, also known as rehat, consists of a large wooden wheel equipped with pots or tindas, and is driven by animal power when attached to a well or tank. When positioned alongside a river or canal, the wheel is propelled by the flow of water, with greater velocity resulting in faster rotation and lifting of more water from the moving source. A horizontal channel or trough is connected at the centre or thirds of the wheel to collect water from the pots and channel it towards irrigation drains or storage devices. In certain places, the rehat system employs a double-wheel configuration (as illustrated in Figure 5.31) and is cattle powered. Dhenkli, on the other hand, works on the lever principle. It comprises a long arm connected to a counterweight at one end and a movable water source at the other. The beam is supported by a wooden fulcrum, which facilitates the flow of water towards the counterweight and into the agricultural fields. Manual labour is required to submerge the other end of the arm into the river or canal. A considerable number of these water-lifting devices were situated at the point where the canal begins to descend in the landscape after traversing smaller terrains, as demonstrated in the section (see Figure 5.30, for details see Appendix III/4E). The strategic placement of the water-lifting devices (rehats) and watermills (chaks) at this location is because the flow velocity in the canals increases at this point, allowing the wheels of the rehat and the watermill to leverage the current effectively. 155 Figure 5.31: Rehat or Persian wheel attached to a well, to the North of Delhi, 1813 (Sketch by Col. Smith; Source I309, British Library) It was found that there are two broad categories of drawing water from a source in the region. If the water was drawn or lifted, it was termed as dal, such as from wells, tanks, reservoirs, and cisterns, and if the water was made to flow, it was known as tor, such as from canals, rivers, and streams30. Charsa or a rope- and-bucket, sometimes with a wheel fixed to a horizontal bar, was the common lifting technique used in the region, as in other parts of India, while rehat and dhenkli techniques were the common lift-and-flow techniques (see Delhi District Gazetteer 1883:105). The tor-type irrigation was practiced heavily along the canal. As the proximity from the canal lessened, the dal-type became dominant. The dal irrigation technique was favoured by revenue collectors as the tor technique, if uncontrolled, led to waterlogging (Delhi District Gazetteer 1883) and siltation of the elds (Purser and Fanshawe 1880:82). 5.5 Canal through Scale, Space and Time 5.5.1 Scale: Documenting the everyday society, and the culture and life of people in an ‘engineered landscape’ (Erickson 2009:205) requires the study of an element that binds the landscape and its behaviour. Water acts as that unifying element of the everyday landscape which finds its presence in household activities, religious and cultural practices, transport, irrigation and recreation. A study of the landscape features and water infrastructure of the revenue district of Shahjahanabad based on archival 30 The dal and tor type of classification was also practiced by the British and is referred in revenue documents, gazetteers and settlement records of the Colonial Period. 156 sources; literary and cartographic of the Mughal period, and later by British engineers and surveyors such as Fortescue (1820), Colvin (1833), Khan (1847), Baker (1849) and Greathed (1852) reveal the scale of the relationship between the two. The landscape was characterised by the presence of Aravalli hills, Yamuna River, and large stretches of farmland, orchards and imperial gardens. Small patches of forests, hunting grounds, and cattle grazing grounds were also found braided in the stream networks. Besides Yamuna, the monumental Mughal Canal (Shah Nahr) was the most distinctive feature of the landscape as a 150km long ‘built environmental medium’ (Erickson 2009:206). A comprehensive multi-scalar analysis of the canal landscape revealed the presence of a series of features that the canal was interacting with and/or serving. Among these features, the most significant was the mighty Yamuna River, which served as the primary source of the Shah Nahr and held great reverence within the sacred landscape. Additionally, the presence of renowned Sufi saints’ shrines, such as Qalandar Shah, Bu-Ali Shah Qalandar, Shah Turkman, and the enclosure of the Prophet’s footprint, Qadam Sharif, contributed to the sacral nature of the landscape. Figure 5.32: Presence of water features in the Mughal hunting grounds. The image also indicates its location in a transition zone between the forest and cultivable lands. Image: Preparations for a Hunt, ca. 1680 (Acc. No. 2005. 235a), The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Subsequently, forest lands, predominantly located in the initial stretch of the Firuz Shah canal between Khizrabad, its headworks, and Karnal, also played a significant role. A report by Colvin (1833) indicated that the forest utilised the canal for transporting wooden logs downstream towards Panipat and Sonipat. The river was also used for transporting wood and goods downstream towards Delhi and beyond. 157 https://www.metmuseum.org/collection/the-collection-online/search/455060 The forests and their edges served as hunting grounds for the Mughals near Safidon, Palam (Singh 1992), Dodwah, Rolad, Barwala, and Rithala (according to the Canal Map of 1750). Parpia (2018) argues that the Mughal hunting grounds were predominantly situated in a transitional zone between the forest lands and cultivable lands, referred to by her as ‘modified landscapes’ (Parpia 2018:23; also Figure 4.32). She posits that the construction of the canal by the Mughals attracted wildlife to its edges, thereby contributing to the formation of imperial hunting grounds. These spaces required a regular supply of water for the animals and birds inhabiting the hunting grounds, which the canal provided. Another significant feature was the zone of cultivable land in the canal landscape. The canal played an essential role in promoting agricultural practices in the region, which was evident from the numerous irrigation channels that served the farmlands (see the canal map of 1750; Figure 5.1, also Appendix III/4A). To address the challenge of drawing water from the landscape on rolling terrains, where the introduction of irrigation channels was not feasible owing to the increased velocity of water, various water lifting devices were employed. The canal landscape was also characterised by the presence of numerous settlements, mostly villages, some of which were connected to the canal for watering livestock. The rolling terrain in some sections of the canal also gave rise to seasonal streams, which intersected and overlapped with the canal bed in some places. These seasonal streams acted as secondary sources of water for the canal and also served the agricultural fields, forming micro-hydro systems in the otherwise canal- heavy landscape. Along with ponds, lakes, and wells, these elements formed an independent system separate from the imperial canal. Orchards and imperial gardens were prevalent in the suburban areas of Panipat, Sonipat, and Shahjahanabad, with the highest concentration found in the suburbs of Shahjahanabad. These gardens and orchards were supplied with water through a series of irrigation channels connected to the Shah Nahr. Examples of these connections include the Imperial gardens of Lutfullah Khan Sadiq and Sher Afghan Shah in the Panipat suburbs, a garden near Balana, Bagh-i Badshahi in the Sonipat suburbs, and the gardens and orchards in the Shahjahanabad suburbs such as Shalimar Bagh, Qudsia Bagh, and Roshan Ara Bagh. The canal also served the Royal Garden within the walled city. The canal’s presence in city neighbourhoods and individual households, as well as its association with the Fort and the Palace, highlights its association with multiple scales, also allowing for an exploration of water as a tool for ‘multiscalar thinking.’ Thus, the canal served as a central ‘everyday’ element that carried multiple functions and weaved the landscape and its associated components while also mapping the socio-cultural context of the infrastructure. Unlike Wittfogel’s ‘hydraulic society’ (1957) where civilization is solely based on state- governed hydrological apparatus (see Subtelny 2007:124; also, Price 1994) Shah Nahr emerges as a 158 landscape where state, religion, class and caste had contextual roles to play in management of water resources of all scales. In his highly influential work Oriental Despotism (1957), Wittfogel argued that a centralised control of water infrastructure, labour organisation, and agrarian management, through an authoritarian governance system, was crucial for empires which aimed to exert social and economic control over their territories, referring to this as a ‘hydraulic society’. While there was indeed a relationship between state control and large-scale water infrastructure during the Mughal period, this was primarily for its maintenance and everyday functioning; however, there was no centralised system of labour and agricultural land ownership. Habib (2014), in his work on the Mughal agrarian system, emphasized the extensive control that peasants had over their land. He, through numerous examples of ‘farman’ (royal decree) and ‘sanad’ (deed) issued between the Akbar (r. 1556-1605) and Aurangzeb (r. 1658-1707) period, posited that, in accordance with sharia law, all agricultural land belonged to the peasants cultivating it (Habib 2014: 123-144). The land-tax was collected by the empire, through revenue officials, as a form of ‘remuneration’ for ‘protection and justice’, through a ‘social contract’ between the empire and the farmers. This mechanism operated further through ‘jagirdars’ and ‘zamindars’ who were granted revenue regions in lieu of their services for the empire, where they acted as ‘tax-gatherers’ of their granted regions (Habib 2014:213). All water-related repair works were centrally managed by the empire; however, the labour involved originated from neighbouring villages (Wahi 2013:291-292; also see chapter 7). In contrast to ‘British landlordism’ (Habib 2014:134), which exercised centralised authority over hydraulic projects, Mughal water management practices were encoded in a decentralised control system dictated by ownership rights, labour inputs, religion, and social hierarchies of class and caste. There was an extensive reliance on canal waters in the Shahjahanabad revenue district; however, it is also important to acknowledge the role played by smaller units such as wells, ponds, and lakes in the daily functioning of the broader landscape. These units required management at varying degrees and scales, and thus cannot be subsumed within an oversimplified framework of centralised political authority over water management practices. The study of the canal across scales further illuminates the Mughals’ conception and exercise of power as a watershed-oriented empire. By tracing the canal from its origin at the Yamuna in the Himalayan foothills to Shahjahanabad, it becomes evident that the Mughals were not merely shaping landscapes for irrigation or transport but were actively managing the very lifeblood of the region’s hydrology to serve imperial objectives. The canal’s control at its source reflects a sophisticated understanding of water as a strategic resource, enabling the empire to regulate supply, prevent scarcity, and direct its benefits along routes that reinforced political and economic priorities. 159 The positioning of the capital downstream, at a navigable stretch of the river, at the narrow choke point where it is close to the Aravallis, demonstrates a deliberate strategy of integrating urban settlement, riverine navigation, and administrative oversight. This placement allowed the empire to maximize the advantages of the Yamuna’s flow while consolidating authority over both natural and built infrastructures. When considered alongside similar hydraulic interventions on the Ravi, Sutlej, and rivers of Kashmir, the canal exemplifies a broader imperial practice of working systematically with watersheds, indicating that Mughal engagement with rivers was neither ad hoc nor purely utilitarian, but part of a coherent environmental and political vision. The creation of parallel initiatives, such as the Zabita Khan Canal on the Yamuna’s eastern edge (discussed in Chapter 7), underscores the experimental and adaptive nature of Mughal hydraulic engineering. These projects reveal an ongoing dialogue between environmental conditions and imperial ambition, reflecting a willingness to manipulate fluvial landscapes to serve governance, economic extraction, and urban planning. Furthermore, the Shah Nahr’s direct linkage to the imperial core ensured that its maintenance, supervision, and care were treated as matters of state importance, highlighting water- shaped infrastructures as central instruments of imperial authority. Ultimately, the careful study of this 250 km stretch not only demonstrates the technical and administrative sophistication of Mughal hydraulic practices but also situates water management as a defining feature of imperial strategy. The canal becomes a lens through which the empire’s broader engagement with natural resources, territorial control, and infrastructural power can be understood, revealing how environmental stewardship and statecraft were inseparably intertwined in the Mughal vision of governance. 5.5.2 Space: The landscape, as a hydrological ‘space’, is heavily influenced by its dependency on water sources. In this landscape, which is surrounded by the river Yamuna on its eastern side and the monumental Shah Nahr on its west, the space is formed by a network of ‘tributaries and distributaries’ that make up the water systems. These tributaries flow ‘into’ the river, while the distributaries branch ‘out’ from the canal. The interaction between these two processes ensures that the entire landscape is watered and irrigated. In addition, the summer rains, besides the melting of the Himalayan ice-capped peaks, contribute to the seasonal streams that flow from the hills and rolling terrains and help to keep the canal active throughout the year. The presence of wells also plays a significant role in defining the landscape, as they meet the everyday needs of people for cooking, bathing, washing, and caring for livestock. Together, these contribute to defining the transition of the landscape from a ‘space’ to becoming a ‘place’. These features become the medium of engagement to the landscape for the people and the society. 160 Table 5.1: Place Names indicative of Water Features & Source ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Toponyms Translation Water Feature (indicative) Water Source ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Punchkuiyan Five Wells Well Groundwater Tal Katora Bowl-shaped Reservoir Reservoir Rainfall Rudgiraan Stream-fall Stream/River Rainfall Ballimaran Boatmen’s settlement Stream/River Rainfall Daryagunj Market adjoining the river River River Nasirpur Khadar Khadar Area of Nasirpur Inundation Canals River Nasirpur Bangar Bangar Area of Nasirpur Wells, Ponds & Lakes Rainfall, Groundwater Firuzpur Khadar Khadar Area of Firuzpur Inundation Canals River Firuzpur Bangar Bangar Area of Firuzpur Wells, Ponds & Lakes Rainfall, Groundwater Sheikhpur Khadar Khadar Area of Sheikhpur Inundation Canals River Salempur Khadar Khadar Area of Salempur Inundation Canals River Thaska Khdara Khadar Area of Thaska Inundation Canals River Lal Kuan Sandstone Well Well Groundwater Khari Baoli Well with brackish water Stepwell Groundwater Chah Indara Mother’s Well Well Groundwater Mahabat Khan ki Reti The marshy land of Mahabat Khan Marshy Land Rainfall Kunti Talao The pond of Kunti Pond Rainfall Najafgarh Jheel Najafgarh Lake Lake Rainfall Nigumbodh Ghat Nigumbodh river-edge Ghat/River-edge Rivers Banjaron ki Baoli Nomad’s Stepwell Stepwell Groundwater Khera Dabar Dabar area of settlement Seasonal streams Rainfall ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Toponyms have been used in the past to study historical geographical elements and landscape characteristics of a region (Zhong et.al. 2020:1) as an emic approach in archaeology (Humphreys 1993). Toponymy can contribute to the etymological understanding of landscape features and their locations (Cooper 2020:03). The Persian and colloquial toponymy used in the Mughal period was indicative of landforms31, vegetation32, hydrology33, emplacements34, settlement classification35 hierarchies36, and communities37. Their distribution in the landscape further indicates the dependency of microregions on either rainfall or river sources. They indicate the presence of key water resources in the region such as streams (rud) and rivers (rud or darya), wells (chah) and stepwells (baoli), ponds (talao) and lakes (jheel), tanks (hauz) and reservoirs(tal) for household and irrigational needs. Toponymy was also incorporated in the study of the landform as a contributing element to the understanding of the greater environment (after Antonić 2015) of Shahr38 Shahjahanabad. A comprehensive examination of the distribution of place names ending in ‘khadir’, ‘bangar’, and ‘dabar’ was also conducted. The term ‘khadir’ signifies a landscape reliant on river water sources. This area is typically low-lying and rich in silt because of the inundation channels of the river that feed it. ‘Bangar’ lands, on the other hand, are ‘upland’ areas that depend on both seasonal rains and groundwater sources. These areas, located away from the river floodplains, are 31 Pahadi Bhojla – Hill 32 Angoori Bagh - Vineyard 33 Najafgarh Jheel - Lake 34 Firuzshah Kotla - Mound 35 Firuzabad – City of Firuz 36 Holambi Kalan and Holambi Khurd – big and small settlements 37 Ballimaran – Community of Boatmen 38 city 161 characterised by the presence of wells, ponds, and lakes. ‘Dabar’ lands are stream-fed, particularly those originating from hills. They are also referred to as ‘zerkohi’ or ‘below mountains or hills.’ These areas typically comprise of foothill settlements or agricultural lands. The table 5.1 illustrates the toponyms in the canal landscape that represent water dependencies and water features. The Ain-i Akbari, written by Abu al-Fazl during the reign of the third Mughal emperor Akbar (1556-1605) and the Khulasat-ut Tawarikh completed by Sujan Rai Bhandari during the reign of Aurangzeb (1658-1707) classify the agricultural land based on available water infrastructure. The Khulasat mentions the presence of rivers, canals, tanks, reservoirs, fountains, wells, springs, and ditches as key water features of the landscape (after Amil 2003:9). The discussion on water features in both chronicles is centred around the source that feeds it. Grover (1960) concluded on five typologies of Mughal agricultural land based on his study of Ain’ I Akbari. His classifications were a) barani (rain-fed), b) sailabi (fed by flood-waters), c) chahi (well-fed), d) abi (stream-fed), and e) nahri (canal-fed). These land typologies were thereafter carried over to the Colonial Period (1857-1947) as is evident from the revenue-based categorisation in the District Gazetteers (Malik and Mirza 2022) and Settlement Records (Douie 1930; also, Powell 1868:202). Here, I have attempted to reclassify the above typologies, with slight modifications, for the study area based on its engagement with the water source types (also see Figure 5.33). a) Daryayi are river-fed landscapes. ‘Darya’ is a Persian term for ‘sea’, however in the South Asian context it refers to large rivers. Such landscapes are normally found along the river edge or along its distributaries or channels (Habib 1999:33). The inundation caused by the river results in moist land throughout the year, thereby encouraging dofasli or do fasla (double-crop) cultivation. At times, the Daryayi landscape in Delhi also allowed the harvesting of three crops in one agricultural year (in Ain’i Akbari, after Jarrett 1891:278). The ekfasli-dofasli classification of crop-yielding land was performed for revenue collection during the Akbar period. The predominant landscape in the region is of daryayi nature, as it is bordered by the holy Yamuna River on its eastern edge. With the desert on the west and the river on the east, separated by just 100 km, the study area presents a varied hydrological landscape with dependency on multiple sources of water as the land graduates from arid to semi-arid geographies. b) Kuhi comes from the Persian word ‘kuh’, which means hill or mountain. Referred locally as Kuhi or Pahadi, such landscapes are categorised by the presence of streams, bunds, and tanks. Many seasonal streams are found in the study area on account of the presence of the Aravalli Hills (kuhi) and the typological variation in the landscape. As a significant element of the immediate surroundings of Shahjahanabad, the hills contribute to harvesting seasonal waters in tanks and cisterns. The undulation 162 also leads to the formation of ponds and lakes in the lower elevations of the rainwater catchments. These lakes and ponds are found close to the settlements - another indication that settlements are located around existing water sources. The proximity of the ponds to the villages also indicates their use in household and religious activities besides irrigation. Watercourses were found to be drawn from the seasonal streams for irrigational purposes (Grover 1960:200) in the Kuhi landscape. c) Nahri landscape is categorized by the presence of canals and their outlets. Derived from the Persian term ‘nahr’ for ‘canal’ the Nahri landscape is a noticeable typology in the study area because of the presence of the Shah Nahr which runs for 150 kilometres along the length of the region, originating from the river Yamuna up-north close to Khizrabad, and culminating into the Yamuna at Shahjahanabad. The Nahri landscape is in continuity to the Daryayi landscape, for the river water is its principal source. Besides the irrigation outlets present at regular intervals along the course (Figure 5.24), wooden rehats also known as ‘Persian wheels’ are a common feature (Figure 5.6) in this landscape. The rehat or saqiya is a circular wooden feature consisting of a series of pots, rope and a central ‘pin-drum bearing’ (Habib 1999:28) which facilitates the circular motion of the wheel to draw water from the heightened canal to the field below. Rehats with large pots are also known as jhalars (Delhi District Gazetteer 1883:105). At places where the level of the field is close to the water surface, wooden dhenkli was used. The dhenkli works on the ‘lever principle’ (Chaudhari and Habib 1982:218) and is in the form of a wooden dandle board with a balanced weight of earth or mud graduated to that of water (see Delhi District Gazetteer 1883: 105). Dighghi or canal-fed reservoirs are also found along its course. d) Zer-Zameeni: Referring to groundwater as the source, the landscape is categorized by the presence of wells and stepwells. There are references to qanats or subterranean channels in the study area as well (Colvin 1833). The presence of 1000 wells within Shahjahanabad (Mann 2007:7) categorizes the city’s landscape as predominantly zer-zameeni. Although located on the edge of river Yamuna within a Daryayi landscape, the population of the city was dependent on wells for its household and religious needs. The presence of wells within mosques and temple premises is a common occurrence within the walled city and its suburbs. The cartographic sources of the late Mughal period show the presence of pucca wells, and the later Survey of India maps also show unlined wells in the area (see Figure 5.35). There were four kinds of well construction practiced during the Mughal period in Delhi (after Delhi District Gazetteer 1883:103):pucca wells which were lined with materials such as brick, stone, and mortar; hill wells which were hewn out of rocks, mostly found on the Aravalli or its foothills; wooden wells which are shallow wells lined with planks and are mostly found in areas prone to flooding or near canals; and jhar ka kuan which are short-lived holes dug into the earth lined with brushwood, hence the term jhar, also called kachcha wells in the region. 163 e) Barani is derived from the Persian term ‘baran’ for rain. Landscapes dependent on rainwater are known as Barani. Barani landscapes are easily identifiable by the presence of jheel (lakes), talao (ponds), and rainwater harvesting devices such as tanks, cisterns, and hauz (reservoirs). The tanks and cisterns are constructed predominantly at lower elevations in the catchment area where they are fed by the seasonal streams carrying water from higher elevations. The tanks and cisterns vary in capacity, depending on the scale of the catchment area and its utility. The Barani landscape in the study area consists of tanks and cisterns varying from as small as 3 m to as big as 300 m. Lying in a semi-arid region, all the villages in the study are found to be surrounded by tanks and ponds which also indicate the location of the settlements on sunken lands within the region, but on a raised ground. Temples in the region are also found adjacent to tanks or kunds. Besides the ritualistic needs of the kund, the presence of the temple also acts as a religious tool to conserve the harvested water and contribute to its cleanliness owing to its sacred proximity. Limited rainwater in the region because of an erratic rainfall pattern (see section 4.1.2) allowed for only ekfasli or yak-fasla (single crop, either for spring or autumn) cultivation. At times, farmers cultivated half the land in one year and the other half the following year, depending on the availability of water (Douie 1930:127; Habib 1999:27). The Barani landscape is also categorised by the presence of marshy land, where water accumulates at the lowest elevation in the catchment in the absence of tanks and cisterns. The areas around the marshy lands were also available for double cropping (Habib 1999). The following table illustrates the various access techniques (as discussed in section 4.4.1) practiced in the different hydrological landscape typologiess Table 5.2: Access Techniques in the Mughal Hydrological Landscape of the Shah Nahr Hydrological Landscape Typologies Source of Water Infrastructure Access Technique Barani Rainfall Tanks Dal & Tor Cisterns Dal & Tor Reservoirs Dal & Tor ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Daryayi River Bunds Tor Channels Tor Inundation Canals Tor Ditch Tor ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Zer-Zameeni Groundwater Wells Dal Baolis (Stepwells) Dal Springs Tor ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Kuhi Rainfall/Other Streams Tor forms of Lakes Dal & Tor Precipitation Ponds Dal & Tor Bunds Tor ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Nahri River/Seasonal Canals Tor Streams Irrigation Outlets Tor ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ 164 Figure 5.33 Figure 5.34 5.5.3 Time: Examining the canal on a temporal scale is crucial for comprehending its significance and value. As the most essential element of the Mughal landscape, the canal infrastructure remained active for approximately two centuries and partially served the agrarian landscapes of Karnal, Panipat, and Sonipat. With the emergence of the British Empire in the mid-19th century, the Mughal canal gradually lost its prominence after the introduction of the Western Yamuna Canal (WYC) or the British Canal as a new ‘imperial object’ in the landscape. Although the British attempted to modernize the Mughal Canal after it had run dry in the early 19th century, when the Mughal were still the sovereign of Hindustan. The decline of the Shah Nahr canal was neither sudden nor singular but the outcome of a gradual and complex process shaped by both environmental and political factors. Continuous siltation and the contested control of its headworks for the Western Yamuna Canal (WYC) played a central role in this deterioration. Yule’s 1846 Report records prolonged periods of canal dryness in the years 1707, 1740, 1753–1760, and again in 1820, underscoring the recurrent nature of hydraulic breakdown. These episodes coincided with a wider pattern of climatic fluctuation, most notably the transition from the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) to the Little Ice Age (LIA; c. 1550–1850). The LIA, which overlapped substantially with the Mughal period, is now understood to have produced extended cycles of intensified winter monsoons, alternating floods and droughts, and irregular monsoon rhythms (Hussain et al. 2025: 6; Houghteling 2023; Appleby 1980; Khera 2019; Ray 2016). Such shifts placed enormous strain on agrarian regimes and the hydraulic systems that supported them. Climatic studies conducted of the period reveal the contours of challenges faced by the empire in the region. Ray (2016:22) has drawn attention to the Mughal act of ‘seeing water’ in visual depictions of the Braj region, framing it as an important interpretive device through which the empire perceived and conceptualised fluctuating ecological systems. These depictions highlight shifting river courses, eroding banks, and expanding floodplains, all of which reflected the broader climatic extremities of the LIA. Complementary studies of solar activity during Shah Jahan’s reign similarly suggest phases of prolonged reduced rainfall (Uberoi 2012). Moshe’s (2022) analysis of peasant uprisings adds a further dimension, demonstrating that climate stress often overlapped with heightened social unrest, particularly during the mid-seventeenth century. Taken together, these insights suggest that the Mughal investment in hydraulic infrastructure cannot be understood merely as an exercise in administrative control; it must also be recognised as a deliberate strategy of climatic adaptation. The recurring renewal of canals was directly linked to the agrarian base of the empire, whose productivity sustained both subsistence and imperial revenue. 167 Nevertheless, ecological volatility was compounded by persistent internal conflicts, which also led to the canal’s decline. Yule’s (1846) account makes clear that from the reign of Alamgir II (1753) onwards, the Mughal core region was characterised by almost constant rebellion. Rebel chiefs frequently occupied sections of the canal, interrupting its upkeep and undermining water distribution. This disruption culminated in the complete cessation of canal flow between 1753 and 1760. A similar fate befell Firuz’s canal at Hansi, which had been revived by Akbar, and later by Shah Jahan, but which was seized by the Sikhs after Aurangzeb’s death in 1707 and its water was redirected for their own use. The Safidun branch also dried up in the 1740s, although maps from the same period (see Figure 5.5) complicate this narrative by showing sections of the canal in apparent good condition. Despite such recurrent challenges, the Mughal canal system continued to function until 1857, a longevity achieved through administrative innovations that sought to stabilise its operation. Canal police, or daroghas, were appointed at intervals of three to four kos to supervise maintenance, ensure the regular flow of water, and mediate disputes. Fiscal measures were also adapted to ecological realities. The canal tax (naharana) was assessed in direct proportion to the volume of water in circulation, effectively linking imperial revenue to both canal maintenance and the broader rhythm of climate shocks. This fiscal mechanism ensured a degree of resilience, although it could not entirely offset the disruptions caused by rebellion and environmental instability. By the early nineteenth century, the canal had become a focus of renewed engineering efforts under British supervision. Figures such as Capt. Blane and Major Colvin introduced technical modifications and repair strategies that stabilised the system for a new political economy. The canal, therefore, passed through successive phases of neglect, revival, and reorganisation, each of which reflected the shifting priorities and pressures of its custodians. The timescale of the Shah Nahr illustrates the deeply entangled relationship between empire, ecology, and infrastructure. It demonstrates that canals were not only instruments of agricultural expansion and political control but also adaptive responses to environmental variability. Their decline and revival over centuries highlight both the fragility of hydraulic systems in the face of political contestation and their durability as essential lifelines in a volatile climatic regime. As such, the Shah Nahr stands as a material record of how the Mughal state, and later the British, sought to negotiate the twin challenges of sustaining agrarian productivity and responding to ecological uncertainty. The canal was introduced as an imperial object, marking the permanence of the empire on the landscape and serving as an element of revenue generation, in addition to serving the garden suburbs and walled city of Shahjahanabad. Throughout time and scale, the canal acted as a medium of connect between the state and its subjects. It also contributed to the formation of a ‘watershed empire’ (after Camp 168 1963:23) which is defined by the nature of the empire to control rich highland river systems and also conquered their floodplains to establish total control over the region (Russel 2005:127). Additionally, the study of settlement transformations in the canal landscape provides further evidence of this phenomenon, as these areas grew both in size and population due to the presence of canals, which exemplified ‘infrastructure urbanism’ in the hydrological landscape. Figure 5.34 illustrates the distribution of irrigated areas along the canal based on the agricultural records of 1823-24. Some canal settlements exhibited significantly higher cultivated areas than others. This disparity also suggests a higher population within settlements of higher cropped areas, as indicated by Moosvi (2015) and Moreland (1920). Moreland (1920:21-22) posited that the population density of agriculture-dependent settlements during the Mughal period can be estimated based on the density of cultivated area. In addition to the army size of a region, he proposed that a proportional relationship existed between the size of cropped areas and the population of the region. Moosvi (2015) also endeavoured to develop an equation to calculate the population of the Akbar period, utilising the cultivated area as a significant factor. The pattern of settlement growth along the canal indicates a hierarchical development in the region, with some settlements contributing more substantially to the state treasury than others. Consequently, there is a possibility that these settlements attained a ‘central place’ status within the landscape. Additionally, the toponymy along Shah Nahr introduces a new dimension of settlement typologies in the region, particularly the concept of pair- settlements. The presence of settlement names such as Thana Kalan and Thana Khurd, Assan Kalan and Assan Khurd, Jharont and Jharonti, Nahara and Nahari, Mandaura and Mandauri, ending with Kalan (large) and Khurd (small) suffixes or the addition of an ‘i’ suffix to smaller settlements, illustrates this phenomenon. The distribution of larger settlements closer to the canal and their corresponding pair settlements further away suggests a valuable tool for understanding the hierarchy of settlements and the forces at play in the canal landscape. In addition, this distribution highlights the significant role of the canal in the settlement history of the region. The making of the canal was a complex process that involved design and engineering, under the direction of Ali Mardan Khan, the supervisor of the Shah Nahr. Khan was a former governor of the Safavid empire who later served at the Mughal court. He was also the son and pupil of Mir Ganj Ali Khan, a renowned water architect in Iran who is credited with the development of hydraulic architecture in various cities, including Kandahar, Kashmir, Kabul, Peshawar, and Lahore, where Ali Mardan Khan held governorships. The canal was built using a hybrid formation that combined seasonal streams through artificial water channels. This construction method was also used during the Turko-Mongolian period, as evidenced by the Dargom Canal, which was constructed using a similar composite pattern. The Dargom canal, like the Shah Nahr canal, incorporated natural courses that were canalised and joined by artificial channels, making it difficult to distinguish between natural and artificial sections (after Mantellini 2008). 169 The Shah Nahr canal, with its hybrid formation and composite pattern, stands as a testament to the ingenuity and skill of its designers and engineers. The importance of examining Shah Nahr’s degraded waterscape extends beyond its local significance and serves as an illustration of an urban-regional hydrological model inspired by Persian and Central Asian traditions. The outcomes of this model, both successful and unsuccessful, can offer a plan for the adoption and adaptation of similar models across locations facing water scarcity for both practical and aesthetic purposes. The construction and renovation of gardens and water systems by the Mughals were not merely ornamental additions to the arid landscape of South Asia, but also demonstrated environmentally conscious land management practices. This study can also contribute to the development of urban conservation models and provide insights into the changing patterns of urbanisation in South Asia. Consequently, a large-scale infrastructure project such as Shah Nahr necessitates a preservation strategy to prevent its complete disappearance. As a central feature of landscape design, hydrology, state economy, and urban practice, waterworks offer a critical entry point into the Mughal hydraulic world. The following chapter traces the course of the Shah Nahr from the suburbs, through the walled city, to the imperial fort, situating each segment within broader patterns of water design and imperial authority. It also examines the processes of site selection for the new capital and undertakes a landform reconstruction that foregrounds three interrelated domains of the tripartite urban model: the fort, the city, and the garden suburbs. In doing so, it assesses the typological and technological features of Mughal hydrology, demonstrating how these systems responded dynamically to landforms, landscape conditions, settlement patterns, administrative structures, and religious imperatives. Figure 5.35: Sheet 53C of Survey of India (1914) shows the disused old Mughal Canal (referred here as ‘Disused Canal’ and ‘Old W.J. Canal’), along with the active British Canal shown in Blue. (Source: MAHSA Repository, Cambridge). 170 6.0 Water Map of Shahjahanabad and its Garden Suburbs The Islamic world extending from Asia Minor to northern South Asia was not a homogenous region in terms of geography, culture, ethnicity, politics and dynastic history. There were various iterations of the design ideologies of city layouts and infrastructural systems within this landscape. During the early modern period, the Turko-Mongolian region, encompassing territories governed by the Ottomans, Safavids, Uzbeks, and Mughals, witnessed numerous significant projects in city development and expansion of existing cities, such as Samarqand, Bukhara, Balkh, Isfahan, Shiraz, Yazd, Herat, and Kabul. Before constructing the new city of Shahjahanabad, the cities of Lahore and Agra underwent substantial transformation under the Mughals. These cities were adapted to incorporate the tripartite urban development model prevalent in Central Asia and Iran, as observed in the capital cities of the Turko- Mongolian empires. This chapter expands on the study of the ‘tripartite model’ of urbanism (see chapter 4, section 4.2) situating it within the context of ‘kuhi’ (hill) and ‘darya’ (river) features of the landscape to present Shahjahanabad, the last capital of the Mughal Empire, as a unique Turko-Mongolian model of city development practiced between Asia Minor and South Asia. This chapter focuses on the site selection process for the imperial capital, followed by a landform reconstruction exercise that examines three essential sections of the tripartite model: fort, city, and garden suburbs. An understanding of the historical landform is crucial for comprehending the flow of water in a gravity-based waterscape. This chapter aims to evaluate the typological and technological aspects of Mughal hydrology, which are responsive to landforms, landscape features, settlement patterns, state practices, and religious inclinations. It presents the mapping of water features based on archival sources and fieldwork conducted between 2023 and 2024 on the stretch between the Aravalli hills and the Yamuna River, extending from the bagha’at to the qila. At a micro-regional scale, this chapter employs a GIS-based historical archaeology method that utilises toponymy and information from Mughal chronicles to digitally model the elevational profile of Shahjahanabad and its garden suburbs during the Mughal Period. This approach facilitated the analysis of the flow and velocity of water in the constant-offtake environment of the canal in conjunction with hydraulic techniques responsive to the terrain, hydrology, and geology of Shahjahanabad. It also contributed to the development of the conceptual and contextual framework within which to understand Mughal water practices in Shahjahanabad as an expression of the water management systems of their Turko-Mongolian ‘patrilineal ancestors’ (Fisher 2018). As a central element of the landscape, hydrology, state economy, and urbanism practice, waterworks provide a sectional glimpse of the Mughal hydrological landscape and the socio-political contours of control, use, and access to water. Figure 6.0: A section of Mazhar Ali Khan’s painting of Shahjahanabad (1840). It shows the Delhi Fort overlooking the walled-city and Jama Masjid, city’s sovereign mosque. Lal Diggi Reservoir is shown on the right. [Source: Losty 2012] 172 6.1 Site and Surroundings Agra served as the capital or Dar-ul Khilafat (Seat of the Caliphate) for the Mughal Empire from its establishment in 1526 to 1639. With the exception of a brief period during Humayun’s reign when the capital was relocated to Delhi, and a subsequent period of approximately 15 years during Akbar’s reign when Fatehpur Sikri was designated as the new capital, Agra remained the capital for the first five Mughal emperors. One of the primary reasons why the Mughals moved their capital from Agra to Delhi was the fluvial behaviour of Yamuna’s convex and concave bends. The convex bend of a river is susceptible to erosion, whereas the concave edge is prone to deposition (after Ollero 2010:250; also, Ghosh 2024:7). During the period of Mughal rule, Agra expanded linearly along the convex side of the Yamuna River on its eroding bank (see Figure 4.13). According to Chenoy (1998:33), the city’s riverbanks had deep ravines that extended to the centre, causing significant damage to buildings and infrastructure. The impending threat of further expansion along the river’s edge and the deteriorating condition of the city’s inner area led Shahjahan to choose a new location for the capital (Chenoy 1998:32). Kambo, Shahjahan’s chronicler, also cited the congested state of the city as a reason for the establishment of a new capital (Chenoy 1998:32). Waris, a historian of Shahjahan’s rule, recounted the emperor’s aspiration to create enduring architectural landmarks in the South Asian terrain, especially through grandiose waterworks and urban development projects (Dwivedi 2016:49). The site chosen for the new capital city was situated between the two significant centres of the Mughal Empire: the Caliphate’s seat in Agra and the Sultanate’s seat in Lahore (Chenoy 1998:31). Delhi, situated in a strategic location, has historically served as a convergence point for trade, commerce, and routes, both land- and river-based. This is evident through the location of the earlier Sultanate cities of Delhi, such as Siri, Tughlaqabad, Jahanpanah, and Firuzabad. However, Delhi’s strategic importance lies in its position as an ‘inner frontier’ within South Asia, based on ecological features (Gommans 2002:1-8) and economic opportunities (Heesterman 1985:170-171). Climatically, Delhi acts as a confluence between the Eurasian arid zone and the humid subtropical zone of South Asia. It also connects two important economic zones of the subcontinent: the fertile regions of the Indus and the Ganges. The mighty Thar desert, the long Aravalli Range, and the wide and turbulent Yamuna formed a great barrier between these two agrarian zones, making it possible to cross over only at the tail-end of the Aravalli Range in Delhi at the site of Shahjahanabad, where the river (darya) and the hill (kuhi) form a 3km narrow ‘inner frontier’ in the landscape (see Figure 6.1). It is possible that this was the reason why major battles of the Mughal Empire were fought in Panipat39, near Delhi. The other important ‘inner frontier’ 39 1st Battle of Panipat happened between Babur and Ibrahim Lodi (1526) and the 2nd Battle between Akbar and Hemu (1556). In both the cases Babur and Akbar wished to take control of Delhi being ruled by the Lodi and Hemu respectively. 173 was Burhanpur40 (Heesterman 1985:172) in the Satpura Range, which connected the Deccan to the Ganges belt. Nath (2019) describes the Indus and Ganges as a region with populous cities lying on important trade routes in the Mughal period. The Mughals focused on taking control of cities with rich agricultural hinterlands (Haines 2015:649), and thus, their control of the ‘inner frontiers’ became crucial. Figure 6.1: Site of Shahjahanabad as an Inner Frontier in South Asia It was also the site where the land and river routes converged - the Badshahi Sadak which was an existing trade route remodelled and improved by Shah Suri41, and the Yamuna River which was used for navigation between Delhi and other cities on the river downstream. Owing to the high velocity of Yamuna’s flow from Khizrabad to Delhi, it was difficult to navigate it via boats within the first 250 km42. However, because of Aravalli’s topographical nature at its tail end, the river bends in Delhi, which results in its slowing down, making it navigable downstream. Multiple references exist of emperors using the river to travel to Delhi from Agra, Mathura, and other cities, including Firuz Shah Tughlaq, who is believed to have brought the Iron Pillar at Firuzabad in Delhi from Mathura on the river (see Figure 6.2). Other 40 The Mughal Emperors Akbar, and later Shahjahan, built huge water infrastructure, including qanats and subterranean channels, in Burhanpur for its active control of this ‘inner frontier’ in the Satpura Range. 41 Sher Shah Suri, a renowned builder and the founder of the Sur dynasty, developed and extended the trade route, known as Badshahi Sadak, which connected South Asia to the Silk Road 42 Colvin (1833, p. 24) mentions the river, until Delhi, being used for transfer of timber from the forest situated in the Himalayan foothills. 174 emperors, such as Akbar and Shahjahan, also utilised the river to travel between Delhi and the settlements downstream. Shahjahan entered the fort and city of Shahjahanabad during its inauguration through the Water Gate of the city (Waris 2016:69). Adjacent to the site was an existing fort built by the Sur dynasty, called the Salimgarh Fort (see Figure 6.3). The Surs ruled South Asia for 15 years between 1540 and 1555, briefly interrupting the Mughal rule. Salim Shah, the second sovereign of the Sur dynasty, built the fort on the island in the Yamuna. The positioning of Salimgarh Fort at the junction of the trade route (Badshahi Sadak) and the river, where the land and river routes almost converge in the landscape, underscores the Sur dynasty’s desire to exert control over the movement of goods and individuals in the doab region of the Ganga and Yamuna. A characteristic of the site that might have also influenced its strategic site selection, for Shahjahanabad, at this narrow passage defined by the Aravalli hills (kuhi) and Yamuna River (darya). (Left) Figure 6.2: Transportation of Iron Pillar to Firozabad on Yamuna (Source: Page, 1937); (Right) Figure 6.3: Navigation on the Yamuna: Stretch between Salimgarh Fort (in grey) and the Mughal Fort (in red)(Source: V&A Museum, IM.49-1923, ca. 1836) The Delhi region, also known as the Delhi Triangle, with Aravalli and river Yamuna forming its two arms (see Figure 3.3), connects the two great river-systems of the Himalayas- punj-ab43 (Indus) and do-ab44 (Ganga) (after Mann and Sehrawat 2009:544). The Aravalli hills in Delhi, also referred locally as Kohi or Kuhi or Pahadi, is divided into four sections namely the Northern Ridge, Central Ridge, South- Central Ridge and the Southern Ridge (Singh 1999:7; also, see Figure 3.3) Shahjahanabad was referred as the ‘Indian Rome’ by Von Olrich, who was impressed by the magnificence of the city, its ‘fort, gardens, mosques and pavilions’ (Stephen1876:241). It was the last city in a series of seven cities constructed within a millennium in the political boundaries of present-day Delhi (see Figure 3.3). The first five cities were situated on the hills (kuhi), Firoz Shah Tughluq established the 43 ‘Punj-ab’ translates to ‘five rivers’ namely Indus, Ravi, Satluj, Beas and Chenab. 44 ‘Do-ab’ translates to ‘two rivers’ namely Ganga & Yamuna 175 sixth city on the river’s (darya) edge, and Shahjahanabad, the seventh city, was positioned between the hill and the river. These cities can be broadly categorised based on their water sources. Of the seven cities of Delhi, five were rain-fed: Lal Kot (9th C), Qila Rai Pithora (1152), Siri (1303), Tughlaqabad (1321), and Jahanpanah (1334); and the last two cities were river-fed, namely Firuzabad (1354) and Shahjahanabad (1639). The first five rain-fed cities (also kuhi cities) were located on the South-Central Ridge (Figure 3.3). The topographical nature of Aravallis, with its uneven landform and high elevation, was not conducive to canal construction to draw water from the perennial Yamuna. Consequently, these kuhi cities relied on rainwater and groundwater for their sustenance. The rulers were compelled to innovatively harvest every drop of rainwater for the city. Thus, the early cities can be observed to be replete with wells, reservoirs or tals, tanks, baolis or stepwells, and ditches (see Figure 6.4). The sixth city, Firuzabad, was situated on the river-edge (darya city) and Shahjahanabd between the kuhi (Northern Ridge) and the darya (River Yamuna), resulting in the formation of a distinctive type of urbanism in South Asia, namely kuhi-darya urbanism. The Central Ridge was designated as the edge of the Colonial Capital in 1911, planned and designed by Sir Edwin L. Lutyens. Figure 6.4: Anang Tal (Reservoir) within Lal Kot (9th C); Satpula Dam & Reservoir within Jahanpanah (1334) Prior to the city’s establishment in 1639, the site already contained a number of structures linked to earlier dynasties. The Archaeological Survey of India, in the early twentieth century, documented twenty such structures within the future walled city, largely attributed to the reign of Firuz Shah Tughlaq (1351-1388) and the Sur dynasty (1540-1555). These consisted primarily of mosques (10), shrines (6), wells (3), and a temple (1), suggesting their role in supporting the religious and everyday needs of a local population that inhabited villages on the site (Chenoy 1998). Their strategic placement along the road connecting Firuzabad with Hissar and Hansi further underscores their embeddedness within earlier networks of settlement and circulation. Adjacent to the site was the Salimgarh Fort, constructed by Salim Shah, the second ruler of the Sur dynasty, during their brief interruption of Mughal rule between 1540 176 and 1555. Positioned strategically on an island in the Yamuna, the fort occupied a commanding location at the junction of the Badshahi Sadak (the major north-south trade route) and the river, where land and water routes converged. This siting reveals the Sur dynasty’s calculated attempt to control the movement of goods and people across the doab of the Ganga and Yamuna, underscoring the pre-Mughal recognition of the site’s geo-hydrological and strategic significance. For the Mughals, inheriting this fortified and hydrologically rich terrain meant engaging with an already codified landscape of control and connectivity, which they would reconfigure within a new imperial urban vision. Geographically, the site of the new foundation lay at the confluence of seasonal streams flowing from the Aravalli hills into the Yamuna, making it well suited for agrarian activity and river-related occupations. Toponyms later incorporated into Shahjahanabad’s walled fabric further attest to this hydrological landscape. Rudgaran, meaning ‘the falling of a stream’, signals the earlier presence of a flowing watercourse, while Ballimaran, oar steerers’, likely referred to boatmen residing near such streams. Similarly, Kashtibanan (boat makers) and Mallahey (also oar steerers) indicate neighbourhoods historically tied to riverine activity. The existence of a Nil Karkhana (indigo factory) on the site, recorded by Chenoy (1998:35), is particularly revealing, since indigo processing required substantial quantities of water. Its presence points to the availability of a perennial or semi-perennial water source, possibly a stream flowing from the kuhi to the darya. Together these features highlight how Shahjahanabad emerged as a Mughal attempt to weave older hydrological and settlement patterns into the design of a new imperial capital. Rather than displacing the inherited system, the Mughals semi-codified and rearticulated these pre-existing elements: streams, neighbourhoods, and production sites, within a larger framework of urban water management. This hybrid approach underscores a central characteristic of Mughal urbanism: the capacity to adapt and monumentalize local ecological and cultural landscapes into enduring expressions of imperial order. The earliest architectural remains of significance were a Hindu shrine at Nigumbodh Ghat, on the banks of the Yamuna River, and that of Shah Turkman Biyanbani on one of the hilly outcrops of the Aravalli. The significance of these two sacred sites to Shahjahan is evident from the fact that two gates of the walled city were named after them (Figure 6.5). In Hinduism, the significance of the Nigumbodh Ghat as a place of ‘wisdom restoration’ is attributed to Lord Brahma, the creator, who performed the holy dip at this location to recover his memory after being cursed by Goddess Yamuna (Winter 2018:35). Biyanban, on the other hand, translates to ‘jungle’ or ‘forest land’, and according to Mahajan and Tiwari (2011:59), the Biyanbani sect to which Shah Turkman belonged preferred sites for meditation in forests or uninhabited areas. They also speculated that the shrine was located on a mound, which likely protected 177 the site from flooding by Yamuna. This suggests that the site of Shahjahanabad was primarily a forested area with mounds before Firuz decided to construct his capital south of the site. The establishment of Firuz’s capital and connecting roads likely facilitated the growth of small villages in the suburbs of Firuzabad. Figure 6.5: Satellite Imagery of present-day Shahjahanabad showing the location of Shrines in immediate environs Delhi functioned not only as a strategic centre in economic and hydrological terms but also as a city of spiritual significance. The site of Shahjahanabad sits at the edge of River Yamuna, one of the three sacred rivers, besides Ganga and the allusive Saraswati, that confluence at Allahabad to form the ‘triveni sangam’ (Maitland 2019:247). The religious-cultural ethos of Yamuna’s sacred landscape is associated with Lord Krishna, an incarnation of the Hindu God, Lord Vishnu, the preserver of the universe (Crooke 1900:3). Delhi has also been referred to as ‘Baees Khwaja ki Chaukhat’ or ‘The Threshold of 22 Saints’ (after Chenoy 1998:32). These sacred sites are believed to provide the ‘channel to God’ by the ‘grace of the dead’ (Ephrat 2021:115). As a result, being in proximity to the shrines is an attempt to attain forgiveness from God through the grace of the saint. Kings and subjects both wished to be in the sacralised landscape defined by Yamuna and the Saints. Among the most venerated were Shah Turkman Biyanbani, Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki, Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya, and Hazrat Chiragh-i Dehli. These shrines became central points of devotion and were regularly visited by Mughal emperors from Babur to 178 Shahjahan (Ghani 2020:388-391). Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire in South Asia, visited the shrines of Nizamuddin Auliya and Bakhtiyar Kaki immediately after his victory at the Battle of Panipat (after Dadlani 2017:150). This victory marked the foundation of Mughal rule in the subcontinent, and his act of pilgrimage embedded the new dynasty within Delhi’s sacred landscape. His successor Humayun was later buried in a complex that incorporated the chillah, or meditation chamber, of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya. The shrine itself stood adjacent to Humayun’s tomb, further entwining imperial presence with spiritual sanctity. As a major spiritual centre of northern South Asia, Delhi carried both religious and dynastic weight. The repeated acts of veneration by Mughal emperors, combined with the burial sites of earlier sovereigns of the Delhi Sultanate, reinforced its sacred and political authority. Equally significant was Delhi’s symbolic role as the former capital of the Delhi Sultanate, whose first four sovereigns ruled from the city. For the Mughals, this continuity reinforced further their claim to imperial legitimacy in the region. These associations underline why Delhi emerged as an ideal site for the Mughals to cultivate both spiritual prestige and imperial standing. Culturally, Delhi’s prominence stemmed from its longstanding connections with Central Asia and Iran. Already in the reign of Iltutmish (1211-1236), and more intensely during the post-Timur period of the Delhi Sultanate (1398-1526), the city became an active hub of the Persianate world. Artists, scholars, traders, and physicians travelled to Delhi, enriching it with intellectual and cultural capital. The city came to occupy a prominent position in the literary imagination of the period. As Nizami and Farouqui (2020:19) note, Delhi was consistently depicted as a centre of intellectual production, spiritual refinement, and commercial vitality in the wider medieval world. This portrayal reveals how the city’s reputation extended well beyond the subcontinent, situating it firmly within the interconnected cultural geography of the Persianate sphere. Mughal political practice was characterised by a peripatetic model of kingship, where rulers such as Akbar and Jahangir spent more than sixty percent of their reigns away from their main capitals (Sinopoli 1994:296). This practice was rooted in Turko-Mongolian traditions of imperial identity (see chapter 2). However, it also required the establishment of a formally constructed capital that could serve as a widely acknowledged centre of spiritual, imperial, and cultural authority. In this sense, Delhi provided an unmatched combination of symbolic depth and strategic advantage within the hydrologically rich but environmentally fragile landscape of northern South Asia. The creation of a Mughal capital in Delhi also took place within a broader imperial context in which Safavid Isfahan and Ottoman Istanbul were being refashioned as monumental capitals (Babaie & Kafescioğlu 2017:846, also see section 7.1.1). For Shahjahan, the intended audience of his new capital was 179 not only his domestic subjects but also the greater Islamic world. It was essential to choose a city that embodied historical continuity, spiritual legitimacy, and imperial prestige, and Delhi fulfilled all these criteria. Its significance was amplified by its repeated celebration in scholarly and literary works circulating across the Persianate world (Nizami & Farouqui 2020:18-20). Delhi symbolised a convergence of spiritual authority, imperial continuity, and cultural richness. Its selection as a Mughal capital was not merely a political choice but a deliberate alignment with the city’s long-established symbolic prestige. This choice was further reinforced by the hydrological advantages of the region, which sustained its economic and cultural vitality. The Mughal choice of Delhi as their imperial capital must be understood as a deliberate act of political and cultural self-fashioning rather than a matter of geographic advantages alone. The city’s sacred associations with venerated Sufi lineages and its dynastic continuity with the Delhi Sultanate encoded it with a symbolic capital that legitimised Mughal sovereignty within a recognised historical and spiritual framework. At the same time, Delhi’s ecological and hydrological positioning at the intersection of the Eurasian arid zone and the humid subtropical zone, and at the natural corridor linking the Indus and Ganges basins, offered both defensive strength and economic vitality. Further, the selection of the site for Shahjahanabad represented a deliberate exercise in imperial strategy. Situated within the narrow corridor between the Yamuna River and the Aravalli ridge, the city occupied a unique frontier zone where urban settlement, monumental architecture, and mechanisms of strategic control could be simultaneously concentrated. Unlike the earlier cities of Delhi, all of which were located further to the south, Shahjahanabad’s placement effectively secured the vulnerable frontier, which had historically been exposed to incursions from the Indus plains toward the Ganga basin. This decision reflected more than a concern for defence. It signalled a carefully calculated convergence of geography, politics, and ideology. By anchoring the new capital at this northern edge, the Mughal state not only consolidated territorial control but also underscored its capacity to command the arterial routes connecting Central Asia, the Punjab plains, and the Gangetic heartland. At the same time, the site reinforced spiritual and dynastic continuities, embedding the city within the sacred geography of Delhi as an enduring seat of sovereignty over the subcontinent. In this way, Shahjahanabad’s site represented a strategic synthesis: the fusion of defensive foresight, geographic advantage, and symbolic legitimacy, all projected through the material form of an imperial capital. It was here, in the fertile yet contested ecologies of northern India, that they projected their empire as both heir to the region’s past and re-shaping of its hydrological futures. 180 6.2 Between Kuhi and Darya: Suburbs, City and the Fort of Shahjahanabad The city of Shahjahanabad extended beyond the walled city, embracing hill, river, and villages that consisted of varying typologies of water features. The agency of water over its users, and the contours of its use, access and control were the defining elements of this cultural geography (see Figure 6.7 & 6.12). As discussed in Chapter 5, Shah Nahr was the only defined man-made feature that connected the city to its suburbs and agricultural hinterlands between the Aravalli Hills (kuhi) and the Yamuna River (darya). It is argued here that the site selection parameters bear a strong resemblance to the Turko-Mongolian traditions of city placement. The Safavid cities of Kashan, Shiraz, Isfahan, the Timurid urban centres of Kabul, Herat, and Kandahar, and Khanate’s capital Samarqand followed a model where the river and mountains were used as sources of water for the urban centre located between these two distinct features of the landscape. Such urbanism practices were also defined by continuous garden layouts, as in Shahjahanabad, which tied the foothills to the river, forming avenues and vistas in the urban centre. These gardens also acted as instruments of ecological welfare by arresting the rapid flow of water from the hills to run through the urban area, in addition to contributing to groundwater recharge by acting as sponges to seasonal rainwater. The conceptual and contextual development of such an urbanism practice can shed light on reading cities from a new perspective. It can also contribute to the study of ‘continuous’ hydrological landscapes in the socio-political context of the state and religion. The study of the tripartite model of ‘qila-sharestan-bagha’at’ or ‘fort-city-garden suburbs’ of urban Shahjahanabad presented here employs the kuhi to darya approach, beginning from the garden suburbs and proceeding to the city, and then to the fort. The fieldwork conducted between 2023 and 2024 followed a similar approach of fieldwalking from the hill to the river, documenting landform and extant water features. This fieldwork was preceded by a landform reconstruction exercise of the suburbs, followed by that of the city and fort, based on historic cartographic, literary, and visual sources. 6.2.1 Garden Suburbs Landforms evolve either naturally or as a result of human impacts on the environment surrounding urban centres. Water follows the landform, considering its gradient and surface cover. A study of the hydrological landscape of the past necessitates an analysis of historical landforms, which can aid in interpreting the contours of water sources and usage. As water is a regional feature, the model of reconstruction requires a process that can address the three scales of region, micro-region, and settlement. Landform reconstruction practices in archaeology are not new and have been used in the past to study different scales: human origins and society (settlement), inter-relationship of the archaeological site with its surroundings (microregion) (Dincauze 2000:195), and the environmental context (region) (Roos 181 2014), including the hydrological framework within watersheds (Band 2015:528). The process of reconstruction will contribute to the understanding of small hydrological features and their relationship to large-scale landforms, opportunities, and challenges of introducing hydraulic techniques along the canal landscape, mapping of palaeo-streams (Shan, 2018), possible location of rainwater harvesting devices, identification of flood-prone areas, and location of agricultural settlements (Byrd 2005) in context to landform and water features. The garden suburb of Shahjahanabad extends approximately 5 km from the city wall, occupying the foothills of the Aravallis on both ends, toward the river as well as its agricultural periphery. The location of gardens in such terrain requires an understanding of landforms fed by gravity-based stream networks and the imperial canal. I conducted a preliminary study of gardens in the suburbs based on Mughal chronicles, colonial listing endeavours, and cartographic sources. A total of 25 gardens were identified in the suburbs of the walled city (see Appendix II/5A), with associated wells and canal-fed tanks. To analyse the water pattern of the garden suburbs and the locational nature of the gardens, a landform reconstruction exercise was undertaken. Sources & Methods: The process of landform reconstruction followed the land along the canal on a sub-regional scale. It extended from the immediate vicinity of the city, comprising the garden suburbs and the wall-edge of the city of Shahjahanabad. In this discussion, I will first cover the reconstruction of garden suburbs, followed by the city and the fort precinct. The suburbs represent an intermediate scale between the city and region, with characteristics of all three scales combined: agricultural lands, garden suburbs, and the urban precinct of Shahjahanabad. An area of 60 sq.km. to the north of Shahjahanabad was identified for this reconstruction. Based on historical chronicles, cartographic sources, archaeological reports, travel accounts of the Mughal period, and colonial reports on drainage and sanitation, the following features were identified in the area to be remodelled: Topographical: Hills and Mounds Hydrological Features (Linear): River, Streams, Channels, Canals, Bunds. Hydrological Features (Point): Wells, Stepwells Hydrological Features (Shape): Lakes, Ponds, Tanks, Cisterns, Reservoirs. Landuse: Residential (Walled-City & Villages), Garden Suburbs & Orchards, Agricultural Lands. Built Features (Architectural): Mosques, Temples, Tombs, Shrines, Gardens. 182 In archaeology, Geographic Information System (GIS) has been used as a tool for predictive hydrological modelling to study water management systems from small-scale irrigation techniques (Harrower 2010:1447) to large-scale palaeo-river systems (Katona 2012). The use of GIS for digital reconstruction contributes to the production of historical topographical data that can be easily made available (Leverington et.al. 2002) for ‘landscape modelling’ and ‘environmental analysis’ (Mihu-Pintilie & Nicu 2019). Hence, as an attempt to understand the distribution of settlements (after Petrie et. al. 2019) and their dependency on water resources, the aim was to create a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) based on historical records, cartographic sources, and archaeological localities The Catalogue of the MRIO-Miscellaneous Maps of the Survey of India 1742-1872 was published by S.A.I. Tirmizi (1982) as the Director of the National Archives of India. A valuable addition to the series was a military map45 of the environs of Shahjahanabad drawn to a detailed scale of 1’=500’ under the supervision of Major General A. Wilson and Lieut. Col. R. Baird Smith46 (see Figure 6.6). The map was drawn to siege and capture Shahjahanabad during the 1857 Mutiny. This is probably the only map available with a detailed elevation profile of the city environs. The map carries spot height values at an average interval of 200 feet. All heights mentioned on the map were in reference to the finish-floor level of the Nigumbodh aqueduct. The values were written in two colours: red, denoting the rise (in feet) from the aqueduct floor, and black, denoting the fall. In addition to this F.S. White’s Survey of Delhi (1807), Trigonometrical Survey of the Environs of Delhi or Shah Jehanabad (1808), Plan of Delhi (1812), Muhammad Faiz Ali Khan’s Persian Map of Shahjahanabad (1820-30), McLagan-Cumming Map of Delhi (1857) and Map of the ‘Plan of the British Position in Delhi’ (1857) were used to identify features of the microregion (see Appendix III/5A; Maps sourced from 'Maps of Delhi', Guerrieri 2017). QGIS and ArcMap tools were used for the reconstruction exercise. The ArcMap topographic interpolator developed by Hutchinson (1988) uses spot-heights, contours, hydrological features, and mounds to produce a hydrologically correct DEM (Zheng 2015). Earlier known as ANUDEM47, the TopoGrid technique was used on ArcMap 10.8 (Interpolation Tool: Topo to Raster) to generate the DEM of the Mughal Period (1748-1857) and Colonial Delhi (1857-1847). The interpolation was based on elevation values and land surface characteristics: mounds representing elevated terrains, streams denoting valleys, and lakes denoting basins. The following steps were involved in creating a digital reconstruction of the historical landform: 45 Catalogue No. 1841-60/87 46 Signed by Surveyor W.T. Dodsworth 47 Australian National University Digital Elevation Model, developed by Hutchinson in 1988-89 183 Figure 6.6:1857 Map of the Environs of Shahjahanabad (Supervised by Major General A. Wilson & Lieut. Col. R. Baird Smith) Figure 6.7: 1857 Georeferenced Map of Environs of Shahjahanabad 184 Step 01 (using QGIS 3.16): The first step involved georeferencing all the above maps with the help of extant physical features: the principal feature being the wall of the Red Fort of Shahjahanabad, the city- wall profile which still defines the shape of the historic district, and the reservoir of the Roshan Ara Bagh48. Though other royal gardens such as the Shalimar Bagh and Qudsia Bagh still remain, their profiles and features were drastically altered by the British. Similar to the earlier georeferencing process in chapter 5 (section 5.3.1), linear elements (road intersection and stream junctions) and point elements (Iron pillar, Kos Minar, Bridges etc.) of the landscape were further identified to locate, orient and scale the map to its geography (see Figure 6.7). Step 02 (using QGIS 3.16): Wilson-Smith’s map of 1857 was divided into grids of one square kilometre. and spot heights ranging from 20 to 45 in number were identified per sq.km. The reason for the variation in the number of spot heights per grid was based on the topographical profile and intensity of urbanisation. Twenty spot heights were identified in areas with almost flat terrain; however, in the Aravalli hills, foothills, garden suburbs along the canal, and the city boundary, more points were identified to develop an accurate land model. A total of 1139 spot-heights were chosen to develop the DEM of a 60 sq.km area. (see Appendix II/5B) Step 03 (using QGIS 3.16 and ArcMap 10.8): All spot heights in the 1857 map were based on a reference that does not exist today. The Nigumbodh Aqueduct has now given way to the Delhi Ring Road with no sign of any remains. The next step was to identify a feature in the landscape whose elevation has not been altered in the last 200 years. The natural landscape around Shahjahanabad has witnessed immense change because of the mutiny (1857), the clearing of the Aravalli foothills for the coronation durbar of King George V (1911), and later the partition of India (1947). Hence, a built feature had to be identified with a known spot height (1857). The base of the Roshanara Bagh Reservoir was chosen as a reference to calculate the relative elevation of the terrain in the Mughal Period. The size of the square water tank measures 150 gaz49 which was a popular tank dimension during the Shahjahan period (after Wescoat Jr. 2012:218). As per the 1857 map, the spot height at the tank was 11.87feet (=3.61m) below the aqueduct flooring corresponding to the present-day elevation of 210m at the same spot. Following this standard conversion technique, all 1139 spot heights were converted (refer to the conversion chart in Appendix II/5B). All spot-height values were used as ‘point elevation data’ for landform reconstruction. These values were then used to generate contours on ArcMap 10.8. The output file was used as the ‘contour line data’ for constructing the DEM. 48 Garden 49 1 Mughal Imperial gaz = 30-32 inches (after Wescoat 2012). The depth of the water tank is 5 gaz. Taking 30 inches as the gaz equivalent, the depth of the tank = 150 inches or 12.5 feet. 185 Step 04 (using QGIS): The next step was to identify the features in the landscape that could be used to define the surface characteristics of the landscape. Features that denote peaks, sinks, valleys, and saddles (after Hutchinson 1988). The following landscape features with surface characteristics were identified and mapped from cartographic sources, to be used later in developing the DEM: (i) Rivers, Streams and Water Channels were used as ‘streamline data’, (ii) Hills and Mounds as ‘cliff line data’ and (iii) Ponds, Lakes, Tanks, Reservoirs and Marshy Lands as ‘lake boundary data’. The box size of 60 sq.km. was used as the ‘mask boundary data’. Step 05 (ArcMap 10.8): All six datasets were thereafter imported to ArcMap 10.8. for interpolation purposes to generate the DEM using ‘Topo to Raster’ tool. The six input features (point elevation, contour, stream, hills, lake, and boundary) were then processed generating a 30m resolution DEM of the Mughal Period (see Figure 6.8 & 6.9). Another DEM with information from the colonial period sources was also generated to map the change in the landform between the Mughal period and the mid-20th century (see Appendix II/5B). Figure 6.8: Reconstructed Digital Elevation Model of Mughal Period of the Garden Suburbs of Shahjahanabad (1639-1857) 186 Figure 6.9: Contour Map of Garden Suburbs during the Mughal Period (1639-1857) Discussion: Reconstruction of the historical landform of the Mughal Period sheds light on the hill-river placement of the walled city. Two distinct features of the reconstruction were the elevated terrain of the Aravalli and Yamuna’s fluvial depressions. The city of Shahjahanabad extended from the foothills of the Aravalli on its west to the banks of Yamuna on its east. A site which was not only defined by its geography but also triangulated between the two sacred shrines of the Muslims, Qadam Sharif and Shah Turkman Biyabani, and the holy site of the Hindus, Nigumbodh Ghat (see Figure 6.5). Defined by both geography and religion, understanding of the hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad requires an enquiry from both perspectives. The reconstructed landform can be seen as an area with two distinct mini-watersheds, one to the west of the Aravalli with its stream networks feeding the Yamuna, and the other to the east extending to the garden suburbs and the agricultural lands beyond. A reconstruction of the stream orders on the west indicates the formation of only one major stream, fed by minor streams, which would have been the bed of the Najafgarh stream, later streamlined into a canal (see Figure 6.10). This stream was the primary feeder to Najafgarh Jheel (lake). The Aravalli is a hill of considerable height; however, because of its form, stream formation to the west is comparatively less. A close observation of the landform on the west indicates the formation of a series of hollows, sunken lands, mostly interconnected through streams, 187 Figure 6.10: Digitally Reconstructed Contours & Stream Network of the Garden Mughal Period (1639-1857) forming a series of natural reservoirs which are dependent on seasonal rains (also Danver 1876). Some of these hollows lead to the formation of swampy areas within the landscape, which are inundated by seasonal waters that subsequently evaporate, resulting in the creation of ‘usar’ lands. Usar lands are characterised by high soil alkalinity due to inadequate surface drainage and the presence of an impermeable subsoil layer, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions (Singh and Bajaj 1988:181). A huge swampy land abutting Duhhurpoor, Dhukkao, Mullikpoor, and Azadpoor can be found on the north, occupying the lowest elevation to the west of Aravalli. The occurrence of such swampy lands or potential ‘usar’ lands was common in the canal landscape. Danver’s Report (1876) on the Irrigation Works in India refers to the presence of ‘usar’ lands, which were formed by a covering of ‘reh’. Reh is a particular kind of ‘alkaline efflorescence’ that kills vegetal life rendering the soil ‘banjar’ or infertile for any future cultivation. Reh forms a top layer in the swampy land. The sodium salts that are impregnated in the subsoil return to the surface through capillary action and are evaporated because of the excessive summer heat, mostly in areas with high groundwater table (Gibson 1880:277-280). These appear in patches in the landscape amidst agricultural fields along the Mughal canal, and frequent attempts to remove these ‘usar’ lands have been made in the past. 188 Another feature that holds stream water and regulates its flow for irrigation is the bund. Bunds or embankments are mostly found close to the foothills. The locations of bunds in the study area were found from early 19th century cartographic sources and colonial reports on bund management of Delhi, sourced from the Delhi State Archives. The reports indicated two forms of irrigation: through ‘submersion’ at the upper level, and through controlled running water released from the bund gates at the lower level. The bunds were placed such that the settlements in foothills such as Sabzi Mandi and Rajpore could be protected from flash floods in the case of heavy rains (see Figure 6.11). A controlled release of bund waters into the Najafgarh stream was also maintained by a bund located close to Rajpore village. Bunds act as checkpoints in the landscape dictated by hilly terrains where a sudden gush of water in the rainy season can lead to large-scale destruction. Two settlements, Sudourah Kalan and Rajpore, and two abandoned villages were also found along the length of the digitally constructed Najafgarh Stream (see Figure 5.11). The two abandoned villages which now lie in ruins can be a consequence of streamlining the canal, a phenomenon which was quite common along the derelict 150 km long Mughal Canal because of the introduction and modernisation of the British Canal (after Colvin 1833). The reconstructed landform indicates the position of the settlement between hollow lands on elevated mounds. These hollows possibly acted as temporary reservoirs during the rainy season. Figure 6.11: Garden Suburbs (Reconstruction), with associated water features: river, streams, bunds, and canals. 189 In the centre of some of these hollow lands were tanks (see Figure 6.10). The location of the tanks was found to follow the stream alignment, occupying lower elevations of the landscape. As central elements of the catchment within the hydrological landscape, these rainwater harvesting devices were placed away from settlements in an undisturbed semi-arid landscape. Beside tanks, a unique hydrological feature, which defines the edge of habitation in the landscape around the villages, is ‘talao’ or ponds. The settlements seemed to have been developed on elevated land (kotla) surrounded by ponds, thereby resulting in ‘hump’ profile habitable mounds. The wells were the next salient features of the landscape mapped using cartographic sources (Figure 6.12). They were concentrated within the urban Shahjahanabad and garden suburbs. The density of wells was found to decrease as one advanced to the agricultural lands from the city (see Figure 6.12). There were lined and unlined wells. Most of the lined wells occupied the imperially dominated built zones, such as the city and garden suburbs. Some deep wells were also found in the Aravalli hills. Figure 6.12: Garden suburbs (reconstruction), with locations of wells and tanks. Wells & Tanks 190 Figure 6.13: Reconstructed DEM showing location of shrines and religious structures, along with water features The gardens to the northwest of Shahjahanabad (see Figure 6.12) involved a composite water- distribution system, primarily dependent on the Shah Nahr. As per the sourced historical maps and fieldwork, tanks supplied by canal waters were identified in most gardens. The canal occupied an elevated terrain, with its distributary channels terminating in large cisterns and reservoirs of garden complexes (for details, see section 7.1.3). The concentration of wells increased in the gardens located near the city wall. This phenomenon may be attributed to the depth of the canal at this point, as the wells were found to be connected to the canal through underground feeder channels (Colvin 1833:109). Colvin (1833) asserted that the canal closer to Delhi was excavated in the Aravalli rocks to a crest-depth of 60 feet, with a series of underground channels. Several channels from the canal, at the surface level, were diverted to supply the Imperial gardens in the suburb. By tracing these water channels, it can be established that the canal waters closer to the walled city were predominantly allocated for the imperial landscape, the king and the nobles, and religious institutions, while wells, tanks, ponds, and the Najafgarh canal supported agriculture in the suburbs. This can be further corroborated by the study of the hand-sketch map of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal from the Hyderabad Archives (discussed in section 5.2), where settlement names gave way to the names of gardens as the canal approached the suburbs of Shahjahanabad, indicating the changing behaviour of the canal from an egalitarian element to an Imperial one. It appears that the canal in the Shrines & Religious Structures 191 suburbs was exclusively designed to serve royal gardens and orchards, converting them into water retreats for the nobility. 6.2.2 City of Shahjahanabad A preliminary study of the water features within the walled city of Shahjahanabad was conducted based on historical literary and cartographic sources, including the built heritage listing compiled by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in the early 20th century. This listing was preceded by two other surveys conducted by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1847 & 1854: Asar-us Sanadid) and Bashiruddin Ahmad (1873: Waqiat-i Dar-ul Hukumat). The inventory by ASI, under Maulvi Zafar Hasan, adhered to the same listing template as Khan and Ahmad. The most recent inventory of built heritage was undertaken by Intach in 1999, which documented 1196 structures compared to Zafar Hasan’s inventory of 1280 structures of historical value. Of the four volumes of ASI listing, the first is dedicated to the walled city of Shahjahanabad and enumerates a total of 410 structures. As an initial step to comprehend the water feature distribution within the walled city, a study of the four listing documents prepared between 1846 and 1999 was performed (see Appendix II/5C). This analysis facilitated the identification of the typology of water features within the walled city, including the fort premises. The fort, imperial gardens, and select elite mosques, based on the listing documents of 1846 and 1873, were found to have been supplied water by the Shah Nahr, while other mosques and temples possessed individual wells that were utilised for both ritualistic and quotidian purposes. Some mosques also contained epigraphic remains bearing inscriptions regarding the presence of wells, tanks, and gardens, including writings on waqf or endowment policies (see Appendix I/B). Certain descriptions also indicated the topographical nature of the site, noting the presence of ‘elevated grounds’ within the walled city (Figure 6.15). The distribution of tanks within the walled city and the frequent reference to ‘elevated grounds’ necessitated an understanding of the topographical nature of the site in the gravity-based waterscape. Therefore, this investigation was followed by a landform reconstruction of the walled enclosure of Shahjahanabad to gain insight into the site’s topographical characteristics, which would have influenced the city’s water design. The reconstruction was based on point elevations obtained from colonial maps of the city. The methodology employed was similar to that utilized for reconstructing the landform of the garden suburbs (see section 6.2.1). Information derived from historical reports, cartographic sources, and place names was extracted (see Table 6.1) and utilised as feature types to model the landform of the walled city. 192 Figure 6.15: Traces of Hillocks within the Walled City: Pahadi Imli (left) and Pahadi Bhojla (Right) Table 6.1: Listing of Feature Types for ANUDEM-based landform reconstruction S. No. Feature Type Place & Description Source (ANUDEM) 1 Hillocks (Ridge) Pahadi Bhojla Varma (2016)* 2 Hillock (Ridge) Pahadi Jhojla Varma (2016) 3 Hillock (Ridge) Pahadi Imli Fieldwork* 4 Ridge (Minor) Red Fort Nahr Axis Sanderson (1912) 5 Ridge (Minor) Chandni Chowk Greathed (1852) 6 Hillock (Ridge) Pahadwali Gali BL Map of Delhi (1840)* 7 Ridge Kalan Masjid Fieldwork (2023-24)* 8 River Yamuna 9 Stream Chandni Chowk to Hauz Qazi Farman* 10 Stream Kucha Nala BL Map of Delhi (1840)* 11 Stream Khas Bazaar to Fort Map of Delhi (Ahmad, 1873) 12 Stream Faiz Nahr to Akbarabadi Hauz Chenoy (1998) 13 Stream Rudgaraan Chenoy (1998)* 14 Reservoir (Sink) Lal Diggi BL Map of Delhi (1840) 15 Reservoir (Sink) Hauz Qazi Farman; BL Map of Delhi (1840) 16 Moat (Sink) Fort & City Moat: Warsi & Kambo* 17 Point Elevations British-Era Maps (1850-1911) * Information corroborated during fieldwork The resulting landform, obtained by combining point elevations, place names, and natural features, revealed three significant hilly outcrops of the Aravallis and a range of smaller elevations within the walled area (see Figure 6.16; for details, refer to Appendix III/5B). It reveals the presence of two significant hill within the city, known locally as Pahadi Bhojla and Pahadi Jhojla (after Varma 2016:175; also Intach Unesco Dossier 2012:26). These hills were known by their same names in the pre- Shahjahanabad period. Pahadi Bhojla further consists of a series of four smaller hills, named Pahadi Imli, 193 Pahadi Darziyaan, Pahadi Mochiyaan, and Pahadi Rajan. These names were assigned to the hills, probably after the city was built, as they are indicative, beside Imli, of the occupational nature of the settlers on these hills. Figure 6.16: Landform Reconstruction of Mughal Shahjahanabad A cartographic analysis of built structures and settlements from the pre-Shahjahanabad period revealed their predominant occupation of two hilly outcrops, Bhojla and Jhojla (see Figure 6.17). The earliest extant features of the landscape, the Nigumbodh Ghat and the shrine of Shah Turkman, were situated on a river and hill, respectively, on the pre-Shahjahanabad terrain. Given the site’s proximity to Tughlaq’s 14th-century capital, Firuzabad, a road connecting the capital to Hissar and Hansi (in present- day Haryana), traversed the area, likely facilitating the presence of built structures between the two hills. Three villages (now neighbourhoods within the walled city) were also identified at the foothills of these small outcrops, presumably sustained by streams flowing from the Aravallis to the Yamuna River. 194 Figure 6.17: Pre-Shahjahanabad Structures on Reconstructed Landform (after Chenoy, 1998) The landform indicates an outward slope towards the city moat and an inward slope towards the moat of the fort (see Figure 6.19 & 6.20). This double drainage system, with the Chandni Chowk elevated stretch forms two small basins draining seasonal runoff to the moat (also Greathed 1852:1-2). This also suggests that the site of the Delhi Fort was probably an island formed by an anabranch of the Yamuna River. The Mughals constructed draw-bridges (now replaced by permanent bridges, see Figure 6.18) over moats to connect the fort to the city (at Lahore and Delhi Gate) and the city to its suburbs (now features a connecting road) at all the major gates of the city. 195 Figure 6.18: (Left) Draw-bridge at Lahore Gate of the Fort; (Centre) 1840s Map showing the draw-bridge at Lahore Gate of the City and (Right) Delhi Gate of the City. Figure 6.19 & 6.20: Stream Network and Micro-Valley Formations based on Reconstructed Landform of Shahjahanabad (for details refer to Appendix III/5B) The Jama Masjid, the sovereign mosque of Shahjahanabad, was built on top of Pahadi Bhojla (see Figure 6.17), the highest hill within the walled city, and was the most noticeable feature of the landscape (Waris II 2016:144). The location of Pahadi Jhojla appears to have determined the orientation of the Shah Nahr within the city. The canal entered the city through the elevated terrain of Jhojla, falling inward to form the imperial axis of Chandni Chowk (see Figure 6.21). It is worth noting that the canal stretch within the city occupied a linear elevated west-east stretch, with land falling on either side. Farmans (or decrees) issued during the Mughal period related to the Shah Nahr within the walled city indicate the flow of water from the canal to Hauz Qazi (Lahori 2013:83-84) and other streets following the natural terrain indicative of the higher elevation occupied by the canal bed. The canal was designed in such a manner that its waters were utilised to flush the subsoil sewerage system of the city (Mann 2007:8). Regular flushing facilitated de-siltation of the canal and its associated infrastructure. 196 Figure 6.21: Map showing Imperial water features (canal & moat) together with the Fort & the Elite Mosques of Shahjahanabad (based on 1840s Map of Shahjahanabad) Additionally, the streets of the walled city occupied the valleys and overlapped with the minor stream network of the reconstructed landform. This suggests a clear built zoning within the city, following the topographical nature of the site, designed to increase the harvesting potential of rainwater during the Saawan-Bhadon months. During fieldwork, individual houses within the walled city were found to have rainwater shafts on their external facades to drain water in the stormwater channels of the street (see Appendix I/B; SJB/01/70, 72, 74, 77, 78, 80). Chandni Chowk Hauz Qazi 197 Figure 6.22: 1840s Hand-drawn Map of Shahjahanabad. © British Library Board, X/1659, India Office Collection, London. Prior to conducting fieldwork for this thesis, I examined an 1840s hand-drawn map of Shahjahanabad, accessible at the British Library (British Library Board, X/1659, India Office Collection, London; Figure 6.22), to assess the distribution of water features within the walled city. This map utilised vibrant and subdued colours to delineate the various thanas (administrative units) within the city. The map was recently expanded in book form wherein the different built fabrics of each of the thanas were analysed and explicated in detail in each chapter by Liddle (2024). She postulated that the map was primarily intended for administrative purposes, as each thana was demarcated with a red boundary and a unique colour assigned by the cartographer. Rather than delineating different localities, the map was 198 predominantly commissioned to illustrate the 12 administrative units within the city. As the sole detailed map of the city, it also holds significant importance for studying the distribution of built patterns and open spaces within the walled enclosure of the city. Upon closer examination, these different colours potentially indicate the distribution of the predominant social groups in each thana. The utilisation of bright colours for elite, high-class-caste clusters and muted tones for poor, low-class-caste clusters provided a contour of the ‘served’ and ‘servants’ distribution across the city. By extension, one may infer access, use, and control of water across this topography, contributing to the understanding of the water management system and its influence on the planning and distribution of imperial water infrastructure, which will be discussed in the subsequent chapter. The 1840s hand-drawn map is the only cartographic record that provides a sufficiently detailed account of the city’s planning. This map has been recognized as the most important source for reconstructing the urban morphology of Shahjahan’s imperial capital (Ehlers & Krafft 1993:18). In the absence of earlier detailed cartographic evidence, the surviving 1840s map cannot be regarded as an exact representation of the city’s original seventeenth-century plan. Shahjahanabad was never static; its built environment was subject to continual yet subtle transformations, particularly in the subdivision of havelis and the modification of gardens. Therefore, to reconstruct and interpret the city’s hydrological and urban form, a wide range of complementary sources was consulted. These included Mughal chronicles of Shahjahan and later emperors, descriptive texts on the city such as the Muruqqa-i Dehli (1739–41) and the Sair-ul Manazil (1820) along with illustrated works by Nidhamal (1750), Mihr Chand (1780–90), Thomas Longcroft (1780–1811), Thomas and William Daniell (1789), Sita Ram (1815), Ghulam Ali Khan (1817–22), Latif (1820), Mazhar Ali Khan (1840), and Mirza Shah Rukh Beg (1847). In addition, visual sources from Gentil’s Atlas (1774) and Hyde’s collection (1780) were also employed, together with epigraphic evidence gathered during fieldwork. Together, these diverse materials enabled the construction of a reliable water map of the city and shed light on its planning principles. However, it should be noted that visual artworks often dramatized space or events (Mukherji 2003:9); accordingly, hydrological interpretations relied on corroboration between cartographic, textual, and visual sources. The combined literary, visual, and epigraphic evidence indicates that although Shahjahanabad underwent periodic adjustments, the underlying design principles established during Shahjahan’s reign remained intact. The city’s principal built elements, its hydrological infrastructure, and its topographical siting continued to serve as the fundamental determinants of its morphology. The hierarchy of public spaces, carefully articulated during the city’s foundation, persisted as a distinct urban vocabulary throughout its life as the imperial capital (Blake 1991:26). Most modifications occurred at the scale of property divisions, as large estates were subdivided across generations (Hosagrahar 2005:15). 199 With respect to water infrastructure, the evidence suggests remarkable continuity. The only significant addition was the construction of the Lal Diggi in front of the Red Fort in 1846 (Nanda 2012:161). Beyond this singular intervention, the city’s hydrological system largely preserved its imperial configuration. Simultaneously, the commissioning of wells by the imperial household assumed increasing importance, both as acts of public charity and as infrastructural support for religious institutions and the general populace (see section 7.1.2). This interplay of continuity and incremental adaptation underscores the resilience of Shahjahanabad’s urban form which was anchored in its imperial design yet flexible enough to meet evolving needs. The 1840s map therefore serves as a critical proxy for reconstructing the city’s water system and should be treated as broadly indicative of its original design. The analysis of water features such as canal and hauz (tanks) within mosques, house-gardens and havelis (mansions), based on the 1840s hand-drawn map of Shahjahanabad (see Table 6.2), reveals the Shah Nahr as the predominant feature of the walled city, adjoining 8 of the 12 thanas. The quantity of tanks or cisterns was the greatest in these eight thanas as well, likely being supplied by the canal. Public and private wells also fed the tanks, particularly during seasons when the canal water levels were low. The remaining four thanas occupied the ‘elevated grounds’ of the city and consequently could not be supplied water in the gravity-based waterscape of Shahjahanabad. The concentration of wells, predominantly deep wells, in these four thanas was the greatest, indicative of a decentralised functioning of water dependency and distribution, independent of the imperial canal. Another significant feature of the city map (Figure 6.22) is the khana-bagh or house gardens present within large mansions. Some of these mansions were of such considerable size that the locals referred to them as qasr, or forts (after Blake 1996:182).These mansions were predominantly located in thanas adjacent to the canal, indicating the affluent nature of these neighbourhoods. These khana-baghs were primarily ‘well-watered’ gardens. Following a quadrilateral layout, these gardens were observed to have wells situated at one of their corners that supplied water to the garden and its fountains. A total of 200 mosques were also identified in the city (see Appendix II/5C) based on the listing by Khan (1846) and Ahmad (1873). Ablution, or the form of purification before prayers, is a crucial ritualistic feature involving water; consequently, most mosques were found to have a tank or well within their premises or an adjacent community well. Tanks were either supplied with water by the wells or for mosques in proximity to the Shah Nahr by the canal. 200 Table 6.2: Water Features within the Walled City of Shahjahanabad (based on the 1840 Map; see Figure 5.22 for historical map, and Figure 5.23 for GIS-based mapping of its water feature) S. No. Thana (Administrative Unit) Canal Tanks/Cister ns Wells (Public) Wells (Privates) Khana Bagh (House Gardens) 1 Guzar Etiqad Khan Adjacent 1 12 (+1 SW) 10 12 2 Guzar Lahori Darwaza Adjacent 7 5 0 17 3 Kashmiri Darwaza Adjacent 3 03 (+1 SW) 6 13 4 Nigumbodh Adjacent 3 6 10 1 5 Chandni Chowk Central Feature 5 15 (+1 SW) 8 12 6 Dariba Adjacent 2 7 1 5 7 Pahadi Bhojla 1 13 (+1 SW) 0 6 8 Sunehri Masjid Adjacent 2 1 1 2 9 Faiz Bazaar Central Feature 4 12 4 15 10 Ajmeri Darwaza 4 24 1 14 11 Qasim Khan 10 1 2 12 Turkman Darwaza 2 8 1 2 34 116 43 101 Comments The canal acts as a central feature in two administrative units, and shares the edge with 06 thanas. 04 of the thanas do not receive any water from the canal, other than the Public Reservoir (Hauz Qazi) located at the road intersection in Ajmeri Darwaza. 34 Tanks/ Cisterns (They are mostly located within house gardens and some function as ablution tanks within mosques) The wells count to a total of 159 based on information from historical maps and fieldwork. However I assume the presence of of 58 more wells as all the khana baghs were being supplied water from the wells located within their premises, especially when the canal ran dry because of siltation in the Late Mughal Period. Hence a total of atelast 217 wells were present within the walled city (minus the Fort). The presence of a higher concentration of khana bagh is indicative of the affluent nature of that particular thana. 201 Figure 6.23: Map showing the location of Mosques & Gardens within Shahjahanabad (based on 1840s map of the city) Field Survey of Garden Suburbs & City The analysis of water features through historical cartographic sources was complemented by an extensive fieldwork conducted between 2023 and 2024. This phase of the research involved systematic fieldwalking across three key zones: the garden suburbs surrounding the walled city, the inner-city itself, and the precincts of the Red Fort. The objective was to identify surviving traces of the city’s historic hydrological infrastructure within an urban landscape that has undergone significant transformation since the mid- twentieth century. In the garden suburbs, the field survey revealed the precarious survival of imperial landscapes. Today, no more than ten Mughal gardens remain, and these are preserved only in a fragmented form, with most having been repurposed for housing development or institutional expansion. Within the walled city, similar pressures of urban change have left equally visible marks. Following the rebellion of 1857, large Chandni Chowk Hauz Qazi 202 aristocratic mansions (havelis) began to disintegrate (Hosagrahar 2001:32), a process accelerated after Partition in 1947 when these residences were further subdivided to accommodate the influx of migrants from Punjab and beyond. By the 1950s, many of these once-grand estates had been divided into multiple smaller dwellings, resulting in the loss of Mughal spatial coherence. These twin ruptures of 1857 and 1947 were decisive turning points in the erosion of most of the city’s imperial fabric, leading not only to the fragmentation of its built environment but also to the disappearance of key elements of hydrological infrastructure. Wells that once sustained the city’s population fell into disuse and were gradually replaced by the piped water supply introduced by the British in the late nineteenth century (Mann 2007:16). Additionally, following India’s independence in 1947, the suburbs of Shahjahanabad witnessed substantial urban development, as they accommodated populations migrating from Punjab and other regions after Partition. This was further compounded by successive phases of urban expansion, most notably after the economic liberalisation of 1991, which triggered large-scale migration from surrounding states and contributed to Delhi’s rapid population growth. In this context, the city embarked on ambitious infrastructure projects under the rubric of becoming a ‘world-class city’ (Trumpp & Kraas 2015:12). Such demographic and economic pressures have had profound implications for the survival of Shahjahanabad’s historic layers, many of which were compromised or obliterated in the process of redevelopment. The vulnerability of the city’s historic environment has long been documented. The heritage listing undertaken by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in 1915, and subsequently by Intach in 1999, revealed the disappearance of nearly 40 percent of listed structures. This decline highlights the precariousness of built heritage in the face of rapid urbanisation. As Meskell (2021:31) observes, heritage listings are often perceived as obstacles, or even ‘curses’, to development, a perception borne out in the continued erosion of the city’s historic fabric. Within such a context of accelerated urban change, the necessity of field-based investigations becomes critical, both to corroborate cartographic reconstructions and to document the rapidly vanishing physical remnants of Shahjahanabad’s water systems. I surveyed a total of 371 sites in and around the walled city, of which 220 sites were found to have attestations of Mughal water features (see Appendix I/B; also, Figure 6.25 & Figure 6.26), either in the form of physical remains or epigraphical evidence. There were 41 sites which still had epigraphical remains, suggesting the presence of water features (see Figure 6.26; also, Appendix II/5D). All extant features were photographically documented, with the majority drawn to scale (see Figure 6.27 & 6.28). Each feature’s geographical coordinates were recorded along with its period of construction, feature type, and current usage. Their material compositions and profiles, including their present state of preservation, 203 were also documented. Each site was assigned a unique code, and all surveyed features were compiled in the form of a booklet (see Appendix I/B). All measured drawings of wells and tanks were separately compiled (see Figure 6.27 & 6.28) on a comparative scale to facilitate an understanding of their significance, as well as the affluent nature of their premises in which they were located, together with their distribution across the city. A total of 93 wells, 04 stepwells, and 52 tanks/cisterns were identified during the field survey, including attestations of stormwater channels at 35 different sites (see Appendix I/B, and Appendix II/5D & II/5E). Figure 6.24: Extant Octagonal Wells of Shahjahanabad (for details refer to fieldwork booklet in Appendix I/B) The wells were predominantly circular; however, octagonal-shaped wells were observed within the fort premises. Additionally, the wells associated with elite mosques, havelis, and gardens of royal households exhibited octagonal shapes (Figure 6.24). This suggests that wells commissioned by the royal household were enclosed in an octagonal form with a circular drum or shaft, distinguishing them from the standard uniform circular configuration built and used by the general populace. The presence of some octagonal-shaped community wells indicates the involvement of royal households in their construction (see Appendix I/B; SJB/01/75). All the wells, octagonal and circular, found during fieldwork, were built in stone. The wells situated on the two pahadis (Bhojla and Jhojla) were deep, while those located in proximity to the canal were shallow and were presumably also supplied with fresh water by the canal when the water table decreased (after Mann 2007:7). During fieldwork, the majority of wells were observed to be covered by metal or stone openable-lids, a later addition, through which pipes were inserted to draw water, through submersible electric pumps, to taps or overhead storage tanks (see Appendix I/B; SJB/01/013, 019, 047). The original pulley system for water extraction was no longer operational, and 204 Figure 6.25 Figure 6.26 FATEHPURI MASJID FATEHPURI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID MADARSA & MASJID HUSAINIYA MASJID HUSAINBAKSH MASJID IMLIWALI LAL KUAN CHAH RAHAT, JAMA MASJID MASJID CHATTA SHEIKH MANGLU MASJID ANJUMAN MOHALLA QABRISTAN CHOWK DARGAH & MASJID SHAH ALI QADRI BANJARON KI BAOLI DARGAH SARMAD TEMPLE, ROSHANPURA COMMUNITY WELL ROSHANPURA SRI DIGAMBAR JAIN PANCHAYATI MANDIR SRI DIGAMBAR JAIN NAYA MANDIR MASJID SYED RAFAI MASJID DAI WALI MASJID KIKAR WALI LAL MASJID MASJID HAMMAM WALI MASJID YEK BURJ WALI GALI KHAZANCHI GURUDWARA SHISH GANJ SAHIB JOGIWARA TEMPLE HAVELI HAIDER QULI HAUZWALI MASJID MASJID ANARWALI UNKNOWN MOSQUE MASJID SABZI MANDI MASJID MAULANA AHMAD SAEED UNKNOWN MOSQUE CHOTI MASJID PUBLIC WELL MASJID HANFIYA MASJID BUDHIA WALI SHAHI MASJID QUDSIA BAGH QUDSIA BAGH ROSHANARA BAGH SHEESH MAHAL, SHALIMAR BAGH SHEESH MAHAL, SHALIMAR BAGH ANGLO-ARABIC SCHOOL EIDGAH TEMPLE, KATRA NEEL HAVELI, KUCHA MIR ASHIQ Documentation of Wells, ShahjahanabadFigure 6.27 FATEHPURI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID MASJID PEEPALWALI ZEENAT UL MASAJID MADARSA & MASJID HUSAINIYA MASJID HUSAINBAKSH MASJID DO JAANA HOUSE MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID HAUZWALI KALAN MASJID MASJID SABIR BAKSH HAVELI, ROSHANPURA MASJID SHAHJAHANI MASJID HAUZ QAZI MASJID HAUZWALI HAVELI KHAZANCHI MADRASA AMINIA JAMA MASJID SHAHI MASJID, QUDSIA BAGH ESPLANADE ROAD EIDGAH Documentation of Tanks/Cisterns, ShahjahanabadFigure 6.28 only a limited number of locations retained remnants of this system (see Appendix I/B; SJB/01/014, 042, and 043). Colvin (1833:109) also noted the presence of connecting inlets from the Shah Nahr to city wells. According to the 1840s map, 114 of the 155 wells were identified as community wells. Among these 114 wells, the majority were either within religious complexes or adjacent to them, primarily for ritualistic purposes. Approximately one-third of the public wells featured a raised platform, predominantly located at street intersections or within small public squares. Of the 93 wells surveyed during fieldwork, the majority were found within mosques and temples and are still being utilised for ritualistic purposes. Wells within temples continue to be venerated by newlywed brides, thus maintaining protected status within religious premises. At some sites, wells have been built over but retain place names indicative of their presence, such as Jangi Kuan (SJB/01/067), Chunga Kuan (SJB/01/068), and Chah Hathi (SJB/01/053). In addition to the wells, the city possessed a network of cisterns and reservoirs predominantly situated within khana-baghs (house-gardens) and mosque complexes. Hauz Qazi was likely the largest community reservoir, supplied by the Shah Nahr (Lahori 2013:83-84; see Figure 6.29). Located in a valley to the southwest of the city, this tank was the defining feature of the city square. Surrounded by mosques and markets on three sides, Hauz Qazi square functioned as a focal point for the exchange of trade, commerce, and religious ideas (Sair-ul Manazil tr. by. Qasmi 2022:67-68). The site is currently occupied by the Chawri Bazaar metro station, with no traces of the reservoir remaining. The adjacent mosques, however, still exist with small water tanks, supplied by wells. Towards the end of the Mughal period, the water requirements of the city were further addressed through the introduction of an additional reservoir outside the fort complex by British forces, adjacent to the Lahore Gate. Known as the Ellenborough Tank, and locally referred to as Lal Diggi or ‘The Red Cistern’ (see Figure 6.29), this tank measured 500 ft. x 150ft. in size and was constructed entirely of red sandstone (after Khan 1846:103). The mapping of water features onto the plan of the walled city revealed a significant disparity in their distribution within Shahjahanabad. The northern section of Shahjahanabad (above Chandni Chowk) was supplied by the Shah Nahr or Royal Canal, which provided water to Begum ka Bagh (Queen’s Garden) and the havelis (mansions) of royal family members, as well as the residence of Ali Mardan Khan, the designer of the Shah Nahr. These havelis featured extensive gardens with individual wells, stepwells, and tanks. The concentration of public wells in this area is predominantly found in neighbourhoods inhabited by the general populace, who were in service to these havelis and gardens. The southern section of Shahjahanabad primarily relies on wells for water supply. Apart from a few garden tanks and one community reservoir fed by the canal, this area also featured water-drinking fountains (sabeel or piyau; see Appendix I/B; SBJ/01/61, 63, 98, 143) for travellers as well as facilities for cart-drawing animals (see 209 Appendix I/B; SJB/01/122, 123) along the roads leading to the main market streets. The khana-baghs (house-gardens), in this section, are primarily concentrated in two areas, both adjacent to the canal: to the south of Shah Nahr and to the west of Faiz Nahr50. Jama Masjid, the sovereign mosque, is the most prominent feature of the landscape, situated on elevated terrain and supplied by its own system of chah rahat (well with Persian wheel; SJB/01/022) and a central ablution tank (SJB/01/099). All other elite mosques were positioned along the edge of the canal, drawing water for ablution from the canal into their respective tanks. The fort possessed its own water-distribution mechanism and rainwater harvesting system, independent of city networks. Figure 6.29: Map of Shahjahanabad showing mosques, gardens & all water features (based on fieldwork & 1840s map of the city) 50 The Shah Nahr was known as Faiz Nahr between Delhi Gate of the Fort & Delhi Gate of the City. Chandni Chowk Hauz Qazi Lal Diggi 210 6.2.3 Delhi Fort or Qila-i Mualla The reaffirmation of the Turko-Mongolian lineage and its citadel-building practices of the Mughal empire was strongly evident in Shahjahan’s design of the Delhi Fort. Also known as Timur-Sani (Timur II), Shahjahan used his lineage as a tool of ‘prestige and credibility’ (Golombek & Koch 2017:811) of his governance and architectural practices. Hence, it is important to study the positioning and layout of the fort complexes within the Turko-Mongolian (later Turko-Persian) landscape to draw on the similarities, as well as understand the adoption or adaptation of designs to South Asian geography, if any. Rather than the concentric enclosure design of the city where the fort occupies the centre of the shahristan (inner city), the forts are placed tangentially to the city layout, as in the case of Samarqand (Afrasiyab), Herat (Qal’a-ye Ikhtiyar al-Din), and Shahr-i Sabz (Ak-Sarai). This practice is also evident in the fort designs of Kerman, Tabriz, Balkh, and Termez. In most cases, the fort occupies an elevated terrain surrounded by a ditch, which is a common defensive practice when building a citadel, as in Kandahar, Bukhara, and other cities of the medieval era. In Delhi, Shahjahan used the area between one of the anabranches of the river Yamuna, adjacent to the Salimgarh Fort, to build the fort using the anabranch as a moat and strategically separating the fort from the city. The construction of the Qila-i Mualla or Delhi Fort in Shahjahanabad took place between 1639 and 1648. The site selected for the fort was situated on an island of the Yamuna River, which was adjacent to another island that housed the Salimgarh Fort. These islands were probably hilly outcrops of the Aravalli Range. Salimgarh Fort51 was constructed by Salim Shah of the Sur dynasty. The Surs ruled South Asia for 15 years between 1540 and 1555, briefly interrupting the Mughal rule. Sher Shah Suri, a renowned builder and the founder of the Sur dynasty, also developed and extended the trade route known as the Badshahi Sadak, which connected South Asia to the major trade routes of Central Asia. He ruled North India from 1540 until his death in 1545. His son, Salim Shah, built a fort on the island in Yamuna. Situated at the convergence of the Badshahi Sadak trade route and the river, where land and water routes nearly align, Salimgarh Fort exemplifies the Sur dynasty’s intent to control the transit of goods and people within the doab area between the Ganga and Yamuna rivers (also discussed in section 6.1). The eight-sided Fort, built of red sandstone52 and white marble, measuring 1000 x 600 imperial gaz, consisted of a tripartite layout with the royal complex, gardens and residential quarters of the nobles and servants. The walls of Delhi Fort had the Yamuna River flowing on three sides, encompassing the perimeter of the fort (Kambo tr. in 2013:442). The eastern wall, which housed all the royal buildings, was constructed in a straight line and faced the river and its sandy edge. Therefore, Yamuna potentially flowed on all sides of 51 Later known as Nurgarh Fort, after Nuruddin Jahangir, the 4th Mughal Emperor. 52 Quarried from Fathpur (after Rezavi, 2011, p. 1111). The fort is now known as Red Fort or Lal Qila. 211 the fort through its anabranch, creating a fort-island typology with the river as its moat. The royal buildings were interconnected through the Nahr-i Bihisht or the Shah Nahr’s water channels, which flowed through a central water channel in each building (Kambo tr. in 2013:501). The fort boasted an extensive system of hauz (water tanks), abshaar (cascades), fountains, and nallahs (water channels) that connected the gardens and buildings of the royal complex. Figure 6.30: Water channels leading to Zafar Mahal within the Fort Complex. The suruving British barrack yards can be seen in the background on either side of Zafar Mahal. In 1857, the British seized control of India from the Mughal Empire. This was followed by a significant amount of demolition, both within and outside the fort complex, including the clearance of the Daryaganj and Begum ka Bagh precincts located to the south and west of the fort. Many of the buildings within the fort complex were demolished (see Figure 6.31), and its gardens, such as the Hayat Bakhsh and Mahtab Bagh, were replaced by barrack yards (Figure 6.30). Archaeological excavations of the Fort conducted in the early 20th century uncovered a set of water features that were integral to its design. One of the earliest explorations in 1903 by the Archaeological Survey of India within the fort complex revealed evidence of water tanks, water courses, and sunken gardens (ASI Annual Report 1903-04:22), suggesting the presence of a larger hydraulic system within the fort precinct during the Mughal era. Further investigation in 1904 led to the discovery of watercourses connected to the central tank of Zafar Mahal. Additionally, they found a water tank in Shah Burj, which connected the Hayat Bakhsh gardens to the royal apartments on the eastern edge of the fort complex via a 9’6’ wide channel (ASI Annual Report 1904-05:17-18) of the Shah Nahr, also referred to as Nahr-i Bihisht, within the royal quarters (see Figure 6.32). 212 Figure 6.31: Plan of the Delhi Fort Complex before demolition by the British Empire (after Sanderson, 1914). Structures shown in red were demolished in 1857 as a measure of visual control by colonial forces. Francois Bernier, a French traveller who visited Delhi in the 17th century, noted that the imperial quarters of the Mughals were interconnected through the waters of the Nahr-i Bihisht, with each building having its own reservoir and fountain systems (Bernier 1916:257). Additionally, these buildings were surrounded by gardens that had their own hydraulic systems connected to canal waters. Salih Kambo, the chronicler of Shahjahan, described the flow of the Nahr-i Bihisht through the buildings on the eastern 213 wall (see Figure 6.32), including the Hammam, Diwan-i Khas, Khwabgah, Rang Mahal, Mumtaz Mahal, and the imperial seraglio, before eventually draining into the moat or towards Yamuna (Kambo tr. in 2013:444). Archaeologists working on the Fort complex during the years 1907-08 uncovered the water tank of Rang Mahal. This tank was linked to the Nahr-i Bihisht and it overflowed into a tank located to its west, which in turn flowed into the garden’s water courses surrounding the structure (ASI Annual Report 1907-08:28). This finding significantly aided the revival of water systems within the imperial quarters of the fort complex. Figure 6.32: Nahr-i-Bihisht within the Imperial quarters of the Delhi Fort Complex In subsequent years, further excavations focused on gradually unearthing the historical water courses and garden beds of the Hayat Bakhsh gardens (ASI Annual Report 1908-09:2). Between 1909 and 1911, the minor causeways of the Mughal Garden were restored to their original levels, along with the gardens surrounding Shah Burj. The most significant discovery, however, occurred in 1912 when Gordon Sanderson, the Superintendent of the Muhammadan Monuments of the British Northern Circle, published the layout of the Hayat Bakhsh Garden, as well as the layout and water system design of other gardens within the fort complex, such as those adjoining Diwan-i Khas and Rang Mahal. This was based on excavations carried out between 1902-1912 by the Archaeological Survey of India. Sanderson also attempted a sketch of the fort complex, incorporating all the original buildings, based on Fergusson’s work (1891:593) and an indigenous map of the fort complex, now at the Jaipur Museum. 214 An early indigenous map of Shahjahanabad, created in the 1840s, also aided in assessing building patterns within the fort complex (Figure 6.22). By carefully examining the layout of various sets of drawings, produced at different scales, at different times, and with different objectives, insights were gained into the water design of the fort complex. These drawings highlighted the presence of quadripartite garden designs and water courses that intersected at right angles to one another. The water in the causeways was supplied by Shah Nahr, which entered the fort complex via a small water duct. This water was probably lifted using a technique similar to noria, consisting of a scoop-wheel with buckets or pots to lift water from a flowing source, in this case the canal. The section of the canal known as shutur-gola (camel’s neck) in Mughal maps likely derives its name from the distinct profile of water flow, which travels from a lower elevation outside the fort to a higher point on the fort wall, resembling the shape of a camel’s neck. The water entered the fort complex from the north-west and then turned right towards the south, flowing towards Delhi Gate, through the imperial plaza of the Naqqar Khana, forming a grand water channel (N-S Axis). The canal was flanked by two wide roads on either side (Ahmad 1873:48). Water from this channel was then diverted to the east and west of the fort complex. Based on Sanderson’s archaeological drawing of the fort, it is evident that the water from this channel was diverted to Shah Burj, from where it was further lifted to enter the imperial quarters to form a 12 feet wide Nahr-i Bihisht (Ahmad 1873:59) feeding the tanks and fountains of the royal enclosure. A series of terracotta ducts were found in Shah Burj during fieldwork. These ducts were connected to a water tank which was fed by the Shah Nahr through a lifting device. These two axes are also indicative of the topographical nature of the fort-island site. The two principal water axes, the central (N-S) and the one towards Shah Burj (W-E), probably occupied the highest elevations within the fort complex, and then water was directed through these channels to other parts of the complex following a gravity-based mechanism, concomitant to the sloping profile of the land. Further to Sanderson’s report, based on my fieldwork conducted in 2023 and 2024, archaeological remains of another imperial garden, Mahtab Bagh53, were found. The direction of water flowing into this garden complex was also connected to the N-S and W-E water-axes, further supporting my assessment of the topographical nature of the site (see Figure 6.33). The water from the N-S Axis, thereafter, flowed towards the west through the central imperial axis, constituting of Naubat Khana and Chatta Chowk54 (covered market, also known as Bazar-i-Musaqqif, after Khan II 1846:30) and entered a huge 53 A description from 1821 of the Fort refers to the presence of the revered relics of the Prophet Muhammad within the Mahtab Bagh (Chenoy 2018:14). The presence of these relics not only signifies the sanctity of the garden enclosure but also endows the water of the Shah Nahr with a sacred attribute within the imperial quarters. 54 According to Ahmad (1873:47), Chatta Chowk had a central octagonal tank which measured 30 feet in width. The market section here featured an octagonal opening to the sky exactly above the water tank. 215 underground tank located adjacent to the Lahore Gate (discovered during the fieldwork) before draining into the moat. Figure 6.33: Archaeological Excavation of the Mahtab Bagh conducted in 2014 by the ASI (Image: 2023) Field Survey of Fort Complex I employed a multi-scalar approach during my fieldwork of the Delhi Fort involving three stages to comprehend the water system of the fort complex (see Figure 6.34 and Figure 6.35; also, Appendix I/B). The first stage entailed gaining insight into the fort’s periphery, including its moat and fortification wall, including those of Salimgarh Fort. The second stage concentrated on zoning within the fort complex, considering the associated water features as well as the role of water in the zoning process. The third stage involved analysing the specifics of the techniques and other water features present within the fort precinct. As mentioned earlier, an anabranch of the Yamuna River would have been modelled to create the moat. A landform reconstruction of the fort indicates an outwards drainage typology of the land, resulting in the formation of a trough between the fort and the city. This trough was probably the course of the anabranch of the river. The earth-bed moat had a depth of 10 imperial gaz and a width of 25 imperial gaz (Khan II 1846:29) and encircled three sides of the fort complex. The Mughals introduced a system of recharge wells within the moat, which were later modified by the British, some of which are still visible on the surface. Although the moat is now inaccessible, I was able to traverse the entire length of the moat with the assistance of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) team of the Delhi Chapter. The eight-sided irregular red sandstone fortification wall features rainwater outlets at its centre at the plinth level of the fort (see Figure 6.36). These outlets were likely connected to a storage tank, which collected surface water runoff from the upper and intermediate terraces of the fort wall. Excess water was then released into the moat. My conjecture on the presence of concealed storage tanks is based on a Mahtab Bagh Zafar Mahal 216 similar approach taken by the Mughals in other parts of the Delhi fort, such as the imperial quarters between Shah Burj and Hammam, and adjacent to the Lahore Gate. Fieldwork at Agra Fort also revealed a series of rainwater harvesting tanks built into the fort wall, the excess of which drains into the moat. The city also followed a similar pattern of harvesting during the summer rains of the Saawan-Bhadon months, with rainwater conduits built on both the external and internal facades directing the water to the storage tanks located below the plinth level. The practice of building large-scale storage tanks underscores the significance of harvesting seasonal water by the Mughals in the semi-arid landscape of Delhi. Two wells were discovered near the moat in the south, and it is speculated that they were intended for inhabitants of Daryaganj. A watermill was also present at the outlet of the moat into the river, which likely used the flow of Yamuna’s anabranch to power the mill. Additionally, a series of wells were found in the bastions of the Salimgarh Fort, which is connected to the Mughal Fort through a water bridge. These wells were likely used to access fresh water for the military island fort. The construction of two drawbridges, situated at Delhi Gate and Lahore Gate, served to connect the fort to the mainland. Following the events of 1857, these drawbridges were replaced by permanent bridges by British forces. In addition, a baoli, characterised by broad steps, was located at the southeast corner of the fort, next to the Asad Burj, in close proximity to where the moat meets the river. It is believed that this structure was designed to accommodate the water access needs of elephants and horses. The water system within the fort was designed along a predominantly north-south axis, with water channels originating from it to feed other buildings and enclosures within the fort precinct. Water from Shah Nahr was brought into the fort through an inlet on the northwest, with the water channel initially perpendicular to the wall before being reoriented in the north-south and west-east axes. Besides the land topography, the presence of a baoli or stepwell dating back to the pre-Mughal period was a major reason for this orientation. Two important built-heritage listings conducted by the ASI under Hasan (1914) and Ahmad (1919, surveyed in 1873) attribute the construction of the baoli to the late Afghan period, while Nanda and Gupta (1999) describe it as Tughlaq-era baoli. Near the baoli, there was a mosque of the same period, which further highlights the connection between water and religious structures in the landscape. During my fieldwork, I discovered a religious shrine built in the rear wall of the stepwell. The baoli is a double-flighted L-shaped structure with an octagonal opening, and evidence of a lifting technique involving a pulley system was found on-site. Despite extensive demolition and construction at the site post-1857 by the British, fieldwork enabled the identification of features that can aid in reconstructing the water system within the fort complex and help in deciphering its scheme of development (see Figure 6.37). The layout of the water 217 Figure 6.34 Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Floor Plan of Extant Structures Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam M o at Figure 6.35 Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Stormwater Outlets & Storage Tanks Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam Stormwater Outlets Water Storage Tanks Figure 6.36 Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Canal Network (Conjectural) Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914; canal network diagram based on fieldwork and cartographic sources of Mughal Period) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam M o at Hammam towards Yamuna towards Yamuna towards Faiz Bazaar towards Yamuna towards moat Shah N ah r (C an al) Figure 6.37 system within the fort showed a clear tripartite division. The north-south axis served as a major boundary between the imperial section of the fort and the service quarters, while the west-east axis separates the quarters of the royal court members and their sovereigns. The gardens also played a role in delineating different areas and provided a buffer between the active zones of the Qila-i Mualla. Although the system is primarily fed by the Shah Nahr, the presence of wells within the fort complex suggests the existence of decentralised functioning units, particularly in the service quarters, where the canal waters were not directed. During the course of fieldwork, eight wells were identified, mostly located within the premises of the noble’s havelis and the enclosure of the service quarter units. Some of these wells were also found in the imperial quarters and were likely introduced to supply water to the gardens during the dry periods of the year. The fieldwork involved tracking the course of the canal within the fort complex, its alignment, and related water features and methods, throughout its entirety, to gain a thorough comprehension of its operation and flow. The N-S axis, which currently serves as a drain, originally comprised four key outlets before ultimately forming the water axis of the city, known as the Faiz-Bazaar axis, after leaving the Delhi Gate of the fort complex. These outlets were identified based on the archaeological remains of two imperial gardens, Mahtab Bagh and Hayat Bakhsh, as well as an analysis of the maps and drawings produced during the Mughal era. The first two outlets supplied the gardens and the imperial apartments with water, which was lifted at the Shah Burj, to form the Nahr-i Bihisht. The third outlet established the imperial axis of the fort, originating at the Lahore Gate and terminating at the square of the Diwan-i Am (Hall of Commons). This imperial axis featured a central water tank referred to as the Hauz Nahr or Canal Tank (Ahmad 1873:48), which formed the central square of the imperial axis. Water played a pivotal role in connecting the various channels that led to the imperial, noble, and service quarters of the fort complex. This location also marked the divide between the sovereigns and the commoners, as individuals from non-Mughal households were expected to dismount from their vehicles here. Chronicles refer to the presence of a ‘stable’ at this location (Padhshanama tr. by Dwivedi 2016:65). The fourth outlet drained towards the Yamuna, separating the imperial quarters from the houses of the nobles and animal keepers, who were served by the baoli in the south-east corner of the fort. The sub-branches of the canal further supplied water to the imperial gardens, hammams, seraglio, and personal chambers of the emperor, such as the Khwaabgah (bedroom) and Diwan-i Khas (Hall of Private Audience). These were also fed by wells. During fieldwork, a series of reservoirs were discovered that were probably connected directly to the canal, such as those in Mahtab Bagh, Hayat Bakhsh (around 222 Zafar Mahal), and Rang Mahal. Small open-to-air tanks were found within Shah Burj, Hammam55, Diwan-i Khas, Rang Mahal, and Sheesh Mahal. Sunken storage tanks were also discovered which formed part of the imperial quarter near Hira Mahal and between the Royal Hammam and Diwan-i Khas. An ablution tank, measuring 10’ × 8’, connected to the canal was found within the Moti Masjid or the Pearl Mosque (also Ahmad 1873:71). A small hammam was also discovered during fieldwork at the southeast of the fort, which was probably supplied water from an octagonal well located adjacent to the structure. The analysis of the canal system within the Red Fort complex underscores its centrality not merely as a hydraulic feature, but as an organising principle of imperial palatial planning. Fieldwork tracing the canal’s alignment and outlets demonstrates that water was deliberately deployed to articulate spatial hierarchies, demarcate zones of access, and reinforce the symbolic order of sovereignty. The four outlets identified along the north–south axis reveal a carefully staged sequence of circulation in which water, architecture, and authority were interwoven. The first two outlets sustained the aesthetic and functional requirements of the imperial gardens and apartments, with the Shah Burj lifting water into the Nahr-i Bihisht, a canal that evoked paradisiacal imagery central to Mughal kingship. The third outlet, by contrast, anchored the imperial axis from the Lahore Gate to the Diwan-i Am, where the Hauz Nahr functioned simultaneously as a hydraulic node and a ceremonial square. This intersection between water and architectural space was not incidental but deliberate: the canal both linked and divided, connecting imperial, noble, and service quarters while also marking thresholds of power. The requirement for non-Mughal subjects to dismount at this point reinforced the symbolic boundary between sovereign and subject, while the nearby stable, noted in chronicles, highlighted the choreography of authority embedded in space. The fourth outlet, draining toward the Yamuna, extended this logic of division outward, separating the imperial enclave from the residences of nobles and animal keepers, who relied instead on the baoli in the south-east corner. In this way, the canal system was as much about governance as hydraulics: it supplied and adorned, but also classified and segregated. Together, the canal layout emerges as a structuring device that integrated engineering, aesthetics, and ideology. Its flow articulated the paradisiacal vision of the Mughal court while materially embedding the distinctions between emperor, nobility, and populace. The Red Fort’s canal system thus served as both 55 Hammam, also known as Shahi Hammam, comprised of three distinct chambers. The central chamber featured a sunken water tank, fed by the Nahr-i Bihisht, from which water was diverted to three adjacent water tanks in the eastern chamber and to the tank in the western chamber, which also had a heating mechanism involving a furnace. Copper pipes transported hot water, while clay pipes conveyed cold water, ultimately directing the water to the tank in the western chamber (after Ahmad 1873:67). The hammam waters was also believed to have healing powers (Batalwi 1695:60) 223 the physical infrastructure of water management and the spatial grammar through which imperial authority was expressed, negotiated, and enforced. In a semi-arid region, it is crucial to harvest summer rains, as they bring the highest rainfall in South Asia. Historical studies of the rainfall patterns in the late Mughal period reveal that the Saawan- Bhadon months of the Hindu calendar, which correspond to July-August, received the highest rainfall, sometimes reaching 25-30 inches. The Mughals recognised the significance of these two rain months (see Chapter 4, section 4.1.2) and, as a result, their designs included a system of structural stormwater systems, including rainwater shafts and storage tanks, to harvest surface run-off from hard surfaces (see Figure 6.36). The fieldwork I conducted at Mughal monuments and cities in Agra, Burhanpur, and Delhi demonstrated their efforts to channel and store rainwater for use during the dry seasons. Both Burhanpur and Delhi, located in semi-arid regions, featured centralised systems of Mughal water management, with the cities being supplied by the qanat and canal, respectively. The qanat in Burhanpur and the canal in Delhi originated in the foothills of the Satpura and Himalayan mountain ranges, and working on the constant offtake principle served the city and the fort before draining into the river. In addition to the continuous supply of water, these cities, especially their fort complexes, also had a detailed rainwater harvesting system using a network of stormwater components such as terracotta pipes and brick-lined storage tanks to harvest summer rains. Additionally, during my fieldwork at Delhi Fort, I observed a hierarchical rainwater management system that corresponded to the zoning layout of the fort complex (see Figure 6.36). The first system existed at the peripheral level of the fort. The fort wall was constructed at two levels connected by a flight of steps. Small terracotta pipes were used as rainwater outlets at all levels, directing the water inward rather than allowing it to drain into the moat directly. Water from the terrace at the top level flowed to the intermediate level and then to the ground floor. Thereafter, it was probably collected in storage tanks located at the centre of each face of the octagonal fort. The stormwater outlets located on the external face of the wall likely drained excess water from these tanks into the moat (see Figure 6.36). In the surviving structures located between the public entrance, Lahore Gate, and Naqqar Khana, a series of rainwater outlets were observed in Chatta Bazaar at both the roof and intermediate levels. These outlets directed the rainwater to the ground level, and the slope carried it to the underground storage tank located at the Lahore Gate, with any excess being drained into the moat. Additionally, rainwater pipes were discovered on all four sides of the Naqqar Khana structure. Together with the imperial quarters, the Saawan and Bhadon pavilions, and the Naqqar Khana, the fort exhibits an intelligent layout system of rainwater outlets directing the predominant runoff inward towards sunken storage tanks and garden 224 channels, contributing to the harvesting potential of the fort (Figure 6.36). Most roofs have a central crown directing water to its shorter or near edges to minimise runoff loss. Additionally, some outlets were designed to channel excess water towards the river’s eastern side, which bordered the imperial quarters. The 1840s map of the city also shows that significant surface runoff would have originated from the paved areas of the imperial quarters and entrance plaza, in addition to the rooftops. The demolition of the service quarters and havelis of the nobles has resulted in the absence of any extant remains of the stormwater system in this section of the fort that could potentially contribute to the conjecture of the harvesting system. The majority of the water features within the fort were either destroyed post-1857 or modified following the ASI Report of 1912. Some of these features were also relocated or altered, such as the large movable monolith marble tank (measuring 10’2’ x 9’6’ x 3’2’) that was originally situated in the Moti Mahal (which was demolished in 1857) and was subsequently placed at the centre of the tank, facing the Rang Mahal. Additionally, the N-S water axis was found to have been altered and redirected towards the Yamuna River, near the Delhi Gate of the fort. Consequently, a mapping exercise was conducted to locate the features mentioned in the literary and cartographic sources of the Mughal period, including reports produced by the British. This, in conjunction with fieldwork, allowed for the conjecture of a possible water network within the fort during the Mughal Period (see Figure 6.37). Within the Red Fort complex, water functioned simultaneously as a utilitarian resource, a medium of aesthetics, and a political instrument, shaping both the environmental comfort and symbolic grandeur of the imperial seat. Its integration into garden enclosures, cooling systems, and ceremonial axes demonstrates how hydraulic design was inseparable from the architectural and ideological fabric of the fort. The organisation of space within the complex reveals that the principal buildings were conceived as discrete architectural units, surrounded by open gardens and interconnected through water channels. These channels did more than irrigate or embellish; they operated as connective tissue, linking separate structures into a coherent whole and producing an urban morphology that resembled an ‘encampment city’ (after Sinopoli 1994:296). This encampment model was not incidental but deeply rooted in the nomadic traditions of the Mughal dynasty, themselves heirs to the Timurid and Turko-Mongolian traditions of courtly mobility. Sobti (1995:71, 31) identifies the concept of ‘nomadic encampment’ as a key design principle inherited from the Ilkhanid and Timurid courts, who translated the mobile imperial camp into the sedentary landscapes of Iran, Turan, and Hindustan through formal constructions of forts. The Red Fort, like other Mughal capitals, exemplifies this principle as well: it was a stone translation of the imperial camp, where gardens stood in for camp enclosures and canals as interconnecting links. The 225 architectural vocabulary thus materialised the memory of conquest and migration, embedding a nomadic worldview within a permanent, monumental frame. The peripatetic nature of the Mughal court was fundamental to the articulation of imperial sovereignty. As Blake (1991:97), drawing on the Ain-i Akbari (Fazal I:336), observes, the emperors spent nearly forty percent of their time between 1526 and 1739 in camp, moving across the subcontinent in elaborate tent-cities. This mobility was not merely a logistical necessity for governance, though it facilitated intensive administrative activity (Sinopoli 1994:298), but a symbolic enactment of sovereignty. By repeatedly traversing their territories, the Mughals made their presence visible while transforming movement itself into a performative display of power. These itinerant courts became political spectacles, what Balabanlilar (2009:174) has described as a form of ‘political theatre’, where the grandeur of imperial authority was displayed in highly choreographed and visually striking forms. The first emperors, Babur and Humayun, and for a period Akbar, ruled from these travelling encampments, underscoring the centrality of mobility to Mughal kingship (Macneal 1991:36). Even when Akbar established a permanent capital at Fatehpur Sikri, the first city purpose-built under Mughal rule, the palace layout retained a strong connection to the court’s peripatetic traditions. Scholars have noted that its palace complex echoed the Mongol-style encampment (Monserrate 1922:75, after Macneal 1991:36), translating the order of the mobile court into a fixed built form. In doing so, Fatehpur Sikri embodied a negotiation between two dimensions of Mughal rule: the political tradition of mobility and the stability of state-building through monumental architecture (Martinez 2020:29). Tents, long emblematic of nomadic identity and mobility in Mughal self-representation, provided the conceptual model for this architectural experiment. The spatial organization of Fatehpur Sikri’s palace complex reproduced the encampment’s hierarchical logic, where patterns of movement defined ranks of authority and access. Earlier capitals such as Agra and Lahore, which predated Mughal rule and were later adapted to imperial use, did not embody this logic as distinctly. By contrast, Fatehpur Sikri, and later Mughal interventions within fort complexes, such as the Jahangiri Mahal in Agra Fort, were consciously structured according to peripatetic principles (Klingelhofer 1998:161). Thus, even as the Mughal Empire anchored its authority in monumental architecture, the underlying logic of its political culture remained peripatetic. Movement across the landscape, the visual staging of imperial encampments, and the translation of tents into stone collectively sustained the mobile foundations of Mughal sovereignty. The Red Fort’s design carried this tradition forward: its palaces and pavilions were essentially ‘tents in stone’ (Nanda 2012:158), arranged around flowing water that linked imperial, noble, and service quarters into a hierarchical order. Water was thus the vital element that enabled the fort to reproduce the 226 logic of the camp while simultaneously sustaining life and staging imperial authority. By situating water at the heart of architectural and spatial planning, the Red Fort embodied the dual legacy of the Mughals as both sovereigns shaped by a nomadic, Timurid past and rulers of a sedentary empire in Hindustan. The hydraulic system, therefore, was not merely functional or ornamental but part of a constructed style of kingship, one that merged climatic responsiveness, paradisiacal imagery, and the politics of mobility into a single, enduring expression of Mughal sovereignty. To conclude, the Red Fort of Delhi, together with the city of Shahjahanabad, must be understood not merely as architectural achievements but as instruments of projection and reception, carefully staged to articulate Mughal sovereignty to multiple audiences. Necipoğlu (1993:318) has argued that the inspiration for Shahjahan’s urban and architectural vision drew on the ‘framing and staging’ concepts embedded in the display culture of Ottoman Istanbul and Safavid Isfahan. Both cities functioned as grand theatres of power, where imperial visibility was structured through architecture, ceremony, and spatial order. Their influence on Shahjahanabad reflects the Mughals’ conscious participation in a broader, trans- Islamic discourse of urban kingship, where architecture mediated the encounter between ruler and ruled (Blake 1991; Babaie & Kafescioglu 2017; Asher 2008). Within this comparative frame, Shahjahan’s project in Delhi can be read as a negotiated position. Sharma (2018:102) characterizes it as an attempt to establish a ‘middle ground’ between the Ottoman model of exclusivity, where imperial visibility was tightly controlled, and the Safavid model of inclusivity, where ceremonial encounters between sovereign and subjects were staged more directly within public space. The Red Fort, and particularly its axial connections to the city via the Delhi Gate and the Faiz- Bazaar axis, embodied this calibrated balance. While the fort’s inner palaces and water-fed gardens articulated the intimacy and seclusion of imperial life, its monumental gates, processional routes, and audience halls staged carefully managed moments of accessibility. In this way, architecture became a medium of reception, inviting the populace into orchestrated encounters with sovereignty while preserving the hierarchical distance necessary to Mughal kingship. Yet beyond Ottoman and Safavid models, the Mughal enterprise remained fundamentally anchored in its Timurid inheritance. ‘Timuridity’, as Golombek and Koch (2017:811) argue, persisted as the defining characteristic of the dynasty’s monumental practices. The Red Fort’s pavilion-and-garden layout, conceived as a ‘tent city in stone’ (Nanda 2012:158), directly recalled the encampment traditions of Timur and Babur, thereby situating Shahjahan’s capital within a genealogy of mobile sovereignty. In this sense, the fort operated as a projected memory of the peripatetic court, embedding mobility within sedentary architecture and enabling audiences, imperial, noble, and popular, to experience the grandeur of a nomadic past refracted through monumental form. 227 Together, the Red Fort emerges as a stage for sovereignty, simultaneously projecting Mughal authority across diverse audiences and shaping their reception of imperial power. Through its strategic synthesis of Ottoman staging, Safavid inclusivity, and Timurid memory, Shahjahanabad articulated a vision of empire that was at once cosmopolitan and genealogical. Its architectural grammar allowed the emperor to be both visible and withdrawn, accessible yet exalted, a sovereign whose authority was mediated through water, space, and ceremony, and whose legitimacy was performed before, and absorbed by, the audiences of the city. In a citywide context, canal waters functioned as both axial and nodal components that extended within the fort complex. The waterway that ran through Chandni Chowk and ended at the Naqqar Khana square in Hauz Nahr formed the city’s W-E water axis. Another axis, which ran from Hauz Nahr to Faiz Bazaar via the Delhi Gate of the fort, formed the city’s N-S water axis. These two water axes, fed by the Shah Nahr, were the primary means by which the city design was linked to the fort complex, besides the two physical drawbridges which connected the island-fort to the city occasionally. The study of the water system of Shahjahanabad provides insights into the practices of urbanism, landscape experimentation, imperial waterscapes, and changing hydro-social relationships in the cultural geography of the Shah Nahr and its associated water features. The Persianate traditions of landscape classification, water-distribution practices, and land management through garden networks resonate strongly with the historical process of planning and design of Shahjahanabad. As a central component of the imperial layout, Shah Nahr serves as a conduit linking the fort to the surrounding agricultural hinterlands. Analysing it in terms of monumentality and labour can yield further insights into its functionality and its role as the principal defining element of the ‘new landscape’. The Water Map of Shahjahanabad (Figure 6.38) illustrates a variety of water features, including linear, nodal, and polar forms, both large and small, and seasonal and perennial, ranging from confined urban enclosures to expansive rural geographies. The subsequent chapter endeavours to investigate the mechanisms of staging, framing, and hosting these waters within an imperially-oriented ‘faith-based’ context. Building on the intricate interplay between power, knowledge, and water infrastructure in Mughal Shahjahanabad, the next chapter shifts focus to the lived experiences and social dynamics shaped by these systems. It highlights how monumental canals and urban water networks embodied imperial authority, mediated religious practices, and structured the spatial and environmental landscape. It further examines how these infrastructures were encountered, negotiated, and appropriated by the city’s inhabitants tracing micro-level interactions, social hierarchies, and cultural practices that animated the imperial vision on the ground. In doing so, the study moves from understanding water as a tool of display and governance to seeing it as a medium through which social relations, economic activity, and community life were continuously shaped within the walled city. 228 Figure 6.38 Hand-drawn Map of Shahjahanabad removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is British Library Board. 7.0 The Making of an Infrastructural Monument: Mapping Water, Mapping Empire in Shahjahanabad Infrastructural systems represent memory, sovereignty and history. These systems are representations of imperial power and state geography in South Asia. As cultural artifacts, they contribute to the understanding of identities and associations of both the sovereign and its subjects. These systems possess significant technological value and stylistic importance, being architecturally committed not only to functionalism but also to the political representation of the empire in a ‘new landscape’ defined by its presence. As central elements of the imperial landscape, they contribute to discerning the expansionist means of the empire, its regional administrative measures, and the nature of land cover changes. With religion serving as a means to host the infrastructural system, these structures attain heightened significance in terms of their management system, further attributed by an associational value central to labour investments, positioning them as a major form of cultural production within the South Asian geography. Infrastructure is often imagined as a background condition: functional, technical, and utilitarian. Yet, when considered historically, infrastructural systems emerge not only as conduits of water, goods, and people, but as monumental forms of power and meaning. Their material presence alters landscapes, reorders ecologies, and mediates everyday practices. More significantly, they inscribe authority into the environment itself, functioning as durable markers of imperial ambition and statecraft. To understand infrastructure as monuments, then, is to shift the analytic frame: from seeing them as mere technical artefacts to recognising their symbolic, political, and cultural weight. The introduction of extensive water systems across empires exemplifies this monumental quality. In Central Asia, large-scale infrastructural projects were mobilised as both economic lifelines and political instruments; ‘objects’ and ‘methods’ through which imperial identity was materialised (Subtelny 2007). These systems did not simply supply water; they embodied sovereignty, delineating who could access, use, and control these resources. In South Asia, where ecological rhythms were structured by the volatility of monsoon-fed rivers (after Smith 2024), the introduction of canals transformed precarious seasonal flows into perennial supplies. This shift stabilised agrarian regimes, enabled multiple crop cycles, facilitated inland trade, and supported industry. Such prosperity was inseparable from investments in labour, expertise, and technology that collectively contributed to the ‘taming’ of water (Strang 2015:109). As anthropological and philosophical perspectives remind us, water channelled into infrastructures acquires value not only as a resource but as an artefact of human effort, knowledge, and meaning (Strang 2004:6; after Gell 1992; Ingold 1993). Infrastructures thus operate as both material and symbolic systems: they produce the conditions of everyday life while encoding particular visions of order and authority. They Figure 7.0: A segment of the 1840s Hand-drawn Map of Shahjahanabad. © British Library Board, X/1659, India Office Collection, London. 231 transform environments into landscapes of control, where imperial ‘power over space’ (Carse 2014:15) is inscribed not through fleeting acts of conquest but through enduring physical interventions. The Mughal hydrological system provides a striking example of such infrastructural monumentality. Water, as an everyday necessity, was simultaneously a political instrument, a cultural artefact, and a medium of imperial imagination. Mughal canal networks, dams, and distributive devices reordered agrarian landscapes, sustained urban growth, and structured the geometry of gardens, streets, and palaces. Shahjahanabad itself was materially shaped by the hydraulic order that connected the Himalayan foothills to the plains, projecting a vision of imperial space where control over rivers signified control over territories. Yet this infrastructural monumentalism was not exclusive to the imperial waterworks. The Mughal system was weaved with the indigenous practices, creating a layered watershed empire where centralised imperial projects coexisted with decentralised, locally sustained water units. This hybridity illustrates how infrastructures, like monuments, are not passive symbols but active sites of negotiation, and mediating between ecological rhythms, social practices, and imperial authority. Conceptualising infrastructure as monuments allows us to approach them as cultural and political artefacts that endure, demand recognition, and shape collective memory. Like monuments, they project permanence even as they are embedded in processes of everyday maintenance and repair. Unlike nodal built monuments, however, water infrastructures blur the line between the functional and the symbolic: they are lived and worked through daily, while simultaneously representing imperial ambition and state power. In this light, Mughal water systems exemplify how infrastructures can be read as monumental inscriptions of sovereignty, materially binding empire, ecology, and society into a shared order. This chapter develops the concept of infrastructural monumentality through four interrelated sections, examining how water functioned simultaneously as a material resource and a symbolic medium in the mapping of empire. The first section explores the staging of infrastructure in urban Shahjahanabad, with particular emphasis on the representation of water as a tool for theatrically projecting imperial presence. Special attention is given to the walled city and its garden suburbs, where canals not only provided essential supply but also served as key morphological determinants in the city’s tripartite layout. This section demonstrates how hydraulic infrastructures were integrated into Shahjahanabad’s urban model, embedding themselves within both its spatial form and social fabric. The second section reflects on the monumentality inherent in water infrastructures themselves on a regional scale, considering how processes of imperial projection and the use of labour endowed them with symbolic weight that exceeded their technical functions. The third section turns to the role of religion in hosting these ‘staged and framed’ waters, together with its regional centrality, focusing on Shahjahanabad’s faith-oriented 232 landscape. Religious institutions historically mediated access to water, regulated its distribution, and imbued it with symbolic meaning. Such practices continue to inform the city’s water culture today. The final section situates Mughal hydrological strategies within the broader South Asian landscape, framing the dynasty as a ‘watershed empire’. Here, the control of rivers and catchments emerges as central to defining territorial limits, regulating agrarian economies, and establishing systems of governance. Canals, distributive networks, and indigenous water features are examined not merely as technical instruments but as cultural artefacts that accrued meaning through their operation and management. In doing so, the chapter positions Mughal water infrastructures as monumental inscriptions of empire: forms that combined material utility with symbolic permanence, reshaping landscapes while simultaneously asserting imperial authority. 7.1 Framing the Gaze: Staging Water in the Tripartite Urban Model The tripartite urban model (qila–shahristan–baghaʾat), inherited by the Mughals from their Turko- Mongolian predecessors (see section 4.2), functioned as a mode of mediating the landscape (Parpia 2016; Hunt 2000). It provided a systematic framework for reshaping the environment to accommodate the fort, the city, and the surrounding garden suburbs. In Shahjahanabad, these three spatial components were bound together through the distribution of water infrastructure, with the canal system emerging as the most significant imperial instrument. The Shah Nahr and its ancillary networks not only ensured hydraulic supply but also operated as imperial symbols: their access, distribution, and use delineated the contours of power, privilege, and social hierarchy within the walled city and its suburban gardens. This section examines the multiple ways in which water, both imperial and indigenous, was staged and framed within Shahjahanabad. The management and display of hydraulic infrastructure simultaneously reinforced social and caste boundaries, while inscribing imperial authority into the everyday fabric of the city. In particular, the analysis focuses on the distribution of canal waters across the tripartite model, the infrastructures associated with them, and the supplementary role of wells. By considering these elements together, the section highlights how Mughal emperors staged water through carefully orchestrated acts of control and order (after Parpia 2022:245), producing a visual and experiential frame that projected an imperial gaze. In doing so, the chapter argues that the very act of seeing and experiencing water in Shahjahanabad was structured to affirm imperial grandeur and articulate the empire’s desired self-image to both its subjects and the wider world. 7.1.1 Water Display: Towards Space and Order (Shahristan and Qila) A study of the paintings in Mughal chronicles by Wescoat Jr. (2022) revealed the presence of state- sponsored water infrastructure as a prominent subject of these artworks. His analysis of paintings from the 233 Baburnama, Akbarnama, and Padshahnama, written during the periods of the Mughal emperor Babur (complied during Akbar’s era), Akbar, and Shahjahan respectively, demonstrates that, among the three, Shahjahan’s Padshahnama exhibited the highest focus on water features such as canals, tanks, reservoirs, and pools, including means of lifting water, in its representation of empire-built water infrastructure. Beyond their utilitarian applications, these elaborate structures can be viewed as a means of asserting an imperial presence within the landscape, particularly in urban settings. The utilisation of a series of fountains extended beyond their aesthetic function and theatricality to define imperial vistas and spatial orders in a Mughal capital. This section attempts to analyse the grand water scheme in Shahjahanabad as a tool of ‘water display’ or ‘manzar’ and how it contributes to the understanding of urban form through the study of nodal and linear water features, but most significantly, as a medium for navigating the social order within the walled city through the contours of use, access, and control of these imperial elements. Manzar as a viewing framework has been discussed by researchers in context to landscape studies (Mansouri & Mokhles 2017; Hosseini 2019; Kiani-DehKiania 2023). In her work on the Safavid and Mughal bridges, Hosseini (2019) discussed the role of elevated water structures, especially chattris or pavilions, as a place for visual practice connecting viewers to the landscape. Hosseini posits that manzar, as an outward-looking framework, was extensively utilized by the Safavids and the Mughals in an effort to direct the gaze towards a landscape. Here, with an ‘outward-looking framework’ I mean to refer to viewing of city surroundings. The term manzar translates literally to ‘to see’ with aesthetic, and occasionally monumental, connotations associated with it. It is also believed to have spiritual attributes associated with it in which the sight also leads to contemplation within the innerself when viewing (Kiani- DehKiania, 2023). Here, I aim to explore the ‘inward-looking framework’ of manzar which involves the control of ‘seeing’ and ‘being seen’ (Ruggles, 2003) within urban contexts and examine how the Mughals incorporated this concept to frame ‘sights’ within urban areas, employing water as a central element. The process of creating manzars involved the formation of enclosures as well as visual continuity within the walled city of Shahjahanabad which was achieved by the introduction of the Shah Nahr within the walled city. Connecting the city to the suburbs and the fort, the water of Shah Nahr served as the central element of display. The manzar of Shah Nahr not only symbolised imperial presence but also represented the monumental achievement of manipulating the landscape and its water features by the Mughals. The canal within the city constituted the principal element of the two grand axes of the city: Chandni Chowk Street and Faiz Bazaar Street (see Figure 7.1). The city was oriented toward these two commercial axes, and all major caravanserais, religious edifices, and public squares were connected to this street. All significant public activities were concentrated on these two urban axes, which also witnessed merchants 234 from various regions of Iran and Central Asia. As per Chenoy (1998:143), 17th century Shahjahanabad comprised individuals from Turkey, Khorasan, and Khwarizm (present-day Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan). Bernier, the French physician and traveller during Shahjahan’s reign, describes his encounters with Turki horses, dried fruit merchants from Persia, Balkh, Bukhara, and Samarqand, Shiraz wine sellers from Bunder Abbas, Iran, the sporting dogs from Uzbekistan, and caravanserais that accommodated Persians and Uzbeks, on these two principal streets of the city (Bernier 1983:243-281). The presence of individuals not only from the Mughal Empire but also from concurrent Safavid, Khanate, and Ottoman territories underscores the significance of these streets and the grandness of the space that attracted people from diverse regions to engage in commerce. Therefore, it was crucial for the Mughals to design these streets in a manner that would reflect their imperial magnificence and monumental presence. Concurrently, the new capital of the Safavid empire, Isfahan, or the ‘city of sightseeing’ (after Kiani-DehKiania 2023), was being established by its ruler Shah Abbas I. Shah Abbas I also utilized the framework of water display in Isfahan as evident in the formation of the imperial axes (Allahverdi Khan Bridge), city squares (Naqsh-e-Jahan), and significant nodes of the city such as the Ali Qapu Palace and Sheikh Lotfollah Mosque (Zonouzi 2022). Figure 7.1: ‘Water Display’ or Manzar of Chandni Chowk Street (top) and Faiz Bazaar Street (bottom). Both illustrations depict the Shah Nahr as the central element of the commercial axes. The presence of fountains on the main streets, as well as within mosques, contributed to the imperial ‘water display’ within the walled city. (Source: Five Plans of Delhi, AL.1 762, V&A Museum, London) A significant study in understanding the framing of imperial gaze in Isfahan comes from Babaie’s study of the Safavid capital, along with Farahabad and Kerman (2015:179), where she analyses how the spatial orientation of monuments shaped the experiential encounter of observers within the city. Her concept of a ‘royal-urban vision’ demonstrates how imperial strategies of staging and framing objects were 235 deployed to materialize and project an image of sovereignty. Spatial, architectural, and ceremonial configurations of seeing, in this framework, became central to articulating Persian kingship. Parallel insights are offered by Necipoğlu’s study of the Ottoman Topkapı Palace (1992), a monument of an empire at its zenith of expansion. She highlights the way in which the palace mastered the gaze by asserting domination and control while at the same time accentuating the spatial and socio-political distance between ruler and subjects (1992:244). In her comparative work on Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal settings, Necipoğlu (1993:317) demonstrates that techniques of framing the gaze were integral to the visual and spatial legitimation of dynastic authority in their respective landscapes. In the South Asian context, this practice took shape through the Mughal adaptation of manzar (a mode of sight marked by aesthetics and monumental associations) in tandem with darshan (a Sanskrit concept of auspicious and devotional seeing). Whereas darshan was ruler-centric and place-specific, most notably at the Delhi Fort where the emperor appeared to his subjects, manzar was diffused across the urban landscape, embedding imperial visibility into its monumental and infrastructural fabric. It is this broader manzar-ic framing that provides a productive lens for examining the Mughal orchestration of water infrastructures in Shahjahanabad. Another framework that distinguished Shahjahanabad from Isfahan was the manner in which water was employed in its imperial statement of the urban layout. While Isfahan utilised water display as a nodal feature of the city, Shahjahanabad employed it as both a nodal and linear feature. Chandni Chowk Street and Faiz Bazaar Street formed visual axes within the city that terminated in the Fort (qila). The water of Shah Nahr directed the viewers towards the Mughal qila through a stretch of linear water channels followed by a series of fountains. Recent studies have focused on fountains as a ‘hydraulic technology of display’ in relation to Mughal gardens (see Campbell & Boyington, 2018; also Rehman 1997; Ali 2011; Fatma & Fatima 2012; and Wescoat Jr. 2011 & 2022). These gardens, however, were predominantly private, belonging to royal households or urban elites, and consequently were largely inaccessible to the general public. The introduction of fountains in civic spaces, such as the two principal axes along with the ablution tanks of royal and elite mosques of the city (Figure 7.2), underscores the empire’s objective of showcasing its advanced hydraulic technologies to the urban populace while simultaneously establishing its omnipresence in the cityscape. It is important to note here that Necipoğlu (1993:318) identified the inspirations behind Shahjahanabad’s planning, particularly the fort and the canal-based city layout, as being derived from Ottoman Istanbul and Safavid Isfahan, both of which were deeply invested in staging and framing imperial space (also Blake 1991; Asher 2008; Babaie & Kafescioglu 2017). In these imperial capitals, 236 architectural planning, monumental siting, and hydraulic display worked together to choreograph the gaze of subjects and visitors, ensuring that the experience of the city was also an encounter with sovereignty. The Ottomans privileged spatial hierarchies of access and exclusivity, while the Safavids emphasized more inclusive modes of spectacle through urban vistas and water-centred ceremonial grounds. Both traditions positioned water infrastructures, whether in palatial gardens, public squares, or canal systems, as central to framing imperial authority in visible, experiential terms. Shahjahanabad may be understood as a deliberate adaptation of these models. The Mughal fort and city were designed not only as functional spaces but also as visual instruments of rule, where canals and gardens structured pathways of movement and sightlines that constantly reinforced the emperor’s presence. Sharma (2018:102) interprets this project as an attempt to establish a middle ground between Ottoman exclusivity and Safavid inclusivity in the visual accessibility of the ruler: the emperor was both elevated above his subjects, in settings of controlled visibility, and yet perceptibly connected to them through orchestrated encounters such as darshan. The careful siting of the Shah Nahr canal and its distributive branches amplified this balance, integrating hydraulic spectacle into the very fabric of the walled city and its garden suburbs. Golombek and Koch (2017:811) further underscore the persistence of Timurid models as a defining characteristic of Mughal monumental practice. This Timurid inheritance manifested not only in architectural vocabulary but also in the strategic deployment of water infrastructures as markers of dynastic legitimacy (see Chapter 2, section 2.3). The Mughal adaptation thus combined Timurid precedents with Ottoman and Safavid innovations, producing in Shahjahanabad a unique hydraulic- urban vision in which the framing of the gaze was inseparable from the staging of water. The fort, the canal, and the city together constituted a carefully choreographed landscape of sight, where imperial authority was projected simultaneously through monumental form, hydraulic order, and the visual politics of accessibility. The Shah Nahr waters, within the walled, city. were distributed to ablution tanks, imperial and residential gardens, and public fountains, resulting in nodal features within the urban layout forming enclosures of appreciation or manzar. Notable examples include the Fatehpuri, Akbarabadi, Sirhindi, and Aurangabadi Masjid (elite mosques), Serai of Chandni Chowk (imperial inn), Begum ka Bagh (imperial garden), and the Haveli of Ali Mardan Khan and Dara Shukoh (khana bagh or residential gardens). The canal waters were further distributed to smaller squares such as Hauz Qazi, and neighborhood mosques such as Aamwali Masjid and Masjid Ghaziuddin (see Appendix I/B). Another significant site of manzar was the Jama Masjid complex, the sovereign mosque of the Mughals. Water was lifted from wells through Persian wheels (see Appendix I/B, SJB/01/022) to fill the ablution tank (SJB/01/099), which was characterised as the ‘spring of Salsabil’ or water of paradise by the Mughals, as evident in an epigraphic 237 remain on arch VII of the mosque (Hasan 1916:144). Situated atop a hill, conveying water to Jama Masjid necessitated advanced techniques of elevating and distributing water within the complex, which was facilitated by the rehat system of lifting water from deep wells. Functioning as a city square and a site of religious gathering, the manzar of a large-scale ablution tank thus also represented a symbol of imperial grandeur in the form of ‘place-making’ on an elevated terrain supported by technological advancement of hydraulic systems. It is noteworthy that squares, as a morphological component in Islamic cities, differ from their European counterparts in the sense of being an enclosed space with a central water feature. In most instances, the courtyard of a mosque serves as a city square. The display of water features helped to signify the empire’s influence within the urban landscape; however, it also led to the division of social groups in the city, determined by their access to these water elements, especially the Shah Nahr. Figure 7.2: Elements of Water Display -Tanks & Fountains within Elite & Neighborhood Mosques The Mughal manipulation of water infrastructures in Shahjahanabad, above all the Shah Nahr and its distributive networks, emerges as a crucial strategy in the staging of imperial vision. The alignment of canals with the city’s tripartite form (fort, walled city, and garden suburbs) not only supplied water but also orchestrated lines of sight and movement, embedding imperial presence into the spatial fabric. Tanks, fountains, and wells functioned as nodal points where access was staged and differentiated, producing 238 visible hierarchies of privilege. In this sense, hydraulic landscapes were not simply utilitarian devices but carefully choreographed instruments of vision, directing the gaze of subjects and visitors alike towards imperial authority. Through water, Shahjahanabad was thus transformed into a performative stage where the everyday act of seeing was inseparable from the experience of empire. Beyond projecting imperial presence, the process of manzar creation also subtly reconfigured the urban fabric of Shahjahanabad, shaping both engagements and segregations among its inhabitants. It effectively delineated the city into spatial pockets that determined who lived where, and with what degree of proximity to imperial infrastructure. The manzar-ic sites and their immediate environs became the domains of nobles and elites, while the surrounding zones were inhabited by groups without direct access to such infrastructural privileges. These populations either relied on, or were compelled to create, alternative infrastructures to meet their needs. In this way, manzar-ic sites reinforced visible boundaries between the served and the servants, inscribing patterns of social inequality into the spatial organization of the city. The following section turns to these dynamics of segregation and engagement by examining two thanas of the walled city, using the 1840s map as a critical reference point. While this map does not provide a direct representation of Shahjahan’s time, it serves as a valuable proxy for reconstructing how the capital’s social and spatial behaviours evolved around imperial water infrastructures (see section 5.2.2). Through this case study, the analysis seeks to illuminate how Shahjahanabad functioned as an imperial capital whose urban life was structured as much by access to hydraulic resources as by their symbolic staging. 7.1.2 Contours of ‘Engagements’ as Contours of ‘Segregation’ Previous research on water and its associated interactions has revealed patterns of inequalities (Wollenweber 2015; Simelius 2023) that are predominantly contingent on the distribution of access to water resources. Consequently, an examination of these interactions may also elucidate the patterns of societal segregation. Accordingly, I conducted a study of two thanas or administrative zones of Shahjahanabad to examine access to water sources by various communities and craft clusters. The study relied on a hand-drawn map of Shahjahanabad from the 1840s, housed in the British Library. This map, which outlines various thanas of the city (see Chapter 6; Figure 6.22), illustrates the distribution of social groups by class and caste within the urban landscape using different colours. Bright colors were used to represent the elite high-class-caste groups, while muted shades depicted the poorer low-class-caste groups, highlighting the division between the ‘served’ and the ‘servants’ throughout the city. This visual representation allows for inferences about the access, usage, and control of water across this landscape, enhancing the understanding of the water management system and its impact on the planning and distribution of imperial water infrastructure. 239 The two thanas of Shahjahanabad, selected for the study based on their proximity to the canal, indicated the dependency of the neighbourhoods within these thanas on wells and stepwells. Although the canal formed the edge of these two thanas, the distribution of canal water was limited to the Imperial Garden and two mosques on the edge of the canal. Blake’s (1991) study on the layout of Shahjahanabad describes the city as ‘patrimonial-bureaucratic’ where the city’s neighbourhoods are modelled based on the Fort. As the Fort is centred around the palace, so are the neighbourhoods around the havelis or mansions. The haveli as a central element of the neighbourhood (Figure 7.3) defined the contours of the ‘served’ and the ‘servants’. As adherents of Islam, most haveli owners, as a form of charity, also contributed to the city landscape by constructing neighbourhood mosques and excavating wells. A total of 191 neighbourhood mosques existed in the city (Khan 1846). Twelve mosques were identified in the two wards (Figure 7.4) based on historical chronicles, archaeological listings, and cartographic sources. Because ablution requires the availability of water in or near a mosque, all 12 mosques were found to have a well either within or adjacent to the complex. Two mosques with ablution tanks drew water from the canal. One Hindu temple was located in proximity to a well. Figure 7.3: Neighborhood Map of the 02 thanas of Shahjahanabad, with the Canal and the Havelis 240 Figure 7.4: Map of Shahjahanabad (North) showing the location of religious institutions, gardens and water features within the two thanas of the walled-city Figure 7.5: Map of Shahjahanabad (North) showing the location of different caste-based mohallas (neighborhoods) with water features A significant characteristic of the two wards was the presence of khana-bagh or house-gardens. Twenty khana-baghs were identified within the 02 wards (see Figure 7.3). These khana-baghs were exclusively designed for elite households, serving as private enclosures within mansions, and constituted a key component of the domestic architecture of the havelis of Shahjahanabad (Blake 1996:171). Chandar 241 Bhan Brahman, a poet in Shahjahan’s court, described the city as abundant with khana-baghs (after Blake 1996:182). Although most of these house gardens appeared to have disappeared by the Late Mughal Period, a few remained. The design of the khana-bagh was also mentioned in Bayaz-i-Khushbui, the manual of agriculture written during Shahjahan’s reign. Bayaz delineated the dastur-al-amal (model) to be followed for house-garden layout based on the number of wells and gardeners per bigha of land. The house gardens in Shahjahanabad were supplied by the canal, in addition to wells and baolis (stepwells), as illustrated in Figure 7.4. Additionally, there were gardens featuring central water features, fed by wells using waterwheels. Some of these are hypothesised to have been connected to the canal bed in the garden suburbs through underground channels (after Colvin 1833). A study of the distribution of water resources within these two neighbourhoods (see Figure 7.5) makes the class and caste distinction quite evident in society. The haveli-centric neighbourhoods with their own set of water infrastructure stand in contrast to the craft and caste communities of chamar (leather worker), qasab (meatseller), dhobi (wahserman), kumhar (potter), raj mistry (mason), and lohar (ironsmiths) with shared water resources, mostly wells (Figure 7.5). Chamar quarters were also found along the city walls, away from neighbourhood centres, with their exclusive wells. The other communities seem to share resources, as some wells are found to be located on the shared gali or street between two mohallas or neighbourhoods, as nodal features of the neighbourhood. This suggests the possibility that water features were utilised to delineate neighbourhoods within the walled city and served as a tool for social segregation. Wells functioned as the central element within these neighbourhoods, and their distribution may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the reliance on these water sources in both canal-fed thanas and non-canal thanas within the walled city. Furthermore, an examination of the Mughal Badshahi drain network, which carried stormwater and wastewater of the city, may indicate a form of segregation at the subsurface level. The channelization of stormwater and wastewater in what was considered the ‘largest city’ of the Mughal empire (after Kraft & Ehlers 1995:126) was as significant a task for the empire as that of ‘water display’ to demonstrate its imperial grandeur. A city with an efficient drainage system not only facilitates the removal of refuse for public health safety but also functions as a flood control mechanism in an urban environment whose form and layout have been largely determined by the elevational profile of its site. Therefore, for a city such as Shahjahanabad, it is essential to conduct a study of its subsurface drainage system in conjunction with its elevational profile and to examine the extent to which it facilitated the everyday living of the inhabitants of the walled city. 242 The introduction of the sewer system by the British, commencing in 1871, rendered the Mughal system nonfunctional. In the same year, the initial reports of well water contamination from wastewater also appeared in local newspapers (Prashad 2001). It is probable that the initial attempts by the British did not adhere to the gravity-based planning, followed by the Mughals, rendering the sewer networks to pockets of cesspools (Mann 2007:12). The Badshahi Drains, which carried the city’s stormwater and sullage, were filled during this period, and the city subsequently became entirely dependent on a new drainage system. Subsequently, the state government expanded the colonial drainage network in the post- independence period. These subsequent attempts also led to an uneven change in its elevation profile, with minimal or no traces of the Mughal drainage system found today. During a recent excavation related to the Chandni Chowk Street Redevelopment Project, traces of the filled brick-lined Badshahi drains were discovered (see Figure 7.6) on the imperial water axis, at the centre of which ran the Shah Nahr. Traces of another brick-lined drainage network were reportedly found at the edge of the Delhi Fort, which drained water from the fort into the moat (see Figure 7.7). Similar Mughal drainage networks have also been identified within the walled city of Lahore (Wescoat 1991:7). Figure 7.6: Traces of the Badshahi Drain found during Chandni Chowk Redevelopment Project (Source: Sharma, 2019, The Times of India); Figure 7.7: Mughal-era Stormwater Drain in Red Fort (Source: Roychowdhury 2020; Hindustan Times) In the absence of any major extant built traces of the Badshahi drain in Shahjahanabad, this study focused on the drainage reports of the city compiled by the British during the Late Mughal period. A valuable source was the 1852 report on the drainage improvement of the city, especially of Chandni Chowk Street, by W. Greathed (also known as the Roberts Report of 1852). Appendix D of this report contains a table listing cross-drains, with information provided by Motee Singh Mistree (Brick-Mason), who was familiar with the wastewater movement pattern in the Badshahi drains. As per the report, the major trunk of the Badshahi drains ran contiguous to the Shah Nahr on both commercial axes. A number of cross-drains were connected to the major trunks that eventually drained the wastewater through the canal escape adjacent to the south end of the fort towards the river. The Badshahi drains were rectangular in cross-section and were covered with an arched lid. It measured 2’ (bed) × 4’ (height) enclosed in a 1’6’ thick wall. The subsurface drainage system was dependent on the canal for the flushing of its wastewater 243 (Gupta 1981; Prashad 2001). As the canal became non-functional, the drainage system became ineffective, necessitating the introduction of a new sewer system by the British. Shahjahanabad followed the dry toilet system, and the night-soil was removed by sweepers each morning (Prashad 2001; Mann 2007). As the Badshahi drains only carried stormwater and the city’s sullage, it was essential for it to be designed in accordance with the landform to direct the flow of waste towards the major trunks that were parallel to the Shah Nahr. An attempt was made to map the cross-drains based on the table provided in Greathed’s report (see Appendix II/6B). As the drains were described in the report as being situated along the neighbourhood lanes and streets, the street-network pattern from the 1840s hand-drawn map of Shahjahanabad (see Chapter 6, Figure 6.22) was used to map the Badshahi drainage network of the principle commercial/water axis, Chandni Chowk Street (see Figure 7.8). Figure 7.8: Badshahi Drain Network of Chandni Chowk Street (based on Appendix D of Robert’s Report of 1852) Figure 7.9: (Left) A well with platform located at a temple node; (Centre) Public wells marked sacred by a statue of a Hindu Goddess; (Right) A platform-well on a neighborhood street. The analysis of the drainage network of Chandni Chowk Street, which also hosts the Shah Nahr, revealed a pattern that corresponds to the extent of the imperial water distribution system of the canal (as discussed in section 7.1.1). The main trunk of the Badshahi drain ran parallel to the Shah Nahr and received wastewater from residences within the canal-fed neighbourhoods through cross-drains. The 244 Badshahi drain network was found to follow land topography and thus was conceptualised as a gravity- based design. The main conduit further followed the terrain gradient to direct the wastewater toward Yamuna. This phenomenon partially indicates the overlap between the surface water social segregation system and wastewater. However, in the absence of data from other areas within the walled city, it is challenging to conclusively determine whether the city had implemented a mechanism of social segregation for wastewater as well. Figure 7.10: Map showing the distribution of public wells within the walled city, along with their Mean Catchment Area. An analysis of the public well distribution further revealed a pattern of socially segregated areas within the walled city. The wells are predominantly concentrated in neighbourhoods inhabited by the general populace, who were in service to the havelis and gardens. In addition to this, 4 thanas in the southern section of Shahjahanabad primarily relied on wells for water supply as this area was not connected to the Shah Nahr. A total of 141 public wells were identified based on fieldwork and the 1840s 245 map of Shahjahanabad (Figure 6.22). Of these 141 wells, two distinct typologies were observed: one with a platform around the well and another without a platform. Wells with platform features were located at street intersections or adjacent to havelis on public streets. Wells without platform features were located within mosques and temples. The average mean catchment area of the public wells was determined based on their proximity to the nearest well (for calculations, see Appendix II/6A). The mean catchment radius of each public well was calculated by measuring its distance from adjacent public wells to determine its catchment sphere. The average Mean Catchment Radius of public wells in Shahjahanabad was determined to be 86.30m. Public wells north of Chandni Chowk Street had an average Mean Catchment Radius of 88.57m, while those in the south had an 84.01m Mean Catchment Radius. The wells with a platform feature, located on public streets and nodes, had an average Mean Catchment Radius of 95.5m, while the remaining public wells, predominantly located within mosques and temples, had an average Mean Catchment Radius of 77.10m (see Figure 7.10; also, Appendix II/6A). This analysis revealed a higher dependence of the general population on platformed public wells compared to those situated within mosques and temples. The affluent thanas, evidenced by the presence of khana-baghs or house- gardens (Thana nos. 1-6, 8-9; see Table 6.2), and their partial connectivity or adjacency to the Shah Nahr, indicates that the concentration of wells is in areas beyond the extent of the Shah Nahr distribution framework (also discussed previously in this section; see Figures 7.3-7.5). This further reveals the inequality to access of imperial water sources within the walled city thereby delineating the ‘served’ from the ‘servants.’ As a unifying element within the Mughal tripartite urban model, the imperial water system articulated infrastructural monumentality through both the spectacle of water display and the technical mastery of its elevation and distribution. The manzar generated by water features structured a sequential spatial experience that became central to shaping the morphology of Shahjahanabad. Notable instances include the imperial water axis and ablution tanks within sovereign and elite mosques, which simultaneously reinforced the continuity of imperial waters and showcased the technological sophistication of Mughal hydraulic systems. In a semi-arid landscape, these waters played a pivotal role in place-making, defining central focal points within house gardens, shaping linear and nodal features of the walled city, and creating the paradisiacal nahr-i-bihisht within the fort complex as a symbol of grandeur and retreat. Yet, while serving as an integrative mechanism linking the bagha’at, shahristan, and qila into a coherent tripartite form, the imperial canal also inscribed social hierarchies through differentiated access, use, and control. The spatial production of manzar, however, extended beyond the confines of the walled city into the suburban gardens, an equally critical component of the tripartite model, imbued with symbolic 246 significance surpassing that of the palace itself. The following section examines the bagha’at of Shahjahanabad, focusing on how the imperial gaze was constructed and enacted within the garden suburbs. Whereas the urban core was studied using an inward-looking framework of manzar, in public- places, the gardens have been analysed through an outward-looking approach, framing the entire landscape as an imperial construct. These exclusive spaces, reserved for rulers, their families, and the nobility, operated as stages for regulated imperial functioning, mostly as mobile courts, that inscribed authority onto the environment and invested the landscape with an imperial identity. Yet these gardens were not hermetically sealed from their immediate contexts. They coexisted alongside pre-existing villages, agrarian networks, and indigenous water infrastructures, producing a hybrid landscape where imperial waterworks intersected with local systems. This oscillation between grand imperial canals and modest village water features rendered the suburban gardens sites of experimentation in hydraulic practice, blending symbolic display with functional adaptation. Thus, the bagha’at of Shahjahanabad may be understood as liminal spaces, at once imperial stages of authority, paradisiacal retreats, and laboratories of water management, that mediated between the city’s formalized urban order and the ecological realities of its hinterland. The following section turns to a focused study of waterworks within these garden suburbs, tracing how their design, hydraulic features, and staged performances produced an imperial gaze that not only articulated Mughal sovereignty but also redefined the relationship between city, landscape, and empire. 7.1.3 Water in a Mediated Environment (Bagha’at) The garden suburbs of Shahjahanabad occupy a strategic location along the slope of the Aravalli Hills. Drawing from earlier Turko-Mongolian practices, where gardens contributed to mitigating the active flow of streams from the hills into the plains as an effective flood control mechanism, the Mughals manipulated the Aravallis and the streams running on either side by constructing bunds and garden enclosures in the form of orchards and stepped or sloped garden complexes following the gentle hilly terrain. The transition from settlement names to garden names in the hand-sketch map of the Ali Mardan Khan Canal from the Hyderabad Archives (see Appendix III/4A), as the canal approached the suburbs of Shahjahanabad, indicates the canal’s transformation from an egalitarian element, in the agricultural landscape, to an imperial one within the garden suburbs and the walled city. Based on the landform reconstruction exercise (see Section 6.2.1), it is evident that the canal in the suburbs was primarily designed to serve royal gardens and orchards. In the garden suburbs, a network of feeder channels can be observed surrounding the gardens, connected to tanks, cisterns, and wells, converting them into water retreats for the nobility (see Figure 6.11). The branching of the canal intensified in the garden suburbs. According to the hand-drawn map of the 1750s, there were 59 irrigation outlets from the canal to the garden suburbs in the last 10 kilometres between the Shalimar Bagh and the Kabul Gate of the walled 247 city, double the average outlets per kilometre compared to that in the agricultural hinterlands (see Appendix II/4A). This intensification is also indicative of the importance of garden suburbs to the Mughal empire. The garden suburbs were perceived by the Mughals as representations of a ‘spatial context’ derived from Central Asian garden traditions, historically serving as an instrument of imperial governance (after Wescoat Jr. 1991:109). This concept is exemplified through Mughal gardens in the suburbs, which functioned as imperial residences (Shalimar Bagh, Roshan Ara Bagh, Qudsia Bagh), coronation grounds (Shah Jahan’s son Aurangzeb’s coronation in Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh; after Sharma 2012:36), and centres of empire administration (after Parpia 2016). The symbolic nature of water in Mughal gardens, a ‘paradisiacal space’ (Dickie 1985:131; Koch 1997:146; Fatma 2012:1271; and Parpia 2016:173), have been a subject of intense research illustrating its representation as ‘heavenly rivers’, symbol of ‘eternity’ and ‘water of life’ (Dickie 1985; Moynihan 1988; Wescoat Jr. 1991; Koch 1997; Parodi 2000; Sharma 2007; Golombek 2008; and Fatma & Fatima 2012). They have also been discussed as central to ‘territorial control’ and ‘imperial identity’ of the Mughal empire (Wescoat Jr. 2022:116). While substantial research has been conducted on its symbolic significance, this study aims to focus on discussions regarding the placement, form, and technique of these imperial gardens based on the landform reconstruction exercise (see Section 6.2.1) as well as fieldwork of extant water features. Archaeological excavations conducted in Mughal gardens in South Asia (see Appendix II/3A & II/3B), coupled with fieldwork carried out in Shahjahanabad, Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, and Burhanpur, indicate that garden suburbs during the Mughal period functioned as a significant urban layer. A substantial number of Mughal waterworks beyond the walled city were concentrated in these garden suburbs. These areas exhibited the highest concentration of water features, including hauz (45), causeways (31), fountains (22) serving the bagha’at (79) or imperial gardens (see Table 4.3). Fieldwork conducted in Shalimar Bagh, Roshan Ara Bagh, and Qudsia Bagh (See Appendix I/B; SJB/01/105-117), the three imperial garden complexes that have survived despite recent intensification of development in the suburbs, continues to demonstrate the characteristics of imperial palatal gardens. They include quadripartite enclosures (char-bagh), extensive orchards, and an intricate irrigation network originating from the Shah Nahr. These ‘monumental’ garden enclosures also incorporated reservoirs for seasonal storage in addition to garden-wells that served as decentralised units of the imperial water system. A landform reconstruction of the garden suburbs also indicates a strategic orientation of the gardens and their water features, along the slope of the hill, with irrigation channels from canals feeding these gardens from an elevation. The slope of the hills was probably manipulated to generate the necessary 248 hydraulic pressure required to make the fountains function as a gravity-based mechanism. Additionally, archaeological excavation reports of Mughal gardens suggest the presence of an interconnected network of water features designed to generate the necessary pressure for the running and functioning of fountains (See Appendix 3A). Cascades (chadar or abshar) were used extensively by the Mughals as a pressure- generating mechanism and found their presence not only in the suburbs but also in the royal quarters within the Delhi fort. My fieldwork at Agra of the Mughal gardens, at Imtad-ud Daula’s tomb, Chini ka Rauza gardens, Ram Bagh, and Mehtab Bagh, revealed a pattern of terracotta pipes on garden walls, which carried rainwater from wells, through scalloped cascades, to reach the tanks and fountains. Fieldwork of the gardens of Taj Mahal also revealed the use of high-level tanks that were fed by a monumental aqueduct that lifted water from the Yamuna and ran at a significant height to feed these three tanks. The water from these tanks then entered the tomb garden complex, generating sufficient pressure to distribute the water across the complex. This mechanism of generating hydraulic pressure for running of water within paradisical gardens was probably achieved in Shahjahanabad’s suburbs by the placement of the canal, and wells, at the higher elevation of the garden, which ran through a series of cascades to generate enough pressure to distribute the water in the enclosed gardens (see Figure 7.11). Evidence of terracotta pipes was discovered during fieldwork in Shahjahanabad and was probably the principal medium of carrying water from the canal and the wells. A series of fountains were added to the garden aesthetics as well, the work of which required a systematic technique of increasing the water pressure as it approached the fountains. Fountains with brass and copper nozzles (Sheesh Mahal in Shalimar Bagh), zoomorphic fountainheads (Roshan Ara Bagh), and spouts (Qudsia Bagh) were discovered during fieldwork in the study area (see Appendix I/B). They were found to be connected to a series of terracotta pipes, with reducing cross-sections, which aided in increasing the water pressure. The hydraulic technique was entirely gravity-driven and followed a systematic layout of alternate widening and narrowing of the flow of water to manage sufficient pressure for its distribution. Within the garden suburbs, there were also a few villages, including Sabzi Mandi, Rajpore, and Sadourah Kalan. Besides deep wells, these villages likely received water through bunds or embankments, which were designed to capture stream water from hills and release it occasionally for irrigation. Bunds are typically situated near the foothills, constructed just above the villages to shield them from seasonal flash floods, and also to store water at a higher elevation, allowing it to flow by gravity to the agricultural fields adjacent to these settlements. The positioning of the bunds relative to the agricultural fields is essential for regulating water release for irrigation, particularly when determining whether to employ submersion or immersion techniques for crops. Bunds serve as checkpoints in landscapes shaped by hilly terrain, where sudden water surges during the rainy season can cause widespread destruction. Thus, the suburbs, while 249 being a mediated environment of a highly imperial and exclusive nature, due to the Shah Nahr feeding the private garden enclosures, also featured interventions that benefited the local populace. The deliberate introduction of canals and irrigation outlets, the channeling and retention of stream waters through carefully constructed bunds, and the establishment of storage tanks and reservoirs, combined with the aestheticization of water through fountains, cascades, pools, and waterfalls, transformed a landscape once reliant on scattered wells and intermittent streams into a meticulously orchestrated hydraulic environment. This transformation did more than address practical concerns of water supply; it elevated water itself into a medium of monumental expression, shaping both the experience and perception of the urban landscape. In Shahjahanabad, the display of water functioned as a visual and symbolic device that articulated imperial presence, authority, and technological mastery. Drawing on precedents set by earlier Turko-Mongolian empires, the Mughals deployed water not only for utilitarian purposes but as an instrument of the imperial gaze, an instrument through which spectators, whether urban inhabitants or visiting elites, were guided to perceive the city and its environs as an ordered, sovereign, and aesthetically perfected domain. Figure 7.11: Direction of Water Movements in the Garden Suburb (Conjectural) 250 The framing of water, through axial canals, tanks, and choreographed fountains, produced sequences of visual and spatial encounters, wherein the viewer’s movement through the city was carefully orchestrated to reveal the reach and grandeur of imperial power. Water, in this sense, became both a functional and performative element, mediating between infrastructure and spectacle, utility and ideology. The cumulative effect of these hydraulic interventions was the creation of a city in which the act of seeing was inseparable from the assertion of authority, and the urban experience was inseparably bound to the experience of water. By monumentalizing water, Shahjahanabad not only demonstrated the technological capabilities of the Mughal state but also embedded the gaze of empire into the very fabric of the city, producing a landscape in which aesthetic appreciation, political power, and spatial control were mutually reinforcing. The chapter now advances to consider the projection of imperial grandeur on a regional scale, focusing on the Shah Nahr and its role in articulating Mughal authority, with Shahjahanabad serving as the imperial core. Building upon earlier discussions on environmental necessity (see Chapter 4), this section examines how the demands of an arid and semi-arid landscape informed the design, labour, and enduring functionality of these hydraulic infrastructures. The empire’s interventions in containing, diverting, and managing water were not purely utilitarian; they encoded imperial identity within the built environment and functioned as instruments of control across the surrounding region. In this context, the following section also investigates how water infrastructure operated as a collective cultural object, simultaneously embodying utility, authority, and monumental expression, and serving as a tangible marker of Mughal power in the greater landscape. 7.2 Re-Configuring a Landscape: Water and Imperial Identity The concept of monumentality has predominantly been associated with the physical scale of a built feature – characterised as large, grand, and great – which is shaped by the contours of power in an imperial landscape and belief in a sacralised one. This section, and the next section, aims to expand on these concepts to further incorporate the sense of gravity of need and belief that contributes to identity formation in the context of Shahjahanabad’s waterscape. A monumental characteristic is attributed to an infrastructure not only by means of its scale but also its significance in a semi-arid landscape. Through this process, it attains a form of identity associated with the builders of the infrastructure, contributing to the establishment of a hydrological regime. I argue that in the Mughal period, infrastructure transcended the standard utilitarian template to become a cultural object, and the study of its engagements can provide deeper insights into societal norms and urbanism practices. The distinctive nature of Shahjahanabad’s landscape stems from the convergence of two monumental characteristics: ‘power’, in an imperial context, and ‘belief’ as a sacred virtue (discussed in section 7.3). The former is externally manifested, whereas the 251 latter resides within each individual. Collectively, these elements contribute to the establishment of water, in its various infrastructural forms, as a central valued component in the daily lives of the populace (after Strang 2004). Historically, water control and governance have been associated with identity formation (Boelens 2015; Ingate 2019) in the practices of the Timurid and Safavid empires. Timur utilized the monumental nature of the canal to establish his empire’s presence in the arid landscape of Iran and Central Asia (Subtelny 2007:124). The Timurids employed large-scale, empire-driven infrastructure projects as a crucial strategy for reconfiguring landscapes and creating identity markers across their conquered territories. This is evidenced by the construction of new canals and the renovation of existing ones, such as the Nahr-i Barlas in Qarabagh, the Baylaqan Canal in Baylaqan, Juy-i Nau and Nahr-i Badam in Kabul, and the canals from the Murghab River for Maruchaq and Pajdih (Subtelny 2007:124-125). Some of these waterways were substantial enough in width and depth to allow boat navigation, highlighting the prominent visual impact of this infrastructure on the surrounding environment. Furthermore, water management infrastructure such as dams, bunds, and reservoirs were built along rivers to conserve water for dry periods, both as a mark of ‘good kingship’ (Subtelny 2007:121) practice and as a visual marker of the empire’s presence. In certain areas, unproductive lands were transformed into a unified agricultural expanse through use of numerous feeder canals and underground water sources (Subtelny 2007:138-144). These extensive efforts to control and distribute water through technological means across vast territories underscore the Timurid’s attempt to establish a visible presence on the landscape. Imperial identity was also reflected in various related infrastructural initiatives within the region. Gaube (2008) noted in his study on Iranian urbanism that the Safavids’ introduction of large-scale hydrological projects in the area resulted in the creation of extensive land-road systems and other communication channels for managing regional administration and trade. These networks and their related activities made water a prominent feature in the landscape. This presence of water influenced the arrangement of settlements, streets, gardens, and palaces, thereby shaping urban structures and the surrounding rural areas (Montalbano 2008:692). The Mughals endeavoured to reconfigure the landscape from the Himalayan foothills to Shahjahanabad, utilising water as the principal element. A river exhibits variability not only in its edges but also in its tributaries and inundation canals. It forms a dynamic landscape, characterised by either subtle movements of water supporting regional well-being or rapid movements resulting in large-scale destruction. The Mughals attempted to regulate the Yamuna waters through the design of offtakes at its headwork, two on either side, forming the Western Ali Mardan Khan Canal and the Eastern Ali Mardan Khan Canal (the latter was subsequently known as the Zabita Khan Canal, after the Rohilla-Afghan ruler 252 Figure 7.12 of the doab region revived it in the late 18th century). The Shah Nahr (Western Ali Mardan Khan Canal) persists in fragments as earthen depressions in the landscape (see section 5.3), while the Zabita Khan Canal (Eastern Ali Mardan Khan Canal) did not endure beyond the initial Shahjahani phase. It was purportedly partially revived by Mughal emperor Muhammad Shah (1719-1748), and later by Zabita Khan (1772-1785) (after Cautley 1861:3; Ataullah 2008:106-107; and Chakrabarti 2020:30). The project’s abandonment may have been due to the need for precise control of the Zabita Khana canal passage, which was necessitated by its location on the Yamuna river’s concave ‘erosive’ bank and the presence of fluctuating mountain streams. As Mughal canals were constructed following a composite design - connecting seasonal stream beds through artificial channels - the avulsive nature of mountain streams would have presented a significant challenge, necessitating a high degree of design precision and management to ensure the canal’s continued functionality. Traces of the Mughal canal were also found near Meerut, which was once used to irrigate the royal gardens and hunting areas (after Cautley 1861:4- 5). One significant factor contributing to the Zabita Khan Canal’s decline beyond its initial period of use may have been its location outside the imperial core of the Mughal capital. In contrast, the Shah Nahr, directly linked to Shahjahanabad and situated on the same side of the Yamuna as the imperial city, occupied a strategically central position along major trade and communication routes that connected much of South Asia. Its proximity to the political and economic core of the empire necessitated regular maintenance, reinforcing its role as a visible and enduring marker of imperial authority on the landscape. Beyond its utilitarian function, the Shah Nahr carried symbolic meanings, representing an agricultural continuum and projecting the Mughal strategy as a watershed empire that integrated urban, agrarian, and hydrological systems (see section 7.4). The Zabita Khan Canal, by contrast, lacked such symbolic and strategic significance; positioned on the opposite bank of the Yamuna, it functioned primarily as a fiscal and agricultural instrument, dependent on seasonal upkeep rather than continuous imperial oversight. Its marginal position in relation to the capital and main trade arteries contributed to its reduced visibility, weaker symbolic resonance, and eventual decline. Both of these canals were subsequently modernised and remodelled by the British and are presently known as the Western Yamuna Canal and the Eastern Yamuna Canal, respectively. In a landscape characterised by the ‘tributaries’ of the Yamuna, two substantial offtake infrastructures introduced a significant number of ‘distributaries’ into the terrain (see Figure 7.12). Habib (1963:34n) posits that the Shah Nahr likely carried half of Yamuna’s water, supporting cultivation and irrigation of gardens, including supplying water to the capital of the Mughal Empire, Shahjahanabad. In a region characterised predominantly by stationary infrastructural elements such as wells, ponds, and lakes, the introduction of the dynamic Shah Nahr, and the short-lived Zabita Khan canal, along with its associated network of irrigation channels, conveying water from the ‘sacred’ Yamuna, contributed to the 254 formation of water monumentality manifested through the contours of ‘need’ and ‘belief’. The grandness of the canal and its imperial presence in the landscape can be further inferred from an 1808 painting of the Zabita Khan Canal (see Figure 7.13) by Robert Smith, an engineer and artist with the British Empire. His painting depicts two sailing boats on the canal, presumably an imaginative construct by the artist to emphasise the grandeur of the canal. Figure 7.13: The Jumna Canal near Meerut with soldiers and fortifications, by Robert Smith (Source: National Army Museum, London, Acc. No. NAM. 1971-08-16-1; also Chakrabarti 2020:29). The design of the canal adhered to an imperial directive that sought not only to revitalise earlier canals but also to establish new ones in proximity to significant shrines in the landscape. The Shah Nahr was constructed in a manner that created an insular land mass between the Yamuna and the canal, with the Badshahi Sadak (present-day GT Road) bisecting that landscape (see Figure 7.12). The land on either side, between Karnal and Shahjahanabad, was irrigated by the Shah Nahr or Yamuna, respectively. The resultant waterscape defined by Shah Nahr as an ‘imperial object’ also witnessed major technological innovations, including the utilisation of water lifting devices such as rehats (Persian wheels), dhenklis, and water mills, which contributed to the economic growth of the region and intensification of land usage. The state’s efforts to contain and divert water through technological means encode a sense of imperial identity in the infrastructure, which is subsequently utilised as a tool of control in the broader region. This acculturation (after Strang 2004), facilitated by technological means, also accelerates the process of land cover changes and has been defined as the ‘expansionist’ or ‘technotasking’ (Scarborough 255 2005:215) approach to landscape modification in semi-arid regions. The introduction of Shah Nahr enabled large-scale landscape modification through the implementation of irrigation channels extending to Farmana in the west and Sonipat in the east, spanning a total of around 25 km and forming the core zone of the imperial revenue district. The influence zone extended beyond the defined region to other villages and urban centres, with key dependencies on food production by settlements in the canal region (see Figure 4.34). The landscape as a whole conferred the identity of an imperialized landscape (after Stampoultzidis 2024), redirecting water through canals, dams, irrigation channels, and water wheels to settlements of all scales, including Shahjahanabad. It is noteworthy that the introduction of the canal and its associated infrastructure served not only as a means to generate substantial revenue but also as a mechanism to facilitate the settlement population (Wahi 2013:293, after Lahori 1992, and Kambo 2013). This proliferation of settlements adjacent to water features exemplifies large-scale ‘infrastructural urbanism’ in the region, as evidenced by the presence of place names such as Kalan and Khurd in the landscape (see Figure 5.30). It also presents a formative idea of Mughal urbanism practices involving large-scale landscape reconfiguration strategies in South Asia. The grandeur of the garden suburbs (bagha’at) of Shahjahanabad, one of the three key elements of the Mughal tripartite urban model (see chapter 4, section 4.2), was largely attributed to the Shah Nahr distribution system. Numerous garden irrigation channels were found to be directed towards these imperial suburban features (Appendix III/4A), which facilitated the formation of a series of gardens around the walled city of Shahjahanabad. Cautley (1861:4-5) also mentions the contribution of the Zabita Khan canal, across Yamuna, to formation of modified landscapes in the form of garden suburbs and hunting grounds in Meerut. The Shah Nahr further assumes a grand scale within the walled city in the form of two axial components, as a central feature of the two major commercial streets of the city, the Chandni Chowk and the Faiz Bazaar. It continued to supply water to the imperial gardens within the city before entering the fort complex. The canal, as the most prominent visual feature of Shahjahanabad’s walled city, exerted a significant influence on its urban planning and design practices. An analysis of the canal’s water distribution system within the walled city provides insights into the social hierarchies of class and caste (see Section 7.1.2) in the sovereign capital. The restricted access to canal water, limited to elite residences and royal-commissioned mosques, exemplifies the superiority of the imperial hydraulic infrastructure within the city’s tripartite model. The imperialized landscape also contained pockets of indigenous fluidscapes (Strang 2009), forming smaller independent units of decentralised water systems through wells, ponds, lakes, and bunds. This method has also been termed ‘hydroagriculture’ (as noted by Spooner 1974:705, and Subtelny 2007:140), which was sustained through individual financial investments. These units existed prior to the 256 introduction of the Shah Nahr and were found to irrigate an area of 5 to 12 acres (Meerut Universal Magazine I 1835:428). The variation in the irrigated area depended on the technique used for drawing water. Persian wheels with pukka wells supported larger areas, while dhenkli worked efficiently with ponds and lakes. Operating the water wheels and dhenkli required substantial manual labour (Delhi Settlement Record 1872). Numerous such water-lifting mechanisms were also positioned at regular intervals along the Shah Nahr, particularly where it began to descend after crossing elevated terrains (see Figure 5.30, for details see Appendix III/4E). The following section attempts to examine the relationship between water and labour to comprehend the functioning of the imperial machinery. 7.2.1 Water and Work: A significant engagement with the Mughal water systems in Shahjahanabad, and its agricultural hinterlands, was in the form of labour performed by workers, including animals, to lift and distribute water to agricultural fields, imperial gardens, city and the fort (see Figures 4.6-4.11). Ain-i Akbari (Administration of Akbar; Fazl, tr. in 1873), written during the Akbar Period (1556-1605), remains the most important source for the study of water-related labour during the Mughal period. It mentions the role and wages of water labourers involved in imperial projects, including the construction of wells and tanks (Fazl 1873:222). Water labourers have been classified as bildars (canal diggers), chah-kan (well- diggers), ghautah-khur (well-divers, for cleaning of wells), and abkash (water-carriers). According to Fazl (1873:225-226), among the various categories of labour associated with water infrastructure, bildars were paid the least for canal-digging projects. The bildars were also employed in excavating foundations for fort walls and buildings. Well-cleaners were paid more in the cold season than in the hot season. Habib (1963:29) also mentions the presence of a vibrant community of well-diggers who contributed to agricultural production in the region. Large-scale water infrastructure, such as canals, required maintenance from both skilled and unskilled workers. Based on the 1750s map of the canal, a total of 113 water lifting devices, including 06 water wheels, were identified along the Shah Nahr (for details, see Appendix II/4A) that necessitated substantial labour for their operation and maintenance. The distribution of water in the landscape through irrigation channels, fed by water lifting devices such as rehats and sluice gates (see Figure 7.14; also see Appendix II/4A & III/4A), was supervised by mir-abs (water superintendent), and the taxes collected by them from the users of canal water was called naharana. Any form of repair, including de-silting of the canal, was centrally managed by the empire; however, the labour involved came from neighbouring villages (Wahi 2013:291-292). The relationship between labour and irrigation, involving technology, was examined by Chaudhary (1998:37) in her study on labour practices during the Mughal period. She worked on the preferred mode of drawing water between animal-powered lifting devices (charas) and Persian wheels 257 (rehats) used in wells and its relationship to the depth of the water table in that region. Regions with low water levels opted for the rehat system in wells, as it required less time to draw water from greater depths compared to oxen-powered charas systems, where the animal had to traverse a distance greater than the depth of the well each time it lifted water from it. The Delhi Settlement Record (1872) from the early Colonial Period presented an analysis of the efficiency of water lifting devices in the Delhi region through a one-hour experiment conducted to extract water involving human and animal labour. The findings indicate that in the Sonipat region, two men and two pairs of oxen were required at the peg to lift water from a well 8 and ½ to 11 hathas (hand) deep using the charas technique. In contrast, the rehat system necessitated only one pair of oxen and facilitated the extraction of approximately the same volume of water in one hour, thus demonstrating superior efficiency. The maintenance cycle for a charas was typically five years, whereas a Persian wheel required annual repairs. Figure 7.14: Capt. T. Oliver’s Survey Map of Shah Nahr (1823-24). The survey sheet shows the presence of rehats and sluices along the Mughal Canal (Source: F-02/40, Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India 1700-1900, National Archives of India). Moosvi’s (2011) work on Mughal ‘labour forms’ and their relationship to social hierarchies of caste and class briefly addressed the involvement of low-caste kahaars (water carriers) in the operation of the Mughal administrative apparatus. Wescoat’s (2022) recent work on the energy and food requirements 258 of labour involved in the functioning of the Mughal imperial water system, within gardens and in agricultural hinterlands, presents a detailed account of the ‘water and labour’ of the Mughal period. He studied the role of labour in the operation of Mughal machinery through the use of paintings of the Mughal period and descriptions from Mughal-era chronicles, especially Ain-i Akbari. He used political economy as a tool to study water-related labour in an empire that focused on expansion and creating an imperial identity. Across a canal spanning more than 150 km, the study of labour involvement indicates a network of use, production, and product. Within micro-transects of geographies, it ascribes an associational value to water defined by the effort invested in the process (Strang 2004:6, also, Gell 1992) of lifting and its distribution for the purpose of irrigation, livestock, and everyday needs of the society. Collectively, it also contributes to the projection of the canal and its associated infrastructure as a cultural object defined through the value it attains in the process of its functioning. These cultural objects should be understood as monuments by virtue of their complex interplay between power, belief, and necessity that they embody. In the Mughal period, hydraulic infrastructure articulated imperial authority while simultaneously engaging with the sacred and social dimensions of the landscape. The monumental character of these works arises from both their ability to project external expressions of power and their integration into the daily civic lives of the populace, reflecting a convergence of imperial ambition and its everyday significance. Through this dual lens, Shahjahanabad’s waterscape emerges as a site where infrastructure, identity, and urbanism intersect, establishing a hydrological regime that is simultaneously functional, symbolic, and socially resonant. The Mughals, in shaping these waterworks, created monuments that are measured not only in stone and scale but in their enduring cultural and societal value, illustrating how infrastructure can become a medium through which power, belief, and collective life are materially and symbolically inscribed. However, in South Asia, the orchestration of water as a medium of imperial presence extends beyond its display, regulation, and use to encompass the ways in which it is hosted. Religion has historically shaped, and continues to shape, access to and management of water, embedding hydraulic infrastructures within complex frameworks of belief and practice. Religion is a significant aspect that ascribes monumental value to even the smallest of objects. A comprehensive understanding of water culture, therefore, necessitates attention not only to the technical means by which water is sourced, channelled, and distributed, but also to the religious and cultural contexts that frame its significance. In the faith-oriented landscapes of the subcontinent, where sacred rivers are revered as goddesses and all water bodies carry religious resonance, hydraulic structures are invested with sanctity, transforming functional infrastructures into sites of spiritual and monumental value (Hegewald 1998:17). Eck (2012:4- 5) describes this as a sacred everyday geography, a living landscape in which ecological features, water 259 channels, and reservoirs are inseparably linked to deities, rituals, and devotional practices, and where each intervention acquires symbolic meaning and narrative identity. In this manner, the very act of hosting and managing water confers upon it a dual ‘monumental’ significance: as an essential resource in a semi-arid environment and as a culturally and religiously charged medium capable of shaping spatial perception and social order. The subsequent section examines how these dynamics played out in the faith-based landscape of Shahjahanabad, where Hindu ritual practices and the devotion of Sufi-shrine communities coexisted alongside experiments with Mughal hydraulic innovations. The focus is on the ways in which religious and cultural frameworks mediated the hosting of water, transforming it into a socially, spiritually, and politically resonant feature, thereby linking hydraulic infrastructure to both monumental display and the projection of imperial authority. 7.3 Water Management in a ‘Faith-based Environment’ ‘Imperialism…[is] fundamentally concerned with territory and knowledge…the ineluctable necessities of conquest and government are to understand…the physical space that one occupies or that one hopes to dominate…to establish regular contact with the peoples and their territories….To govern territories one must know them.’ (Matthew H. Edney: 1997) This assertion encapsulates the essence of imperial control as an intricate interplay between power, knowledge, and space. The establishment of Mughal rule was not merely an act of conquest, but a deliberate effort to map, study, and categorise both the land and its inhabitants. By embedding themselves within the cultural, geographical, and administrative frameworks of the territories they sought to govern in South Asia, the Mughals transformed knowledge into a tool of domination, enabling them to establish authority and control over vast and diverse landscapes. This integration of governance and territorial comprehension underscores the critical role of spatial behaviour and social beliefs in sustaining imperial agendas by the Mughals, as evidenced in the making and governance of Shahjahanabad. Religious shrines in South Asia are often associated with water bodies because of their ritualistic importance as symbols of purity. Devotees access water through a series of steps, known as ghats, which serve as conduits to the sacred domain (Andhare 1993; Samant 2004). This dynamic relationship also designates the temple structure as a custodian of the water body, often collectively forming a ‘cultural ecology’ (Czerniak-Drożdżowicz 2022:186). Notable examples include Bindusagar Lake (Lingaraj Temple) in Odisha, Padmatheertham Tank (Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple) in Kerala, a series of Pushkarani Tanks in Hampi, Amrit Sarovar (Golden Temple) in Amritsar, and Surya Kund (Sun Temple) in Gujarat. In addition to tanks, stepwells (Mata Bhavani Vav, Gujarat), springs (Kheer Bhawani Temple, Kashmir), ponds (Srirangam, Tamil Nadu), and lakes (Brahma Temple, Pushkar) are also 260 associated with shrines, highlighting the relationship between nature and culture in the South Asian landscape. The Kumbh Mela (Prayagraj), Mahamakham fair (Kumbakonam), and Puskaram Mela (Rajahmundry) are among the significant religious festivals centred around water in the subcontinent. Religious shrines in medieval South Asia have served as a medium for hosting water, which itself is imbued with a sacred significance. This practice was found to have notably influenced the Mughal hydrological practices in South Asia. Shahjahanabad, the last capital of the Mughal Empire, was located on the banks of the sacred Yamuna River in India. Numerous ponds, lakes, and tanks, as well as the tributaries of the river, are revered, by Hindus, for their proximity to Yamuna and hold agency over the human surroundings. Furthermore, Shahjahan, the fifth Mughal emperor and builder of Shahjahanabad, was an ardent practitioner of Islam. The laws and policies of the Mughal state were governed by Islamic sharia (law), and people of the faith were considered as environmental stewards to the water features. In light of these water-centric sacred attributes, this chapter focusses on a discussion of water features in the ‘faith-based’ hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad, with an emphasis on the role and function of water as both a tool of management and an imperial object. I use water infrastructure as a ‘central object’ of the landscape, aiming to decode patterns that emerge from interactions with these systems, particularly in the context of socio-spatial organisation, sacred engagements, and large-scale urban practices. The chapter focuses on the role of large-scale infrastructural systems in landscape reconfiguration, the making of ‘monumental’ architecture, and its centrality in the formation of the tripartite urbanism model. The waterscape was designed to serve not only imperial control and economic purposes but also to imbue the landscape with sacred significance. The Yamuna and numerous Sufi shrines rendered the landscape ritualistic, with water as its central element. These religious sites and attributes were utilized by the Mughals, drawing from their Turko-Mongolian heritage, as mechanisms for water management and control (see Chapter 2, Section 2.3.2). It is noteworthy that while the canal introduced by the Mughals was primarily intended for the agricultural hinterlands of Shahjahanabad, it was anchored by imperial outposts in the form of gardens and state-patronised shrines at regular intervals, marking the imperial presence in the landscape. Dedicated irrigation channels were designed for suburban imperial gardens and shrines in Karnal, Panipat, and Sonipat. These channels also likely functioned as boundaries of control in the landscape, dividing the watershed into smaller, manageable regulated regions. Another manifestation of power control was evident in the construction of large dams along the canal. The dams were built in close proximity to the shrines (see Appendix III/4A) and underscored the involvement of these shrines in the management of dams and regulation of water for the agrarian landscape. 261 Shahjahanabad is located along the banks of the Yamuna River, one of the three holy rivers, alongside the Ganga and the allusive Saraswati, which converge at Allahabad to create the ‘triveni sangam’ (Maitland 2019:247). The sacred landscape of the Yamuna is intertwined with the religious and cultural traditions associated with Lord Krishna, an avatar of the Hindu deity, Lord Vishnu, who is regarded as the preserver of the universe (Crooke 1900:3). Vishnu is also regarded as vyapin, one who permeates everything (Michael 2016:324). The pervasion extends to the greater landscape through the river which not only permeates through its distributaries but also transcends beyond the sacred landscape through the ‘Yamuna jal’ (holy water of Yamuna) that believers carry to their native lands. All the tributaries of its basin, along with the numerous talao (ponds), tal (lakes), and kunds (tanks) are revered for their proximity to the river. They carry an agency over the human surroundings and dictate the ‘way of life’ of its believers through an act of ritual and practice, centred around water. They govern the life cycle of a believer from the time of birth to when their body-ash is sprinkled into the sacred waters. It is believed that not only the river water, but all forms of water in the landscape, including groundwater, is a form of the sacred and hence is used for ritualistic purposes (Maitland 2019:250). Delhi has also been referred to as ‘Baees Khwaja ki Chaukhat’ or ‘The Threshold of 22 Saints’ (after Chenoy 1998:32). The stretch between Delhi and Karnal is also revered as a blessed land owing to the presence of shrines of significant Sufi saints of South Asia such as Hazrat Ali Shah Qalandar (14th C, Karnal), Hazrat Bu Ali Shah Qalandar (13th C, Panipat), Khwaja Khizr (16th C, Sonipat), Hazrat Shah Turkman Biyabani (12th C, Delhi), and the footprint of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh56) at Qadam Sharif (Shrine of the Holy Foot, 14th C, Delhi). These sacred sites are believed to provide the ‘channel to God’ by the ‘grace of the dead’ (Ephrat 2021:115). As a result, being buried in proximity to shrines is an attempt to attain forgiveness from God, through the grace of the saint, from the ill deeds committed in life. Both kings and subjects wished to be buried in the sacralised landscape. Together they constitute a ‘faith-based environment’ (Sinha 2014:59) in this polycentric landscape constituting of numerous sites of sacred nature which are connected to each other through the ‘footsteps of the pilgrims’ (after Eck 2012:12). Hence, it is crucial for an imperial force to acknowledge these sacral nodes in the landscape, together with the lines of movement that connect them. These connections are sometimes transregional in the sacred South Asian landscape. The curation of an imperial governance mechanism in such a ‘territory’ hence necessitates its relationship to the religious ‘knowledge’ of the landscape for the effective management of land and its resources (after Edney 1997), especially water. In a sacred landscape, the introduction of newer water infrastructure and the use of hydraulic tools 56 peace be upon him 262 and techniques to draw and transport water from its source also require a framework to host it. It works best when it is centred around the religious beliefs of the people (Montalbano 2008:1) The Mughals were followers of Islam (Fisher 2018), and consequently, Islamic sharia law initially provided an important framework for the formulation of state policy. However, by the seventeenth century, sharia no longer occupied the central position in Mughal political discourse. Alam (2004:5–6) identifies three major reasons for this shift. First, the continuing influence of the Tura-i Changezi, the legal code of the Mongols, shaped Mughal political conduct as part of their Timurid inheritance. Second, the nomadic traditions of rule inherited from Central Asia often rendered strict adherence to sharia impractical for the effective governance of a diverse and expansive empire. Third, the Mongol destruction of the Islamic East undermined the unquestioned authority of Islamic orthodoxy, opening intellectual and political space for alternative frameworks of legitimacy. This third factor was particularly consequential, as it fostered the rise of tasawwuf (Sufi ideologies), which provided a more flexible and inclusive mode of engaging with religious and social plurality. By the seventeenth century, Mughal rulers such as Jahangir and Shahjahan demonstrated a marked inclination towards Sufism (discussed in section 7.2.1). As Alam (2004:7) argues, between the twelfth and eighteenth centuries Sufi orders played a pivotal role in the political formation of empires in South Asia. In North India especially, Sufis advocated cultural assimilation and emphasized the alleviation of human suffering as the highest form of devotion. This orientation allowed Sufi shrines to emerge as sites of cross-religious convergence (Umashankar 2015), attracting diverse communities and thereby exerting significant influence on society, social hierarchies, and political authority (Alam 2004:83). From this perspective, Mughal engagement with the religious landscape was less about enforcing sharia as a rigid legal code and more about mobilizing the integrative capacities of Sufi traditions. Sufism offered a political language (Alam 2004) that mediated between competing cultural and social practices, enabling the empire to manage land, resources, and populations within a heterogeneous landscape. The Mughal state’s recognition of the authority of Sufi knowledge thus functioned as a crucial instrument in both legitimizing rule and ensuring the effective administration of its territories. Shahjahanabad, like other Mughal urban centres, embodied a landscape distinct from its Turko- Mongolian precedents, marked by the polycentric coexistence of Hindu and Muslim sacred sites. Within this setting, water held layered meanings: in Islam as a medium of ritual purification, and in Hinduism as a cosmological and devotional substance. The Mughal hydrological system, through canals, reservoirs, and waqf-endowed waterworks, thus operated not merely as infrastructure but as a framework where sacred symbolism and urban necessity converged. Managing water in Shahjahanabad required navigating this 263 interplay of ritual and everyday demands, allowing the state to integrate technical control with religious legitimacy. It is within this nexus of water, sacredness, and imperial authority that the following section turns to examine the specific mechanisms of Mughal intervention in the urban landscape. 7.3.1 Hosting ‘Water’ in a Sacred Geography Religion, state, and economy were not indistinguishable entities in the South Asian landscape. A decision pertaining to one domain had implications for the others. An examination of water, which is interconnected with these three aspects, necessitates its consideration as a central element in the imperial decision-making process. In this section, I employ water, and its sacred and imperial attributes, as an analytical framework to investigate the process of imperial layout and management of the last capital of the Mughal empire. The earliest architecturally significant structures in Shahjahanabad encompassed a Hindu shrine at Nigumbodh Ghat, located on the banks of the Yamuna River, and the shrine of Hazrat Shah Turkman Biyanbani, situated on a hilly outcrop of the Aravalli range. The importance of these sacred sites to the city of Shahjahanabad is highlighted by the naming of two gates of the walled city. Within Hindu tradition, Nigumbodh Ghat holds profound spiritual significance as a site of ‘wisdom restoration’, attributed to Lord Brahma, the creator deity, who is believed to have taken a holy dip here to regain his memory after being cursed by Goddess Yamuna (Winter 2018:35). Hindus revere this site as a locus of transcendence between celestial and terrestrial realms, where deities descend and mortals ascend (Eck 2012:18). According to Jagmohan (2015:162), the Ghat was established by Yuddhishthira, the eldest Pandava and the ruler of Indraprastha. This Ghat, along with the Yamuna River, defines the sacral character of the landscape, further emphasised by the numerous cremation grounds surrounding the area, marking a symbolic passage between life and the afterlife. The word ‘Biyanban’ translates to ‘jungle’ or ‘forest land’. According to Mahajan and Tiwari (2011:59), the Biyanbani sect, which included Shah Turkman, preferred to meditate in secluded, forested areas. It is believed that the shrine’s location on a mound helped protect it from the floods of the Yamuna River. These sacred sites illustrate a distinctive interplay of ‘ecology and topography’ (after Taneja 2013:211), with Hindu shrines typically situated along riverbanks and shrines of Sufi saints occupying elevated terrains. This spatial distribution forms a recurring pattern along the 150-kilometer stretch of the Yamuna River and its canal within the study area. It is important to note here that the listing documents prepared during the British period (Khan 1846; Ahmad 1873; and, Hasan 1914) contain no mention of the relationship between ecology and topography and the listed sacred sites. These sites have been documented as individual built entities, independent of the landscapes they occupy. This documentation 264 approach also demonstrates how the landscape significance of these sacred sites, which functioned as design controls for Mughal hydrology, was disregarded by colonial surveyors, whose water engineering interventions eventually rendered the old system obsolete or marginalised. Figure 7.15 (Left): The approach lane to the Shrine of Shah Turkman Biyanbani within Shahjahanabad; Figure 7.16 (Right): Temple Shrine adjacent to a Pond in the Canal Landscape. The shrine sites are distinctly visible in an otherwise flat landscape along the canal; however, the post-independence urban development in the walled city and its suburbs has led to a disconnect between the sacred sites and their natural landscape. These patterns may not be distinctively visible; nevertheless, traversing these sites enables one to discern their locations on elevated terrains (Figure 7.15). During fieldwork, the presence of temple shrines on settlement mounds was also observed as a distinctive visible element in the canal landscape (See Appendix 4F, SN/01/10, SN/02/014, SN/04/015; also, see Figure 7.16). A survey of Shah Nahr conducted in 1823-24 by Capt. T. Oliver demonstrated the presence of Hindu temples and tombs along the canal (Figure 7.18), constituting a significant feature of the ritualistic landscape, which likely influenced the alignment of Shah Nahr. The existence of Sufi saint shrines and temples predates the construction of the canal and city. The modelling of the canal in the landscape by the Mughals followed the Turko-Mongolian principle of aligning water infrastructure with religious shrines. The 18th-century hand-drawn map of Shah Nahr (see Appendix III/4A) depicts the first bend of the canal adjacent to the shrine of Shah Sharf in Ladwa, followed by another adjacent to the shrine of Hazrat Ali Shah Qalandar in Karnal. The first major dam, equipped with iron shutters and sluice gates, was strategically positioned opposite to the shrine in Karnal. A Mughal bridge was also identified during fieldwork close to the shrine, representing the sole point where Badshahi Sadak crossed Shah Nahr (Figure 7.12). Subsequently, the canal ran along the shrines of Hazrat Bu Ali Shah Qalandar in Panipat, Temple shrines of Mooranuh, Khookranuh, Sootanuh and Bhadour (Figure 7.18), The Water Saint - Khwaja Khizr’s Tomb, in Sonipat (Figure 7.17), before turning towards Shahjahanabad, abutting Qadam Sharif 265 and Shah Turkman Biyanbani’s shrine, before eventually draining into its source, the sacred Yamuna. This deliberate alignment of the canal, along with the construction of major water control features near the shrines, underscores the integration of these sacred sites into the broader framework of state infrastructure and water management within the canal landscape. Figure 7.17 (Top): Water Saint -Khwaja Khizr’s Tomb in Sonipat (Courtesy: Shiekh Intekhab Alam, Sonipat) Figure 7.18: 1823-24 Survey Sheet of Shah Nahr showing the location of Temples & Tombs adjacent to the canal. (Source: F-02/38, Catalogue of the Historical Maps of Survey of India 1700-1900, National Archives of India). 266 Figure 7.19 (Left): Shrine of Sheikh Salim Chishti in Fatehpur Sikri by Yoshida Hiroshi (Source: Copy from C. A. Petrie’s Private Collection, Cambridge); Figure 7.20 (Right): Jahangir preferring a Sufi Shaykh to Kings (Source: St. Petersburg Album, F1942.15, Freer Gallery of Art; Wikimedia Commons) Shrines of Sufi Saints have been integral to the imperial decision-making process of the Mughals, particularly in relation to urban planning and architectural endeavours. The association and veneration of shrine sites in South Asia can be traced back to the founder of the Mughal Empire, Babur, who, subsequent to his victory at the Battle of Panipat, visited the shrines of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya and Hazrat Qutubuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki in Delhi (after Sengupta 2016:62). His son and successor, the second Mughal emperor Humayun, was buried in a complex that also housed the chillah or meditation chamber of Hazrat Nizamuddin Auliya. Nizamuddin’s shrine is situated adjacent to the tomb complex. The third Mughal emperor, Akbar, conceived and constructed an entire city surrounding the shrine of Sheikh Salim Chishti in Fatehpur Sikri (Figure 7.19), following the birth of a male heir who subsequently ascended to the throne as Mughal Emperor Jahangir. Jahangir’s reverence for Sufi saints is evidenced by a painting created between 1615 to 1618, depicting him preferring a Sufi Shaykh over the Ottoman Sultan and the King of England, King James I (Figure 7.20). The reign of Shahjahan witnessed the apex of interaction between the royal family and the Sufi orders (Alam 2021:4-7). Alam (2021) notes that the princesses of the Mughal empire, including Shahjahan’s daughters Jahan Ara and Roshan Ara, were significant patrons 267 of Sufi shrines and considered themselves mureed or spiritual disciples of the saints in Ajmer and Kashmir. Together with their brother, Dara Shukoh, they also authored treatises on the Sufi lineage of saints buried in the South Asian landscape. Shahjahan’s son and successor, Aurangzeb, the subsequent Mughal emperor, also maintained close affiliations with Sufi orders. In a landscape inhabited predominantly by non-Muslims, the Mughals were compelled to adopt a political and cultural ‘language’ (Alam 2004) that legitimised their authority over populations who did not follow Islam as the state religion (Faroqhi 2019:106). As Alam (2004; 2021) demonstrates, Sufi shrines, owing to their cross-religious appeal (Umashankar 2015), became central to imperial practices of negotiation, accommodation, and governance. These shrines provided the Mughals with an idiom of inclusivity and mediated between imperial authority and local traditions, thereby stabilising rule in a religiously diverse milieu (Alam 2004:88). Yet this mode of accommodation extended beyond Sufi institutions into older Indic sacred geographies already inscribed in the land. Among these, the Yamuna occupied a uniquely central place as both a sacred river and a critical hydraulic artery. Revered in Hindu tradition, all waters feeding into the Yamuna, its tributaries, ponds (talao), lakes (tal), and tanks (kund), were imbued with divine agency, governing ritual practices that structured the life cycle of devotees from birth to the dispersal of ashes (Maitland 2019:250). Even groundwater, as part of this sacred continuum, was ritually valorised. For the Mughals, then, the Yamuna was more than a natural resource: it was a sacredscape whose management required balancing religious meaning with urban and ecological utility. The next section turns to this dual role of the Yamuna, examining how the river’s sanctity and hydraulic potential converged to shape both the spiritual and material foundations of Shahjahanabad. a. Yamuna’s Sacredscape Prior to relocating their capital to Delhi, the Mughals were already cognizant of the Yamuna’s deep religious and cultural significance within the north Indian landscape. Their earlier capital, Agra, was situated along the river’s banks and in close proximity to Mathura and Vrindavan, sites that hold elevated sanctity due to their association with Lord Krishna. As Sinha (2020:78) observes, such sites are venerated for their divine potency and are often marked by the construction of ghats, which enable ritual interaction with the sacred waters. Delhi, and specifically the site later chosen for Shahjahanabad, was likewise embedded in this sacred geography. According to local belief, the site derived its devotional power from its association with Lord Brahma, who is said to have bathed in the Yamuna to recover his memory after being cursed by the goddess herself (Winter 2018:35). The incorporation of this sacred site into the spatial fabric of Shahjahanabad was therefore far from incidental. Rather, it reflected a deliberate imperial strategy to align the city with long-standing 268 Hindu traditions and ritual practices already rooted in the Yamuna’s sacredscape. By integrating pilgrimage routes and devotional geographies into the urban planning of the walled city, the Mughals not only acknowledged the religious life of the majority population but also positioned Shahjahanabad as a site of cross-religious appeal. This strategic embedding of the Yamuna’s sanctity within the city’s physical and symbolic architecture reveals the Mughal effort to combine political authority with cultural inclusivity, thereby consolidating imperial legitimacy through the shared reverence for water as sacred substance. The Yamuna, often referred to as a ‘river of heaven’ (Eck 2012:245), is intimately linked with notions of purification, love, and liberation (moksha). It draws pilgrims from across the globe who undertake tirtha, a spiritual journey encompassing both life and death. The extension of the Yamuna via canals on its eastern (Shah Nahr) and western (Zabita Khan Canal, see section 7.3) banks likely reflects Mughal efforts, within this ‘faith-based landscape,’ to sanctify the region and prevent the misuse of its waters. This initiative was particularly significant because the Yamuna served as a major economic resource, contributing to agricultural productivity and, by extension, to the state treasury. The Mughals actively facilitated engagement with the river, promoting ritual practices through the strategic development of infrastructure and the implementation of inclusive urban planning principles that reinforced the sacred and utilitarian significance of the Yamuna. In their comparative study of the landscape along the Yamuna in Mughal Agra and the sacred sites of Mathura and Vrindavan, Sinha & Ruggles (2004:141) contend that the Mughal scopic regime contrasted sharply with Hindu visual practices in Mathura and Vrindavan. They conceptualized that the Mughals introduced a scopic regime to the South Asian landscape, where the mode of viewing the landscape was characterized by a clear separation between the observer and the observed. In contrast, they argue that Hindu visual practices along the Yamuna dissolved this distinction, perceiving the river not merely as an object of visual contemplation but as a living presence, intimately bound to its devotees. They highlight Babur’s gardens along the Yamuna in Agra as examples of the Mughal visual mode, in contrast to the ghats of Mathura and Vrindavan, where Hindu traditions embedded viewing within the sacred geography through practices of ritual interaction. These differences, they argue, reflect the Mughals’ inheritance of Timurid cultural codes of viewing, set against local Indic traditions. In the case of Shahjahanabad, however, the integration of the Yamuna suggests a negotiated act of visual practice. Here, the Mughal act of framing a gaze was not confined to distanced observation but was reconfigured through both urban planning and religious interaction. On the one hand, the city’s riverfront gardens framed the Yamuna as a spectacle within imperial aesthetics; on the other, the encouragement of devotional use along the riverfront allowed believers to inhabit and sacralise the banks through darshan. In this way, the 269 Mughals sought to balance their inherited scopic regime with the embodied sacred practices of the local population, effectively transcending visual and physical boundaries through the Yamuna’s landscape. The practice of ‘darshan’ or ‘auspicious sight’ (Sinha 2014:60) of the sacred river is common across its fluvial edge, with some places gaining more ‘darshan-ic’ importance than the others owing to their significance in religious narratives. Eck (1999), in her seminal work on Darshan defines these places as ‘locative form of religiousness’ (also Sinha 60:2014). It is interesting to note how the concept of ‘darshan’ associated with sacred waters also manifests into Shahjahan’s practice of ‘darshan’57 or ‘auspicious viewing of the king’ to the people of its state through the ‘jharokha-i-darshan58‘ located in the Red Fort of Shahjahanabad (Ahmed 1939:1137; Koch 1997:154). The Nigumbodh Ghat, a stepped embankment leading believer to the Yamuna River, constitutes a significant darshan site on the Yamuna. The Ghat forms the boundary of the walled city. Of the 14 gates of Shahjahanabad, the Nigumbodh Gate provided access to the sacred river for the city’s inhabitants and practitioners. Mughals’ decision to name the gate after this revered site and provide access to it serves as an indicator of the negotiation of ‘political order and meaning’ (Williamson 2023) by the imperial forces in a landscape shaped by the contours of rituals and belief. In Shahjahanabad, the Gosain59 and Thakurdwara60 communities occupied sites closest to the river (Hasan 1982:312, also Maitland 2019). Several important temples are also located in close proximity, with the most significant being the Hanuman Temple61, situated on the riverbank. The sacred landscape of Yamuna is further characterized by the presence of notable topographical features along its edge, such as the Aravallis Hills and the Siwalik Hills (Sharma 2019:453), which contribute to the watershed of the venerated river, and the doab62 land on the opposite side. Shahjahanabad, positioned between the Aravalli and Yamuna, thus occupies a unique location within this sacred geography. The stream network reconstruction of the Mughal Period (see Figure 6.9) indicates the catchment contribution of the Aravalli hills to the river. These streams, as contributors to the river catchment, along with other water features such as kunds (tanks), talao (ponds), kuiyan (small wells), and baolis (stepwells), also attain religious significance and are revered within the landscape. During fieldwork, I observed that the tradition of well-worshipping, or kuiyan-poojan, continues to be practiced in the walled city by Hindus. This tradition involves women seeking blessings from the ‘well’ at the time of marriage. Hindus 57 The jharokha-darshan practice was inherited from Akbar, the 3rd Mughal Emperor (Kumar 1997:246) 58 Window located on the east wall of the fort. 59 Stewards of the Hindu religious scripture, the Vedas 60 Houses with a sacred enclosure dedicated to Lord Krishna. 61 Dedicated to Lord Hanuman, a companion of Lord Rama in Ramayana. 62 Do-ab is a Persian term which translates to ‘land between two rivers’, here Yamuna and Ganga. 270 revere the water from the well as a symbol of health and prosperity. In some instances, the bride carries water from the well to the groom’s family in small containers (Mathur 2023). Cartographic sources from the early 19th century also illustrate the pattern of temple association with small-scale water bodies dedicated to Hindu deities, as exemplified by Kunti Talao (Kunti was the mother of the Pandavas in Mahabharata) and Chah Indara (named after the Rain God, Indra). The sacred significance of the Yamuna in Shahjahanabad functioned as both a spiritual anchor and a practical instrument for Mughal urban and hydraulic planning. By situating the capital along a river deeply embedded in Hindu devotional geographies, the Mughals leveraged pre-existing religious reverence to integrate water infrastructure such as canals, ghats, tanks, and stepwells into the city’s sacredscape. This alignment allowed them to frame the Yamuna simultaneously as a source of imperial spectacle, a locus of ritual engagement, and a vital economic resource. The negotiation between the Mughal scopic regime and local practices of darshan transformed the riverfront into a site where imperial authority and religious devotion coexisted, enabling believers to sanctify and inhabit the riverbanks while the state harnessed the water for urban and agricultural purposes. Moreover, the spatial organization of gates, temples, and water bodies demonstrates how Shahjahanabad was deliberately positioned within the sacred geography of the Yamuna, connecting topographical features, devotional sites, and hydraulic networks into a coherent, faith-infused urban strategy. In this way, the religious and cultural significance of the Yamuna was not merely acknowledged but strategically mobilized, allowing the Mughals to consolidate political legitimacy, facilitate social cohesion, and ensure the sustainable management of the river as both a sacred and utilitarian lifeline. b. Islam & Water Practices The concept of environmental stewardship is of utmost importance in Islam (Chuvieco 2012:12), where natural resources are defined as ‘gifts from God’, and their protection and regulation, as per religious laws, is the responsibility of humans. Symbolised as God’s benevolence, water in Islam is considered sacred, life-giver, and the key element of Paradise (de Chatel 2009:5). The Quran emphasises the symbolic and functional value of water. The Book also discusses the importance of various sources of water, such as rain, rivers, springs, wells, and seas (Zargar 2014). Abu Yusuf’s 8th-century book, Kitab Al-Kharaj, written during the Abbasid period in Baghdad, identifies rivers, canals, wells, springs, and reservoirs as primary water sources for settlements. The text addresses the rights of ‘Followers of the Way’ to waterbodies, riverbank maintenance, canal digging for dead lands (Lambton 1953), and prohibits the sale or rental of flowing water (Wilkinson 1990). It discusses upstream and downstream water rights, well access, and river water use. While wells may be privately owned, the water within them is part of a broader underground system (Ibn Qudama in Al-Mughani 1147-1223, per Norvelle 1974). Similarly, no 271 individual owns rivers or streams, but catchments such as tanks, pools, and ditches can be developed for irrigation or operational needs such as mills with priority use given to habitants in proximity to the source before releasing excess water. Regulations specify that water for seasonal crops should be ankle-deep, with excess water released to other fields. In Islam, water is a natural resource and cannot be taxed, although revenue can be collected from its produce, including crops, livestock, orchards, and recreation (Wilkinson 1990:60). Islamic water sharia mandates buffer zones around water sources, prohibiting construction and agriculture to protect wells and channels from disruption. This buffer area, known as harim, varies from 3 m for wells to 100 m for springs (Norvelle 1974; Zaharuddin & Sabri 2005). Ibn Qudama’s 13th-century work, Al-Mughani, specifies harim lands as 25 cubits (~13.5m) for new wells, 50 cubits (~27m) for old wells, and 500 cubits (~267m) for springs. Prophet Muhammad stated the harim of a well to be the length of its rope to allow animals using the well to move freely (Sunan Ibn Majah 2487 Book 16 Hadith 52; Norvelle 1974). Harim also supports groundwater recharge by protecting adjacent lands from contamination, thereby enhancing the region’s ecological health (Wilkinson 1960). The concept of harim land was incorporated by the Mughals for canals and reservoirs. During my fieldwork of Shah Nahr, I found an average buffer of 50 m on each edge of the canal. Fieldwork revealed that in numerous regions, the forest department owned land adjacent to the canal. They utilised this land to grow commercial trees, including both short- and long-rotation species, with eucalyptus being a prominent choice because of its fast growth as an agro-forestry species (Ahmed 2008:167). This practice resulted in the formation of linear forests, which stood out prominently in the predominantly flat agricultural landscape of the canal (see Chapter 5, Figure 5.20). Not only for canals, but harim lands were also introduced by the Mughals around reservoirs, as in the Roshanara Bagh, and around wells meant for livestock in rural areas. Cartographic sources from the late 19th century also indicate the presence of a series of shallow wells along the canals in the harim (buffer) zone (Figure 6.12) within the garden suburbs. One of the central aspects of Islamic water law is the concept of ‘care’ and ‘endowment’ (waqf) of water resources for communal use (Hussein 2003). Waqf continues to be an important tool for managing and conserving water resources within communities. Those who benefit from these resources are responsible for safeguarding them from pollution. Agricultural communities are entrusted with canals, rivers, and streams; urban areas with wells; and rural villages with tanks and lakes for livestock. In Islam, humans are designated as khulafa, or stewards, of resources, which influence how humans interact with and depend on the environment (Amery 2009; Faruqui 2001; Gudorf 2010). Several epigraphic evidences discovered during fieldwork within Shahjahanabad illustrate the significance of waqf (see Appendix I/B; SJB/01/053, 060, 064, 096, 099, and 103), particularly for water features. In some instances, these 272 evidences also enumerate commercial units within the walled city for the maintenance of water features and religious structures. In Islam, water is essential for wudu (ablution) and ghusl (bathing), which are both acts of ritual purification. Mosques are typically situated in proximity to water sources for wudu before prayer or Quran recitation. Water in tanks and cisterns within shrine complexes is also believed to possess healing powers (Bradley 2012). During fieldwork, I observed that all mosques within the study area were associated with a water source, such as a well, baoli, or hauz (refer to Appendix I/B). Reconstruction based on historical chronicles and cartographic sources (see Chapter 6, Figure 6.13) demonstrated the presence of numerous mosques in the landscape. The concentration of 200 mosques within the walled-city (Figure 6.23) and more than a score in the garden suburbs can be attributed to the practice of Islam by the Mughal Empire (Fisher 2018). The purity of water (tahara) is crucial for ritualistic practices in Islam. Ablution is a fundamental ritual performed before every prayer; hence, the presence of a water source in proximity to the mosque is essential for such a practice. Wells and tanks were typically developed within or around mosques; however, this was not always the case, as in some instances, the construction of the mosque was due to the presence of the water feature, conferring agency to water over development, as observed in Lal Kuan and Khari Baoli. Canal water, which possessed no sacred virtues in the greater landscape, transformed into holy water upon reaching the water tank within Qadam Sharif, and exerted agency over the immediate surroundings, influencing the contours of faith and movement within the complex. The water tank within Qadam Sharif was, and is, considered sacred due to its location within the complex that contains a tablet with the footprint of the Prophet Muhammad. Similar to the Yamuna jal, the tank’s water, owing to its sacred and healing nature, is transported in containers by believers to distant locations, extending the role of water as an agent beyond the sacred landscape. The Mughals’ engagement with the ritual dimensions of water transformed functional infrastructure into sites of enduring cultural and spiritual significance, effectively turning them into monuments shaped by belief. By constructing gateways offering darshan of the sacred Yamuna, integrating canals and tanks within shrine enclosures sanctified by saints, and establishing ablution tanks and temple wells for daily worship, the Mughals materialized religious reverence in built form. These structures were not merely utilitarian; their placement, accessibility, and design reflected deliberate imperial strategies, mediating social hierarchies while embedding the city within a sacred geography. The tangible imprints of such interventions demonstrate how the Mughals harnessed religious devotion to confer symbolic power, transforming hydraulic and urban infrastructure into sacred markers. In this sense, infrastructure in Shahjahanabad transcends functionality, embodying belief itself and attaining the status of a monument where faith, authority, and urban planning converge to shape a watershed empire. 273 7.4. Towards a Watershed Empire As discussed in Chapter 2, the concept of watershed empires, first introduced by Camp in The Ancient Engineers (1963:23), framed rivers and their associated catchments as the ecological basis of imperial power. In Camp’s view, vast watersheds, when organised through irrigation networks and governed by centralised authority, provided the material conditions for empire-building. He pointed to the Nile, Mesopotamia, the Indus, and the Hwang-ho as classical instances of such systems, but he also suggested that governance over large watersheds was inherently unstable, prone to revolt, fragmentation, and the rise of smaller polities within a larger hydrological unit. He conceived states that settled within a river basin and expanded ‘inside-out’, making rivers the axial feature around which their economies, societies, and authorities revolved. In the case of South Asia, and especially the Mughal Empire, the notion of the watershed empire requires redefinition. The Mughals engaged water not only as a resource to be manipulated but as a medium through which sovereignty was consolidated, projected, and monumentalised. Their hydrological strategies reveal a more complex orientation than Camp’s models of internal expansion. Rather than viewing the watershed as a bounded, self-contained unit, the Mughals approached the subcontinent as a mosaic of interconnected micro- and mini-watersheds, each requiring strategic integration. Their empire-building was not simply a matter of harnessing rivers; it was about establishing control across multiple scales, from the headwaters of rivers to the distributive systems of canals and tanks, including the indigenous formations of wells, lakes, ponds, and bunds, that sustained agrarian villages and imperial cities alike. This expansive vision was rooted in the Turko-Mongol inheritance of mobility across inter-fluvial zones, combined with the sedentary Perso-Islamic traditions of hydraulic governance (see Chapter 2). It produced a distinctive mode of conquest and consolidation, where the river was not only a territorial anchor but also part of a larger hydraulic ensemble. The prosperity of Mughal South Asia was inseparable from this ability to combine different technologies of water management: tanks and reservoirs stored monsoon rains; embankments and dams regulated flows; and canals diverted rivers to feed imperial capitals and agricultural hinterlands. These interventions, in turn, shaped the ecological and social geographies of empire, embedding Mughal authority in both the monumental structures of cities and the quotidian rhythms of cultivation. Religion further deepened this entanglement. In Shahjahanabad and elsewhere, water was governed not only through imperial instructions but also through religious institutions, which mediated access, regulated distribution, and sacralised its use. Mosques, gardens, and shrines often acted as focal points for hydraulic networks, embedding infrastructures within ritual landscapes (see Chapter 5 & 6). In this way, water management became a site where political sovereignty and religious legitimacy were 274 mutually reinforced. Unlike Camp’s Nile (1963:23) or Russel’s Ch’in (2005:127-138), the Mughal ‘watershed empire’ was not reducible to centralised irrigation alone; it was also sustained by cultural meanings, religious institutions, and local practices that invested hydraulic systems with symbolic as well as practical value. The Shah Nahr provides a striking example of how the Mughals operationalised the logic of a watershed empire in South Asia. Diverted from the Yamuna in the Himalayan foothills and carried for more than 250 kilometres downstream to Shahjahanabad, the canal illustrates an imperial strategy that centred on securing and controlling river headwaters. By fixing its source at the upper reaches of the Yamuna, the Mughals were not simply creating a channel for irrigation or navigation; they were asserting command over the entire hydrological system of the watershed. This control at the origin allowed the empire to regulate water supply, mitigate scarcity, and channel resources into landscapes and settlements that served its political and economic priorities. Shahjahanabad’s placement along a navigable stretch of the Yamuna demonstrates how the city was conceived as both a beneficiary and an anchor of this watershed order. The capital became the nodal point where the natural flows of the river were transformed into an imperial infrastructure of distribution, binding together agriculture, trade, and administration. In this sense, the Shah Nahr was not an isolated engineering feat but part of a systemic practice of watershed management that underpinned Mughal statecraft. The deliberate diversion, extension, and management of the Shah Nahr canal reflect a sophisticated strategy of hydrological control, emblematic of Mughal interventions on rivers such as the Ravi, Sutlej, and in Kashmir. Wahi’s study (2013) of the Shah Nahr on Ravi demonstrates how the canal’s three branches systematically redirected dammed waters from the foothills, across agricultural hinterlands, to Lahore. Under Shah Jahan, this was not merely an exercise in irrigation but a calculated assertion of control over the river from its source, employing the technologically innovative Shah Nahr as both a tool of visual authority and territorial consolidation. The intervention stimulated large-scale agricultural intensification, fostered settlement growth, and linked urban nodes to their surrounding hinterlands, effectively reshaping the socio-economic landscape. Crucially, the canal’s management integrated local communities, embedding socio-economic value in its operation through active user participation. Archaeological evidence (see Table 4.1) shows that approximately 60% of Mughal hydraulic infrastructure depended directly on river systems, particularly in arid, semi-arid, and tropical wet/dry regions. In such contexts, Mughal waterworks expanded the reach of riverine resources while coexisting with indigenous micro-hydraulic systems, including wells, stepwells, and rainwater cisterns, as observed in 275 urban centres such as Delhi, Lahore, Kashmir, and Mirzapur (see Appendices 3A and 3B). Such projects collectively demonstrate that the Mughals viewed rivers and their watersheds as central political resources, whose mastery defined the durability and reach of imperial power. The Shah Nahr of Shahjahanabad, in particular, epitomised this approach: its construction transformed the Yamuna from a natural river into a controlled artery of empire, a medium through which sovereignty was embedded in how water flowed across the landscape. As a tool of watershed control, the Shah Nahr exemplifies the Mughal capacity to integrate environment, infrastructure, and governance. Embanked, canalised, and redistributed, waterways became instruments of conquest and markers of imperial authority, shaping both the physical landscape and the cultural imagination of South Asia. It was both a practical means of securing food production and mobility, and a symbolic assertion of power over nature itself as an enduring marker of the Mughals’ identity as a watershed empire. They fashioned a monumental order in which the management of water was inseparable from the performance of power, and in which infrastructure itself became the medium through which landscapes were governed, sacralised, and transformed. 276 8.0 Conclusion The findings of this thesis suggest the emergence of a regional order centred on the use of water infrastructure as a primary medium for the articulation and visualisation of imperial identities within the ‘Persianate world’ (9th to 19th c.). This order further manifested in the establishment of new cities or the remodelling of existing ones, following urbanism patterns prevalent in the broader geography defined by the presence of the Turko-Mongolian/Turko-Persian empires. The exchange of ideas and traditions related to water urbanism practices within this region was not unidirectional towards South Asia; rather, it is believed to have reciprocally influenced Iranian and Central Asian landscapes. It is posited that Nadir Shah, the ‘Emperor of Persia’ (after Fraser 1742:118), constructed a new city, one-fourth the size, modelled after Shahjahanabad, in Khurasan in 1741 (Blake 1991:71-74; after Fraser 1742 & Bayan-i Waqai fols. 43a-b, British Museum). He is thought to have carried the design draft of the Delhi Fort and City of Shahjahanabad upon his return to Iran following his invasion of Hindustan in 1739 (Fraser 1742:221). Furthermore, gardens designed in Shiraz (Takht-i Qajar, formerly Bagh-i Firdaus), gardens of the Zand empire, and gardens in Azerbaijan are believed to have been modelled after Babur’s hill-garden typology, where seasonal streams of ‘running water’ fed central water tanks (Wilber 1979:83; also Khalilnezhad 2024). The geography of the Persianate world, extending from Iran and Central Asia to South Asia, presents its own regional constraints in the form of climate variability and environmental diversity. As orders within the ‘Persianate world’, responsive to terrain, climate, material, and beliefs, water urbanism models exhibited slight variations, adaptive to local conditions and environmental constraints. The learnings from the thesis are summarised below, corresponding to the major chapters (Chapters 2 to 7), in an effort to draw parallels, where applicable, between the ancestral geography of the Mughals and South Asia. This analysis was conducted within the framework of urbanism and water management models derived from the Turko-Mongolian landscape. It is crucial to acknowledge that while these models inspired and influenced Mughal practices in South Asia, they operated in conjunction with the region’s vernacular water management practices, forming a composite model that was responsive to local conditions. Therefore, these models should not be studied as mere replications, but rather as adaptations to the environmentally diverse landscape of South Asia. Chapter 2 on Waterscapes as Powerscapes built on the conceptualisation of water management practices in historical civilisations as a mechanism for consolidation by imperial powers. It presented the relationship between imperial statecraft, urban development, and the climatic and environmental contexts in which these processes unfolded. It emphasised the importance of Mughal’s Transoxiana ties and Central Asian connections in understanding their practices of empire consolidation through the use of hydraulic tools. It contextualised Mughal hydrological practices by drawing on the empire-building methodologies of Turko- Figure 8.0: Babur supervising the garden layout of Bagh-i Wafa at Kabul c.a. 1504 (Source: Acc. No. IM276A.1913, V&A Museum, London) 278 Mongolian/Turko-Persian traditions, and examined water-related infrastructural systems pivotal to the imperial strategy of manipulating the landscape and the ruled to consolidate territories across environmentally diverse regions. This chapter examined the significance of ecological factors, particularly hydrological resources, in the establishment of long-term conquests by empires during the medieval and early modern periods in Iran and Central Asia. It investigated how landscapes were modified to benefit the state economy and the role of large-scale water infrastructure systems in shaping society. This chapter employed historiography to examine landscape alteration, the expansionary impulses of empires over natural environments, and the formation of articulated hydrographical regions. It also presented tools for the acculturation of the Turko-Mongols to Perso-Islamic sedentary practices through hydrological and agricultural manuals commissioned for the management of agrarian landscapes. Moreover, the employment of shrines, religious bodies, and waqf deeds in the hosting and regulation of water features. The knowledge derived from the greater geography was crucial to the articulation of the model of governance, urbanism, and water management practices of Mughal South Asia. Chapter 3, titled Water Management Practices in Pre-Mughal South Asia, shifts the focus to the subcontinent from Iran and Central Asia. It examined the indigenous hydraulic traditions of the Indus- Ganga basin and demonstrated how these practices were progressively codified by pre-Mughal Muslim polities. Indigenous hydraulic strategies had evolved to optimise water capture and distribution across distinct micro-ecological zones: dabar, bangar, and khadar, and were deeply embedded within local socio- cultural and religious frameworks. From the 11th century onwards, as sovereign powers expanded their dominion from Khorasan into Hindustan, these locally developed water management systems were not only adopted but also systematically reconfigured and redistributed through a centralised administrative apparatus. This process was particularly evident in the arid and semi-arid tracts of the subcontinent, where hydraulic installations such as dams, canals, stepwells, and reservoirs were strategically situated within the landscape. Their placement reflected principles of spatial organisation and urban design that drew upon Iranian and Central Asian planning traditions. The city of Delhi served as a key case study, illustrating how hydraulic systems were integrated into urban planning across successive dynasties. The deliberate siting of cities in geomorphologically advantageous locations was shown to be a strategic choice that aligned defensive imperatives with hydrological efficiency. The evidence indicated that water did not function as a passive backdrop to Delhi’s urban history but as its primary organising axis. Hydraulic infrastructure structured the location of settlements, influenced their architectural and defensive features, and sustained their socio-political order. The chapter further traced the emergence of a tripartite urbanism model: qila (citadel), shahristan (inner city), and bagha’at (garden suburbs), in South Asia. While experimentation with this model was discernible in pre-Mughal cities, its full articulation was associated 279 with the Mughal period, during which indigenous hydraulic traditions were synthesised with transregional techniques and planning principles. Chapter 4, on Archaeology of Water Management in Mughal South Asia: An Overview examined the hydraulic strategies of the Mughal Empire and their role in the development of a sophisticated water management system in South Asia. This system combined resilient local traditions with planning principles and engineering influences derived from Central Asian contexts. The Mughals adapted their hydraulic networks to varied ecological conditions, integrating multiple water sources to sustain citadels, inner cities, suburban extensions, and agricultural hinterlands. Findings from the spatial distribution of water infrastructure demonstrated the Mughal emphasis on introducing water features in suburban zones, thereby extending urban form beyond the fortified cores of citadels and city walls. This outward expansion underscored the transformation of suburbs into vital extensions of the city, embodying the political and territorial ambitions of the empire. The Mughals employed a wide range of hydraulic features and techniques for lifting, distributing, and managing water across diverse climatic regions. Their water management system was structured, expansive, and adaptive, reflecting both the empire’s strategic foresight and its capacity to negotiate the volatility of the South Asian waterscape. Mughal approaches to city-making and landscape management thus integrated inherited techniques with locally adapted strategies, signalling a careful balance of continuity and innovation. The study further demonstrated that hydraulic infrastructure functioned as a calculated instrument of imperial authority. It transformed essential practices of survival into visible emblems of sovereignty, embedding political legitimacy within the material environment. The territorial expansion of the Mughal Empire was inseparable from its control over water, with imperial frontiers often aligned with major river systems, effectively rendering the empire a ‘watershed empire’. Mughal visions of expansion were distinctly interfluvial, conceptualising regions as assemblages of micro- and mini-watersheds structured by their riverine systems. Chapter 5, on Shah Nahr: Mapping the Waterscape of the Mughal Canal, examined the Shah Nahr, also referred to as the Ali Mardan Khan Canal, between 1639 and 1857. This analysis was grounded in literary, cartographic, and artistic sources from the Mughal and Colonial periods, complemented by comprehensive fieldwork conducted between 2023 and 2024. The canal, spanning 150 km from Karnal to Shahjahanabad, was a significant element of the Mughal landscape. Geospatial tools were employed to map and analyse the landscape, encompassing a variety of water-related structures and features. The primary aim of this chapter was to elucidate the interconnected nature of Mughal water management strategies implemented at various scales throughout the region. The chapter presented the canal at regional, micro-regional, and urban scales, emphasising the study of associated landscapes and water features, land cover and land use, societies and communities, and techniques and technologies. The initial section provided an overview of the canal’s history and its visual representation in Mughal-era maps and 280 paintings. Subsequently, it discussed the process of mapping the canal through the georeferencing of cartographic sources from the Late Mughal period and surface-surveying methods of the 17th-century Mughal Canal, involving field walking, photography, and measured drawings of the extant canal sections. It also examined the hydrology and hydraulics of the canal through GIS-based landscape modelling and Remote Sensing techniques, including SMTVI and MSRM methods, to map palaeochannels and decode the canal construction process by the Mughals. Additionally, it explored the science behind the placement of water-lifting devices along the canal to feed irrigation channels. The chapter further presented the canal through the lens of scale, space, and time, highlighting its multi-scalar nature, interaction with various landscape features, and role as a central element in the region’s everyday life. This chapter also investigated the spatial typologies of the Mughal hydrological landscape based on water sources and toponymy. Finally, it discussed the temporal significance of the canal, its decline with the introduction of the British Western Yamuna Canal, and its impact on settlement patterns and hierarchy in the region. Chapter 6, titled Water Map of Shahjahanabad and its Garden Suburbs, explored the typological and technological dimensions of Mughal hydrology, which were responsive to landforms, landscape features, settlement patterns, state practices, and religious inclinations. This examination was conducted through a study of the garden suburbs (bagha’at), inner city (shahristan), and fort (qila). This chapter positioned Mughal waterworks as a central element of the landscape, hydrology, state economy, and urbanism practices, offering sectional insight into the Mughal hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad and the socio-political dynamics of water control, use, and access. The study used a GIS-based historical archaeology method to digitally model the elevational profile of Shahjahanabad and its garden suburbs during the Mughal Period. The chapter provided a detailed discussion on the process of landform reconstruction, drawing on historical records, toponyms, and fieldwork conducted between 2023 and 2024. Subsequently, it presented findings from the reconstruction exercise alongside insights from the field survey, which strongly resonated with parallels drawn from the Persianate traditions of urbanism, landscape classification, water distribution practices, and land management through garden networks. Chapter 7 on The Making of an Infrastructural Monument: Mapping Water, Mapping Empire in Shahjahanabad demonstrated the intricate interplay between power, knowledge, and space in the establishment of Mughal rule, where water acquired a tangible presence through large-scale infrastructure, shaping the rural hinterlands and urban structure of Shahjahanabad. The chapter focussed on the role of water infrastructure systems, especially Shah Nahr, as central elements of the imperial landscape and how they contributed to discerning the expansionist means of the empire, its regional administrative measures, and the nature of land cover changes. This chapter built on the concept of infrastructural monumentality to examine how water functioned both as a material resource and as a symbolic medium in the construction of Mughal imperial authority. It argued that hydraulic systems in Shahjahanabad were not 281 merely utilitarian but were deliberately staged as instruments of power, shaping both urban form and social life. Canals, which sustained the walled city and its garden suburbs, also served as morphological determinants within the city’s tripartite layout, embedding hydraulic infrastructures into the very fabric of urban design. On a regional scale, the chapter demonstrated that water infrastructures acquired monumentality through imperial projection and the mobilisation of labour, which invested them with symbolic weight beyond their technical purposes. Religion further amplified this symbolic dimension, as religious institutions mediated access to water, regulated its distribution, and conferred sacred meaning upon it. Such practices reinforced the centrality of water within Shahjahanabad’s faith-oriented landscape and continued to influence the city’s water culture. Finally, the chapter situated Mughal hydrological strategies within the broader South Asian context, framing the dynasty as a ‘watershed empire’. The control of rivers and catchments was shown to be fundamental to defining territorial boundaries, sustaining agrarian economies, and consolidating governance. By interpreting canals, distributive networks, and indigenous water features as cultural artefacts, the study revealed Mughal hydraulic infrastructures as monumental inscriptions of empire, combining material utility with symbolic permanence to reshape landscapes while asserting imperial sovereignty. The subsequent section endeavours to establish a thematic framework for evaluating the typological and technological aspects of Shahjahanabad waterworks, serving as a microcosm of ‘Turko- Mongolian’ urbanism and water management practices in South Asia. It employs components and frameworks of the water management system of Shahjahanabad, as well as the broader Mughal South Asia, to elucidate the influences derived from the ‘Turko-Mongolian’ landscape that shaped the region’s water-centric practices. Furthermore, the argument is situated within the sociocultural context of Mughal hydrology, considering the factors that informed the use, access, and control of water. The section, however, concludes that Mughal hydrological systems in South Asia could not be understood solely as a continuation of Turko-Mongolian traditions. Local strategies of water harvesting and distribution were systematically incorporated into the imperial framework, enabling Mughal cities, often organised around a tripartite spatial model, to operate as integrated structures shaped by both imperial objectives and local innovation. 8.1 Shahjahanabad: A Turko-Mongolian Water Urbanism Model ‘Do not become sedentary, for sovereignty resides in those who practice the nomadic Turkmen way of life’ Qara ʿUthmān Yülük (d. 1435); after Durand- Guédy (2013:1). In context to the above quote, Durand-Guédy (2013:2) emphasised the significance of the history of ‘location of rule’ in the environment by the Turko-Mongolian empires. He posited this to be an important 282 tool in decoding the empires’ practices of city building and governance. Complementing this research, by drawing on Foucault’s ‘representation-based thinking’ (1966), Roberts (2024:7) asserted that the Timurid empire (of the Turko-Mongolian model) followed a similar practice. They ‘reimagined’ and recreated their native, and nomadic, steppe landscape patterns in the sedentary regions of Iran and Central Asia as a mark of their ‘sovereign image’. As discussed in Chapter 2, the imperial identity of the Mughal empire was introduced as that of a patrilineal descendant of the nomadic Turko-Mongols. Though largely sedentary by the time Babur founded the empire in South Asia (1526), Mughal’s model of urbanism exhibited multiple adaptations from their ancestral geographies of Central Asia and Iran. Utilising water as a tool to understand Mughal imperialism, the findings from this thesis indicate these adaptations to the South Asian landscape. It also contributes to the study of tools and techniques of Mughal water management practices in South Asia between 1526 and 1857. The study of the hydrological landscape of Shahjahanabad, the last capital of the Mughal Empire (1639-1857), has demonstrated how ‘culture reshaped the environment’ (after Parpia 2019) along the Yamuna, exhibiting imprints of landscape practices of their patrilineal ancestors. Mughal gardens, as principal features of the imperial landscape, have been the focus of numerous scholarly investigations. These gardens have been examined as significant elements of a mediated landscape, and several parallels have been drawn with Timurid and Safavid garden design practices. As a transformative element of the landscape, gardens were introduced by Babur (1526-1530) to the South Asian landscape as an act of recreating the homeland in South Asia (Baburnama, tr. by Thackston 2002:364)). Although garden practices in city suburbs predate the advent of the Turko-Mongolian empires in the sedentary landscape of the Perso-Islamic world (Golombek 1995:142; also Subtelny 2007:116), the rulers were believed to have adapted and modified these gardens as sites of encampment, qualifying them as ‘mobile cities’ of ‘Chaghatai tribes63‘ (O’Kane 1993:250), linking these gardens to the ‘nomadic heritage’ of their native steppe lands (Gronke 1992:19). Research on the distribution of Mughal gardens in the South Asian landscape has predominantly situated these mediated landscapes as elements of ‘territorial conquest’ and Mughal ‘imperial identity’ (after Wescoat Jr. 1991), as sites of ‘coronation and camping grounds’ of Mughal rulers (Sharma 2012), and as ‘administrative centers’ of the empire (Parpia 2016). It is important to note that these gardens also functioned as experimental grounds for hydraulic practices (Chapter 7), sometimes as independent units and at times as part of a larger framework of infrastructural systems. Shah Nahr revealed these garden enclosures as part of a larger system of landscape management, positioning them at the intermediary of the urban and rural environments. 63 Chaghatai Khan was the second son of Genghis Khan, the founder of the Mongol Empire. 283 A significant contribution to the dissemination of garden-building knowledge within the Persianate world can be attributed to the father and son duo of garden designers, Mirza Mirak Ghiyath and Sayyid Muhammad-i Mirak. Subtelny (2007:135) traced the movement of these two garden specialists from the Timurid’s Khorasan to Shaybanid’s Bukhara to Babur’s India in her seminal work on Timurids in Transition. The portfolio of their work led to the compilation of two garden design manuals by Qasim b. Yusuf, Irshad al-Zira’a, and Tariq-i Qismat-i Ab-i Qalb (Chapter 2). Based predominantly on the projects within the Timurid landscape, these manuals are believed to have been commissioned by the Safavid ruler Shah Ismail I (Subtelny 1997:110). Subtelny’s translation of Irshad’s eighth chapter (1997:117) enumerated the hydraulic system of an imperial quadripartite walled-garden. These included juy (water channel), gharq (subterranean reservoir channel), shah-juy (central water channel), and hauz (pool). It also delineated the arrangement of these water features together with their dimensions. The detailed descriptions focused entirely on the internal layout of gardens and did not address the criteria for the placement of these gardens in the landscape. The findings on their placement for this thesis were largely derived from the study of historical cartographic sources of Iranian and Central Asian landscapes. As a landscape intervention, the garden suburbs of Shahjahanabad occupied a strategic location along the slope of the Aravalli Hills. Drawing from earlier Turko-Mongolian practices, where gardens contributed to mitigating the active flow of streams from hills into plains as an effective flood control mechanism (for example, Timurid gardens of Herat, Samarqand, Balkh, Kabul, etc.;see Figure 8.2), the Mughals manipulated the Aravallis and the streams running on either side. They constructed bunds and garden enclosures in the form of orchards and stepped or sloped garden complexes following gentle hilly terrain. The slope of the hills was likely manipulated to generate the necessary hydraulic pressure required to operate the fountains as a gravity-based mechanism, a technique analogous to that employed in the Timurid gardens of Samarqand and Herat (Chapter 7; also Figure 8.2). The analysis of the distribution of water features in the garden suburbs in Agra, Lahore, Fatehpur, Sikri, and Delhi revealed an extension of the city development model from the bipartite system of fort and inner city to include the gardens around walled-city, forming a tripartite urban model extending beyond the citadel-centralities (Chapters 3 & 4). The tripartite-urban model was significant to the Turko-Mongolian urbanism practices in the sedentary landscapes of Iran and Central Asia (see Golombek 2008), and its introduction to the South Asian landscape formed a ‘new order’ of urbanism in Mughal South Asia (after Petruccioli 1984). The conceptual and contextual development of such an urbanism practice can provide insights into interpreting cities from a novel perspective as continuous hydrological landscapes within the socio- political context of the state and religion. 284 Figure 8.1 (Left): Kuhi-Darya Urbanism Model of Samarqand (top), Herat & Mashhad (middle) and Shahjahanabad (bottom) (Base Map: Google Earth Satellite Imagery @2025); Figure 8.2 (Right): Tripartite Urban Model of Timurid Samarqand (after Brandenburg 1972), Herat (after Allen 1981), & Mughal Shahjahanabad. The historical landform reconstruction of the Mughal era (Chapter 6) provides insight into another city development model in Mughal South Asia, kuhi-darya urbanism (mountain-river). Two key features of the landform modelling were Aravalli’s elevated landscapes and Yamuna’s fluvial depression. Shahjahanabad’s urban expanse stretched from the Aravalli foothills in the west to Yamuna’s shores in the 285 east, exemplifying the unique kuhi-darya urbanism model. It bears a strong resemblance to the Turko- Mongolian city placement traditions of Safavid cities like Kashan, Shiraz, and Isfahan; Timurid urban centres such as Kabul, Herat, and Kandahar; and the Khanate capital, Samarqand (see Figure 8.1). These cities employed the kuhi-darya urban planning strategy, utilising rivers and mountains as water sources for the urban centre situated between these two distinct landscape features. Such urban practices were characterised by continuous garden layouts, as in Shahjahanabad, which connected the foothills to the river, creating avenues and vistas within the urban centre. These gardens also served as ecological welfare tools by slowing down rapid water flow from the hills through the urban area, while also contributing to groundwater replenishment by absorbing seasonal rainfall. The Mughal canal, Shah Nahr, was a crucial component of both the tripartite and kuhi-darya urbanism models. Studying the deteriorated waterscape of Shah Nahr was important not only for its local relevance but also as an example of an urban-regional hydrological system influenced by Persian and Central Asian traditions, particularly in the context of South Asia’s water scarcity, where a significant number of medieval and early modern water features are in a derelict and degenerate state (see Appendix II/1A). The Shah Nahr’s complex structure and mixed pattern showcase the expertise of its creators, primarily from Turko-Mongolian backgrounds, including the lead engineer Ali Mardan Khan from Safavid Kirman. Topographical analysis using computational methods, along with field survey data, revealed that canal formation involved linking various seasonal streambeds through artificial linear channels across the landscape. This approach mirrored Timurid and Safavid canal construction practices, as seen in studies of the Murghab, Hari Rud, Zayandeh Rud, and Zeravshan Rud basins (Chapter 2). Additionally, the Dargom Canal (Timurid), like Shah Nahr, incorporated natural courses that were canalised and joined by artificial channels, making it difficult to distinguish between natural and artificial sections (after Mantellini 2008). These findings also suggest the development of a ‘watershed empire’ within the broader context of Turko-Mongolian hydraulic management practices, where large-scale highland water sources were controlled from their headworks to regulate flow and management for the empire’s benefit. Additionally, morphological analysis of the canal landscape, combined with historical maps, showed the distribution of water-lifting devices along Shah Nahr. Many of these devices were located where the canal began to descend after crossing smaller terrains. Water-lifting devices and watermills were strategically placed at these points because the canal’s flow velocity increased, allowing the wheels to effectively harness the current (Chapter 5). The study of settlement transformations in the canal landscape, as the region experienced growth in both size and population due to the presence of canals, exemplified ‘infrastructure urbanism’ in the hydrological landscape. This ‘infrastructural urbanism’ was a consequence of agricultural intensification in 286 the region, a characteristic feature of the Mughal empire evidenced by large-scale conversion of forest lands to agricultural lands (after Parpia 2018:119) supported by imperial canal systems. Analogous practices have been identified in the Timurid expansion models in the Herat, Marv, Mashhad, and Khorasan Regions (Subtelny 2007:119-25). The place-names along Shah Nahr introduced a novel aspect of settlement classifications in the region, specifically the notion of paired settlements (Chapter 5). The arrangement of larger settlements nearer to the canal and their corresponding smaller ones farther away offers a useful method for comprehending the settlement hierarchy and dynamics at work in the canal- influenced landscape. Furthermore, this distribution underscores the canal’s crucial impact on the area’s settlement history. In the Mughal Empire, water played a vital role not only in governance and economics, but also in religious practices. The Mughals, drawing from Turko-Mongolian traditions (Chapter 2), incorporated religious shrines as essential elements in their water and agricultural management strategies. They gave concrete form to the spiritual aspects of water, which were universally revered across the region, by constructing structures that defined specific ‘ritualistic’ locations within the landscape. Given that most of the population were non-Muslims, the Mughals found it necessary to adopt a language that could legitimise their rule over people who did not follow the state religion of Islam. These shrines were instrumental in establishing a stable government and facilitating crucial decision-making processes within the empire. An analysis of shrine distribution in the landscape also revealed how the canal’s design was influenced by the presence of shrines with cross-religious appeal. The intentional alignment of the canal, along with the construction of major water control features near these shrines (see the 1840s map of Shahjahanabad; Appendix III/4A), highlights the integration of these sacred sites into the broader framework of state infrastructure and water management within the canal landscape. In a predominantly dry environment, imperial waterways played a crucial role in shaping the landscape. They contributed to the creation of central water features in suburban gardens outside the walled city, influenced the development of linear and nodal spatial patterns within the city walls, and established the ‘nahr-i-bihisht’ and paradise gardens as symbols of grandeur, beauty, and retreat within the fort complex. During the investigation of the fort complex’s water system, it was noted that the structures stood as distinct entities surrounded by open areas that functioned as gardens on all sides. The water channels acted as a link between these separate components of the fort complex, mirroring the concept of an ‘encampment city’ (Sinopoli 1994:296). This design principle was a significant feature employed by the Mughals, following the imperial camp layout of their forerunners, including Babur and Timur (Sobti 1995:71). 287 These Turko-Mongolian concepts extended from Asia Minor to South Asia, a region frequently referred to by the Mughals as the tripartite conception of ‘Iran-Turan-Hindustan’ (Frost 1998:7), collectively forming a socio-cultural region as ‘one world’. With a patterned repetition of urban orders across the region, along with its water management practices, it can be further characterised to follow a ‘one world, one order’ paradigm. The study of order contributes to the understanding of patterns of landscape manipulation while simultaneously indicating large-scale land cover changes and territorial expansion mechanisms, thus contributing to the environmental and settlement histories of the regions. Additionally, it enhances the comprehension of universal ideas (Acharya 2023), manifested in the form of water infrastructure, which would have governed the shaping of the region at a specific point in history. Furthermore, in such landscapes, the introduction of large-scale infrastructure transcends the standard utilitarian template, becoming a cultural object central to societal norms and urban development practices (Chapter 7). However, the Mughal approach to water management cannot be reduced to a simple continuation of Turko-Mongolian traditions. Rather, it emerged as a consciously hybrid system, a composite corpus that drew upon indigenous experimentation while incorporating techniques disseminated through trade, migration, conquest, and diplomacy. Indic practices of water harvesting and distribution were carefully integrated into the larger imperial framework, ensuring that Mughal cities, often organised around a tripartite spatial model, functioned as layered tapestries of imperial vision and local ingenuity (Chapter 3). This synthesis was neither passive nor incidental: experiments in staging, framing, and hosting were shaped by the Persianate world yet reconfigured to resonate with regional traditions and sacred geographies, most notably through the symbolic and practical mediation of the riverine landscapes. In effect, the Mughals balanced inherited visual and hydraulic regimes with embodied local practices, producing systems that transcended both physical and cultural boundaries. The resulting hydraulic order was defined by deliberate hybridity. The empire simultaneously absorbed partially codified legacies from the Delhi Sultanate, embedded transregional planning principles, and reshaped them into a distinctive model of governance. Within this framework, decentralized community-managed systems coexisted with centrally administered imperial infrastructures, creating a mutually reinforcing dynamic between local resilience and imperial authority. In doing so, the Mughal state not only anchored itself within deeply rooted regional traditions but also projected power across diverse ecological and cultural terrains, making its water management practices emblematic of an enduring imperial vision of hybridity and adaptation. 288 Together, such a practice is emblematic of a watershed empire. The Mughal empire-building was not simply a matter of harnessing rivers; it was about establishing control across multiple scales, from the headwaters of rivers to the distributive systems of canals and tanks, including the indigenous formations of wells, lakes, ponds, and bunds, that sustained agrarian villages and imperial cities alike. The strategic occupation of these fluvial corridors allowed the Mughals not only to secure territorial edges but also to dominate the arteries of settlement, agriculture, and movement. Central to this strategy was the large-scale redirection and distribution of water. Canals were constructed to carry river water into dry zones, while monumental works such as dams, reservoirs, and embankments rendered imperial power visible in the landscape. Water was thus given tangible presence through its monumentalization, ensuring that ecological necessity was simultaneously a medium of political expression. However, canals, distributive networks, and indigenous water features should be examined not merely as technical instruments but as ‘cultural artefacts’ that accrued meaning through their operation and management. Examining the Mughal water management system as a cultural artefact that operated across multiple scales help assign value and importance to the infrastructure based on its scope, interactions between need, faith, and governance. This analysis unveils the complex relationships among authority, expertise, and territorial organisation. The Mughal’s rise to power involved more than just a military conquest; it encompassed a conscious effort to comprehend the region and its people. In an environment rich in rituals, the Mughal hydrological system served as both a political and economic instrument, illustrating how belief structures were negotiated and influenced to reinforce and maintain imperial authority. Water became a tangible feature of the landscape through the implementation of extensive canal networks, complemented by water-lifting technologies, weirs, aqueducts, and distribution systems. This ‘infrastructural system’ shaped the layout of communities, roadways, parks, and royal residences, thereby influencing rural areas and the urban design of the ‘last and the greatest’ capital of the Mughal empire. 8.2 Towards Preservation of ‘Infrastructural Systems’ The findings from this thesis indicate that infrastructural systems serve as representations of imperial power and state geography (Chapter 7). As cultural artefacts, they contribute to the understanding of the identities and associations of both the sovereign and its subjects. These systems possess significant technological value and stylistic importance, being architecturally committed not only to functionalism but also to the political representation of the empire in a ‘new landscape’ defined by its presence. As central elements of the imperial landscape, they contribute to discerning the expansionist means of the empire (Chapter 2), its regional administrative measures (Chapter 5), and the nature of land cover changes (Chapter 7). Within historic city precincts, the infrastructure system extends beyond its utilitarian 289 nature to represent authority through its visual presence as a central element of city design. In addition, as a unifying component, tying together the elements of the urban layout (Chapter 7). With religion serving as a means to host the infrastructural system, these structures attain heightened significance in terms of their management system, further attributed by an associational value central to labour investments, positioning them as a major form of cultural production within the Persianate world. ‘Large-scale irrigational canals were among the building projects that satisfied Temur’s taste for the monumental’. Subtelny (2007:124) Infrastructural systems represent ‘memory, sovereignty and history’ (Neimark 2012). The cultural program in the Persianate world focused, as stated in the aforementioned quote by Subtelny, on infrastructure and public works as ‘monuments’ in making. As a significant cultural vehicle, these infrastructural monuments were committed to the imperial brief and the social function for which they were designed, serving as a symbol of the ‘collective force’ (after Sert et al. in Nine Points of Monumentality 1943) of the king and its subjects. During my fieldwork on Shah Nahr and its associated water features, including the Mughal waterworks of Agra, Burhanpur, and Delhi, I observed the state of neglect in which these infrastructural systems exist, both within the city, suburbs, and agricultural hinterlands. This observation led to the design of a field survey that included a section on ‘condition and damage assessment’ of the historic infrastructure as well as its ‘state of preservation’ (Chapter 5; also see Appendix I/A for Fieldwork Booklet). The preservation practices of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) have largely been ‘monument’ centric, focusing on buildings, groups of buildings, and sites. Governed by the Ancient Monuments and Remains Act of 1958, ASI focuses on the preservation of ‘ancient and historical monuments’ (Section 3:1958), with emphasis on the protection and maintenance of ‘protected’ sites. The absence of a historical landscape narrative, together with the exclusion of a massive number of unprotected sites and features, in the Act has resulted in the neglect and degeneration of large-scale systems which hold significant evidential, historical, and environmental value. It is also important to note the communal value they possessed at the time of their functioning and the collective memory they generated. These systems have also contributed to the development of other forms of cultural heritage. Shah Nahr still finds its presence in literature (Fictional Works: Faruqi’s The Mirror of Beauty 2013; Safvi’s A Firestorm in Paradise 2024; Singh’s Delhi: A Novel 1990, and Ali’s Twilight in Delhi, Poetic Works: Mir, Ghalib and Zauq), cinema, and music (particularly regarding Chandni Chowk, the principal square of Shahjahanabad formed by the Mughal Canal). Furthermore, the 290 Nahr influenced family surnames in the region, a notable example being the surname of independent India’s first and longest-serving Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru (Nehru derived from Nahr, formerly Kaul), whose ancestors were granted a jagir (land with a house) by the Mughal emperor in 1716 on the edge of the canal (after Moraes 1959:16). The findings from the thesis propose the inclusion of these infrastructural systems as ‘monuments’ of a city/region (Chapter 7) as an attempt to advocate for their preservation and maintenance by the ASI within the confines of the Act. The Ancient Monuments and Remains Act of India (1958) was based on the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904, introduced by Lord Curzon, Viceroy of British India, in the early 20th century. Curzon played a significant role in the reform of the Archaeological Survey of India (after Ghosh 2023). Curzon’s speech on The Ancient Monuments of India (1900) emphasised the ‘obligation of the Government’ towards conservation of historic monuments, including the ‘imported’ Mughal structures. He also noted the ongoing attempts of repairs as a ‘faithful guardian’ of the Mughal cities of Agra, Fatehpur Sikri, Sikandra, Lahore, and Delhi. This speech was followed by the appointment of Sir John Marshall as governor-general of the ASI in 1902. Marshall, introduced by Curzon as his ‘coadjutor’ (Curzon 1925:137), was tasked with the framing of legislations for the protection and preservation of monuments in India. This led to the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904. The Act defined monuments as structures (or buildings) carrying significant ‘historical, archaeological, or artistic interest’ (Act 7:1904). The act also mentions regulated ‘protected areas’, as sites for potential excavation for archaeological research, however it lacked a landscape preservation approach, especially concerning large- scale infrastructural systems. Herbert (2012) attempted to situate the ‘landscape’ in Curzon’s vision of historicity by relating to the Viceroy’s native 18th c. ‘streams and vistas’ of Kedleston Park in Derbyshire. However, she concluded that the learning from English landscape appreciations did not extend beyond the empire’s practices of landscaping historic monument precincts and preserving Mughal gardens, as evidenced by small sections on ‘archaeological gardens’ in the annual reports produced by the ASI. During his tenure, Marshall also produced a series of systematic annual reports of the ASI, which remains a key resource for the study of the archaeological practices of the empire in the South Asian landscape. The annual report was further refined by Sir Mortimer Wheeler in the mid 1940s and evolved into Indian Archaeology: A Review by the ASI post-independence in 1947 (after Herbert 2012). Marshall’s definition of ‘monument’ remains largely unchanged since 1902, as do the practices of ‘monument-centric preservation’. The Act underwent minor modifications in 1958, with amendments in 1959 and 2010. These amendments primarily focused on regulating development within the buffer zone of heritage buildings and sites, designating the immediate vicinity as a ‘prohibited area’ and the surrounding zone as a ‘regulated area’ (1959: III-VII; 2010: Section 20A-Q). Additionally, the amendments introduced the 291 classification of monuments and sites based on their ‘historical, architectural, and archaeological’ values (2010: Section 4A). The focus has largely remained on the buildings and sites they occupy, indicating that conservation efforts over the past century have primarily concentrated on individual structures or confined areas, thereby neglecting broader systems with more extensive spatial impacts. It is important to acknowledge that although the British introduced conservation and preservation acts in the early 20th century, the subcontinent, particularly Shahjahanabad, had already experienced significant destruction by colonial forces in 1857 (Chapter 6). Approximately 80% of the Mughal structures within the fort precinct were demolished (Figure 6.31) and replaced with military barracks. Additionally, two areas within Shahjahanabad, located to the south and east of the fort, Daryaganj and Begum ka Bagh, were completely eradicated as part of the visual control strategy implemented by British forces. It was likely due to the initial intervention of Lord Canning in 1861 (Pal 2024), followed by Lord Curzon in 1904, that efforts to protect medieval-era monuments were initiated. Archaeological investigations into the features of medieval Indian settlements have historically been neglected, resulting in a ‘disjointed’ narrative of the landscape, including its irrigation and technological history (after Chakrabarti 2006:442). Wheeler (1955:181) commended Marshall’s efforts to establish a framework for the preservation of India’s ‘medieval and Moghul architecture’, including the formation of the Ancient Monuments Act of 1904 (also Ray 2008:18). However, the lack of emphasis on field archaeology during the post-partition era (Chakrabarti 2003:89) may have contributed to the abandonment and fragmentation of historical large-scale infrastructure, which has been subject to developmental pressures in the ‘changing landscape’ of towns and cities (Hasan 1982). Chakrabarti (2003:90) advocated for an interdisciplinary approach to studying medieval archaeology, incorporating ‘topographical, toponymical, and textual’ evidence (after Mehta 1974 & 1979). The archaeology of the medieval period has also been characterised as ‘text-aided archaeology’ (Siddiqui 1981:659), likely due to the availability of textual sources from this era. Chakrabarti (2003) identified the 1970s as a revivalist period for medieval archaeology, including the Mughals, with contributions from the Archaeology Sections of Universities in Aligarh, Bengal, and the Deccan, alongside the ASI. During this period, archaeological excavations predominantly concentrated on defining city boundaries (e.g., Sikri; after Gaur 1997, II:444), examining the principles of town planning (e.g. Shahjahanabad; after Hasan 1982), and analysing patterns of urbanisation (e.g. Champaner, after Siddiqui 1981; Gaur-Pandua, after Ray 1995). This focus reflects an urban-centric approach in archaeology (after Siddiqui 1981:657), often resulting in the oversight of large-scale hydraulic systems. Recent initiatives, however, have shifted attention towards the preservation of water systems in Bijapur (World Monument Fund 2020) and the qanat system in Burhanpur (Tentative list, UNESCO 2024). These efforts underscore a landscape-oriented approach to conservation, which is essential for the maintenance of infrastructural systems. 292 Infrastructural systems should be acknowledged as ‘monuments’ within urban environments. These systems, as collaborative endeavours involving rulers, planners, architects, engineers, landscapists, masons, and labourers, alongside users, provide a collective representation of a historical period, encompassing its cultures, techniques, and technologies. Sert et al. (1943) describe this as the ‘lyrical value’ of a monument, which transcends its utilitarian function to reflect its harmonious essence. As sites of collective decision-making, skill, and memory, hydraulic systems, particularly those integral to the landscapes of medieval and Mughal South Asia—a region historically central to transregional exchange— offer a platform for exploring past relationships across multiple geographies and empires, as well as insights into climate-responsive mechanisms in diverse environmental contexts. 8.3 The Way Forward ‘…the landscape is the richest historical record we possess.’ W.G. Hoskins (1955) The insufficient attention given to historical landscapes in South Asia, especially India and Pakistan, particularly large-scale infrastructural systems that illustrate the connection between past and present water management practices as a shared ground of imperial and indigenous approaches, has resulted in the deterioration and degeneration of these systems. As a significant cultural artefact, historical infrastructural systems across South Asia can provide insights into landscape history and the mechanisms for addressing climate change in a predominantly arid landscape. In contemporary urban India, the water-settlement relationship has evolved into a form in which uncontrolled growth and unplanned resource exploitation, combined with a population increase, have resulted in severe water-stressed districts. India and Pakistan are currently facing an imminent acute water crisis, with a significant number of these sites lying in what was historically the landscape of the Delhi Sultanate, Mughals, and the Persian Deccan Sultanates. Evidence suggests that the Deccan water systems significantly transformed the arid landscape during the Sultanate rule (Chaturvedi 2018:83). Furthermore, in North India, the restoration of gardens and waterworks by Babur and his successors, as demonstrated in this thesis, were not merely aesthetic additions to the arid landscape but also ecologically conscious land management interventions. Additionally, engagement with such systems can provide insights into ‘water livelihoods’ (Wescoat Jr. 2020) within the arid South Asian context. Many of these infrastructural projects still survive (see Table 8.1), albeit in fragments, owing to the absence of systematic and structured preservation techniques. The methods employed in this thesis present an interdisciplinary approach to studying the archaeology of historic water systems (after Orengo & Petrie 2017 & 2018; Petrie 2020; also Mehta 1979; Chakrabarti 2003; Siddiqui 1981), incorporating techniques for assessing long-term landscape changes. 293 This research is situated within a period characterised by rapid development and the formation of large urban agglomerations, particularly following the economic liberalisation policies in India post-1991, which accelerated migration from villages to urban centres. It resulted in landscape transformations on an unprecedented scale (Marshall & Randhawa 2017). Consequently, this shift has led to the loss of substantial archaeological evidence that could have elucidated the mechanisms of establishing imperial infrastructure connecting urban centres to agricultural hinterlands. Each method employed in this thesis complements the others, offering a corroborative approach to studying historical derelict systems rendered dysfunctional by newer technological and revenue regimes. These methods can aid in characterising, categorising, and classifying historic landscapes and encoding values into the systems formed by the interaction between nature and human action, which can contribute to preservation strategies, zoning regulations, and development guidelines. The lessons learned from the successes and failures of these models can provide a blueprint for adoption, adaptation, and replication, both on utilitarian (design and function) and aesthetic grounds, across water-stressed sites of similar nature. These infrastructural systems have, in some locations, acquired a new, albeit temporary, role, such as the Shah Nahr, which now functions as an anonymous distributary of the British Canal (Chapter 5). Reduced by almost 90% in its cross-section, Shah Nahr illustrates the changing landscape, transitioning from its central role to becoming an associated ‘object’. As monumental construction sites, these landscapes and systems serve as a language of the changing environment. Methods are required to repair and restore their physical and historical qualities using preservation techniques and management plans. It is imperative not to isolate these ‘systems’ from society; rather, efforts should be directed towards enhancing their historical and contemporary interactions, thereby fostering greater integration within the local context. The primary focus should be on formulating recommendations aimed at reclaiming the waterworks system, with the dual objectives of preventing further misuse and ensuring accessibility to the general public within the urban environment. In conjunction with broadening the definition of ‘monument’ as a fundamental aspect of the Act, it is essential to establish a legal entity in South Asia, particularly in India and Pakistan, dedicated to the preservation of landscapes characterised by extensive built features which may or may not be occurring within an urban setting. In recent years, preservation strategies have focused on walled cities of the Mughal era, notably Lahore, and to a lesser extent, Shahjahanabad, and on the Muzaffarids’ Ahmadabad. The Walled City of Lahore Authority Act of 2012, established as a legal entity, is dedicated to the preservation of both architectural structures and land within the historic city’s walled enclosure, maintaining a strong commitment to this objective. Additionally, their efforts extend to heritage structures in Greater Lahore and settlements beyond the city. The Shahjahanabad Redevelopment Corporation, established by the Delhi State Government as a non-profit organisation under the Companies Act, 222449994 initially concentrated on the walled city but has since expanded its purview to encompass the entire National Capital Territory, thereby broadening its scope and diluting its focus. The preservation of the walled city of Ahmadabad, located in present-day Gujarat, is overseen by its Municipal Corporation through a heritage cell, marking the first such initiative within an Urban Local Body in India. The efforts of the cell led to Ahmadabad being declared the first UNESCO heritage city in India. However, these three entities have largely remained confined to walled enclosures and have predominantly focused on building-centric preservation, with limited attention to broader spatial impacts. Table 8.1 List of Large-scale Water Infrastructural System in South Asia (11th to 19th c.) [based on fieldwork (2023-24), Annual Reports of ASI (1871-2014), Mughal Chronicles (Babur-Aurangzeb); and Chaturvedi (2018:305-8); also see Appendix II/3A & II/3B] Water Infrastructural System Description Climatic Zones City/Region Qanats Subterranean Channels, with Cisterns and Reservoirs. Semi-arid (03), Humid/Wet sub- tropical (02) Burhanpur, Daulatabad Subterranean Channels Shillong, Tira-Sujanpur Tunnel-wells Burhanpur, Kasargode Hauz Tank and Reservoir Systems. Arid (04), Semi-arid (30), Humid/Wet sub- tropical (10), Mountainous (02) Delhi, Fatehpur Sikri, Agra, Lahore, Sikandara, Kashmir, Sahebganj, Burhanpur, Sheikhupura, Shahdara, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Ladakh, Bidar, Bijapur, Sringaverpura, Bihar, Bengal, Odisha, Shillong, Surajkund, Western Rajasthan, Jaunpur, Ajmer, Gujarat, Eastern Rajasthan, Bundelkhand, Chanderi, Mandu, Khuldabad, Bijapur, Golkonda, Chittoor, Vijayanagar, Khajuraho, Benares, Aurangabad, Mozamabad, Amber, Narnaul, Wah, Osmanabad, Kabul, Qandahar, Ahmadabad Nahr Canals, Surface Channels Semi-arid (17), Humid/Wet sub- tropical (5), Mountainous (4) Delhi, Hissar, Hansi, Karnal, Sonipat, Panipat, Ahmednagar, Kashmir, Lahore, Multan, Bengal, Maharashtra, Nagaland, Jammu, Ladakh, Spiti, Arunachal, Pradesh, Mirzapur, Gingee, Kabul, Bandar Hubli, Bijapur, Aurangabad. Aqueducts, Overhead channels, Causeways Tughlaqabad, Mandu, Gulbarga Bunds & Puls Embankments, Dykes & Dams, Bridges Arid (4), Semi-arid (14), Humid/Dry sub- tropical (6), Tropical (1) Delhi, Karnal, Burhanpur, Peshawar, Jaunpur, Lahore, Attock, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Maharasthra, Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Jhabua, Alwar, Bhopal, Mewar, Kishangarh, Eastern Rajasthan, Jaisalmer, Braj, Bihar, Akbarpur, Faizabad, Dakhni, Faridabad, Kabul 295 Recent research conducted by Petrie et al. (2019) characterised the landscapes of northwest India as possessing multiple layers of historicity. The study also highlighted the vulnerability of archaeological landscapes, demonstrating that several sites documented in the early 20th century have since vanished, while others face increasing developmental pressures and the threat of the modernisation of agricultural practices. Consequently, it is imperative to establish an entity dedicated to the preservation of landscape patterns that are integral to long-term infrastructural systems connecting diverse landscapes and historic urban centres. UNESCO’s Historic Urban Landscape (2011) offers preservation strategies, as a ‘soft-law’, that can be tailored to the geographical context of historic urban centres, which Member States may adopt voluntarily. These recommendations provide a framework for ‘infrastructures above and below the ground’ and can serve as a foundation for establishing a legally binding entity in regions with significant heritage infrastructure legacies (see Table 8.1). Such an entity can draw inspiration from the Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) of the United Kingdom, the Council for European Landscape Convention (CELC) of Europe, and the National Trust of Australia, all of which adhere to a legal framework for the classification, protection, regulation, and preservation of historic landscapes. Such an initiative is crucial, especially as the subcontinent faces an increasing number of water-stressed districts, with some approaching Day Zero64. The preservation methodologies will help protect archaeological evidence and associated landscapes, facilitating insights from historical responses to adverse climatic situations, through the examination of water management, techniques, and regulatory mechanisms in historic environments. 64 ‘Day Zero’ denotes the day on which a city or region’s water reserves become critically low, rendering them insufficient to sustain the population (Ahmad et al., 2020). 296 Bibliography The bibliography is organized into four sections. The first section comprises a list of sources cited within the text. The second section presents a compilation of archaeological records consulted for the purpose of listing water feature types in Mughal South Asia, broadly, and Shahjahanabad, specifically. The third section includes a list of historical texts referenced for this thesis. Most of the archival textual sources have been translated and were thus accessed in Urdu, Hindi, or English; however, some were consulted in the original Persian text. The final section chronologically lists all historical cartographic sources and photo/painting albums referred for this thesis. These visual sources were instrumental in mapping the Shah Nahr and other water features, as well as in reconstructing the historical landform of the suburbs and the city. a. Reference List Acharya, A. (2023). Before the nation-state: Civilizations, world orders, and the origins of global international relations. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 16(3), 263–288. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poad011 Agarwal, A., & Narain, S. (1997). Dying wisdom: Rise, fall and potential of India’s traditional water harvesting systems. Centre for Science & Environment. Ahmad, B. (1873). Waqiat-i Dar-ul-Hukumat. (published in 1919), Urdu Academy, Delhi. Ahmad, N. L. (1939). Some feasts and festivals at the court of Shah Jahan. Proceedings Of The Indian History Congress, 3, 1133–1138. Ahmad, S. (1905). Asar-i Akbari yaani Tarikh-i Fatehpur Sikri (Urdu translation). Matba Akbari. Ahmadi, M. S., Sušnik, J., Veerbeek, W., & Zevenbergen, C. (2020). Towards a global day zero? Assessment of current and future water supply and demand in 12 rapidly developing megacities. Sustainable Cities and Society, 61, 102295, 2210–6707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102295 Ahmed, P. (2008). Trees outside forests (TOF): A case study of wood production and consumption in Haryana. International Forestry Review, 10(2), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.10.2.165 Aka, I. (1996). The agricultural and commercial activities of the Timurids in the first half of the 15th Century. Oriente Moderno, 15(76), 9–21. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25817400 Akhtar, R. (2000). Nuskha Dar Fanni- Falahat: The art of agriculture. Asian Agri-History Foundation, Secunderbad. Alam, I. (2020). Of Hauz & Kund: A scientific study of the water infrastructure. In T. Munawer (Ed.), Science in Architecture (pp. 93–103). Medtech – A Division of Scientific International. Alam, I. (2022). Landscapes as museums: Staging and framing Kashmir’s historical geography. LA Journal of Landscape Architecture, (72), 22-29. Alam, M. (1997). State Building under the Mughals: Religion, Culture and Politics, Cahiers d’Asie centrale [Online], 3/4 | 1997, Online since 03 January 2011, connection on 15 April 2025. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/478 Alam, M. (2004). The languages of political Islam in India c. 1200-1800. Permanent Black Publishers. Alam, M. (2009). The Mughals, the Sufi Shaikhs and the formation of the Akbari dispensation. Modern Asian Studies, 43(1), 135–174. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X07003253 Alam, M. (2021). The Mughals and the Sufis: Islam and political imagination in India, 1500-1750. State University of New York Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781438484907 Figure 8.3 : Shahjahani water tank at Ahu Khana, Burhanpur, India 298 https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poad011 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102295 https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.10.2.165 https://doi.org/10.1505/ifor.10.2.165 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25817400 http://journals.openedition.org/asiecentrale/478 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X07003253 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781438484907 Alam, M., & Subrahmanyam, S. (Eds.). (1989). The Mughal State, 1526–1750. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-mughal-state-1526-1750- 9780195652253?type=listing&subjectcode1=1793239%7CAHU00010&lang=en&cc=bt# Alcock, S. E. (2001). The afterlife of empires. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison, & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 69–373). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Allchin, R., Ball, W., & Hammond, N. (Eds.). (2019). The archaeology of Afghanistan: From earliest times to the Timurid Period. Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474450478 Allegranzi, V. (2021). The medieval urbanism of Ghazni (Afghanistan, 10th–12th centuries). A cross-reading of textual and material evidence. Afghanistan, 4(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3366/afg.2021.0061 Allen, M., & Trousdale, W. B. (2019). Timurid period rural settlement in the Sar-o-Tar Desert (Helmand Sistan Project), Afghanistan. Avail. Annual Conference of the Society for American Archaeology, Albuquerque. Available at https://sistanarchaeology.org/images/uploads/img/Allen_Trousdale_Timurid_Sar-o-Tar_2019.pdf Amery, H. A. (2009). Environment: Water and pollution: Arab States. In S. Joseph (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Women & Islamic Cultures. Brill. Amil, S. (2003). Critical edition, translation, and annotation of Khulasat-ut-Twarikh of Sujan Rai Bhandari. Indian Council of Cultural Relations. Andhare, U. S. (1993). Determinants of urban structure: Ujjain [Diploma dissertation, CEPT University]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12725/12783 Annanepesov, M., & Bababekov, H. N. (2003). The Khanates of Khiva and Kokandand the relations between the Khanates and with other powers. In A. Chahryar & I. Habib (Eds.), History of Civilizations of Central Asia, v.5: Development in contrast, from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century (pp. 65–89). UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000130205 Anooshahr, A. (2014). Mughals, Mongols, and Mongrels: The challenge of aristocracy and the rise of the Mughal state in the Tarikh-i Rashidi. Journal of Early Modern History, 18(6), 559–577. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-12342420 Anooshahr, A. (2021). The Ghaznavid empire of India. The Indian Economic & Social History Review, 58(4), 441– 476. https://doi.org/10.1177/00194646211041162 Antonić, N. (2015). Combining documents, toponyms, and archaeology in Turopolje (Croatia). GIS in historical research. Annual of Medieval Studies at Ceu, 21, 211–228. Ardalan, N., & Bakhtiar, L. (1973). The sense of unity: The Sufi tradition in Persian architecture. ABC International Group. Asher, C. B., (2008). The complete Taj Mahal and the riverfront gardens of Agra. The Art Bulletin, 90(2), 295–298. Asher, C. B., & Talbot, C. (2006). Introduction: Situating India. In India before Europe (pp. 1–24). Cambridge University Press. Ataie-Ashtiani, B., & Simmons, C. T. (2020). The millennium-old hydrogeology textbook The Extraction of Hidden Waters by the Persian mathematician and engineer Abubakr Mohammad Karaji (953 CE–1029 CE). Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 24(2), 761–769. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-761-2020 Ataullah (2008). The city of Delhi during the eighteenth century: A socio-cultural profile [Doctoral dissertation, Aligarh Muslim University] 299 https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-mughal-state-1526-1750-9780195652253?type=listing&subjectcode1=1793239%7CAHU00010&lang=en&cc=bt https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-mughal-state-1526-1750-9780195652253?type=listing&subjectcode1=1793239%7CAHU00010&lang=en&cc=bt https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474450478 https://doi.org/10.3366/afg.2021.0061 https://sistanarchaeology.org/images/uploads/img/Allen_Trousdale_Timurid_Sar-o-Tar_2019.pdf http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12725/12783 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000130205 https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-12342420 https://doi.org/10.1177/00194646211041162 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-761-2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-761-2020 Aubin, F. (2000). The Turco-Mongol period. In History of humanity: Scientific and cultural development (Vol. IV: From the seventh to the sixteenth century) (pp. 286–288). UNESCO. Babaie, S. (2015). Sacred sites of kingship: Spatial-spiritual mapping and the discourse of empire in early modern Safavid Iran. In S. Babaie & T. Grigor (Eds.), Persian kingship and architecture: Strategies of power in Iran from the Achaemenids to the Pahlavis (pp. 175–215). I. B. Tauris. Babaie, S., & Kafescioğlu, Ç. (2017). Istanbul, Isfahan, and Delhi. In F. B. Flood & G. Necipoğlu (Eds.), A companion to Islamic art and architecture (Ch. 33). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119069218.ch33 Baker, W. (1849). Memoranda on the Western Jumna Canals in the North-western Provinces of the Bengal Presidency (IOR/V/27/733/22). India Office Record, British Library, London. Balabanlilar, L. (2009). The emperor Jahangir and the pursuit of pleasure. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 19(2), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186308009395 Balabanlilar, L. (2010). The begims of the mystic feast: Turco-Mongol tradition in the Mughal harem. Journal of Asian Studies, 69(1), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911809992543 Ballestero, A. (2019). The anthropology of water. Annual Review of Anthropology, 48, 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102218-011513 Band, L. E. (2015). Spatial hydrography and landforms. In P. A. Longley, M. F. Goodchild, D. J. Maguire, & D. W. Rhind (Eds.), Geographical information systems: Principles, techniques, management and applications (pp. 527–542). Wiley. Barfield, T. J. (2001). The shadow empires: Imperial state formation along the Chinese-Nomad frontier. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison, & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 10–41). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Barthold, V. V. (1962). Four studies on the history of Central Asia (Vols. 1–3, V. & T. Minorsky, Trans.). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004646100 Baswal, H. (2025). Management of water at Śṛṅgaverapura: An early historic hydraulic system on the Ganga. Journal of Historical Studies and Research, 5(1), 247–259. Beaumont, P. (1974). Water resource development in Iran. The Geographical Journal, 140(3), 418–431. https://doi.org/10.2307/1796535 Beinart, W., & Hughes, L. (2007). Introduction. In W. Beinart & L. Hughes (Eds.), Environment and empire (pp. 1–21) https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199260317.003.0006 Bernier, F. (1983). Travels in the Mogul Empire (2nd ed.). Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203820551 Bhaduri, A., Singh, H., & Misra, M. (2010). Western Yamuna Canal. In On the brink: Water governance in the Yamuna River Basin in Haryana. Peace Institute Charitable Trust. https://www.indiawaterportal.org/drinking- water/brink-water-governance-yamuna-river-basin-haryana Bhargava, M., & Nath, P. (2023). Introduction: History and the politics of periodization. In M. Bhargava & P. Nath (Eds.), The early modern in South Asia: Querying modernity, periodization, and history (pp. 1–40). Cambridge University Press. 300 https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119069218.ch33 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1356186308009395 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911809992543 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102218-011513 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004646100 https://doi.org/10.2307/1796535 https://doi.org/10.2307/1796535 https://doi.org/10.2307/1796535 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199260317.003.0006 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199260317.003.0006 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203820551 https://www.indiawaterportal.org/drinking-water/brink-water-governance-yamuna-river-basin-haryana https://www.indiawaterportal.org/drinking-water/brink-water-governance-yamuna-river-basin-haryana Bhattacharya, N. (Ed.) (2019). The great agrarian conquest: The colonial reshaping of a rural world. State University of New York Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.18252627 Bichsel, C. (2013). Dangerous divisions: Peace-building in the borderlands of post-Soviet Central Asia. In B. Korf & T. Raeymaekers (Eds.), Violence on the margins (pp. 145–165). Palgrave Macmillan. Blair, S. S., & Bloom, J. M. (1995). The art and architecture of Islam 1250-1800. Yale University Press. Blake, S. P. (1996). The Khanah Bagh in Mughal India: House gardens in the palaces and mansions of the great men of Shahjahanabad. In J. L. Wescoat & J. Wolschke-Bulmahn (Eds.), Mughal gardens: Sources, places, representations, and prospects (pp. 171–188). Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, Harvard University. Blake, S. P. (Ed.). (2013). Time in early modern Islam: Calendar, ceremony, and chronology in the Safavid, Mughal, and Ottoman empires. Cambridge University Press. https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9781107030237/Time-Early- Modern-Islam-Calendar-1107030234/plp Blake, S. P. (Ed.). (1991). Shahjahanabad: The sovereign city in Mughal India 1639–1739. Cambridge University Press. https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9780521522991/Shahjahanabad-Sovereign-City-Mughal-India- 0521522994/plp Boelens, R. (Ed.) (2015). Water, power and identity: The cultural politics of water in the Andes. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867557 Bonacossi, D. M. (2018). Water for Nineveh: The Nineveh irrigation system in the regional context of the ‘Assyrian Triangle’: A first geoarchaeological assessment. In H. Kühne (Ed.), Water for Assyria (pp. 77–116). Harrassowitz Verlag. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4fg3.9 Bonine, M. E. (1989). Qanats, field systems and morphology: Rectangularity on the Iranian Plateau. In P. Beaumont, M. Bonine, & K. McLachlan (Eds.), Qanat, kariz, and khattara: Traditional water systems in the Middle East and North Africa. Middle East and North African Studies Press Limited. Bosworth, A. (1993). Conquest and empire: The reign of Alexander the Great (Canto). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511518539 Bosworth, C. E. (1961). The early Islamic history of Ghur. Central Asiatic Journal, 6(2), 116–133. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41926500 Bosworth, C. E. (1963). The Ghaznavids: Their empire in Afghanistan and Eastern Iran 994–1040. Edinburgh University Press. Bosworth, C. E. (1968). The development of Persian culture under the early Ghaznavids. Iran, 6, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299599 Bradley, I. (2012).Water: A spiritual history, Bloomsbury Publishing. Braemer, F., Geyer, B., Castel, C., & Abdulkarim, M. (2010). Conquest of new lands and water systems in the western Fertile Crescent (Central and Southern Syria). Water History, 2, 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-010-0029-9 Brand, M., & Lowry, G. D. (1985). Introduction. In M. Brand & G. D. Lowry (Eds.), Fatehpur Sikri: A sourcebook (pp. 1–16). Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture. Bregel, Y. (1980). The role of Central Asia in the history of the Muslim East. Afghanistan Council Occasional Paper, 20. New York. Available at http://dx.doi.org//10.2458/azu_acku_pamphlet_ds329_4_b74_1980 Brite, E. B. (2018). The hydrosocial empire: The Karakum River and the Soviet conquest of Central Asia in the 20th century. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 52, 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.003 301 https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.18252627 https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9781107030237/Time-Early-Modern-Islam-Calendar-1107030234/plp https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9781107030237/Time-Early-Modern-Islam-Calendar-1107030234/plp https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9780521522991/Shahjahanabad-Sovereign-City-Mughal-India-0521522994/plp https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9780521522991/Shahjahanabad-Sovereign-City-Mughal-India-0521522994/plp https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315867557 https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4fg3.9 https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvcm4fg3.9 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511518539 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41926500 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41926500 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41926500 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299599 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299599 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299599 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-010-0029-9 https://dx.doi.org/10.2458/azu_acku_pamphlet_ds329_4_b74_1980 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.003 Burn, S. R. (1937). The Cambridge history of India: The Mughal period. Cambridge University Press. Byrd, B. F. (2005). Reassessing the emergence of village life in the Near East. Journal of Archaeological Research, 13(3), 231–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-005-5443-9 Caldera, U., Sadiqa, A., & Gulagi, A. (2021). Irrigation efficiency and renewable energy powered desalination as key components of Pakistan’s water management strategy. Smart Energy, 4, 100052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2021.100052 Campbell, J. W. P., & Boyington, A. (2018). Fountains and water: The development of the hydraulic technology of display in Islamic gardens 700–1700 CE. Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes, 38(3), 247– 267. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2018.1452827 Campbell, K. (2021). Cities and the Mongol conquest: Urban change in Central Asia 1200–1400 [Doctoral dissertation, University of Oxford]. Campbell, K. (2023). The impact of the Mongol conquests on earthen cities in Central Asia. International Journal of Islamic Architecture, 12(2), 393–414. https://doi.org/10.1386/ijia_00118_1 Canby, S. (2009). Sufis, Shahs, and Shi’is: Shrines of the Safavids, 1500–1650 CE. The Institute of Ismaili Studies. Carr, S. (1876). The archaeology and monumental remains of Delhi. Civil & Military Gazette. Carse, A. (Ed.). (2014). Beyond the big ditch: Politics, ecology, and infrastructure at the Panama Canal. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537414/beyond-the-big-ditch/ Casale, G. (2006). The Ottoman administration of the spice trade in the sixteenth-century Red Sea and Persian Gulf. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 49(2), 170–198. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165138 Casana, J., & Wright, R. (2023). Remote sensing-based evidence of Indus-era irrigation works in Punjab, Pakistan. Water History, 15, 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-023-00321-6 Cautley, P. T. (1861). Notes and memoranda on the Eastern Jumna, or Doab canal, and on the water courses in the Deyra Doon. Thomason College Press. Cerasetti, B. (2002). A 5000-years history of settlement and irrigation in the Murghab Delta (Turkmenistan): An attempt at the reconstruction of ancient deltaic systems. In G. Burenhult & J. Arvidsson (Eds.), Archaeological informatics: Pushing the envelope. CAA2001. Computer applications and quantitative methods in archaeology. Proceedings of the 29th conference, Gotland, April 2001 (BAR International Series 1016, pp. 21–28). Archaeopress. Chakrabarti, D. K. (2006). The Oxford companion to Indian archaeology: The archaeological foundations of ancient India from the Stone Age to the 13th century. Oxford University Press. Chakrabarti, P. (2020). Inscriptions of nature: Geology and the naturalization of antiquity. Johns Hopkins University Press. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/book.78532 Chaturvedi, A. (2018). Historic water systems in India: Relevance for sustainable development of significant cultural landscapes. In F. Sulas & I. Pikirayi (Eds.), Water and society from ancient times to the present: Resilience, decline and revival (pp. 282–312). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315560144-14 Chauhan, O. S., Vogelsang, E., Basavaiah, N., & Kader, U. S. A. (2010). Reconstruction of the variability of the southwest monsoon during the past 3 ka, from the continental margin of the southeastern Arabian Sea. Journal of Quaternary Science, 25(7), 798–807. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1366 Chen, F., Yuan, Y., Trouet, V., et al. (2022). Ecological and societal effects of Central Asian streamflow variation over the past eight centuries. npj Climate and Atmospheric Science, 5, 27. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022- 00239-5 302 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-005-5443-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segy.2021.100052 https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2018.1452827 https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2018.1452827 https://doi.org/10.1386/ijia_00118_1 https://doi.org/10.1386/ijia_00118_1 https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537414/beyond-the-big-ditch/ https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537414/beyond-the-big-ditch/ https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262537414/beyond-the-big-ditch/ http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165138 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165138 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165138 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-023-00321-6 https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/book.78532 https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/book.78532 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315560144-14 https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.1366 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022-00239-5 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022-00239-5 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-022-00239-5 Chenoy, S. M. (1998). Shahjahanabad: A city of Delhi, 1638-1857. Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. Cherian, D. (2004). Pairing mega events and hydrological systems for urban sustainability: Strategy framework for Delhi beyond the Commonwealth Games 2010 [Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/28802 Chida-Razvi, M. (2019). Resituating Mughal architecture in the Persianate world: New investigations and analyses. South Asian Studies, 35(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1628690 Chuvieco, E. (2012). Religious approaches to water management and environmental conservation. Water Policy, 14, 9–20. Clement, C. R., & Cassino, M. F. (2020). Landscape domestication and archaeology. In C. Smith (Ed.), Encyclopedia of global archaeology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_817 Colvin, M. (1833). On the restoration of the ancient canals in the Delhi territory. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 2.15, 104–127. British Library, Shelfmark ac. 8826. Cooper, J. C. (2020). Introduction. In J. C. Cooper (Ed.), Toponymy on the periphery: Placenames of the Eastern Desert, Red Sea, and South Sinai in Egyptian Documents from the Early Dynastic until the End of the New Kingdom (pp.1–4). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004422216_002 Cowen, D. (2019). Following the infrastructures of empire: Notes on cities, settler colonialism, and method. Urban Geography, 41(4), 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1677990 Crooke, W. (1900). The legends of Krishna. Folklore, 11(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/0015587X.1900.9720517 Crosby, A. W. (1986). Ecological imperialism: The biological expansion of Europe, 900-1900. Cambridge University Press (2013 edition). Crowe, S., & Haywood, S. (1972). The gardens of Mughal India. Thames & Hudson Ltd. Curzon, G. N. (1901). Ancient monuments of India. In G. N. Curzon (Ed.), Speeches of Lord Curzon of Kedleston (pp. 189–202). Thacker, Spine & Co. Curzon, G. N. (1925). British government in India (Vol. II, pp. 136–137). Cassell. Czerniak-Drożdżowicz, M. (2022). Nine ponds (navatīrthas) of Śrīraṅgam: Preliminary notes. Cracow Indological Studies, 24, 185–218. https://doi.org/10.12797/CIS.24.2022.02.07 D’Souza, R. I. (2006). Water in British India: The making of a ‘colonial hydrology’. History Compass, 4(4), 621– 628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2006.00336.x Dadlani, C. (2017). The city built, the city rendered: Locating urban subjectivity in eighteenth-century Mughal Delhi. In Affect, emotion, and subjectivity in early modern Muslim empires (pp. 173–198). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004352841_008 Dalrymple, W. (2024). The golden road: How ancient India transformed the world. Bloomsbury Publishing. Danvers, F. C. (1876). Report on irrigation works in India for the year 1875–1876. Shelfmark c/141. ff. 33–63, Oriental & India Office Collections, British Library. Darby, J. (1723). The history of Timur-Bec, known by the name of Tamerlain the Great, emperor of the Moguls and Tartars: Being an historical journal of his conquests in Asia and Europe (Vol. 1 & 2). Bartholomew-Close. 303 https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/28802 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1628690 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1628690 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30018-0_817 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004422216_002 https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1677990 https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2019.1677990 https://doi.org/10.1080/0015587X.1900.9720517 https://doi.org/10.12797/CIS.24.2022.02.07 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2006.00336.x https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004352841_008 Dassa, A., Asyari, S., & Qadry, I. (2020). Volume unit in the period of the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam: An integrated study of mathematics and Islamic histories within the contemporary context. Daya Matematis: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan Matematika, 7, 245. https://doi.org/10.26858/jds.v7i3.11869 Davar, S. K. (1975). The making of Fatehpur Sīkri. Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 123(5232), 781–805. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41372237 Dawkes, G., Jorayev, G., & Rouard, O. (2016). Urbanism east of the Aral Sea: The medieval city of Kuik-Mardan, Kazakhstan. Archaeology International, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.1911 Dayal, M. (1982). Rediscovering Delhi: The story of Shahjahanabad. S. Chand & Company. Dazheng, M. (2003). The Tarim Basin in the history of civilizations of Central Asia (Vol. 5: Development in contrast, from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century). In C. Adle & I. Habib (Eds.), History of civilizations of Central Asia (Vol. 5). UNESCO Publishing. De Chatel, F. (2009). Drops of faith: Water in Islam. Water Resources IMPACT, 11(6), 5–6. De Chatel, F. (2016). Drops of faith: Water in Islam. About Islam. https://aboutislamver2.aboutislam.net/shariah/shariah-and-humanity/shariah-and-life/drops-faith-water-islam/ (Accessed August 2, 2022). Delhi District Gazetteer. (1883). Punjab Government. Revenue Department, Haryana. https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3d79c6256b9bdac53a55801a066b70da3/uploads/2020/10/2020101512.pdf (Accessed July 29, 2022). Denny, W. B. (1970). A sixteenth-century architectural plan of Istanbul. Ars Orientalis, 8, 49–63. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629252 Dickie, J. (Yaqub Zaki). (1985). The Mughal garden: Gateway to paradise. Muqarnas, 3, 128–137. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523089 Digby, S. (2004). Before Timur came: Provincialization of the Delhi Sultanate through the fourteenth century. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 47(3), 298–356. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165052 Digby, S. (2015). After Timur left: North India in the fifteenth century. In F. Orsini & S. Sheikh (Eds.), After Timur left: Culture and circulation in fifteenth-century North India (online ed.). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450664.003.0002 Dincauze, D. (2000). Landforms. In Environmental archaeology: Principles and practice (pp. 195–226). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607837.013 Douie, J. M. (1930). Punjab Settlement Manual. Government Printing, Lahore, Punjab. Available at https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.236697 Durand-Guédy, D. (2013). Introduction: Location of Rule in a Context of Turko-Mongol Domination. In Turko- Mongol Rulers, Cities and City Life. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004257009_002 Duva, F. (2019). Confirmation of a predating of the first Abbasid Masjid-i Jumʿa in Isfahan: The nahr Farsān as the mādī Fadan. Eurasian Studies, 17, 85–103. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/24685623-12340065 Eaton, R. M., & Wagoner, P. B. (2013). Qutb Shahi Warangal and the foundation of Hyderabad. In Power, memory, architecture: Contested sites on India's Deccan Plateau, 1300–1600 (Ch. 6). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198092216.003.0006 304 https://doi.org/10.26858/jds.v7i3.11869 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41372237 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41372237 http://www.jstor.org/stable/41372237 https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.1911 https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.1911 https://aboutislamver2.aboutislam.net/shariah/shariah-and-humanity/shariah-and-life/drops-faith-water-islam/ https://aboutislamver2.aboutislam.net/shariah/shariah-and-humanity/shariah-and-life/drops-faith-water-islam/ https://aboutislamver2.aboutislam.net/shariah/shariah-and-humanity/shariah-and-life/drops-faith-water-islam/ https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3d79c6256b9bdac53a55801a066b70da3/uploads/2020/10/2020101512.pdf https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3d79c6256b9bdac53a55801a066b70da3/uploads/2020/10/2020101512.pdf https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3d79c6256b9bdac53a55801a066b70da3/uploads/2020/10/2020101512.pdf http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629252 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629252 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629252 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523089 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523089 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523089 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165052 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25165052 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450664.003.0002 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450664.003.0002 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450664.003.0002 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607837.013 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.236697 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004257009_002 https://doi.org/10.1163/24685623-12340065 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198092216.003.0006 Eaton, R. M. (2018). The Persian Cosmopolis (900–1900) and the Sanskrit Cosmopolis (400–1400). In A. Abbas & A. Ashraf (Eds.), The Persianate world: Rethinking shared sphere (pp. 63–83). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_004 Eaton, R.M. (2019). India in the Persianate Age 1000–1765. Allen Lane: Penguin Random House. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520974234 Ebel, K. A. (2008). Representations of the frontier in Ottoman town views of the sixteenth century. Imago Mundi, 60(1), 1–22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40234114 Edney, M. H. (1997). The ideologies and practices of mapping and imperialism. In M. H. Edney (Ed.), Mapping an empire: The geographical construction of British India, 1765–1843 (pp. 1-36). The University of Chicago Press. English, P. W. (1968). The origin and spread of Qanats in the Old World. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 112(3), 170–181. http://www.jstor.org/stable/986162 Ephrat, D. (2021). The gravesite and the new sacred landscape. In D. Ephrat (Ed.), Sufi masters and the creation of saintly spheres in medieval Syria (pp. 115–134). Arc Humanities Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781641892094-011 Erickson, C. L. (2009). Agency, roads, and the landscapes of everyday life in the Bolivian Amazon. In J. Snead, C. Erickson, & A. Darling (Eds.), Landscapes of movement: Trails, paths, and roads in anthropological perspective (pp. 204–231). University of Pennsylvania Press. https://doi.org/10.9783/9781934536537.204 Farkhi, T. (2015). The process of urbanization under the Sultans of Delhi. Historicity Research Journal, 1(12), 1–8. Farrington, I. S. (1980). The archaeology of irrigation canals, with special reference to Peru. World Archaeology, 11(3), 287–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1980.9979768 Faruqui, N. I. (2001). Islam and water management: Overview and principles. In N. I. Faruqui, A. K. Biswas, & M. J. Bino (Eds.), Water management in Islam (pp. 1–32). United Nations University Press. Fatma, S. (2016). Gardens in Mughal India [Doctoral dissertation, Aligarh Muslim University]. Fatma, S., & Fatima, S. (2012). Waterworks in Mughal gardens. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 73, 1268–1278. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156328 Fazal, A. (1873). Ain-i Akbari (H. Blochmann, Trans.). Baptist Mission Press. Fisher, B. (1928). Irrigation systems of Persia. Geographical Review, 18(2), 302–306. https://www.jstor.org/stable/208053 Fisher, M. (2018). Islam in Mughal India. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Religion. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.013.648 Fisher, M. (2018). The environment and forest-dweller, late Vedic, Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, and Dravidian cultures, societies, and states (c. 600 BCE – c. 800 CE). In M. H. Fisher (Ed.), An environmental history of India: From earliest times to the twenty-first century (pp. 49–76). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316276044.004 Fisher, M. (2019, March 26). The Mughal Empire. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Asian History. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.013.357 Fisher, M. (2019). Conflicting meanings of Persianate culture: An intimate example from colonial India and Britain. In N. Green (Ed.), The Persianate world: The frontiers of a Eurasian lingua franca. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.64.j 305 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_004 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_004 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_004 https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520974234 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40234114 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40234114 http://www.jstor.org/stable/986162 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781641892094-011 https://doi.org/10.9783/9781934536537.204 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1980.9979768 https://www.idrc.ca/sites/default/files/openebooks/924-0/index.html#ref-ch01-4 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156328 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156328 https://www.jstor.org/stable/208053 https://www.jstor.org/stable/208053 https://www.jstor.org/stable/208053 https://oxfordre.com/religion/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-648 https://oxfordre.com/religion/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-648 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.013.648 https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316276044.004 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.013.357 https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.64.j Flaminio, S., Rouillé-Kielo, G., & Le Visage, S. (2022). Waterscapes and hydrosocial territories: Thinking space in political ecologies of water. Progress in Environmental Geography, 1(1–4), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/27539687221106796 Fletcher, J. (1986). The Mongols: Ecological and social perspectives. Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 46(1), 11– 50. https://doi.org/10.2307/2719074 Fletcher, R., Pottier, C., Evans, D., & Kummu, M. (2008). The development of the water management system of Angkor: A provisional model. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association, 28, 57–66. https://doi.org/10.7152/bippa.v28i0.12016 Flood, F. B. (2019). Before the Mughals: Material culture of Sultanate North India. Muqarnas, 36, 1–39. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26835430 Fortescue, T. (1820). Report on the revenue system of the Delhi Territory. In Punjab Govt. Records, Vol. I (Delhi Residency and Agency, 1807–1857). Lahore: Punjab Government Press (1911). Fraser, J. (1742), A History of Nadir Shah, Printed for A. Millar, London. Fredriksson, T. (2020). The significance of water in Buddhism – Its spiritual symbolism and part of daily life. The Swedish Buddhist Community. https://swedishwaterhouse.se/wp-content/uploads/The-significance-of-water- Buddhism_-ENG-and-SVE.pdf Frye, R. N., Bosworth, C. E., Bregel, Y., Pugachenkova, G. A., Rtveladze, E. V., Schmitz, B., Zand, M., & von Kügelgen, A. (n.d.). Bukhara. In Encyclopaedia Iranica Online. Columbia University. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2330-4804_EIRO_COM_7183 Gabriel, A. (1928). Les étapes d’une campagne dans les deux ‘Iraq d’après un manuscrit turc du XVIe siècle. Syria, 9, 328-349, https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1928_num_9_4_3332 Gallop, A. T. (1999). The genealogical seal of the Mughal emperors of India. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 9(1), 77–140. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25183628 Gaur, R. C. (2002). Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri. Aryan Books International. Gell, A. (1992). The technology of enchantment and the enchantment of technology. In J. Coote & A. Shelton (Eds.), Anthropology and aesthetics (pp. 40–63). Clarendon Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198277330.003.0003 Ghani, K. (2020). The Mughals and Sufism. In L. Ridgeon (Ed.), Routledge handbook on Sufism (pp. 387–398). Routledge. Ghasemi, P. (2024). Persian paradises: Unveiling the Sasanian Dastgerd of Mohammadabad-Baghdasht, south of Jereh, Pars, Iran. Journal of Field Archaeology, 50(4), 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2024.2438545 Ghazi, Z.-d. M. B. P. (2017). Babur-Name (Memoirs of Babar) (A. S. Beveridge, Trans.). Low Price Publications. Gholikandi, G., Sadrzadeh, M., Jamshidi, S., & Ebrahimi, M. (2013). Water resource management in Ancient Iran with emphasis on technological approaches: A cultural heritage. Water Science & Technology: Water Supply, 13, 582–589. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2013.084 Gibson, J. (1880). On the composition of “Reh,” an efflorescence on the soil of certain districts of India. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 10, 277–280. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0370164600043844 Giese, E. (1980). Aufbau, Entwicklung und Genese der islamisch-orientalischen Stadt in Sowjet-Mittelasien. Erdkunde, 34(1), 46–60. https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.1980.01.08 306 https://doi.org/10.1177/27539687221106796 https://doi.org/10.2307/2719074 https://doi.org/10.2307/2719074 https://doi.org/10.7152/bippa.v28i0.12016 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26835430 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26835430 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26835430 https://swedishwaterhouse.se/wp-content/uploads/The-significance-of-water-Buddhism_-ENG-and-SVE.pdf https://swedishwaterhouse.se/wp-content/uploads/The-significance-of-water-Buddhism_-ENG-and-SVE.pdf https://swedishwaterhouse.se/wp-content/uploads/The-significance-of-water-Buddhism_-ENG-and-SVE.pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2330-4804_EIRO_COM_7183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2330-4804_EIRO_COM_7183 http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2330-4804_EIRO_COM_7183 https://www.persee.fr/doc/syria_0039-7946_1928_num_9_4_3332 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25183628 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25183628 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198277330.003.0003 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2024.2438545 https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2013.084 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0370164600043844 https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.1980.01.08 https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.1980.01.08 Gilman, P. A. (1987). Architecture as artifact: Pit structures and pueblos in the American Southwest. American Antiquity, 52(3), 538–564. https://doi.org/10.2307/281598 Gole, S. (1989). Indian maps & plans: From earliest times to the advent of European surveys. Manohar Publications. Golombek, L. (1995). The gardens of Timur: New perspectives. Muqarnas, 12, 137–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523228 Golombek, L. (1996). Timur’s gardens: The feminine perspective. In M. Hussain, A. Rehman, & J. L. Wescoat Jr. (Eds.), The Mughal garden (pp. 29–36). Dumbarton Oaks. Golombek, L. (2008). The ‘citadel, town, suburbs’ model and medieval Kirman. In S. K. Jayyusi, R. Holod, A. Petruccioli, & A. Raymond (Eds.), The city in the Islamic world (pp. 445–463). Brill. Govindankutty, V. (2016). Historic cultural landscape conservation: Rejuvenating Surang Bhawi system of Bidar. Urban Update, 1, 28. Greathed, W. H. (1852). Report on the drainage of the city of Delhi. Orphan Press. Green, A. S., & Petrie, C. A. (2018). Landscapes of urbanization and de-urbanization: A large-scale approach to investigating the Indus Civilization’s settlement distributions in northwest India. Journal of Field Archaeology, 43(4), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2018.1464332 Green, N. (2019). Introduction: The frontiers of the Persianate world (ca. 800–1900). In N. Green (Ed.), The Persianate world: The frontiers of a Eurasian lingua franca. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.64.a Green, N. (2019). The Persianate world: The frontiers of a Eurasian lingua franca (1st ed.). University of California Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvr7fdrv Griffith, Z. (2022). Environment, political ecology, and the culture of waqf in the eighteenth-century northern Egyptian Delta. Mamlūk Studies Review. https://doi.org/10.6082/271n-4714 Griffiths, T., & Robin, L. (1997). Ecology & empire: Environmental history of settler societies. Keele University Press. Gronke, M. (1992). The Persian court between palace and tent: From Timur to ‘Abbas I. In L. Golombek & M. Subtelny (Eds.), Timurid art and culture: Iran and Central Asia in the fifteenth century (pp. 18–22). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004662551_004 Gronke, M. (1992). The Persian court between palace and tent: From Timur to ‘Abbas I. In L. Golombek & M. Subtelny (Eds.), Timurid art and culture: Iran and Central Asia in the fifteenth century (pp. 18–22). E. J. Brill. Grove, R. (1993). Conserving Eden: The (European) East India Companies and their environmental policies on St. Helena, Mauritius, and in Western India, 1660 to 1854. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 35(2), 318–351. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500018399 Grover, B. R. (1960). Classification of agrarian land under Akbar. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 23(Part I), 198–209. Grover, S. (1981). The Khaljis and Tughlaqs of Delhi. In The architecture of India: Islamic (727–1707 A.D.) (pp. 23–48). Vikas Publishing House. Gudorf, C. E. (2010). Water privatization in Christianity and Islam. Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics, 30(2), 19–38. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2356294 Guerrieri, P.M. (2017). Maps of Delhi. Niyogi Books, New Delhi 307 https://doi.org/10.2307/281598 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523228 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523228 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523228 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2018.1464332 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2018.1464332 https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.64.a http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvr7fdrv http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctvr7fdrv https://doi.org/10.6082/271n-4714 https://doi.org/10.6082/271n-4714 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004662551_004 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500018399 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2356294 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2356294 Guha, R., & Gadgil, M. (1989). State forestry and social conflict in British India. Past and Present, 123(1), 141– 177. https://doi.org/10.1093/past/123.1.141 Gupta, N. (1986). Delhi and its hinterlands: The nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Oxford University Press. Gupta, T. (2020). Delhi Sultanate waterworks: Ancient network of water harvesting structures in Delhi, India. https://circularwaterstories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Delhi-Sultanate-Waterworks_Tanvi-Gupta-1.pdf Gustafson, J., & Speer, J. (2022). Environmental crises at the end of Safavid history: The collapse of Iran’s early modern imperial ecology, 1666–1722. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 54(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743821001082 Haberman, D.L. (2012) India: A Sacred Geography, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 81(1), 278– 281, https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfs088 Habib, I. (1963/1999). The agrarian system of Mughal India (1556–1707). Asia Publishing House. Habib, I. (1982). Agrarian economy. In T. Raychaudhuri & I. Habib (Eds.), The Cambridge economic history of India (pp. 48–76). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521226929.005 Habib, I. (1982). An atlas of the Mughal Empire: Political and economic maps with detailed notes, bibliography and index. Oxford University Press. Habib, I. (1996). Timur in the political tradition and historiography of Mughal India. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 57, 289–303. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44133321 Hackeloeer, A., Klasing, K., Krisp, J. M., & Meng, L. (2014). Georeferencing: A review of methods and applications. Annals of GIS, 20(1), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2013.868826 Haider, N. (2014). A lost city of Delhi through Persian histories. Studies in People’s History, 1(2), 163–171. Halim, A. (1939). Sikandar Lodi as a founder. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 3, 842–848. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44252439 Hamilton, E. J. (1948). The role of monopoly in the overseas expansion and colonial trade of Europe before 1800. The American Economic Review, 38(2), 33–53. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1910481 Harrower, M. J. (2010). Geographic information systems (GIS) hydrological modeling in archaeology: An example from the origins of irrigation in Southwest Arabia (Yemen). Journal of Archaeological Science, 37(7), 1447– 1452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.01.004 Hasan, S. N. (1982). The morphology of a mediaeval Indian city: A case study of Shahjahanabad in the 18th and early 19th century. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 43, 307–317. Hasan, Z. (1915). List of Muhammadan and Hindu monuments in Delhi Zail (Vols. 1–4). Superintendent of Government Printing. Hasbrouck, A. (1935). The conquest of the desert. The Hispanic American Historical Review, 15(2), 195–228. https://doi.org/10.2307/2506294 Hastrup, K., & Hastrup, F. (Eds.). (2015). Waterworlds: Anthropology in fluid environments. Berghahn Books. Hearn, G. (1906). The seven cities of Delhi. W. Thacker & Co. Herbert, E. (2012). Curzon nostalgia: Landscaping historical monuments in India. Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes, 32(4), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2012.719715 308 https://doi.org/10.1093/past/123.1.141 https://doi.org/10.1093/past/123.1.141 https://circularwaterstories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Delhi-Sultanate-Waterworks_Tanvi-Gupta-1.pdf https://circularwaterstories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Delhi-Sultanate-Waterworks_Tanvi-Gupta-1.pdf https://circularwaterstories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Delhi-Sultanate-Waterworks_Tanvi-Gupta-1.pdf https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743821001082 https://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/lfs088 https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521226929.005 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44133321 https://doi.org/10.1080/19475683.2013.868826 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44252439 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44252439 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44252439 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1910481 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1910481 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.01.004 https://doi.org/10.2307/2506294 https://doi.org/10.2307/2506294 https://doi.org/10.2307/2506294 https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2012.719715 https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2012.719715 Herbert, E. W. (2011). Flora’s empire: British gardens in India. Penguin India. https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812205053 Herrin, J. (2006). Turks: A journey of a thousand years, 600–1600. History Workshop Journal, 61, 238–242. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472849 Herrmann, G. (1997). Early and medieval Merv: A tale of three cities. In Proceedings of the British Academy (Vol. 94, pp. 1–43). https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.0110 Hesse, R. (2010). LiDAR-derived local relief models: A new tool for archaeological prospection. Archaeological Prospection, 17, 67–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.374 Hodge, A. T. (2002). Roman aqueducts & water supply (2nd ed.). Duckworth Publishers. Hodgson, M. G. S. (1974). The venture of Islam: Conscience and history in a world civilization (Vols. 2 & 3). The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.1080/03612759.1975.9945026 Hosagrahar, J. (2001). Mansions to margins: Modernity and the domestic landscapes of historic Delhi, 1847–1910. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 60(1), 26–45. https://doi.org/10.2307/991677 Hoskins, W.G. (1955). The Making of the English Landscape. Hodder & Stoughton. Hosseini, S. (2019). Safavid and Mughal urban bridges: Visual and embodied experience of nature. South Asian Studies, 35(1), 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1605573 Houghteling, S. (2023). Beyond ice: Cooling through cloth, scent, and hue in eighteenth-century South Asia. Journal18, 16. https://www.journal18.org/7041 Howard, D. A. (2017). A History of the Ottoman Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333995_6 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.113 https://proceedings.caaconference.org/files/2008/CD51_Mantellini_et_al_CAA2008.pdf https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.idrc.ca/sites/default/files/openebooks/924-0/index.html#ref-ch01-4 Hula, E. (1941). Control of the conquered. Social Research, 8(2), 136–155. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40981769 Humphreys, A. J. B. (1993). The significance of place names in archaeological research. African Studies, 52(1), 43– 53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00020189308707766 Hunt, J. D. (2000). “First principles” or “rudiments”. In J. D. Hunt (Ed.), Greater perfections: The practice of garden theory (pp. 1-13). University of Pennsylvania Press. Husain, F. H. (2021). Water for the Saints of Baghdad: The hydrology of a sacred Ottoman geography. Journal of Early Modern History, 25(4), 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-BJA10025 Husain, M. (1963). Tughluq dynasty. Thacker Spink & Co. (1933) Pvt. Ltd. Hussain, S. A., Tan, L., Kathayat, G., Hussain, A., & Widory, D. (2025). Climate change during the Holocene in South Asia: A review study of Pakistan. Quaternary Science Reviews, 352, 109203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109203 Hussein, A. A. (2001). Islamic water management. Water International, 26(4), 481–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060108686949 309 https://doi.org/10.9783/9780812205053 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472849 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472849 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25472849 https://doi.org/10.5334/ai.0110 https://doi.org/10.1002/arp.374 https://doi.org/10.1080/03612759.1975.9945026 https://doi.org/10.2307/991677 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1605573 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2019.1605573 https://www.journal18.org/7041 https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333995_6 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.113 https://proceedings.caaconference.org/files/2008/CD51_Mantellini_et_al_CAA2008.pdf https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.idrc.ca/sites/default/files/openebooks/924-0/index.html#ref-ch01-4 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40981769 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40981769 https://doi.org/10.1080/00020189308707766 https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-BJA10025 https://doi.org/10.1163/15700658-BJA10025 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2025.109203 https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060108686949 Hussein, I. (2003). Management of shared ground water: International vs. Islamic law. Workshop on Legal Framework for Shared Ground Water Development and Management in ESCWA Region. Economic and Social Council, Beirut. Available at https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/506581?ln=en&v=pdf Hutchinson, M. F. (1988). Calculation of hydrologically sound digital elevation models. In Third International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling (pp. 117–133). Hutchinson, M. F., Xu, T., & Stein, J. (2011). Recent progress in the ANUDEM elevation gridding procedure. Geomorphometry.org. Retrieved from http://www.geomorphometry.org/uploads/pdf/pdf2011/HutchinsonXu2011geomorphometry.pdf Imperial Gazetteer of India (1909). Vol. XXVI, Plate 9 & 10. Clarendon Press. Ingate, J. (2019). Water and urbanism in Roman Britain: Hybridity and identity (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315206707 Ingold, T. (1993). The temporality of the landscape. World Archaeology, 25(2), 152–174. http://www.jstor.org/stable/124811 Irfan, L. (2018–2019). Medieval Indian madarsas: Structures and architectural remains. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 79, 260–269. Islam, R., & Bosworth, C. E. (1998). The Delhi Sultanate. In History of civilizations of Central Asia, Volume 4: The age of achievement, A.D. 750 to the end of the fifteenth century, Part I: The historical, social and economic setting (pp. 269–291). UNESCO Digital Library. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000112866 Jackson, P. (2009). Studies of the Mongol Empire and early Muslim India. Ashgate Variorum. Jagmohan, M. (2016). Triumphs and tragedies of Ninth Delhi. Allied Publishers Private Ltd. James, J., et al. (2013). Guidelines for scientific water management in ancient India as revealed from Kautilya’s Arthasastra. In Proceedings of the Kerala Environment Congress (pp. 101–115). Kochi. Jarrett, H. S. (1927). Ain-i-Akbari by Abul-Fazal Allami (Vol. II). Low Price Publications. Jarrett, H. S. (Trans.). (1891). Translation of Abul Fazal Allami’s Ain-i-Akbari (Vol. II). Asiatic Society of Bengal, Baptist Mission Press. Johnston, N. J. (1971). The urban world of the Matraki manuscript. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 30(3), 159– 176. http://www.jstor.org/stable/543605 Kambo, M. S. (2013). Shahjahannama (Mumtaz Liyaqat, Trans.). Sang-e-Meel. Karimian, H. (2015). Cities and social order in Sasanian Iran: The archaeological potential. Antiquity, 84, 453–466. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00066709 Katona, O., Sipos, G., Onaca, A., & Ardelean, F. (2012). Reconstruction of palaeo-hydrology and fluvial architecture at the Orosháza palaeo-channel of River Maros, Hungary. Journal of Environmental Geography, 5(1–2), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.14232/jengeo-2012-43805 Kaur, D. (1990). Iqtadari system and the growth of towns in medieval India. India Quarterly, 46(2/3), 188–196. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45073091 Keating, J. (2022). Introduction: Towards a political ecology of aridity. In On arid ground: Political ecologies of empire in Russian Central Asia (Chapter 1). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192855251.003.0001 310 https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/506581?ln=en&v=pdf http://www.geomorphometry.org/uploads/pdf/pdf2011/HutchinsonXu2011geomorphometry.pdf https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315206707 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315206707 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315206707 http://www.jstor.org/stable/124811 http://www.jstor.org/stable/124811 http://www.jstor.org/stable/124811 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000112866 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000112866 http://www.jstor.org/stable/543605 http://www.jstor.org/stable/543605 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00066709 https://doi.org/10.14232/jengeo-2012-43805 http://www.jstor.org/stable/45073091 http://www.jstor.org/stable/45073091 http://www.jstor.org/stable/45073091 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192855251.003.0001 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192855251.003.0001 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192855251.003.0001 Keay, S., Millett, M., & Strutt, K. (2014). The canal system and Tiber Delta at Portus: Assessing the nature of man- made waterways and their relationship with the natural environment. Water History, 6, 11–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-013-0094-y Khalilnezhad, M. R., Russo, A., & Kheirollahi, M. (2024). Edible landscapes in Persian gardens: A historical perspective from ancient Iran to the present day. Landscape History, 45(2), 121–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2024.2407196 Khan, I. (1990). Shah Jahan Nama: An abridged history of the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan, compiled by his royal librarian. Oxford University Press. Khan, M. (1996). An introduction to the historical, architectural and hydraulic studies of the Mughal garden at Wah, Pakistan. East and West, 46(3/4), 457–472. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757289 Khan, S. A. (1847). Asar-us-Sanadeed (Republished 2007). Sir Syed Academy, Aligarh Muslim University. Kiani-DehKiania, G. (2023). Isfahan, the city of sightseeing: Recognizing the viewpoint-driven architecture of the Safavid era. Bagh-e-Nazar Journal, 20(125), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.22034/BAGH.2023.376585.5307 Kinra, R. (2015). Writing Self, Writing Empire: Chandar Bhan Brahman and the Cultural World of the Indo-Persian State Secretary. University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.3 Klesner, C. E., Akymbek, Y., & Vandiver, P. B. (2021). Lead-glazing technology from Medieval Central Asia: A case study from Aktobe, Kazakhstan. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 36, 102825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102825 Klingelhofer, W. G. (1988). The Jahangiri Mahal of the Agra Fort: Expression and experience in early Mughal architecture. In O. Grabar (Ed.), Muqarnas V: An annual on Islamic art and architecture (pp. 123–145). E. J. Brill. Koch, E. (1991). Mughal Architecture. Prestel. Koch, E. (1997). Mughal palace gardens from Babur to Shah Jahan (1526–1648). Muqarnas, 14, 143–165. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523242 Kondo, N. (2018). State and shrine in Iran: Waqf administration of the Shah ʿAbd al-ʿAzim Shrine under the Qajars. In T. Miura (Ed.), Comparative study of the waqf from the East: Dynamism of norm and practice in religious and familial donations (pp. 1–25). Tokyo: The Toyo Bunko. Kozlowski, G. C. (1995). Imperial authority, benefactions and endowments (Awqāf) in Mughal India. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 38(3), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1163/1568520952600425 Krause, F., & Strang, V. (2016). Thinking relationships through water. Society and Natural Resources, 29(6), 633– 638. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1151714 Krawulsky, von D. (1982–1984). Ḫorāsān zur Timuridenzeit nach dem Tārīḫ-e Ḥāfeẓ-e Abrū (verf. 817–823h.) des Nūrallāh ʻAbdallāh b. Luṭfallāh al-Ḫvāfī genannt Ḥāfeẓ-e Abrū. Wiesbaden: L. Reichert. https://wellcomecollection.org/works/eew22gr3 Kumar, N. (1997). Rituals of power and power of rituals: A study of imperial rituals and invented traditions in 16th century North India. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 58, 244–252. Kumar, S. (2002). The present in Delhi’s past: Five essays. Three Essays Press. Kumar, S. (2021). The Delhi Sultanate as empire. In P. F. Bang, C. A. Bayly, & W. Scheidel (Eds.), The Oxford world history of empire: Volume Two: The history of empires (online ed., 23 Dec. 2021). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197532768.003.0020 311 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-013-0094-y https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2024.2407196 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2024.2407196 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2024.2407196 http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757289 http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757289 https://doi.org/10.22034/BAGH.2023.376585.5307 https://doi.org/10.1525/luminos.3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102825 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102825 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2021.102825 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523242 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523242 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523242 https://doi.org/10.1163/1568520952600425 https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1151714 https://wellcomecollection.org/works/eew22gr3 https://wellcomecollection.org/works/eew22gr3 https://wellcomecollection.org/works/eew22gr3 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197532768.003.0020 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197532768.003.0020 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197532768.003.0020 Lahiri, N. (2003). Commemorating and remembering 1857: The revolt in Delhi and its afterlife. World Archaeology, 35(1), 35–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0043824032000078072 Lakshmi, G. V. (2024). Aristocratic women during Kakatiya Kingdom: Whose contributions still inspire the women of present era. Samriddhi, 1(3). Lambrick, H. T. (1952). Sir Charles Napier and Sind. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Lambton, A. K. S. (1953). Landlord and peasant in Persia: A study of land tenure and land revenue administration. London: Oxford University Press. Leverington, D., Teller, J., & Mann, J. (2002). A GIS method for reconstruction of late Quaternary landscapes from isobase data and modern topography. Computers & Geosciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(01)00097-8 Liddle, S. (2024), Shahjahanabad: Mapping a Mughal City. Roli Books, Delhi. Liyaqat, M. (2013), Shahjahan Nama: Muhammad Salih Kambo, Sang-e Mil, Lahore Loodin, N., & Wolf, A. T. (2022). Will Islamic water management principles be included if the Helmand River Treaty is revisited? Water, 14(67). https://doi.org/10.3390/w14010067 Losty, J.P. (2012). Delhi 360o: Mazhar Ali Khan’s View from the Lahore Gate, Lustre Press, Roli Books, New Delhi. Ludden, D. (1999). Modernity. An agrarian history of South Asia. The New Cambridge History of India (pp. 167- 230). https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/AgrarianHistorySouthAsia.pdf MacCormack, S. (2001). Cuzco, another Rome? In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 392–418). Cambridge University Press. Macneal, A. (1991). The stone encampment. In A. Petruccioli (Ed.), Environmental design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre, 1–2 (pp. 36–45). Dell’Oca Editore. Mahendrarajah, S. (2018). The Gawhar Shād Waqf Deed: Public works and the commonweal. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 138(4), 821–857. https://doi.org/10.7817/jameroriesoci.138.4.0821 Mahmoudian, S., & Bidhendi, M. Q. (2017). The norm of Mādī: Managing water in Safavid Isfahan. Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie, 5, University of Vienna. https://doi.org/10.29091/9783954906864/005 Maitland, P. D. (2019). The religious and affective actualities of the Yamuna: Conversations with Pandit Premchand Sharma, Nigambodh Ghat, Delhi. In Water Histories of South Asia (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429242694-12 Malik, A. & Mirza R. A. (2022). Pre-colonial religious institutions and development: Evidence through a military coup. Journal of the European Economic Association, 20(2), 907–956. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvab050 Mandala, V. R. (2015). The Raj and the paradoxes of wildlife conservation: British attitudes and experiences. The Historical Journal, 58(1), 75–110. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24532031 Mann, M. (2007). Delhi’s belly: On the management of water, sewage and excreta in a changing urban environment during the nineteenth century. Studies in History, 23(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/025764300602300101 Mansouri, S., & Mokhles, F. (2017). The spectrum of landscape meanings and its equivalents in Persian language. MANZAR: The Scientific Journal of Landscape, 9(40), 16–21. Mantellini, S. (2001). The Dargom Canal and the early settlement of the Middle Zeravshan Valley. In S. Pagani (Ed.), Italo-Uzbek scientific cooperation in archaeology and Islamic studies: An overview. Samarkand. 312 https://doi.org/10.1080/0043824032000078072 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0098-3004(01)00097-8 https://doi.org/10.3390/w14010067 https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/AgrarianHistorySouthAsia.pdf https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dludden/AgrarianHistorySouthAsia.pdf https://doi.org/10.7817/jameroriesoci.138.4.0821 https://doi.org/10.7817/jameroriesoci.138.4.0821 https://doi.org/10.29091/9783954906864/005 https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429242694-12 https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvab050 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24532031 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24532031 https://doi.org/10.1177/025764300602300101 Mantellini, S. (2016). Irrigation systems in Samarkand. In H. Selin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the history of science, technology, and medicine in non-Western cultures (pp. 1–7). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007- 7747-7_9925 Mantellini, S. (2018). Landscape archaeology and irrigation systems in Central Asia: A view from Samarkand (Uzbekistan). In Proceedings of Otto Harrassowitz GmbH & Co. KG (pp. 211–232). Harrassowitz. Mantellini, S., Rondelli, B., & Stride, S. (2008). Analytical approach for representing the water landscape evolution in Samarkand Oasis (Uzbekistan). Markofsky, S., Ninfo, A., Balbo, A., Conesa, F. C., & Madella, M. (2017). An investigation of local-scale human/landscape dynamics in the endorheic alluvial fan of the Murghab River, Turkmenistan. Quaternary International, 437(Part B), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.006 Maroufi, H. (2019). Urban planning in ancient cities of Iran: Understanding the meaning of urban form in the Sasanian city of Ardašīr-Xwarrah. Planning Perspectives, 35(6), 1055–1080. https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 Maroufi, H. (2019). Urban planning in ancient cities of Iran: Understanding the meaning of urban form in the Sasanian city of Ardašīr-Xwarrah. Planning Perspectives, 35(6), 1055–1080. https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 Marsh, G. P. (1884). Man and nature; or, physical geography as modified by human action (D. Lowenthal, Ed.). University of Washington Press. (Weyerhaeuser Environmental Classics). Marshall, F., & Randhawa, P. (2017). Economic liberalisation and rural-urban transformation. In India’s peri-urban frontier: Rural-urban transformations and food security (pp. 8–11). International Institute for Environment and Development. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep02716.4 Martinez, J. (2020). Managing mobility: New materialist approaches to Mughal mobility in the encampment and constructed city. Rice Asian Studies Review. Mathur, B. P. (2008). Kautilya: The art of governance. Indian Journal of Public Administration, 54(4), 763–777. Mazumder, D. (2015). Rethinking the Mongol-Sultanate “frontier” (1241–1327). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 76, 207–213. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156584 McChesney, R. D. (1991). Waqf in Central Asia: Four hundred years in the history of a Muslim shrine, 1480–1889. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400861965 McHarg, I. L. (1969). Design with nature. Natural History Press. McPhillips, S., Meier, A., & Rabo, A. (2019). Ottoman waterscapes: New archaeological, anthropological and historical studies of hydraulic landscapes in the eastern Mediterranean, 1500 to the present day. Levant, 51(2), 128–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2019.1845474 Meskell, L. (2021). A tale of two cities: The fate of Delhi as UNESCO World Heritage. International Journal of Cultural Property, 28(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000102 Michell, G., & Bhabha, J. J. (1999). Eternal Kaveri: Historical sites along South India’s greatest river. The Marg Foundation. Mihu-Pintilie, A., & Nicu, I. C. (2019). GIS-based landform classification of Eneolithic archaeological sites in the plateau-plain transition zone (NE Romania): Habitation practices vs. flood hazard perception. Remote Sensing, 11(8), 915. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11080915 Minorsky, V. (1970). Hudud al-Alam: The regions of the world: A Persian geography 372 A.H-972 A.D (C. E. Bosworth, Ed.). London. 313 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7747-7_9925 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7747-7_9925 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7747-7_9925 https://proceedings.caaconference.org/files/2008/CD51_Mantellini_et_al_CAA2008.pdf https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.006 https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2019.1684353 http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep02716.4 http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep02716.4 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156584 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44156584 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400861965 https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2019.1845474 https://doi.org/10.1080/00758914.2019.1845474 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000102 https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11080915 Mir, N., Hussain, M., & Wescoat Jr., J. (1996). Mughal gardens in Lahore: History & documentation. University of Engineering and Technology. Mitchell, M. (2010). Havelis and the Conglomerate Matrix. In S. Patwari & B. Tang (Eds.), Learning from Delhi: Dispersed initiatives in changing urban landscape. Ashgate Publications. Moazzen, M. (2011). Shi’ite higher learning and the role of the Madrasa-yi Sulṭānī in late Safavid Iran [Doctoral dissertation], University of Toronto. https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/66cd92f8-8f2e- 4eac-a7db- 7c8da74bf5f8/content#:~:text=It%20argues%20that%20Safavid%20madrasas,contextualizing%20or%20cont emporizing%20the%20past. Moin, A.A. (2012). The millennial sovereign: Sacred kingship and sainthood in Islam. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/moin16036 Moin, A.A. (2018). The politics of saint shrines in the Persianate empires. In A. Amanat & A. Ashraf (Eds.), The Persianate world: Rethinking a shared sphere (pp. 105–124). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_006 Mole, G. T. (2015). Mahé and the politics of empire: Trade, conquest, and revolution on the Malabar Coast. La Révolution française, (8). https://doi.org/10.4000/lrf.1294 Montalbano, C. (2008). Dar-Al Ma: The architecture of water in Islamic countries. In S. K. Jayyusi, R. Holod, A. Petruccioli, & A. Raymond (Eds.), The city in the Islamic world (Vol. 2, pp. 679–730). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.195 Moosvi, S. (2015). Population. In S. Moosvi (Ed.), The economy of the Mughal empire c. 1595: A statistical study (pp. 405–416). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450541.003.0017. Moraes, F. (1959). Jawaharlal Nehru: A biography. Asia Publishing House. Moreland, J. (2001). The Carolingian empire: Rome reborn? In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 392–418). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general- interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Moreland, W. H. (1920). India at the death of Akbar: An economic study. London. Moreland, W. H. (2011). The Sayyid and Afghan dynasties. In W. H. Moreland (Ed.), The agrarian system of Moslem India: A historical essay with appendices (pp. 66–78). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511880759.005 Mori, L. (2020). Water and power: What is left? An introduction to the workshop in Waterscapes: New perspectives on hydrocultural landscapes in the ancient Near East. Water History, 12(1), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-020-00246-4. Morrison, K. (2001). Sources, approaches, and definitions. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 1–9). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Morrison, K. D. (2015). Archaeologies of flow: Water and the landscapes of Southern India past, present, and future. Journal of Field Archaeology, 40(5), 560–580. Morshed, S. (2022, March 16). Climate change and rebellion in Mughal India. LSE Economic History Blog. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/economichistory/2022/03/16/climate-change-and-rebellion-in-mughal-india/ 314 https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/66cd92f8-8f2e-4eac-a7db-7c8da74bf5f8/content#:~:text=It%20argues%20that%20Safavid%20madrasas,contextualizing%20or%20contemporizing%20the%20past https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/66cd92f8-8f2e-4eac-a7db-7c8da74bf5f8/content#:~:text=It%20argues%20that%20Safavid%20madrasas,contextualizing%20or%20contemporizing%20the%20past https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/66cd92f8-8f2e-4eac-a7db-7c8da74bf5f8/content#:~:text=It%20argues%20that%20Safavid%20madrasas,contextualizing%20or%20contemporizing%20the%20past https://utoronto.scholaris.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/66cd92f8-8f2e-4eac-a7db-7c8da74bf5f8/content#:~:text=It%20argues%20that%20Safavid%20madrasas,contextualizing%20or%20contemporizing%20the%20past https://doi.org/10.7312/moin16036 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387287_006 http://journals.openedition.org/lrf/1294 https://doi.org/10.4000/lrf.1294 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.195 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450541.003.0017 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199450541.003.0017 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511880759.005 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-020-00246-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-020-00246-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-020-00246-4 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/economichistory/2022/03/16/climate-change-and-rebellion-in-mughal-india/ Morshed, S. (2024). The evolutionary empire: Demystifying state formation in Mughal South Asia (1556–1707). European Review of Economic History, 28(2), 303–306. https://doi.org/10.1093/ereh/head029 Moynihan, E. B. (1988). The Lotus Garden Palace of Zahir al-Din Muhammad Babur. Muqarnas, 5, 135–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523114. Moynihan, E. B. (2000). The Moonlight Garden: New discoveries at the Taj Mahal. Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution & the University of Washington Press. Mujumdar, P. P., Singh, P. K., Dey, P., & Jaina, S. K. (2020). Hydrology and water resources management in ancient India. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 24, 4691–4707. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4691- 2020 Mukminova, R. G., & Mukhtarov, A. (2003). The Khanate (emirate) of Bukhara. In History of civilizations of Central Asia (Vol. 5: Development in contrast, from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century). UNESCO Publishing. Nagheeby, M., Mehdi, P. D., & Faure, M. (2019). The legitimacy of dam development in international watercourses: A case study of the Harirud River Basin. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102519000128 Nanda, R. (2012). Architecture of Shahjahanabad. In J. P. Losty (Ed.), Delhi: Red Fort to Raisina. Lustre Press. Nanda, R. & Gupta, N. (1999), Delhi The Built Heritage: A Listing. Intach Delhi Chapter, New Delhi. Nanda, V. (1994). Ahmedabad: The urban traditions of a medieval city. South Asian Studies, 10(1), 45–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.1994.9628476 Nath, R., & Nath, A. (2018). Fortresses and cities of the Sultanate period. In R. Nath & A. Nath (Eds.), Monuments of Delhi: Architectural and historical. The Heritage. Nazim, M. (1931). The life and times of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazna. Munshiram Manoharlal. Necipoğlu, G. (1993). Framing the gaze in Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal palaces. Ars Orientalis, 23, 303–342. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629455 Neelis, J. (2011). Trade networks in ancient South Asia. In J. Neelis (Ed.), Early Buddhist transmission and trade networks (pp. 183–228). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004181595.i-372.22 Nizami, K. A. (1998). History of civilizations of Central Asia (Vol. 4): The age of achievement, A.D. 750 to the end of the fifteenth century, Pt. I: The historical, social and economic setting (pp. 177–190). UNESCO Digital Library. Nizami, K. A., & Farouqui, A. (2020). Delhi under the Sultanate. In A. Farouqui (Ed.), Delhi in historical perspectives. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190124007.003.0001 Noe, S. V. (1986). What happened to Mughal Delhi. In R. Frykenberg (Ed.), Delhi through the ages: Essays in urban history, culture and society (pp. 237–249). Oxford University Press. Norvelle, M. E. (1974). Water use and ownership according to the texts of Hanbali Fiqh [Master’s thesis, McGill University]. https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/05741s219 O’Hanlon, R. (2013). Contested conjunctures: Brahman communities and “early modernity” in India. The American Historical Review, 118(3), 765–787. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23426243 O’Kane, B. (1993). From tents to pavilions: Royal mobility and Persian palace design. Ars Orientalis. 315 https://doi.org/10.1093/ereh/head029 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523114 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523114 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523114 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4691-2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4691-2020 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/788A0C76399C1022AF7B9AEDC44B9D8F/S2047102519000128a.pdf/the-legitimacy-of-dam-development-in-international-watercourses-a-case-study-of-the-harirud-river-basin.pdf https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/788A0C76399C1022AF7B9AEDC44B9D8F/S2047102519000128a.pdf/the-legitimacy-of-dam-development-in-international-watercourses-a-case-study-of-the-harirud-river-basin.pdf https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102519000128 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.1994.9628476 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629455 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629455 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4629455 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004181595.i-372.22 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004181595.i-372.22 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190124007.003.0001 https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/05741s219 http://www.jstor.org/stable/23426243 Oestigaard, T. (2021, May 26). Water and religion. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190854584.013.477 Olsson, O., Wegerich, K., & Kabilov, F. (2012). Water quantity and quality in the Zerafshan River Basin: Only an upstream riparian problem? International Journal of Water Resources Development, 28(3), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2012.684312 Orengo, H. A., & Petrie, C. A. (2017). Large-scale, multi-temporal remote sensing of palaeo-river networks: A case study from Northwest India and its implications for the Indus civilisation. Remote Sensing, 9(7), 735. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9070735 Orengo, H. A., & Petrie, C. A. (2018). Multi-scale relief model (MSRM): A new algorithm for the visualization of subtle topographic change of variable size in digital elevation models. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 43, 1361–1369. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4317 Orthmann, E. (2015). Ideology and state-building: Humāyūn’s search for legitimacy in a Hindu–Muslim environment. In V. Dalmia & M. D. Faruqui (Eds.), Religious interactions in Mughal India. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198081678.003.0001 Pal, D. (2024). Legal framework on heritage protection in India. Gdańskie Studia Azji Wschodniej. 157-172. 10.4467/23538724GS.24.012.19871. Parodi, L. E. (2000). The distilled essence of the Timurid spirit: Some observations on the Taj Mahal. East and West, 50(1/4), 535–542. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757466 Parpia, S. (2016). Mughal hunting grounds: Landscape manipulation and “garden” association. Garden History, 44(2), 171–190. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44987900 Parpia, S. (2018). Hunting ground, agricultural land and the forest: Sustainable interdependency in Mughal India 1526–1707. Landscape History, 39(2), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2018.1534456 Patel, A. (2007). Architectural cultures and empire: The Ghurids in northern India (ca. 1192–1210). Bulletin of the Asia Institute, 21, 35–60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24049362 Paul, J. (2018). Cities in medieval Iran: A review of recent publications. Eurasian Studies, 16(1–2), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1163/24685623-12340046 Petrie, C. A. (2013). South Asia. In P. Clark (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of cities in world history. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589531.013.0005 Petrie, C.A. (2017). Crisis, what Crisis ?. In T. Cunningham & J. Driessen (Eds.), Crisis to Collapse (1–). Presses universitaires de Louvain. https://books.openedition.org/pucl/6307 Petrie, C. A. (2021). Resistance at the edge of the empires: The archaeology and history of the Bannu Basin from 1000 BC to AD 1200, Bannu Archaeological Project, surveys and excavations 1985–2001. Oxbow Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13pk77m Petrie, C. A., & Lynam, F. (2019). Revisiting settlement contemporaneity and exploring stability and instability: Case studies from the Indus Civilization. Journal of Field Archaeology, 45(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1664848 Petrie, C. A., Knox, J. R., Singh, R. N., Orengo, H. A., Green, A. S., Walker, J. R., Garcia, A., Conesa, F., & others. (2019). Mapping archaeology while mapping an empire: Using historical maps to reconstruct ancient settlement landscapes in modern India and Pakistan. Geosciences, 9(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010011 316 https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190854584.013.477 https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2012.684312 https://doi.org/10.3390/rs9070735 https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4317 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198081678.003.0001 http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757466 http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757466 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44987900 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44987900 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2018.1534456 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2018.1534456 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24049362 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24049362 https://doi.org/10.1163/24685623-12340046 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199589531.013.0005 https://books.openedition.org/pucl/6307 https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13pk77m https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1664848 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1664848 https://doi.org/10.1080/00934690.2019.1664848 https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010011 https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010011 https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences9010011 Petrie, C. A., Singh, R. N., Bates, J., Dixit, Y., & others. (2017). Adaptation to variable environments, resilience to climate change: Investigating land, water and settlement in Indus Northwest India. Current Anthropology, 58(1), 1–30. Petruccioli, A. (1984). The process evolved by control systems of urban design in the Mogul epoch in India: The case of Fatehpur Sikri. In A. Petruccioli (Ed.), Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre (pp. 18–27). Libreria Herder. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.129 Petruccioli, A. (2008). Bukhara and Samarqand. In S. K. Jayyusi, R. Holod, A. Petruccioli, & A. Raymond (Eds.), The city in the Islamic world (Vol. 1, pp. 491–524). Brill. Possehl, G. L. (1997). The transformation of the Indus Civilization. Journal of World Prehistory, 11(4), 425–472. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25801118 Powell, B. H. (1868). Handbook of the economic products of the Punjab (Vol. 1: Economic raw produce). Roorkee. Prasad, S. N. (1974). Catalogue of the historical maps of Survey of India (1700–1900). National Archives of India. Priya, M. V., Rengabashyam, K., Pazhanivelan, S., Ramalingam, K., Kaliaperumal, R., Vanitha, G., Nihar, A., Prajesh, P. J., & Venkatesan, V. (2023). Monitoring vegetation dynamics using multi-temporal Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) and Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI) images of Tamil Nadu. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 15(3), 1170–1177. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v15i3.480 Pugachenkova, G. A., Dani, A. H., & Yingsheng, L. (1996). Urban development and architecture. UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/silkroad/sites/default/files/knowledge-bank- article/vol_IVb%20silk%20road_urban%20development%20and%20architecture%20BIS.pdf Qasmi, S.H. (2022), Sair-ul Manazil (Mirza Sangin Beg). Translation to Urdu. Anjuman Taraqqi Urdu (Hind), New Delhi. Qureshi, I. H. (2008). Muslim India before the Mughals. In P. M. Holt, A. K. S. Lambton, & B. Lewis (Eds.), The Cambridge history of Islam (Vol. 2A, pp. 3–34). Cambridge University Press. Raad, D. R. (2020). The power of collective vision: Landscape, visual media, and the production of American mountains. Journal of Cultural Geography, 38(1), 102–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2020.1775005 Rajani, M. B., & Rajawat, A. S. (2011). Potential of satellite-based sensors for studying distribution of archaeological sites along palaeo channels: Harappan sites a case study. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38(9), 2010–2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.08.008. Rante, R. (2008). The Iranian city of Rayy: Urban model and military architecture. Iran, 46, 189–211. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651442 Ray, S. (2016). Hydroaesthetics in the Little Ice Age: Theology, artistic cultures and environmental transformation in early modern Braj, c. 1560–70. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 40(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856401.2016.1208320 Raza, S. J. (1991). Ghaznavid origins of the administrative institutions of the Delhi Sultanate. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 52, 232–241. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44142607 Raza, S. J. (1996). Constructional activity of the Ghaznavids. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 57, 877– 890. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44133422 Rekavandi, H. O., Sauer, E. W., Wilkinson, T., Abbasi, G. A., Priestman, S., Tamak, E. S., Ainslie, R., Mahmoudi, M., Galiatsatos, N., Roustai, K., Van Rensburg, J. J., Ershadi, M., MacDonald, E., Fattahi, M., Oatley, C., Shabani, B., Ratcliffe, J., & Usher-Wilson, L. S. (2008). Sasanian walls, hinterland fortresses and abandoned ancient irrigated landscapes: The 2007 season on the Great Wall of Gorgan and the Wall of Tammishe. Iran, 46, 151–178. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651440 317 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004162402.i-1500.129 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25801118 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25801118 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25801118 https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v15i3.480 https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2020.1775005 https://doi.org/10.1080/08873631.2020.1775005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.08.008 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2010.08.008 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651442 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651442 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651442 https://doi.org/10.1080/00856401.2016.1208320 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44142607 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44142607 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44133422 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44133422 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25651440 Rezavi, S. A. N. (2010). “The mighty defensive fort”: Red Fort at Delhi under Shahjahan – its plan and structures as described by Muhammad Waris. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 71, 1108–1121. Rezavi, S. A. N. (2013). Fatehpur Sikri revisited. Oxford University Press. Richards, J. F. (1997). Early modern India and world history. Journal of World History, 8(2), 197–209. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20068593 Roberts, W. (2024). Representing the world: Landscape, nature, and cosmos in Timurid Central Asia [Doctoral dissertation, Pomona College]. Rogers, A. (1909). The Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri or Memoirs of Jahangir. Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. Roos, C. I. (2014). Environmental reconstruction in archaeological science. In C. Smith (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1644 Rosenzweig, M. S., & Marston, J. M. (2018). Archaeologies of empire and environment. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 52, 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.004 Russel, W. (2005). The watershed empires. Medicine, Conflict and Survival, 21(2), 127–141. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27017645 Saadati, M., Neyestani, J., Kouhpar, S. M., & Nobari, A. H. (2021). Review and analysis of the spatial structure of Seljuk cities in Iran: Case study: City of Rey. TÜBA-AR: Turkish Academy of Sciences, Journal of Archaeology, 28(28), 211–222. https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaar.2021.28.011 Saatsaz, M., & Rezaie, A. (2021). Water resources management, technology, and culture in ancient Iran. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-173 Safa, H. S., & Soufi, A. A. (2021). Rereading the history of Dargazin city in Nasuh Matrakçı miniature images. Asian Studies, 9(1), 95–123. https://doi.org/10.4312/AS.2021.9.1.95-123 Salikuddin, R. K. (2018). Sufis, saints, and shrine: Piety in the Timurid period, 1370–1507 [Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University]. https://cmes.fas.harvard.edu/publications/sufis-saints-and-shrines-piety-timurid-period- 1370-1507 Salomon, F., Purdue, L., Goiran, J. P., & Berger, F. (2014). Introduction to the special issue: Roman canals studies—main research aims. Water History, 6, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-014-0101-y Samant, S. (2004). Manifestation of the urban public realm at the water edges in India—A case study of the ghats in Ujjain. Cities, 21(3), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2004.03.001 Saxena, A. B. (1995). Hassar-e-Firuza — A medieval town of Haryana (c.1300–c.1500). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 56, 934–944. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158764 Schade, A. E. (2011). Hidden waters: Groundwater histories of Iran and the Mediterranean [Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University]. Schreiber, K. (2001). The Wari Empire of Middle Horizon Peru: The epistemological challenge of documenting an empire without documentary evidence. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 70–92). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Seland, E. H. (2014). Archaeology of trade in the Western Indian Ocean, 300 BC—AD 700. Journal of Archaeological Research, 22(4), 367–402. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24018067 318 http://www.jstor.org/stable/20068593 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1644 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaa.2018.08.004 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27017645 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27017645 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27017645 https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaar.2021.28.011 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-173 https://doi.org/10.4312/AS.2021.9.1.95-123 https://doi.org/10.4312/AS.2021.9.1.95-123 https://cmes.fas.harvard.edu/publications/sufis-saints-and-shrines-piety-timurid-period-1370-1507 https://cmes.fas.harvard.edu/publications/sufis-saints-and-shrines-piety-timurid-period-1370-1507 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-014-0101-y https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2004.03.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2004.03.001 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158764 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158764 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24018067 http://www.jstor.org/stable/24018067 Sen, T. (2023). South Asia and the Mongol Empire. In M. Biran & H. Kim (Eds.), The Cambridge History of the Mongol Empire (pp. 827–851). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316337424.023 Shan, J.F., Lin, Z.P., Chen, L., Zhang, B., Fang, S.-X., Yan, X., Fang, W., Xie, L.-L., Liu, B., & Zhang, L. (2018). Reconstruction of meandering paleo-channels using dense well data, Daqing Oil Field, Songliao Basin, China. Petroleum Sciences, 15, 722–743. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-018-0270-x Sharma, J. P. (2007). 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, 35(2), 210–228. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40219928 Sharma, J. P. (2009). Mughal gardens of the Indian subcontinent and the colonial legacy: The treatment of Delhi’s Shalamar Bagh. Journal of Landscape Architecture, 4(2), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2009.9723420 Sharma, J. P. (2018). Revisiting the Darya (River) urbanism in the Delhi Triangle: The urbanization of the Yamuna in the Mughal Badshahi Shahar (Imperial City), Shahjahanabad. In T. Way (Ed.), River cities, city rivers (pp. 99–126). Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Sharma, J.P. (2021). From a Mughal Bagh to a colonial archaeological garden to a UNESCO World Heritage Property and everything else in between: The many lives of Badshah Shahjahan’s Hayat Baksh Bagh. Landscape History, 42(2), 99–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2021.1999017 Sharma, M., Divyadarshini, A., & Singh, V. (2019). Morphotectonic evolution of the Siwalik Hills between the Yamuna and the Markanda River exits, NW Himalaya. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 94, 453–463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-019-1341-3 Sharma, P., Joshi, A., Choudhary, R. K., & Tiwari, H. (2024). Water management in India: From ancient community-based systems to colonial interventions and modern strategies. [Paper presented at India Water Week / Proceedings]. Sharmin, F. (2019). Lalbagh: An incomplete depiction of Mughal garden in Bangladesh. Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning, 6, Article 21. Siddiqi, J. Mohd. (1981). ‘Medieval archaeology’—The term and its application. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 42, 655–660. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141189 Siddiqui, I. H. (1986). Water works and irrigation system in India during pre-Mughal times. Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, 29(1), 52–77. https://doi.org/10.2307/3632072 Silliman, S. W. (2013). What, where, and when is hybridity? In J. J. Card (Ed.), The archaeology of hybrid material culture (pp. 32–52). Southern Illinois University Press. Silliman, S. W. (2015). A requiem for hybridity? The problem with Frankensteins, purées, and mules. Journal of Social Archaeology, 15(3), 277–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605315574791 Silveira, E. M. de O., de Carvalho, L. M. T., Junior, F. W. A., & de Mello, J. M. (2007). The assessment of vegetation seasonal dynamics using multitemporal NDVI and EVI images derived from MODIS. 2007 International Workshop on the Analysis of Multi-temporal Remote Sensing Images, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/MULTITEMP.2007.4293049 Simelius, S. (2023). Networks of inequality: Access to water in Roman Pompeii. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology, 7(1), 54–74. https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.116 Simpson, S. J. (2017). Sasanian cities: Archaeological perspectives on the urban economy and built environment of an empire. In E. Sauer (Ed.), Sasanian Persia: Between Rome and the Steppes of Eurasia (pp. 21–50). Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474401012.003.0002 319 https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316337424.023 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-018-0270-x http://www.jstor.org/stable/40219928 http://www.jstor.org/stable/40219928 https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2009.9723420 https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2009.9723420 https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2009.9723420 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2021.1999017 https://doi.org/10.1080/01433768.2021.1999017 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-019-1341-3 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141189 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44141189 https://doi.org/10.2307/3632072 https://doi.org/10.2307/3632072 https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605315574791 https://doi.org/10.1109/MULTITEMP.2007.4293049 https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.116 https://doi.org/10.5334/jcaa.116 https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474401012.003.0002 Singh, A. (1992). Irrigating Haryana: The pre-modern history of the Western Yamuna Canal. In I. Habib (Ed.), Medieval India 1: Researches in the History of India 1200-1750 (pp. 49–61). Oxford University Press. Singh, D. and Bajaj.M. (1988). Usar (sodic) soils in Uttar Pradesh: A case study of two villages in Hardoi district. Economic and Political Weekly, 23(52/53), A181–A187. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4394183 Singh, D. P. (2021). Johads: Revival of traditional rainwater harvesting structures. Anthology: The Research, 6(5), 27– 33. Singh, P. K., Dey, P., Jain S.K., & Mujumdar, P. P. (2020). Hydrology and water resources management in ancient India. Hydrology Earth System Sciences, 24, 4691–4707. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4691-2020 Singh, U. (1999). Ancient Delhi. Oxford University Press. Sinha, A. (2014). The sacred landscape of Braj, India: Imagined, enacted, and reclaimed. Landscape Journal, 33(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.33.1.59 Sinha, A. (2020). Envisioning riverfronts in pilgrim cities. In Envisioning India 2050: Concerns of urban environment. NCEI. Sinha, A., & Ruggles, D. F. (2004). The Yamuna riverfront, India: A comparative study of Islamic and Hindu traditions in cultural landscapes. Landscape Journal, 23(2), 141–152. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43323668 Sinopoli, C. M. (1994). Monumentality & nobility in Mughal capitals. Asian Perspectives, 33(2), 293–308. Sinopoli, C. M. (2001). On the edge of empire: Form and substance in the Satvahana dynasty. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 155–178). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires- perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Smith, A. T. (2003). The political landscape: Constellations of authority in early complex polities. University of California Press. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=108556&site=ehost- live&scope=site Smith, M. E. (2001). The Aztec Empire and the Mesoamerican world system. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 128–154). Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology- general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 Smith, M. L. (2016). Urban infrastructure as materialized consensus. World Archaeology, 48(1), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2015.1124804 Smith, M.L. (2014). The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes (October 2014). Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 307-323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-025839 Smith, M.L. (2024). Landscape infrastructure and local infrastructure: Scales of intervention in urban water management. In M.G. Ellis, C.M. DeSanto, M.C.L. Howey (Eds.), Infrastructure in Archaeological Discourse (pp. 78-91), Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032678450-7 Sobti, M. (1995). Timurid Central Asia & Mughal India: Some correlations regarding urban design concepts and the typology of the Muslim house [Master’s dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/54413 Sörlin, S., & Wormbs, N. (2018). Environing technologies: A theory of making environment. History and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2018.154806 Spear, P. (1951). Twilight of the Mughals: Studies in late Mughal Delhi. Cambridge University Press. 320 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4394183 https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4691-2020 https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.33.1.59 http://www.jstor.org/stable/43323668 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=108556&site=ehost-live&scope=site https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=108556&site=ehost-live&scope=site https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=108556&site=ehost-live&scope=site https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://www.cambridge.org/gb/universitypress/subjects/archaeology/archaeology-general-interest/empires-perspectives-archaeology-and-history?format=PB&isbn=9780521112345 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2015.1124804 https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-025839 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032678450-7 https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/54413 https://doi.org/10.1080/07341512.2018.154806 Spooner, B. (1974). Irrigation and society: The Iranian Plateau. In T. Downing & M. Gibson (Eds.), Irrigation’s impact on society (pp. 45–63). University of Arizona Press. Stampoultzidis, A., Morandi Bonacossi, D., Reculeau, H., Savioli, A., Van Nooijen, R. R. P., & Ertsen, M. W. (2024). The fluidity of empire: Hydraulics of Neo-Assyrian canal systems in relation to their possible uses. Water History, 16, 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-024-00348-3 Stokes, E. (1975). Agrarian society and the Pax Britannica in Northern India in the early nineteenth century. Modern Asian Studies, 9(4), 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00012877 Strang, V. (1997). Mapping the country: Representations of the landscape. In P. Hay (Ed.), Uncommon ground: Cultural landscapes and environmental values (pp. 216–233). Berg Publications. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003087281-13 Strang, V. (2004). The meaning of water. Berg Publications. Strang, V. (2009). Indigenous fluidscapes. In Gardening the world: Agency, identity and the ownership of water (pp. 87–118). Berghahn Books. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781845459406-006 Strang, V. (2015). Water: Nature & culture. Reaktion Books. Stride, S., Bernardo, R., & Mantellini, S. (2009). Canals versus horses: Political power in the oasis of Samarkand. World Archaeology, 41(1), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240802655302 Subrahmanyam, S. (1993). The Portuguese Empire in South Asia, 1500–1700: A political and economic history. Longman. https://doi.org/10.1177/084387149300500212 Subrahmanyam, S. (1997). Connected histories: Notes towards a reconfiguration of early modern Eurasia. Modern Asian Studies, 31(3), 735–762. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00017133 Subrahmanyam, S. (2001). Written on water: Designs and dynamics in the Portuguese Estado da India. In S. E. Alcock, T. N. D’Altroy, K. D. Morrison & C. M. Sinopoli (Eds.), Empires: Perspectives from archaeology and history (pp. 42–69). Cambridge University Press. Subtelny, M. E. (1997). Agriculture and the Timurid chaharbagh: The evidence from a medieval Persian agricultural manual. In A. Petruccioli (Ed.), Gardens in the time of the great Muslim empires: Theory and design (pp. 110– 128). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004660823_008 Subtelny, M. E. (2007). Timurids in transition: Turko-Persian politics and acculturation in medieval Iran. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004160316.i-422 Suhrawardy, T. (2023), Mughal Identity: Central Asian or Indian, Islam in India : History, Politics and Society, Ed. by Nasir Raza Khan, Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003400202-7 Tahmasbi, M., Bin, M. H., & Nijhuis, S. (2024). Unveiling water legacy: An interdisciplinary exploration for comprehending Siraf’s historical water landscape. Landscape Research, 50(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2024.2391391 Taieh, A. M. (2024). The city of Kish in Transoxiana: A study of its political and cultural conditions (55 AH/674 AD – 653 AH/1255 AD). Journal of University of Anbar for Humanities, 21(3), 1265–1310. Talib, Y. A. (2016). Islamic revival in the Ottoman, Safavid and Mughal Empires. In The different aspects of Islamic culture, Vol. 6, Part I: Islam in the world today: Retrospective of the evolution of Islam and the Muslim world (pp. 45–51). Tallman, P. S., Piland, N. C., Villarmarzo, M., Victoria-Lacy, L., & Valdés-Velásquez, A. (2024). Waterscapes meet socio-ecological models: A relational framework to examine water insecurity and human health and well-being. People and Nature, 6, 1036–1047. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10635 321 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-024-00348-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-024-00348-3 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00012877 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003087281-13 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781845459406-006 https://doi.org/10.1515/9781845459406-006 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240802655302 https://doi.org/10.1177/084387149300500212 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00017133 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004660823_008 https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004160316.i-422 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003400202-7 https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2024.2391391 https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10635 Thackston, W.M. (2002). Baburnama. The Modern Library, New York, Thomas, D. (2007). Firuzkuh: The summer capital of the Ghurids. In A. K. Bennison & A. L. Gascoigne (Eds.), Cities in the pre-modern Islamic world: The urban impact of religion, state and society (pp. 115–144). Routledge. Thomas, D. C. (2018). The ebb and flow of the Ghurid Empire. Adapa Monographs: Sydney University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvscxsn0 Thompson, A. (2012). Review of The language of the gods in the world of men: Sanskrit, culture, and power in premodern India by Sheldon Pollock. Bryn Mawr Review of Comparative Literature, 10(1). Trinkaus, K. M. (1985). Settlement of highlands and lowlands in early Islamic Dāmghān. Iran, 23, 129–141. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299756 Truschke, A. (2014). A. Azfar Moin, The millennial sovereign: Sacred kingship and sainthood in Islam. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 46(4), 809–811. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743814001147 Tvedt, T. (2011). Hydrology and empire: The Nile, water imperialism and the partition of Africa. The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 39(2), 173–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2011.568759 Twining, T. (1893). Travels in India a hundred years ago (W. H. G. Twining, Ed.). London: James R. Osgood, Mcllvaine and Co. Uberoi, C. (2012). Little Ice Age in Mughal India: Solar minima linked to droughts? Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 93(44), 437. Uljaeva, S., & Mamatova, Z. (2012). Interpretation of water management of Amir Temur in the modern context. In TIMUR Project. Nitra. Umashankar, R. R. (2015). Metropolitan microcosms: The dynamic spaces of contemporary Sufi shrines in India. South Asian Studies, 31(1), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2015.1008819 UNESCO. (2021). The United Nations world water development report 2021: Valuing water. UNESCO World Water Assessment Programme, UN-Water. Ur, J. (2005). Sennacherib’s northern Assyrian canals: New insights from satellite imagery and aerial photography. Iraq, 67(1), 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021088900001418 van Houts, E. (1995). The Norman conquest through European eyes. The English Historical Review, 110(438), 832– 853. http://www.jstor.org/stable/576795 Vidale, M. (2010). Aspects of palace life at Mohenjo-Daro. South Asian Studies, 26(1), 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666031003737232 Voiland, A. (2013). Alluvial fan in Kazakhstan. NASA Earth Observatory. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/83455/alluvial-fan-in-kazakhstan Wahi, T. (2012). Canals, state and society in the pre-colonial Punjab. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 73, 272–282. Wahi, T. (2013). Shah Nahr: Its history, technology and socio-political implications. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 74, 285–296. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158827 Waris, M. (2016). Padshahnama (1st ed.). Sitamau: B.R. Publishing Corporation. 322 https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvscxsn0 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299756 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299756 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299756 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743814001147 https://doi.org/10.1080/03086534.2011.568759 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2015.1008819 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2015.1008819 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021088900001418 http://www.jstor.org/stable/576795 http://www.jstor.org/stable/576795 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666031003737232 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666031003737232 https://doi.org/10.1080/02666031003737232 https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/83455/alluvial-fan-in-kazakhstan https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/83455/alluvial-fan-in-kazakhstan https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/83455/alluvial-fan-in-kazakhstan http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158827 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44158827 Weisiger, A. (2014). Victory without peace: Conquest, insurgency, and war termination. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 31(4), 357–382. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26271369 Welch, A. (1996). Gardens that Babur did not like: Landscape, water, and architecture for the Sultans of Delhi. In J. L. Wescoat & J. Wolschke-Bulmahn (Eds.), Mughal gardens: Sources, places, representations, and prospects (pp. 59–93). Dumbarton Oaks Research Library, Harvard University. Welch, A., & Crane, H. (1983). The Tughluqs: Master builders of the Delhi Sultanate. Muqarnas, 1, 123–166. https://doi.org/10.2307/1523075 Wescoat Jr., J. L. (1985). Early water systems in Mughal India. Environmental Design, 2, 50–57. Wescoat Jr., J. L. (1991). Landscapes of conquest and transformation: Lessons from the earliest Mughal gardens in India, 1526–1530. Landscape Journal, 10(2), 105–114. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43323034 Wescoat Jr., J. L. (1996). Gardens, urbanisation, and urbanism in Mughal Lahore: 1526–1657. In J. L. Wescoat Jr. & J. Wolschke-Bulmahn (Eds.), Mughal gardens: Sources, places, representations, and prospects (pp. 139–170). Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Wescoat Jr., J. L. (2020). Conservation of Indo-Islamicate water experience. In M. Chalana & A. Krishan (Eds.), Heritage conservation in postcolonial India. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003109426-20 Wescoat Jr., J. L. (2022). Water and work in Mughal gardens and landscapes. Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World, 3(1), 112–137. https://doi.org/10.1163/26666286-12340027 Wescoat Jr., J. L., Brand, M., & Mir, N. (1991). Gardens, roads and legendary tunnels: The underground memory of Mughal Lahore. Journal of Historical Geography, 17(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305- 7488(91)90002-D White, J. (2023). Persian and Arabic literary communities in the seventeenth century: Migrant poets between Arabia, Iran and India. I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755644599 Wilber, D. N. (1979). Persian gardens and garden pavilions (Repr.). Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Wilber, D. N. (1979). The Timurid court: Life in gardens and tents. Iran, 17, 127–133. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299682 Wild, A. (2000). The East India Company: Trade and conquest from 1600. HarperCollins Illustrated. Wilkinson, J. C. (1990). Muslim land and water law. Journal of Islamic Studies, 1, 54–72. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/jis/1.1.54 Wilkinson, T. J., & Rayne, L. (2010). Hydraulic landscapes and imperial power in the Near East. Water History, 2, 115–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-010-0024-1 Williamson, B. (2023). Historical geographies of place naming: Colonial practices and beyond. Geography Compass, 17(5), e12687. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12687 Wink, A. (2024). Al-Hind: The making of the Indo-Islamic world, Volume IV: Age of the Great Mughals, 16th–17th centuries. Part One: Afghans and Mughals in the struggle. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004696808 Winter, F. (2018). Searching for the hidden “One”: Muslim and early European interpretations of the Indian Upaniṣads. Numen, 65(1), 28–61. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685276-12341487 Winter, Y. (2011). Conquest. In Political Concepts: A Critical Lexicon. https://www.politicalconcepts.org/conquest- winter/ 323 http://www.jstor.org/stable/26271369 http://www.jstor.org/stable/26271369 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523075 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523075 https://doi.org/10.2307/1523075 http://www.jstor.org/stable/43323034 http://www.jstor.org/stable/43323034 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003109426-20 https://doi.org/10.1163/26666286-12340027 https://doi.org/10.1163/26666286-12340027 https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-7488(91)90002-D https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-7488(91)90002-D https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755644599 https://doi.org/10.2307/4299682 https://doi.org/10.1093/jis/1.1.54 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-010-0024-1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12685-010-0024-1 https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12687 https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12687 https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004696808 https://doi.org/10.1163/15685276-12341487 https://www.politicalconcepts.org/conquest-winter/ https://www.politicalconcepts.org/conquest-winter/ https://www.politicalconcepts.org/conquest-winter/ Wittfogel, K. A. (1957). Developmental aspects of hydraulic societies. http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v3922/pdfs/wittfogel.pdf Wollenweber, R. (2015). One house like another? – Access to water wells as an indicator of social inequality in the Linear and Stroke-Ornamented Pottery Cultures. In Rich and poor – Competing for resources in prehistoric societies: 8th Archaeological Conference of Central Germany, October 22–24, 2015 in Halle (Saale). Woodson, M. K., Sandor, J. A., Strawhacker, C., & Miles, W. D. (2015). Hohokam canal irrigation and the formation of Irragric Anthrosols in the Middle Gila River Valley, Arizona, USA. Geoarchaeology, 30, 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.21513 Wordsworth, P. (2018). The hydrological networks of the Balkh Oasis after the arrival of Islam: A landscape archaeological perspective. Afghanistan, 1(1), 182–208. https://doi.org/10.3366/afg.2018.0010 Wutich, A., & Beresford, M. (2015). The economic anthropology of water. Economic Anthropology, 6(2), 168–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/sea2.12153 Yurdaydın, H. G. (1976). Beyān-i menāzil-i sefer-i ʻIrākayn-i Sulṭān Süleymān Ḥān / Naṣūḥu’s-Silāḥī (Maṭraḳçī). [Facsimile from a manuscript in the Istanbul University Library, MS no. 5964]. Cambridge University Library. Zaharuddin, A., & Sabri, S. (2005). Islamic water law. In J. Lehr & J. Keeley (Eds.), Water encyclopaedia: Oceanography, meteorology, physics and chemistry; water law; and water history, art & culture (pp. 634–636). Wiley Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/047147844X.wl43 Zargar, C. A. (2014). Water, In J. A. Morrow (Ed.), Islamic Images and Ideas: Essays on sacred symbolism (pp. 112– 123). McFarland & Company Inc. Publishers. https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/10384331 Zheng, X., Xiong, H., Yue, L., & Gong, J. (2016). An improved ANUDEM method combining topographic correction and DEM interpolation. Geocarto International, 31(5), 492–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2015.1059899 Zhong, A., Wu, Y., Nie, K., & Kang, M. (2020). Using local toponyms to reconstruct the historical river networks in Hubei Province, China. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(5), 318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9050318 Zonouzi, F. (2022). Safavid Esfahan: The first Persian garden city. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 79(2), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2022.2032935 Newspaper Articles: Abhiyan, Jal Shakti (2019), Reference Note, No. 19/LN/Ref./November/2019. [Online] Available at: http://164.100.47.193/Refinput/New_Reference_Notes/English/15112019_160206_102120367.pdf [Accessed 31 January 2022] Roychowdhury, A. (2020); ‘Archaeologists find Mughal-era rainwater drain near Delhi Red Fort’, Available at https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-archaeologists-find-mughal-era-rainwater-drain-near-red- fort/story-hutSXzmwADmQlevAyLCegL.html, Accessed on Dec 5 2024. Sharma, V (2019), Huge Raj-era drain found in Old Delhi, Available at https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/huge-raj-era-drain-found-in-old- delhi/articleshow/70668002.cms, Accessed on Dec 5 2024. ‘Historical’ brick-lined sewer found during Chandni Chowk revamp, Available at https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/british-era-sewerage-systemfound-during-chandni-chowk-revamp- work/story-aNm4LfTpLm8KaoA1hsWLVJ.html, Accessed on Dec 5 2024. https://quran.com/21/30?translations=17,18,20,21,22,46,48,95,19,84,85,101, Accessed on August 1 2022 324 http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v3922/pdfs/wittfogel.pdf http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v3922/pdfs/wittfogel.pdf http://www.columbia.edu/itc/anthropology/v3922/pdfs/wittfogel.pdf https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.21513 https://doi.org/10.3366/afg.2018.0010 https://doi.org/10.3366/afg.2018.0010 https://doi.org/10.1002/sea2.12153 https://doi.org/10.1002/047147844X.wl43 https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/10384331 https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2015.1059899 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9050318 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9050318 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9050318 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2022.2032935 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207233.2022.2032935 http://164.100.47.193/Refinput/New_Reference_Notes/English/15112019_160206_102120367.pdf https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-archaeologists-find-mughal-era-rainwater-drain-near-red-fort/story-hutSXzmwADmQlevAyLCegL.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-archaeologists-find-mughal-era-rainwater-drain-near-red-fort/story-hutSXzmwADmQlevAyLCegL.html https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/huge-raj-era-drain-found-in-old-delhi/articleshow/70668002.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/huge-raj-era-drain-found-in-old-delhi/articleshow/70668002.cms https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/british-era-sewerage-systemfound-during-chandni-chowk-revamp-work/story-aNm4LfTpLm8KaoA1hsWLVJ.html https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/british-era-sewerage-systemfound-during-chandni-chowk-revamp-work/story-aNm4LfTpLm8KaoA1hsWLVJ.html https://quran.com/21/30?translations=17,18,20,21,22,46,48,95,19,84,85,101 25 Countries, Housing One-Quarter of the Population, Face Extremely High Water Stress, World Resource Institute (WRI), https://www.wri.org/insights/highest-water-stressed-countries, Accessed on March 31 2025. https://www.wri.org/applications/aqueduct/country-rankings/?indicator=drr b. Archaeological Reports Archaeological Survey of India, Four Reports during the Year 1962-63-64-65, Vol I, Simla, 1871 Archaeological Survey of India, Four Reports during the Year 1962-63-64-65, Vol II, Simla, 1871 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1871-72, Vol. III, Calcutta, 1873 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1871-72, Vol. IV, Calcutta, 1874 Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1872-73, Vol. V, Calcutta, 1875 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Eastern Rajputana, 1871-72 and 1872-73, Vol. VI, Calcutta, 1878 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Bundelkhand and Malwa, 1871-72 and in The Central Provinces, Vol. VII, Calcutta, 1878 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour through the Bengal Provinces, Vol. VIII, Calcutta, 1878 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in The Central Provinces, 1873-74 and 1874-75, Vol. IX, Calcutta, 1879 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in Bundelkhand and Malwa in 1874-75 and 1876-77, Vol. X, Calcutta, 1880 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the Gangetic Provinces from Badaon to Bihar in 1875-76 and 1877-78, Vol. XI, Calcutta, 1880 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the Central Doab and Gorakhpur in 1874-75 and 1875-76, Vol. XII, Calcutta, 1879 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the South-Eastern Provinces in 1874-75 and 1875-76, Vol. XIII, Calcutta, 1882 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Punjab in 1878-79, Vol. XIV, Calcutta, 1882 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Bihar and Bengal in 1879-80, Vol. XV, Calcutta, 1882 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in North and South Bihar in 1880-81, Vol. XVI, Calcutta, 1883 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Central Provinces and Lower Gangetic Doab in 1881-82, Vol. XVII, Calcutta, 1884 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Gorakhpur District in 1875-76 and 1876-77, Vol. XVIII, Calcutta, 1883 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour through Behar, Central India, Peshawar, and Yusufzai, 1881-82, Vol. XIX, Calcutta, 1885 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Eastern Rajputana in 1882-83, Vol. XX, Calcutta, 1885 Archaeological Survey of India, Reports of a Tour in Bundelkhand and Rewa in 1883-84 and of A Tour in Rewa, Bundelkhand, Malwa, and Gwalior in 1884-85, Vol. XXI- Parts I & II, Calcutta, 1885 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Gorakhpur, Saran, and Ghazipur in 1877-78-79 and 80, Vol. XXII, Calcutta, 1885 Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Punjab and Rajputana in 1883-84, Vol. XXIII, Calcutta, 1887 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1904 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1903-04, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1906 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1908 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1905-06, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1909 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1906-07, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1911 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1908-09, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1909-10, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1914 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1910-11, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1914 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1911-12, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1915 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1912-13, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1916 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1913-14, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1917 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1914-15, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1920 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1915-16, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1918 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1916-17, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1918 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1917-18, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1920 325 https://www.wri.org/insights/highest-water-stressed-countries https://www.wri.org/applications/aqueduct/country-rankings/?indicator=drr Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1918-19, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1921 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1919-20, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1922 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1920-21, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1913 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, Simla, Government of India Press, 1924 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1926 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1924-25, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1927 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-26, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1928 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1930 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1927-28, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1931 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1933 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1929-30, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1935 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1930-34, Part I & Part II, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1936 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1934-35, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1937 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1935-36, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1938 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1936-37, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1953-54, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1954 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1954-55, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1955 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1955-56, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1956 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1956-57, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1957 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1957-58, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1958 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1958-59, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1959 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1960 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1960-61, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1961 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1964 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1962-63, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1965 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1963-64, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1967 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-65, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1969 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1973 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1968 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1968-69, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1971 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1969-70, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1973 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1974 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1975 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1978 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1974-75, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1975-76, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1980 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1980 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1978-79, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1981 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1979-80, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1983 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1984 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1982-83, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1985 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1983-84, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1986 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1985-86, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1990 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1986-87, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1992 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1987-88, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1993 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1988-89, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1993 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1989-90, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1994 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1990-91, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1995 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1991-92, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1996 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1992-93, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1997 326 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1993-94, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2000 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1994-95, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2000 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1998-99, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2004 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1999-2000, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2005 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2000-01, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2006 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2001-02, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2008 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2002-03, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2009 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2003-04, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2011 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2004-05, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2014 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2005-06, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2006-07, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2007-08, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2008-09, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2015 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2009-10, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2010-11, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2011-12, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2012-13, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2015 Indian Archaeology: A Review 2013-14, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 1, Jan 1946, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 2, Jul 1946, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 3, Jan 1947, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 4, Jul 1947- Jan 1948, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 5, Jan 1949, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 6, Jan 1950, Job Press Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 7, Jan 1951, Lakshmi Book House, Delhi Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 8, 1952, Job Press Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 9, 1953 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 10 & 11, 1954 & 1955, ASI New Delhi, 1985 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 12, 1956, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 13, 1957, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 14, 1958, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 15, 1959, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 16, 1960, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1962 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 17, 1961, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1961 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 18 & 19, 1962 & 1963, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1963 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 20 & 21, 1964 & 1965, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1967 Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 22, 1966, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1973 Gaur, R.C. (2000), Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, Archaeological Survey of India Ancient Pakistan, Vol. I, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1964 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. II, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1965 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. III, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1967 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. IV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1968 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. V, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1970 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1988 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1991 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1991 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. IX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1994 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. X, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1994 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1995 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1995 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1999 327 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2001 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2002 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2005 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2006 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2007 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2008 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2009 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2010 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2011 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2012 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2013 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2014 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2015 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2016 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2017 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2018 Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2019 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 1, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1964 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 2, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1965 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 3, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1966 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 4, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1967 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1968 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 6, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1969 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 7, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1970-71 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 8, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1972 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 9, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1973 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 10-22, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1974-86 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 23, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1987-88 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 24, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1989 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1990 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 26, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1991 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 27, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1992 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 28, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1993 Pakistan Archaeology, Number 29, Department of Archaeology, Karachi, 1994-1996 Excavations At Kandahar 1974 and 1975: The First Two Seasons At Shahr-I Kohna (Old Kandahar), McNicoll, Anthony, and Warwick Ball. Conducted by the British Institute of Afghan Studies. The Monuments of Afghanistan: History, Archaeology and Architecture, Warwick Ball, I.B. Tauris, London, 2008. The Archaeology of Afghanistan, Ed. by R. Allchin, W. Ball and N. Hammond, Edinburgh University Press, 2019 Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1959-61, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1987 Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1969 Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1975, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1983 Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1951-54, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1987 c. Historical Texts Abd al-qadir Bada’oni’s Muntakhab-ut-Tawarikh. Translated in 03 volumes by (1) GSA Ranking, 1898, (2) WH Lowe, second edition, 1924, (3) TW Haig, 1925. Reprinted Delhi 1973. Abu-Talib’s Kaleem Kashani’s Padhshahnama. Edited by Muhammad Yunus Jaffery. Islami Kitab Ghar, Daryaganj, Delhi. 2016. 328 Abu al-Fazl’s Ain-i Akbari, Translated Works: H.S. Jarrett. 1891. Asiatic Society of Bengal, Baptist Mission Press. Also, Edited by H. Blochmann. 2 vols. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1872-7. Anand Ram Mukhlis’s Mirat-ul Istilah. Anjuman-i-Taraqqi-i-Urdu Library, Aligarh, India. English Translation: Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Medieval India, Mirat-ul Istilah by Tasneem Ahmad. Baburnama. Translated, edited and annotated by Wheeler M. Thackston, The Modern Library, New York. 2002. Bashiruddin Ahmad’s Waqiat-e Dar-ul Hukumat, Dehli (1873). 1918-19. Reprinted by Urdu Academy, Delhi in 1990. Bayaz-i Khushbui. Persian Manuscript Collection. MSS. 2784. India Office Library, British Library. Dargah Quli Khan’s Muraqqa-i-Dehli. Translated by Chander Shekhar & Shama Mitra Chenoy as Muraqqa-i-Dehli (The Mughal Capital of Muhammad Shah’s Time). 1989. Inayat Khan’s Shah Jahan Nama. The Shah Jahan Nama of ‘Inayat Khan: An Abridged History of the Mughal Emperor Shah Jahan, compiled by his Royal Librarian, translated by AR Fuller. Revised and Edited by Wayne E. Begley and ZA Desai. New Delhi, Oxford and New York. 1990. Muhammad Hashim Khafi Khan’s Muntakhab al-Lubab. Persian Text edited by Kabir al-Din Ahmad, Calcutta, 1869-1925. The portions related to Aurangzeb have been translated as History of Alamgir by S. Moinul Haq, Karachi, 1975. Translation by Elliot and Dowson: Second Print Calcutta. 1952. Muhammad Salih Kambo’s Amal-i-Salih, or Shah Jahan Namah: A Complete History of the Emperor Shah Jahan/ed. by G. Yazdani; Urdu Translation by Mumtaz Liaquat, Lahore. Sang e Meel Publications. 2013. Muhammd Waris’s Padhshahnama. Persian Manuscript Collection. Add. 6556, British Museum. Translation to Hindi by Rekha Dwivedi. 2016. Qasim b. Yusuf Abunasri’s Irshad Al-Zira’ah. Translation of Chapter 8 on Chahar-Bagh. Subtelny, Maria Eva Subtelny. “Agriculture and the Timurid Chahargagh: The Evidence from a Medieval Persian Agricultural Manual.” In Gardens in the Time of the Great Muslim Empires: Theory and Design, edited by Attilio Petruccioli, 110-128. Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill. 1997. Qasim b. Yusuf Abunasri’s Risalah-i ṭariq-i qismat-i ab-i Qalb. Intisharat-i Bunyad-i Farhang-i Iran, Teheran. 1969. Rai Chaturman Kayasth’s Chahar Gulshan: Akhbar-un Nawadir. An Eighteenth Century Gazetteer of Mughal India. Edited by Chander Shekhar. Prakashika Series. Dilli Kitab Ghar. 2011. Samsam al-Daula Nawaz Khan’s Ma’athir ul-Umara. Translated by H. Beveridge and Baini Prashad. 2 volumes. Calcutta 1911-41. Reprinted Patna, 1979. Sangin Beg’s Sair al-Manazil. Persian Manuscript Collection, Or. 1762 British Museum. Also, Persian Manuscript Collection, Add. 24053; Translated by Nausheen Jaffery, ed. Swapana Liddle, Tulika Books, New Delhi. 2018. Saqi Musata’ad Khan’s Ma’asir-i-Alamgiri. A History of the Emperor Aurangzib –’Alamgir’. Translated and annotated by Jadunath Sarkar, Calcutta 1947. Reprinted Delhi 1986. Sujan Rai Bhandari’s Khulasat al-Tawarikh. Edited by M. Zafar Hasan (1918). J & Sons Press, Delhi, 167, Contains a valuable geographical introduction, giving an account of all the subas of the Empire, especially their rivers, major cities and revenues; Translation and Annotation by Dr. Shahbaz Amil. 2003. Syed Ahmad Khan’s Asar-us Sanadid. 1847 & 1854. Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. Reprinted by Sir Syed Academy, Aligarh. 2007. 329 Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri. The Memoirs of Jahangir. Translated by Alexander Rogers. Edited by Henry Beveridge. 2 Volumes. London, 1909-14. d. Maps & Photographs 1748 Ali Mardan Khan Canal Map. Andhra Pradesh State Archives, Hyderabad. IN. 1774 Five Plans of Delhi. AL.1762. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. a.Street plan of Delhi showing part of Faiz Bazaar from the Delhi Gates of the City wall to the chauk of Sa’datullah Khan and the (now destroyed) Masjid Akbarabadi. b.Street plan of the Chandni Chauk area showing the Fatehpuri Mosque at the west end, as well as the water channel from the Jumna built by Ali Mardan Khan. c.Plan of the Emperor’s garden, Delhi. d.Plan of Red Fort showing the walls and gates. e.Street Plan of the Chandni Chauk area from Fort. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1777 A Map of the Provinces of Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1780 Oude and Allahabad, with part of Agra & Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1786 Map of the country between Agra and Delhi. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1795 Thomas and William Daniell Watercolors of Delhi: Jama Masjid. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1803 Antiquities of Dehlie (1803-1857). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1806 Route Map of Dehlie to Kandahar. IO Islamic 4380. British Library, UK. 1807 Sketch of the Environs of Delhi. National Archives of India, IN. 1807 Trigonometrical Survey of the Environs of Delhy or Shah Jehanabad. Delhi State Archives, IN 1810 A picturesque voyage to India, by way of China. By T. Daniell and W. Daniell. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1812 Plan of Delhi (1812). Delhi State Archives, IN 1814 Sita Ram’s Paintings of Delhi’s Landscape. Add.Or.4786. British Library, UK. 1820 Fifteen Drawings of Monuments in Delhi, Agra and Fatehpur Sikri. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1820 Nine small architectural drawings of Mughal Monuments (ca. 1820). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1820 Shahjahanabad (1820-30). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1823 Capt. T. Oliver’s Survey Map of Delhi Villages (1823-24). National Archives of India. IN. 1828 Robert Smith’s Paintings/Sketches (1828-33). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1833 Delhi, Jypoor, Mewar, Dooab, Bikinair. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1833 Map illustrative of the European connection with India, and of the British administration in its several departments. (Maps by J. Walker). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1836 Indian Company Paintings (of Delhi): Sixty drawings of Mughal Monuments and Architectural Details. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1840 Map of Shahjahanabad/Delhi. India Office Records X, 1659, Map Section of the Oriental and India Office Collections (ca. 1840). British Library, UK. 1840 Mazhar Ali Khan’s Portfolio of Delhi (Shahjahanabad). Published as Delhi 360 (1840). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1844 Charts and Maps, Delhi Survey (1844-46). IOR/Z/E/4/18/C595. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1844 Maps purchased for office of Collector, Delhi (1844-46). IOR/Z/E/4/18/D168. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1849 Maps and Books furnished to Society at Delhi Archaeology (1849-50). IOR/Z/E/4/20/A395. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1850 Felice Beato Photography Archive (Mid 19th C.). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1850 Map of Delhi and its environs showing the walled town, important buildings, the river and causeway, high ground, canals, roads and other buildings and sites outside the walls (mid 19th c.). The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1850 Francis Frith Photography Archives (1850-70). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1850 Shahjahanabad, Delhi (around 1850). Department of Geography, Bonn University, Germany. 1850 Sixteen Views of Monuments in Delhi, Agra, Amritsar, Lucknow and South India. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1850 Five Views of Delhi. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 330 1854 Charts and Maps, Delhi by Mr. Battie, work commended and lithographed copies ordered (1854-55). IOR/Z/E/4/25/C402. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1854 Maps of Delhi and environs by commended and lithographed copies ordered by MR Battie (1854-55). IOR/Z/E/4/25/B177. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1854 Stanford’s Map of Delhi and its Environs (1854-55). Borthwick Institute for Archives: University of York. 1855 Map of Delhi and of environs by Mr Battle commended and lithographed copies ordered OR/Z/E/4/25/D235 (1854-55). India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1855 Delhi and its Environs. From plan and other materials transmitted from India; at the surveys of the Hon’ble East India Company. Published by E. Stanford. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Shahjahanabad (pre 1857). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1856 William Carpenter’s Watercolours of Delhi. Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1857 Shahjahanabad (pre 1857). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Delhi And Its Environs. IOR/X/14703. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1857 Capt. Lawrence’s military plan of Delhi and its cantonments from the un-published plans of the Hon.E.I. Company. Published by G. Abington. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Delhi. Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Fort and Cantonment of Delhi. Published by James Wued. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Delhi and its Environs, from plan and other original materials transmitted from India; and the Surveys of the Hon. East India Company, showing Cantonments. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1857 Delhi. A Plan of the City and its immediate surroundings, drawn in the Quarter-Master General’s Office in the British Camp on the Ridge. Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Delhi, Published by Lahore Chronicle Press. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Rough sketch map of siege of Delhi. Mss Eur C949. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1857 Map of ground of Siege of Delhi. Reverse: Map of country around Delhi (1902), University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Plan of the Siege works of Delhi, from sketches by GT Chesney. Published by J.Wyld. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 The Fort and Cantonment of Delhi. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Sketch plan showing the portion occupied by the British force before Delhi on 13 Aug 1857. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1857 William Simpson Paining Archive (ca. 1857-58). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1857 Delhi, Published by Lahore Chronicle Press. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Plan of Delhi and its Environs. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1857 Plan of the British Position at Delhi maintained from 8th June to 14th September 1857. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Plan of the British position at Delhi, maintained from 8th June to 14th September, 1857 (1904). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 Plan of the British Position in Delhi. INTACH Delhi Chapter, IN. 1857 Rough sketch map of siege of Delhi. Mss Eur C949. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1857 Siege of Delhi. Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Sketch plan showing the portion occupied by the British force before Delhi on 13 Aug 1857. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1857 Strategical Plan of Delhi. Drawn by HM Smith. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 View of Delhi and surrounding country. Drawn by A. Maclure, from original native drawings. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1857 William Simpson Painting Archive (ca. 1857-58). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1857 Western Jamuna Canal: Showing Irrigation Channels and Drainage Works Completed and Proposed (ca.1857). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Plan of Delhi (1857-58). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1857 Plan of Delhi and its Environs (Cassell’s Complete Atlas consists of 260 folio maps; post 1857) 1858 John Murray’s Photo Album of Delhi. Visual Arts Section, British Library UK. 1858 Robert and Harriet Tytler’s Photo Album of Delhi. Visual Arts Section, British Library UK. 1859 Plan of the City of Delhi. National Archives of India, IN. 1859 Plan of the Siege of Delhi and the surrounding country. Lithograph and printed at the Topographical Depot, War Department. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1860 Eugene Clutterbuck Impey Photography Archive (1860-65). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 331 1860 Photographs of Delhi, Lucknow. Amritsar (1860-1900). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1861 Sketch map showing the canals in the North-Western Provinces. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1862 Samuel Bourne Photography Archive (1862-1869). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK./Visual Arts Section, British Library, UK. 1862 Shepherd & Robertson Photography Archive (1862-63). Victoria & Albert Museum, London, UK. 1862 Samuel Bourne Photography Collection (1862-72). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1863 Plan of Delhi. Delhi State Archives, IN. 1863 Plan of Delhi and its Environs (In: The Dispatch Atlas). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1865 Handbook of Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1867 Cantonment Civil Station. City & Environs of Delhi (1867-68). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1867 Cantonment, Civil Station, City & Environs of Delhi 1867-68. Corrected upto 1873 (Survey of India Office). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1867 Seven Cities of Delhi (Gordon Ridley Hearn). 1870 A sketch of the river basins of India and its borders. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1870 W. Caney’s Photo Album (1870s). Visual Arts Section, British Library UK. 1871 Country around Delhi. Published for the use of the army at the camp of exercise, December 1871, under the direction of Colonel HL Thuillier. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1873 Historical records of the Survey of India collected and compiled by RH Phillimore. Published by order of the Surveyor General of India. 5 volumes. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1873 Important Monuments of Delhi (Shahjahanabad). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1874 An album containing photographs of India. Compiled by CW and H. Gardener. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1875 A memoir of the Indian Surveys (1875-90). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1875 Camp of Exercise 1875-76. Map of the country north of Delhi to illustrate the operations of the 14th and 15th January 1876. Captn. J. Waterhouse. Delhi city-environs. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1877 The history of the Imperial Assemblage at Delhi. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1878 A catalogue of manuscript and printed reports, field works, memoirs, maps, etc. of the India Surveys, deposited in the Map Room of the India Office. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1881 Queen Mary India Collection (1881-1889). University Library, Cambridge, UK 1882 Delhi: Final report on the settlement of land revenue in the Delhi District, Maps. IOR/V/27/314/474. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1883 India, showing the principal river basins. Prepared for the Calcutta International Exhibition. Published by the Survey of India Offices (1884). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1885 An Atlas of Twelve Maps of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK 1885 Delhi and Gurgaon (1885-1886). The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1886 India Vol.1 (1886-1887). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1886 Statistical Atlas of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1887 Canal Map of India. Published at the Survey of India Offices. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1893 Delhi and Environs (Bartholomew Map). 1897 Canal map of India. Published at the Survey of India Offices. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1889 District Delhi. Published at the Survey of India Offices. Calcutta. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1900 Irrigation and navigation map of India, prepared by Sir A. Cotton. Brought up to date from statistics at the India Office. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1902 HH Davies Collection on India (1902-1910). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1902 Map of the area round Delhi, showing military sites and arrangements for Durbar. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1904 Plan of Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1905 District Delhi. Published at the Survey of India Offices. Calcutta. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1905 Tom Salkield Delhi Album (1905-1916). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1910 Cantonment, Civil Station, City & Environs of Delhi. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1910 Railway and Canal Map of India. Published at the Survey of India Offices. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1910 Delhi and Vicinity (1910-11). National Archives of India, IN. 1910 Thacker’s reduced Survey Map of India by J. Bartholomew (Town Plan). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1911 Delhi Durbar. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1911 A brief historical memoir of Delhi and guide to points of interest together with the official programme in detail of the Imperial Coronation Durbar. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 332 1911 Railway, Canal and Road Map of India. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Delhi (and environs). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Delhi and Vicinity. Survey of India Offices. 4 sheets. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Delhi and vicinity. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Delhi and Vicinity. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Survey of India Maps (1inch to 1mile, 1 inch to 2 miles, 1inch to 4 miles; Delhi to Yamuna Nagar). University Library, Cambridge, UK; Also MAHSA Project, Department of Archaeology, Cambridge. 1912 Map of Delhi & Vicinity (1912), Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1912 Map of Delhi and Vicinity (scale 2" - 1 mile) by the Surveyor General of India., Mss Eur E343/79, (1912), India Office Records and Private Papers, British Library, UK. 1913 Copy of a map of the new capital of Delhi, a supplement to the Pioneer Mail , 18 July 1913. IOR/L/PJ/6/1261. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1913 Photography Archive of Shahjahanabad (Delhi Album). Archaeological Survey of India (1913-14). Visual Arts Section, British Library, UK. 1915 Delhi Province. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1918 Delhi Museum. Copy of Trigonometrical Survey map of the environs of Shahjahanabad, Delhi (1918-19), Photographer: Archaeological Survey of India, Photo 1007/16(3906). India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1919 Delhi and vicinity. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1920 Birds Eye View of Delhi (1920-29). University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1920 Plan of Railway Terminus, Delhi. The National Archives, Kew, UK. 1920 Delhi and vicinity. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1922 Delhi and vicinity. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1922 Guide Map of Delhi. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1922 Delhi, Gurgaon, Aligarh & Bulandshahr Districts. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1923 Guide to places of interest in Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1923 Three days at Delhi (the capital of India): a guide to places of interest with history and map / by Lt. Colonel H.A. Newell. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1925 Details regarding the Viceroy’s residence, staff etc. prepared for Lord Irwin; Dress Regulations; invitation cards; map of Imperial Delhi. IOR/L/PO/11/9. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1926 Delhi, Thacker’s reduced Survey Map of India by J. Bartholomew. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1927 Delhi Western Section and Extensions (1927-28), Delhi State Archives, IN. 1927 Tourist Map of Delhi. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1930 Delhi Province. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1930 Panoramic India. Sixty-four panoramic photographs of natural beauty spots, monuments of India’s greatness, beautiful temples, picturesque cities, ancient and modern. By WR Wallace. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1930 Map of New Delhi and of the seven ancient cities of Delhi together with many curious sights there unto appertaining, in the year 1930 exactly observed and diligently depicted by Marjorie Shoosmith. Mss Eur F183/2/2. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1931 Map of New Delhi by Marjorie Shoosmith in an Indian style. Colour reproduction from The Illustrated London News. Artist(s): Shoosmith, Marjorie (fl. 1931), after P2982. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1931 Delhi Province. Survey of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1932 Tourist Map of Delhi,. Mss Eur D956/21. India Office Records and Private Papers. British Library, UK. 1933 Delhi. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1933 Punjab, Punjab States and Delhi. Survey of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1934 United Provinces and Delhi, revised. Survey of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1936 Pocket Guide of Delhi with Map; C.M. Mehra. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1939 Delhi Improvement Trust (1939-40). Delhi State Archives, IN. 333 1939 Delhi Guide Map (1939-42). Delhi State Archives, IN. 1942 Delhi Guide Map. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1945 Delhi Guide Map. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1945 Indian album by C. Beaton. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1948 Survey of India. Technical Papers. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1939 Delhi Guide Map surveyed 1939-42. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India, University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1941 Delhi, Gurgaon and Rohtak Districts. Centre of South Asian Studies, Cambridge, UK. 1946 Delhi and surrounding country. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1955 Delhi Guide Map surveyed 1955-56. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1968 Delhi. Published by the Surveyor General of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1969 Delhi Guide Map surveyed 1969. Published under the direction of Surveyor General of India, University Library, Cambridge, UK. 1972 Irrigation Atlas of India. University Library, Cambridge, UK. 334 List of Appendices I/A Fieldwork Booklet - Survey & Documentation: Shah Nahr (Mughal Canal) from Karnal to Shahjahanabad I/B Fieldwork Booklet - Survey & Documentation: Shahjahanabad (Fort, City & Suburbs) - Qila-Shahristan-Bagha’at II/1A Listing of Water Stressed Districts (2019) & associated Empires (1206-1857) II/1B Governors, Supervisors, Architects & Engineers involved in the construction of Shahjahanabad Details of Havelis (Mansions) of Shahjahanabad and their Builders II/2A Turko-Mongolian Water Infrastructure II/3A Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (1526-1857): Based on Archaeological Excavation Reports (1871-2014) & Fieldwork (2023-24) II/3B Potential Sites of Mughal Waterworks: Based on Mughal Chronicles and Other Sources II/4A Details of the Shah Nahr Map from the Andhra Pradesh State Archives, Hyderabad II/4B Change in Settlement Areas with introduction of the British Canal, parallel to the Mughal Canal [Canal Section: North (Raeepoor to Nouluthuh)] II/4C Details of Mughal Canal Villages (based on 1823-24 Survey by Capt. T. Oliver) II/5A Gardens in Mughal Delhi (Watered Retreats, Tomb Gardens, Paradise Gardens etc.) II/5B Details of Landform Reconstruction of Garden Suburbs II/5C Listing of Mosque within Shahjahanabad, with water features II/5D Shahjahanabad & Garden Suburbs: Fieldsurvey Details (2023-24) II/5E Qila-i Mualla or Delhi Fort, Shahjahanabad: Fieldsurvey Details (2023-24) II/6A Mean Catchment Radius of Public Wells in Shahjahanabad II/6B Listing of Cross-Drains in Shahjahanabad based on Robert’s Report of 1852. III/1A Ali Mardan Khan’s Architectural & Hydrological Works III/4A Ali Mardan Khan Canal Map of 1750 (with English Translation of Place Names & Hydraulic Features) III/4B Details of Shah Nahr: Field Survey Points. III/4C Map of Shah Nahr: Survey Area, with Irrigation Outlets. III/4D Details of Shah Nahr, from Naya Bans to Shahjahanabad, with Irrigation Outlets. III/4E Sectional Profile of the Mughal Canal-Bed III/4F SMTVI & Drainage Map of the Canal Landscape; MSRM & Paleochannel Details III/5A Maps of Delhi, for Landform Reconstruction of Shahjahanabad III/5B Details of Shahjahanabad Landform Reconstruction III/5C Shahjahanabad Field Survey Points: Qila, Shahristan, Bagha’at Sites of Extant Water Features in Shahjahanabad Documentation of Wells, Shahjahanabad Documentation of Tanks/Cisterns, Shahjahanabad III/5D Delhi Fort: Field Survey Points Delhi Fort: Floor Plan of Extant Water Features Delhi Fort: Stormwater Outlets & Storage Tanks Delhi Fort: Cana Network Conjectural Survey & Documentation Shah Nahr (Mughal Canal) Karnal to Shahjahanabad PhD Project: Urban Water History of Shahjahanabad, Delhi (1639-1857): A Study of Water Culture of the Last & Greatest Capital of the Mughal Empire Description: This survey was focussed on the 17th century Mughal Canal (a.k.a. Shah Nahr or Nahr i Bihisht or Ali Mardan Khan Canal or Old Western Yamuna Canal or Delhi Canal) which was constructed under the patronage of Shah Jahan and designed by Ali Mardan Khan. The study concentrates on the segment extending from Karnal to Shahjahanabad (present day Old Delhi) and was carried out between February and April 2023. Survey Technique: Fieldwalking/Non-invasive Site Evaluation Surveyed by: Iqtedar Alam, PhD Student, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, UK *Note: The open-source ODK (Open Data Kit) Form, developed by Team MAHSA at University of Cambridge, UK for documenting and listing of archaeological heritage in South Asia was also used at certain sections of the Mughal Canal. Appendix I/A Code: SN/01/001 Coordinates: 29.674 N, 76.997 E Nearest Settlement: Karnal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/002 Coordinates: 29.672 N, 76.997 E Nearest Settlement: Karnal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/003 Coordinates: 29.657 N, 76.990 E Nearest Settlement: Transport Nagar, Karnal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/004 Coordinates: 29.629 N, 76.978 E Nearest Settlement: Kos Minar, Karnal Milestone Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/005 Coordinates: 29.622 N, 76.982 E Nearest Settlement: Madhuban, Karnal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth (Bed) ¨ Brick (Edge Lining) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/006 Coordinates: 29.621 N, 76.982 E Nearest Settlement: Karnal Mughal Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth (Bed) ¨ Brick (Edge Lining) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/007 Coordinates: 29.603 N, 76.962 E Nearest Settlement: Jhinwerheri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/008 Coordinates: 29.597 N, 76.954 E Nearest Settlement: Jhinwerheri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/009 Coordinates: 29.579 N, 76.935 E Nearest Settlement: Rasin Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/010 Coordinates: 29.576 N, 76.944 E Nearest Settlement: Rasin Pond Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/011 Coordinates: 29.574 N, 76.935 E Nearest Settlement: Rasin Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/012 Coordinates: 29.563 N, 76.918 E Nearest Settlement: Phurlak Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/013 Coordinates: 29.549 N, 76.915 E Nearest Settlement: Raipur Jatan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/014 Coordinates: 29.503 N, 76.873 E Nearest Settlement: Kutana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/015 Coordinates: 29.470 N, 76.861 E Nearest Settlement: Bal Jattan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/016 Coordinates: 29.674 N, 76.997 E Nearest Settlement: Bal Jattan Tax Collection Point Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/017 Coordinates: 29.457 N, 76.878 E Nearest Settlement: Sithana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/01/018 Coordinates: 29.437 N, 76.890 E Nearest Settlement: Sithana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/001 Coordinates: 29.413 N, 76.900 E Nearest Settlement: Nohra Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/002 Coordinates: 29.403 N, 76.900 E Nearest Settlement: Asan Kalan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/003 Coordinates: 29.394 N, 76.900 E Nearest Settlement: Sithana Colonial Era Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth (Canal Bed) ¨ Brick (Bridge) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/004 Coordinates: 29.367N, 76.902 E Nearest Settlement: Jattal/Sutana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/005 Coordinates: 29.360 N, 76.902 E Nearest Settlement: Jattal/Sutana Remains of Mughal-Era Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/006 Coordinates: 29.352 N, 76.904 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/007 Coordinates: 29.346N, 76.903 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/008 Coordinates: 29.340 N, 76.902 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/009 Coordinates: 29.336 N, 76.899 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/010 Coordinates: 29.437 N, 76.890 E Nearest Settlement: Khukhrana Branch/Naultha Remains of Mughal-Era Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth (Canal Bed) ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/011 Coordinates: 29.326 N, 76.905 E Nearest Settlement: Naultha Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/012 Coordinates: 29.328 N, 76.902 E Nearest Settlement: Dahar Remains of Mughal-Era Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/013 Coordinates: 29.310 N, 76.917 E Nearest Settlement: Dahar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/014 Coordinates: 29.308 N, 76.904 E Nearest Settlement: Naultha Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/015 Coordinates: 29.238 N, 76.915 E Nearest Settlement: Gawalra Temple Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/016 Coordinates: 29.185 N, 76.919 E Nearest Settlement: Sardhana Tax Collection Point Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/017 Coordinates: 29.177 N, 76.920 E Nearest Settlement: Sardhana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/018 Coordinates: 29.172 N, 76.916 E Nearest Settlement: Khubru Nursery/Naya Bans Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/02/019 Coordinates: 29.164 N, 76.911 E Nearest Settlement: Khubru Nursery Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/001 Coordinates: 29.153 N, 76.912 E Nearest Settlement: Nadipur Majra/Tewari Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/002 Coordinates: 29.137 N, 76.907 E Nearest Settlement: Nadipur Majra Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/003 Coordinates: 29.135 N, 76.905 E Nearest Settlement: Kailana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/004 Coordinates: 29.127N, 76.907 E Nearest Settlement: Kailana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/005 Coordinates: 29.109 E, 76.906 E Nearest Settlement: Moi/Sitawali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/006 Coordinates: 29.124 N, 76.907 E Nearest Settlement: Muhammadpur Majra Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/007 Coordinates: 29.119 N, 76.905 E Nearest Settlement: Moi/Kailana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/008 Coordinates: 29.098 N, 76.909 E Nearest Settlement: Sitawali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/009 Coordinates: 29.082 N, 76.917 E Nearest Settlement: Juan/Mahara Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/010 Coordinates: 29.075 N, 76.915 E Nearest Settlement: Juan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/011 Coordinates: 29.051 N, 76.899 E Nearest Settlement: Badshahpur Machhri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/012 Coordinates: 29.051 N, 76.899 E Nearest Settlement: Badhshahpur Machhri Village Pond Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/013 Coordinates: 29.039 N, 76.899 E Nearest Settlement: Jaji Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/014 Coordinates: 20.072 N, 76.894 E Nearest Settlement: Lohari Tibba Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/015 Coordinates: 28.898 N, 76.895 E Nearest Settlement: Bhatgaon Village Pond Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/016 Coordinates: 28.992 N, 76.897 E Nearest Settlement: Bhatgaon Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/03/017 Coordinates: 28.979 N, 76.898 E Nearest Settlement: Bhatgaon/Galian Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/001 Coordinates: 28.973 N, 76.908 E Nearest Settlement: Tihara Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/002 Coordinates: 28.972 N, 76.910 E Nearest Settlement: Tihara Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/003 Coordinates: 28.965 N, 76.920 E Nearest Settlement: Kheri Dahiya Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/004 Coordinates: 28.961 N, 76.927 E Nearest Settlement: Kheri Dahiya Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/005 Coordinates: 28.961 N, 76.927 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/006 Coordinates: 28.961 N, 76.928 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/007 Coordinates: 28.960 N, 76.929 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/008 Coordinates: 28.959 N, 76.935 E Nearest Settlement: Bhadana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/009 Coordinates: 28.943 N, 76.948 E Nearest Settlement: Jharoti Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/010 Coordinates: 28.923 N, 76.939 E Nearest Settlement: Jharoti Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/011 Coordinates: 28.917 N, 76.936 E Nearest Settlement: Jharoth Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/012 Coordinates: 28.911 N, 76.941 E Nearest Settlement: Jharoth Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/013 Coordinates: 28.911 N, 76.941 E Nearest Settlement: Kanwali/Jharoth Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/014 Coordinates: 28.909 N, 76.947 E Nearest Settlement: Kanwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/015 Coordinates: 28.906 N, 76.950 E Nearest Settlement: Kanwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/016 Coordinates: 28.904 N, 76.951 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/04/017 Coordinates: 28.901 N, 76.953 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/001 Coordinates: 28.899 N, 76.955 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Shrine Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/002 Coordinates: 28.899 N, 76.955 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Tax Collection Point Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/003 Coordinates: 28.900 N, 76.954 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/004 Coordinates: 28.897 N, 76.956 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/005 Coordinates: 28.897 N, 76.958 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/006 Coordinates: 28.890 N, 76.961 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Kalan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/007 Coordinates: 28.878 N, 76.967 E Nearest Settlement: Tarakpur Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/008 Coordinates: 28.868 N, 76.971 E Nearest Settlement: Mandauri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/009 Coordinates: 28.901 N, 76.953 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Irrigation Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/010 Coordinates: 28.901 N, 76.953 E Nearest Settlement: Thana Khurd Irrigation Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/011 Coordinates: 28.865 N, 76.973 E Nearest Settlement: Mandauri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/012 Coordinates: 28.866 N, 76.973 E Nearest Settlement: Mandauri Irrigation Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/013 Coordinates: 28.862 N, 76.977 E Nearest Settlement: Jatola Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/014 Coordinates: 28.858 N, 76.980 E Nearest Settlement: Jatola Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/015 Coordinates: 28.849 N, 76.984 E Nearest Settlement: Jatola Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/016 Coordinates: 28.848 N, 76.988 E Nearest Settlement: Jhinjhori Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/017 Coordinates: 28.848 N, 76.989 E Nearest Settlement: Jatola Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/05/018 Coordinates: 28.846 N, 76.996 E Nearest Settlement: Jatola Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/001 Coordinates: 28.796 N, 77.045E Nearest Settlement: Bawana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/002 Coordinates: 28.788 N, 77.054 E Nearest Settlement: Bawana Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/003 Coordinates: 28.784 N, 77.066 E Nearest Settlement: Holambi Kalan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/004 Coordinates: 28.761 N, 77.109 E Nearest Settlement: Khera Kalan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/005 Coordinates: 27.775 N, 77.085 E Nearest Settlement: Khera Khurd Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/006 Coordinates: 28.747 N, 77.125 E Nearest Settlement: Samaypur Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/007 Coordinates: 28.721 N, 77.143 E Nearest Settlement: Badli/Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/008 Coordinates: 28.675 N, 77.168 E Nearest Settlement: Intersection of Sahibi River and Shah Nahr Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge (Remains) Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lakhori) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/009 Coordinates: 28.668 N, 77.192 E Nearest Settlement: Azad Nagar Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Lined) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Code: SN/06/010 Coordinates: 28.663 N, 77.210 E Nearest Settlement: Azad Market Road Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Topography: ¨ Gentle Slope ¨ Depression/Hollows ¨ Elevated Terrain ¨ Ditch/Trench Feature Type: ¨ Seasonal Stream ¨ Canal (Bed) ¨ Well ¨ Pond/Lake ¨ Irrigational Channel ¨ Bridge Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Earth ¨ Brick (Bitumen Road) ¨ Stone Landuse: ¨ Agricultural/Crop Land ¨ Forest Land ¨ Urban Area ¨ Rural Area Crop Type (if agricultural): ¨ Wheat ¨ Mustard/Lentils ¨ Potato/Sugarcane ¨ Cabbage/Cauliflower ¨ Peas/Brinjal Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High ¨ Lost Feature State of Preservation: ¨ High ¨ Medium ¨ Low ¨ Absent Photo: Sketch/Drawing: Survey & Documentation Shahjahanabad (Fort, City & Suburbs) Qila-Shahristan-Bagha’at PhD Project: Urban Water History of Shahjahanabad, Delhi (1639-1857): A Study of Water Culture of the Last & Greatest Capital of the Mughal Empire Description: This survey focused on the 17th-century Mughal capital of Shahjahanabad in Delhi, encompassing the Red Fort, the walled city, and the surrounding garden suburbs. Conducted between February 2023 and March 2024, the study involved a comprehensive documentation of all existing water features, both public and private, within the surveyed area, along with remains of the city walls. Survey Technique: Fieldwalking/Non-invasive Site Evaluation/Measured Drawing Surveyed by: Iqtedar Alam, PhD Student, Department of Archaeology, University of Cambridge, UK *Note: The open-source ODK (Open Data Kit) Form, developed by Team MAHSA at University of Cambridge, UK for documenting and listing of archaeological heritage in South Asia was also used in some parts of the field site. Appendix I/B Code: SJB/01/001 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.222E Structure: Fatehpuri Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/002 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.222E Structure: Fatehpuri Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/003 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.222E Structure: Fatehpuri Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/004 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.222E Structure: Fatehpuri Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/005 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.227E Structure: Town Hall Gardens Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/006 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.226 E Structure: Hauzwali Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/007 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.226E Structure: Masjid Peepalwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/008 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.226E Structure: Masjid Peepalwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/009 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.231E Structure: Hauzwali Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/010 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.245E Structure: Zeenatul Masajid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/011 Coordinates: 28.642N, 77.237E Structure: Masjid Chatta Lal Miyan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/012 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.233E Structure: Madarsa & Masjid Husainiya Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/013 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.233E Structure: Madarsa aur Masjid Husainiya Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/014 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Husain Baksh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/015 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Husain Baksh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/016 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.233E Structure: Masjid Do Jaana House Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/017 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.233E Structure: Masjid Do Jaana House Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/018 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.231E Structure: Masjid Hauzwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/019 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.224E Structure: Masjid Imli Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/020 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.222E Structure: Lal Kuan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/021 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.222E Structure: Banjaron ki Baoli Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Stepwell) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/022 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.232E Structure: Chah Rahat (Jama Masjid) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/023 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Chatta Sheikh Manglu Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/024 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.232 E Structure: Masjid Hauz Wali (Gali Chandi Wali) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/025 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Anjuman Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/026 Coordinates: 28.644N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Hauzwali (Mohalla Qabristan) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/027 Coordinates: 28.644N, 77.231E Structure: Mohalla Qabristan Chowk Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/028 Coordinates: 28.645 N, 77.230 E Structure: Kalan Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/029 Coordinates: 28.645 N, 77.232 E Structure: Dargah Shah Turkman Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/030 Coordinates: 28.648 N, 77.234 E Structure: Gali Kuen Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/031 Coordinates: 28.646 N, 77.233 E Structure: Pahadi Imli Water Tank Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/032 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.232E Structure: Dargah & Masjid Shah Ali Qadri Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/033 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.234E Structure: Banjaron ki Baoli Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Stepwell) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/034 Coordinates: 28.645N, 77.240E Structure: Masjid Roshan-ud Daula Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/035 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.240E Structure: Masjid Sabir Baksh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/036 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.234E Structure: Dargah Sarmad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/037 Coordinates: 28.652 N, 77.229 E Structure: Residence (Roshanpura) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/038 Coordinates: 28.656 N, 77.222 E Structure: Residence (Demolished, Roshanpura) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/039 Coordinates: 28.652 N, 77.230 E Structure: Temple Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/040 Coordinates: 28.653 N, 77.230 E Structure: Residence (Stormwater Outlet) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/041 Coordinates: 28.653 N, 77.230 E Structure: Community Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/042 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.230E Structure: Shri Digambar Jain Panchayati Mandir Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/043 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.231E Structure: Shri Digamabar Jain Naya Mandi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/044 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.233E Structure: Community Well (Covered, Pahadi Imli) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/045 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.233E Structure: Masjid Syed Rafai Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/046 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.235E Structure: Masjid Kuen Wali, Gali Azam Khan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/047 Coordinates: 28.643 N, 77.238 E Structure: Masjid Dai Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/048 Coordinates: 28.648 N, 77.234 E Structure: Madarsa Anarwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/049 Coordinates: 28.648 N, 77.234 E Structure: Masjid Kaptaan Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/050 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.233E Structure: Masjid Kikar Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/051 Coordinates: 28.645N, 77.236E Structure: Public Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/052 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.238E Structure: Masjid Shah Jahani Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/053 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.234E Structure: Masjid Chah Hathi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/054 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.231E Structure: Masjid Chatta Shah Ji Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/055 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.226E Structure: Masjid Hauz Qazi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/056 Coordinates: 28.652 N, 77.223E Structure: Masjid Adina Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/057 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.222E Structure: Lal Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/058 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.220E Structure: Masjid Hauz Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/059 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Hammam Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/060 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.228E Structure: Masjid Nawab Ruk-ud Daula Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/061 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.228E Structure: Piyau (Drinking Fountain) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/062 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.226E Structure: Masjid Yek Burj Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/063 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.225E Structure: Sabeel (Drinking Fountain) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/064 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.225E Structure: Masjid Gali Qasim Jaan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/065 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.219E Structure: Masjid Chah Shirin (Sweet Water Well) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Place Name) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/066 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.222E Structure: Masjid Maidan Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/067 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.222E Structure: Jangi Kuan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Place Name) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/068 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.223E Structure: Changa Kuan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Place Name) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/069 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.233E Structure: Gali Khazanchi (Well) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/070 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.233E Structure: Residence Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/071 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.234E Structure: Haveli Khazanchi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/072 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.234E Structure: Haveli Khazanchi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/073 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.232E Structure: Gurudwara Shishganj Sahib Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/074 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.227E Structure: Residence (Jogiwara) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/075 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.227E Structure: Jogiwara Temple Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/076 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.227E Structure: Jogiwara Residence Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/077 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.228E Structure: Residence Rainwater Channel Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/078 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.228E Structure: Residence Rainwater Channel Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/079 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.224E Structure: Haveli Haidar Quli Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/080 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.224E Structure: Residence Rainwater Channels Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/081 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.226 E Structure: Hauzwali Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/082 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.235E Structure: Masjid Anarwali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/083 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.235E Structure: Masjid (Unknown) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/084 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.232E Structure: Masjid Maulana Ahmad Saeed Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/085 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.240E Structure: Masjid (Unknown) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/086 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.239E Structure: Masjid Sabzi Mandi Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/087 Coordinates: 28.641N, 77.238E Structure: Badi Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/088 Coordinates: 28.642N, 77.235E Structure: Choti Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/089 Coordinates: 28.644N, 77.231E Structure: Public Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/090 Coordinates: 28.644N, 77.231E Structure: Masjid Quwwatul Islam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/091 Coordinates: 28.651 N, 77.224 E Structure: Masjid Rang Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/092 Coordinates: 28.653 N, 77.222 E Structure: Masjid Hanfiya Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/093 Coordinates: 28.656 N, 77.222 E Structure: Masjid Kuen Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Place Name) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/094 Coordinates: 28.660N, 77.221E Structure: Masjid Hafeezullah Khan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal (Location) ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/095 Coordinates: 28.663N, 77.230E Structure: Madarsa Aminia Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/096 Coordinates: 28.663N, 77.221E Structure: Masjid Mahbub Baksh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Epigraphy) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/097 Coordinates: 28.663N, 77.224E Structure: Masjid Budhia Wali Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/098 Coordinates: 28.644N, 77.232E Structure: Public Well (Place Name)_Begum ka Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/099 Coordinates: 28.650N, 77.233E Structure: Jama Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/100 Coordinates: 28.650N, 77.233E Structure: Jama Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/101 Coordinates: 28.651N, 77.233E Structure: Jama Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/102 Coordinates: 28.650N, 77.233E Structure: Jama Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/103 Coordinates: 28.650N, 77.239E Structure: Sunehri Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Epigraphy) ¨ Tank (Epigraphy) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/104 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.237E Structure: Dargah Bhure Shah Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/105 Coordinates: 28.670N, 77.230E Structure: Shahi Masjid, Qudsia Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/106 Coordinates: 28.670N, 77.230E Structure: Well, Shahi Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/107 Coordinates: 28.670N, 77.230E Structure: Well, Qudsia Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/108 Coordinates: 28.671N, 77.230E Structure: Well, Qudsia Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/109 Coordinates: 28.673N, 77.201E Structure: Roshan Ara Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/110 Coordinates: 28.673N, 77.200E Structure: Roshan Ara Tomb Garden Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/111 Coordinates: 28.673N, 77.200E Structure: Garden Well: Roshan Ara Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/112 Coordinates: 28.673N, 77.198E Structure: Roshan Ara Bagh: Tank Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick (Earth-Bed) ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/113 Coordinates: 28.716N, 77.146E Structure: Shah Nahr: Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick (Earth-Bed) ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/114 Coordinates: 28.720N, 77.154E Structure: Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/115 Coordinates: 28.720N, 77.154E Structure: Garden Well, Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/116 Coordinates: 28.719N, 77.153E Structure: Garden Well, Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/117 Coordinates: 28.721N, 77.154E Structure: Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/118 Coordinates: 28.663N, 77.223E Structure: Dara Shukoh Haveli Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/119 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.226E Structure: Residence (Haveli) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/120 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.220E Structure: Masjid Gali Rajan Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Location) ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/121 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.222E Structure: Anglo-Arabic School (College Bastion) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/122 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.234E Structure: Esplanade Road (Animal Drinking Tanks) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/123 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.205E Structure: Opp. Badi Masjid (Animal Drinking Tanks) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/124 Coordinates: 28.648N, 77.238E Structure: Eidgah Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/125 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.207E Structure: Eidgah (Animal Drinking Tanks) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/126 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.207E Structure: Eidgah Community Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/127 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.226E Structure: Temple, Katra Neel Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/128 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.225E Structure: Haveli, Katra Neel Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/129 Coordinates: 28.650N, 77.231E Structure: Residence, Kucha Mir Ashiq Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/130 Coordinates: 28.647N, 77.245E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/131 Coordinates: 28.665N, 77.233E Structure: Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/132 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.228E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/133 Coordinates: 28.667N, 77.228E Structure: Gate, City Wall. Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/134 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.226E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/135 Coordinates: 28.664N, 77.222E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/136 Coordinates: 28.646N, 77.224E Structure: Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/137 Coordinates: 28.642N, 77.232E Structure: Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/138 Coordinates: 28.641N, 77.240E Structure: Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/139 Coordinates: 28.641N, 77.241E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/140 Coordinates: 28.640N, 77.244E Structure: City Wall & Moat, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/141 Coordinates: 28.640N, 77.245E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/142 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.233E Structure: City Wall, Shahjahanabad Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/01/143 Coordinates: 28.649N, 77.227E Structure: Piyau (Drinking Fountain) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/001 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.239E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/002 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/003 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/004 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/005 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/006 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Water Gate (Khizr Gate) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/007 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Fort Wall Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/008 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mumtaz Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/009 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Fort Wall Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/010 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Khidki (Wicket Gate) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/011 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/012 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Musamman Burj Gate Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/013 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Musamman Burj (Khas Mahal) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/014 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/015 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hira Mahal_Storage Tank Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Storage ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/016 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Fort Wall Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/017 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Location of Draw Bridge_Lahori Gate Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/018 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/019 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Recharge Wells) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/020 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Location of Draw Bridge_Delhi Gate Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/021 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/022 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/023 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Recharge Well) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/024 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/025 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/026 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.239E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Stormwater Outlet Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/027 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Baoli Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Stepwell) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/028 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Baoli (Lifting Technique) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Stepwell) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone & Wood ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/029 Coordinates: 28.660N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Salimgarh Fort_Bridge Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/030 Coordinates: 28.660N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla & Salimgarh Fort Wall_Yamuna Bed Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/031 Coordinates: 28.661N, 77.240E Structure: Salimgarh Fort_Bastion Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Storage ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/032 Coordinates: 28.661N, 77.241E Structure: Salimgarh Fort_Fort Wall Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/033 Coordinates: 28.662N, 77.242E Structure: Salimgarh Fort_Mosque Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/034 Coordinates: 28.662N, 77.243E Structure: Salimgarh Fort_Well Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/035 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Burj_Canal at Imperial Quarters Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/036 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Fort Wall facing Yamuna (with view of the Canal) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/037 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Nahr-i-Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/038 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Upper Platform_Ventilators Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/039 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Burj Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/040 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Burj Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/041 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Nahr-i-Bihisht (view towards Shahi Hammam) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/042 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Nahr-i-Bihisht (view towards Shah Burj) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/043 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Nahr (view towards Zafar Mahal) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/044 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hira Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/045 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shahi Hammam (Royal Bath) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/046 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam (Rotal Bath)_Nahr-i-Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/047 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Storage ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/048 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/049 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/050 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/051 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam_Furnace (Boiler) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/052 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/053 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Moti Masjid Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank (Ablution) ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/054 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Nahr-i-Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/055 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Diwan-i-Khas to Khas Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/056 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Diwan-i-Khas Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/057 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Khas Mahal_Nahr-i-Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/058 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Khas Mahal_Nahr-i-Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/059 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/060 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal_Nahr-i- Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/061 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal_Nahr-i- Bihisht Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/062 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal (towards Fort Garden) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal/Sur ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/063 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal (towards Fort Garden) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Storage ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/064 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)__Mumtaz Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/065 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Baoli at Asad Burj Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well (Stepwell) ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Triangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/066 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Chota Hammam (Small Bath) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/067 Coordinates: 28.652N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/068 Coordinates: 28.653N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/069 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Nahr Inlet in Fort Wall Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/070 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Storage Tanks (03) at Hira Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/071 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Naubat Khana (Stormwater Outlets) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/072 Coordinates: 28.654N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mumtaz Mahal (Stormwater Outlets) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/073 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Rang Mahal Gardens Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/074 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hammam & Moti Masjid (Stormwater Outlets) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/075 Coordinates: 28.66N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Saawan-Bhadon Pavilion Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/076 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Saawan-Bhadon Pavilion Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/077 Coordinates: 28.658N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Saawan-Bhadon Pavilion Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/078 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.239E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Chatta Bazaar (Stormwater Outlets) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/079 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.240E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Shah Nahr Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/080 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.238E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Fort Wall_Upper Platform (Stormwater Outlets) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/081 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.240E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mahtab Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/082 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.240E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mahtab Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/083 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mahtab Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Wel ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/084 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.241E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Mahtab Bagh Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/085 Coordinates: 28.656N, 77.240E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/086 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Zafar Mahal Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/087 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.242E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla)_Hayat Baksh Gardens Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/088 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/089 Coordinates: 28.657N, 77.243E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Code: SJB/F/090 Coordinates: 28.655N, 77.429E Structure: Delhi Fort (Qila-i Mualla) Documentation Technique: ¨ Measured Drawing ¨ Sketching ¨ Photography Period: ¨ Sultanate ¨ Mughal ¨ Colonial Feature Type: ¨ Well ¨ Tank ¨ Canal Moat ¨ Stormwater Channels ¨ Fountains/Cascades Use: ¨ Residential ¨ Fort ¨ Religious ¨ Community ¨ Recreational Feature State: ¨ Dry ¨ Water (Less) ¨ Water (Abundant) Material: ¨ Brick Earth ¨ Stone ¨ Marble Feature Shape Type: ¨ Circular ¨ Square/Rectangular ¨ Octagonal ¨ Linear Epigraphic Remains on site (if any): ¨ Yes ¨ No Condition/Damage Assessment: ¨ Low ¨ Medium ¨ High State of Preservation: ¨ High-Medium ¨ Medium-Low ¨ Absent Photo: Appendix II/1A Listing of Water Stressed Districts (2019) & associated Empires (1206- 1857) Persian Empires in Deccan (Deccan Sultanates) S. No. (as per Jal Shakti Abhiyan's List of Water Stressed Districts, 2019) Name of the Water Stressed District (2019) State (Present Day) Climatic Zone Precipitation Low (0- 70cm), Medium (70-200cm), High (200- 800cm) M ug ha l E m pi re D el hi S ul ta na te (T ug hl aq ) Ba hm an i S ul ta na te Ah m ad na ga r S ul ta na te Be ra r S ul ta na te Bi da r S ul ta na te Bi ja pu r S ul ta na te K ha nd es h Su lta na te G ol co nd a Su lta na te 1 Dindigul Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 2 Nashik Maharashtra Tropical Wet & Dry Low 3 Ahmadnagar Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low 4 Bellary Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 5 Lakshadweep Lakshadweep Tropical Wet High 6 Etah Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 7 Hassan Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 8 Dholpur Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 9 Nawada Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 10 Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Punjab Semi- Arid Low 11 Jodhpur Rajasthan Arid Low 12 Thoothukudi Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Low 13 Jaunpur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 14 Warangal Telangana Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 15 Suryapet Telangana Semi- Arid Low 16 Wanaparthy Telangana Semi- Arid Low 17 Gurugram Haryana Semi- Arid Low 18 Kurukshetra Haryana Humid Sub- Tropical Low 19 Gaya Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium Appendix II/1A 20 Namakkal Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 21 Thanjavur Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 22 Rajsamand Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 23 Buldhana Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low 24 Gurdaspur Punjab Humid Sub- Tropical Low 25 Bijnor Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 26 Saiha Mizoram Humid Sub- Tropical High 27 Mahesana Gujarat Semi- Arid Low 28 South Sikkim Sikkim Humid Sub- Tropical High 29 Chamrajnagara Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 30 Saharanpur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 31 Rampur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 32 Rae Bareilly Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 33 Banas Kantha Gujarat Arid Low 34 Patan Gujarat Semi- Arid Low 35 Madurai Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 36 Haveri Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 37 Fatehpur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 38 Rupnagar Punjab Humid Sub- Tropical Low 39 Churu Rajasthan Arid Low 40 Budaun Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 41 Rajanna Siricilla Telangana Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 42 West Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 43 Central Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 44 Ajmer Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 45 Faridabad Haryana Semi- Arid Low 46 Hissar Haryana Semi- Arid Low 47 Gadag Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Low 48 Koppal Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 49 YSR Kadapa Andhra Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 50 Baran Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 51 Beguserai Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 52 South Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 53 Yamuna Nagar Haryana Humid Sub- Tropical Low 54 Kargil Jammu & Kashmir Mountain Low 55 Saran Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 56 Sangrur Punjab Semi- Arid Low 57 Jaipur Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 58 Nagaur Rajasthan Arid Low 59 Jhalawar Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 60 Ujjain Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 61 Pudukottai Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 62 Krishnagiri Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 63 Moga Punjab Semi- Arid Low 64 Mansa Punjab Semi- Arid Low 65 Tonk Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 66 Aligarh Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 67 Kachchh Gujarat Arid Low Appendix II/1A 68 Rangareddy Telangana Semi- Arid Low 69 Hyderabad Telangana Semi- Arid Low 70 Kurnool Andhra Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 71 Nalanda Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 72 Shajapur Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 73 Neemuch Madhya Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 74 Bathinda Punjab Semi- Arid Low 75 Sikar Rajasthan Arid Low 76 Kota Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 77 Pratapgarh Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 78 Siddipet Telangana Semi- Arid Low 79 Bidar Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Low 80 Kasargod Kerala Tropical Wet High 81 Kendrapara Odisha Tropical Wet & Dry High 82 Jehanabad Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 83 Bokaro Jharkhand Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 84 Sambhal Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 85 Adilabad Telangana Semi- Arid Low 86 Chittoor Andhra Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Low 87 Jyotiba Phoole Nagar Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 88 Tiruvallur Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 89 Ambala Haryana Humid Sub- Tropical Low Appendix II/1A 90 Meerut Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 91 Bhojpur Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 92 Dadra & Nagar Haveli Dadra & Nagar Haveli Tropical Wet High 93 Bharatpur Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 94 Coimbatore Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Medium 95 Tiruppur Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 96 Una Himachal Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 97 Chikballapur Karnataka Semi- Arid Medium 98 South Goa Goa Tropical Wet High 99 Ratlam Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 100 Sawai Madhopur Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 101 Tiruchirappalli Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Medium 102 Sirsa Haryana Semi- Arid Low 103 Chikmagalur Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 104 Chitradurga Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 105 Puducherry Puducherry Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 106 Tumkur Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 107 Theni Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 108 Kolar Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 109 Dewas Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 110 West Godavari Andhra Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 111 Nagarkurnool Telangana Semi- Arid Low 112 Panipat Haryana Semi- Arid Low 113 Sonipat Haryana Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 114 Guntur Andhra Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 115 North-East Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 116 Hoshiarpur Punjab Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 117 Bundi Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 118 Varanasi Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 119 Medak Telangana Semi- Arid Low 120 Karnal Haryana Semi- Arid Low 121 Bangalore Urban Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 122 Balod Chattisgarh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 123 Fazilka Punjab Arid Low 124 Pratapgarh Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 125 Jaisalmer Rajasthan Arid Low 126 Gopalganj Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 127 South-West Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 128 Jhunjhunun Rajasthan Arid Low 129 Kamareddy Telangana Semi- Arid Low 130 Fatehabad Haryana Semi- Arid Low 131 Sangli Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low 132 Firozpur Punjab Semi- Arid Low 133 Patiala Punjab Semi- Arid Low 134 Delhi Shahdara Delhi Semi- Arid Low 135 East Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 136 Kapurthala Punjab Semi- Arid Low 137 Jalore Rajasthan Arid Low 138 Mainpuri Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium Appendix II/1A 139 Sant Ravidas Nagar Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 140 New Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 141 Dhanbad Jharkhand Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 142 Mewat Haryana Semi- Arid Low 143 Muzaffarpur Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 144 SAS Nagar Punjab Humid Sub- Tropical Low 145 Chittaurgarh Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 146 Salem Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 147 Shamli Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 148 Longleng Nagaland Humid Sub- Tropical High 149 Karauli Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 150 Bhupalapalli Telangana Semi- Arid Low 151 Kanpur Nagar Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 152 Charkhi Dadri Haryana Semi- Arid Low 153 Sirmour Himachal Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 154 Solapur Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low 155 Gandhinagar Gujarat Semi- Arid Low 156 Nainital Uttarakhand Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 157 Karimnagar Telangana Semi- Arid Low 158 Rewari Haryana Semi- Arid Low 159 Belgaum Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Low 160 Palakkad Kerala Tropical Wet High 161 Beed Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 162 Anantapur Andhra Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 163 Dhar Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 164 Dausa Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 165 Tiruvannamalai Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 166 Katihar Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 167 Erode Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 168 Vellore Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 169 Hapur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 170 Patna Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 171 Udaipur Rajasthan Arid Low 172 Perambalur Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 173 Khowai Tripura Humid Sub- Tropical High 174 Agra Uttar Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 175 Bhadradari Telangana Semi- Arid Low 176 Chandigarh Chandigarh Humid Sub- Tropical Low 177 Kangra Himachal Pradesh Mountain Medium 178 Solan Himachal Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 179 Ludhiana Punjab Semi- Arid Low 180 Bhilwara Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 181 Firozabad Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 182 Jagitial Telangana Semi- Arid Low 183 Sangareddy Telangana Semi- Arid Low 184 Kaithal Haryana Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 185 Jalandhar Punjab Semi- Arid Low 186 Bangalore Rural Karnataka Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 187 Pune Maharashtra Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 188 Amravati Maharashtra Semi- Arid Low 189 Tirunelveli Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Low 190 Karur Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Low 191 Tiruvarur Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 192 Krishna Andhra Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 193 Diu Daman & Diu Semi- Arid Low 194 Bagalkote Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 195 Chandel Manipur Humid Sub- Tropical High 196 Kannauj Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 197 Mahoba Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 198 Virudhunagar Tamil Nadu Semi- Arid Medium 199 Barmer Rajasthan Arid Low 200 Nagapattinam Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 201 Gautam Buddha Nagar Uttar Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 202 Prakasham Andhra Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 203 Barnala Punjab Semi- Arid Low 204 Chennai Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 205 Mahendragarh Haryana Semi- Arid Low 206 Mahabubabad Telangana Semi- Arid Low 207 Warangal Urban Telangana Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 208 South-East Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 209 Chitrakoot Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 210 Mandsaur Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 211 Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 212 Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 213 Indore Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 214 Amritsar Punjab Humid Sub- Tropical Low 215 Hooghly West Bengal Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 216 Davangere Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 217 North-West Delhi Delhi Semi- Arid Low 218 Mahamaya Nagar Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 219 Faridkot Punjab Semi- Arid Low 220 Alwar Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 221 Baghpat Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 222 Allahabad Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 223 Sirohi Rajasthan Semi- Arid Low 224 Mahaboobnagar Telangana Semi- Arid Low 225 Pali Rajasthan Arid Low 226 Cuddalore Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 227 Villupuram Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 228 Tarn Taran Punjab Semi- Arid Low 229 Palwal Haryana Semi- Arid Low Appendix II/1A 230 Raipur Chattisgarh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 231 Mathura Uttar Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 232 Nizamabad Telangana Semi- Arid Low 233 North Cachar Hils Assam Humid Sub- Tropical High 234 Muzaffarnagar Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 235 Kasganj Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 236 Ramanagaram Karnataka Semi- Arid Low 237 South Andaman Andaman & Nicobar Islands Tropical Wet High 238 Moradabad Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 239 Mirzapur Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 240 Nalgonda Telangana Semi- Arid Low 241 Srikakulam Andhra Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 242 Vaishali Bihar Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 243 Barwani Madhya Pradesh Semi- Arid Low 244 Fatehgarh Sahib Punjab Humid Sub- Tropical Low 245 Jind Haryana Semi- Arid Low 246 Upper Subansiri Arunachal Pradesh Mountain High 247 Agar Madhya Pradesh Tropical Wet & Dry Medium 248 Bikaner Rajasthan Arid Low 249 Bulandshahr Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 250 Medchal Malkajgiri Telangana Semi- Arid Low 251 Dharmapuri Tamil Nadu Tropical Wet & Dry Medium Appendix II/1A 252 East Garo Hills Meghalaya Humid Sub- Tropical High 253 Bhiwani Haryana Semi- Arid Low 254 Kaushambhi Uttar Pradesh Humid Sub- Tropical Medium 255 Yadadri Bhongiri Telangana Semi- Arid Low Semi-Arid Climate & Low Rainfall - 117 205 198 37 6 2 1 4 3 23 80% 77% 30% M ug ha l E m pi re D el hi S ul ta na te (T ug hl aq ) Ba hm an i S ul ta na te Ah m ad na ga r S ul ta na te Be ra r S ul ta na te Bi da r S ul ta na te Bi ja pu r S ul ta na te K ha nd es h Su lta na te G ol co nd a Su lta na te References: a. Map of Delhi Sultanate & Map of Mughal Empire, Islamic Civilisation in South Asia: A History of Muslim Power and Presence in the Indian Subcontinent, Burjor Avari, 2013, Routledge Publication, Oxon b. Map of Deccan in 15th Century, by Gabriel Moss & Map of Deccan before 1565, by Gabriel Moss in The Courts of the Deccan Sultanates, Living Well in the Persian Cosmopolis, by Emma J Flatt, Cambridge University Press, 2019 c. Climate Map: Fig 2. Major climate zones in India based on Köppen-Geiger climate classification. "Mountain" zone includes multiple climate regions in northern India. Map image is based on Beck, H. E. et al., Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution. Sci. Data. 5:180214 doi: 10.1038/sdata.2018.214 (2018) in DimitrovaA, Bora JK (2020)Monsoonweatherand early childhoodhealthin India.PLoSONE 15(4):e0231479 d. Precipitation Map: Groundwater systems of the Indian Sub-Continent, Abhijit Mukherjeea, Dipankar Sahab, Charles F.Harveyc, Richard G.Taylord, Kazi Matin Ahmede, Soumendra N.Bhanjaa, Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, Volume 4, Part A, September 2015, Pages 1-14 Appendix II/1B Governors, Supervisors, Architects & Engineers involved in the construction of Shahjahanabad S. No. Name of the Noble Native Place, and other Associated Places Empire 1 Ghairat Khan (Governor & Supervisor)1 Hisar in Transoxiana (present day Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan & Kazakstan)2 Khanate 2 Ilahwardi Khan (Governor & Supervisor)3 Seljuk Family (direct descendant of Great Seljuk Sultan Sanjar Seljuki), Khorasan (Iran)/Merv (Turkmenistan)4 Seljuk/Safavid/Khanate 3 Makramat Khan (Governor & Supervisor)5 Shiraz6 Safavid 4 Ali Mardan Khan (Governor of Kashmir, Punjab, and Kabul & Canal Supervisor, his mansion and garden) Kurdistan (Iran)/Kerman/Yazd/Kandahar/Kabul/Lahore7 Safavid/Mughal 5 Yusuf Aqa (Ali Mardan Khan’s Canal Team)8 Mughal 6 Aqil Khan (deputy Bakhshi)9 Khawaf (Khaf, Iran)10 Safavid 7 Ustad Hamid (architect)11 Persia12 Safavid 8 Ustad Ahmad (architect)13 Isfahan14 Safavid References: a. Beveridge, H. (1979), The Maathir-ul-Umara, Biographies of the Muhammadan and Hindu Officers of the Timurid Sovereigns of India from 1500 A.D. to about 1780 A.D., Nawwab Samsam-ud-Daula Shah Nawaz Khan & Abdul Havy, Vol I & Vol. II, Translated by H. Beveridge, Revised, Annotated and Completed by Baini Prashad, Janaki Prakashan, Patna, 1979 b. Warsi, Muhammad (2016), Padhshahnama, Translated in Hindi by Akhtar Husain Nizami, Ed. by Dr. Rekha Dwivedi, Sri Natnagar Shodh Sansthan, Mandsaur (M.P.) c. Ziauddin, Muhammad (2005), Role of Persians at the Mughal Court: A Historical Study, during 1526 A.D. to 1707 A.D., PhD Thesis, University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan d. Muhammad Afzal Khan (1983), Ali Mardan Khan: A Great Iranian Noble of Shahjahan, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Vol. 44 (1983), pp. 198-210 1 Waris 2016:49 2 Beveridge 1979:576 & 97 3 Waris 2016:50 4 Beveridge 1979:668 5 Inayat Khan 1990:408, Waris 2016:51 6 Beveridge 1979:264 7 Mohammad Afzal Khan 1983, Beveridge 1979:186 8 Inayat Khan 1990:404 9 Inayat Khan 1990:404 10 Beveridge 1979:264 11 Waris 2016:49 12 Muhammad Ziauddin 2005 13 Waris 2016:49 14 Muhammad Ziauddin 2005 Appendix II/1B Havelis (Mansions) of Shahjahanabad and their Builders S. No. Name of the Haveli (after the Builder) Native Place of the Builder, and other Associated Places Empire 1 Haveli Safdar Jang Kara Koyunlo/Nishapur1 Safavid 2 Haveli Dara Shikoh (s/o Shahjahan) Mughal 3 Haveli Ali Mardan Khan Kurdistan/Kerman/Yazd/Kanda har/Kabul/Lahore/Kashmir2 Safavid/Mughal 4 Haveli Lutfullah Khan Sadiq Panipat3 Mughal 5 Haveli Abdul Majid Khan, Majd al- Daulah Kashmir4 Mughal 6 Haveli Shaista Khan Persia5/Yazd6 Safavid 7 Haveli Raushan al-Daulah Bukhara7 Khanate 8 Haveli Ghasi Ram Native to India Mughal 9 Haveli Habsh Khan Abyssinia8 Ethiopian/Ottoman 10 Haveli Sa’adat Khan Persia9/Herat, Balkh, Badakshan, Termez, Ghazni10 Safavid/Khanate 11 Haveli Ismail Khan Hyderabad11 Mughal 12 Haveli Haider Quli Khan Isfarain12 Safavid 13 Haveli Sher Afghan Khan Persia13 (Istalju tribe/Safavid)14/Panipat15 Safavid/Mughal 14 Haveli Sipahdar Khan Persia16/Safavi17 Safavid 15 Haveli Adinah Beg Khan Lahore18 Mughal 16 Haveli Qamar al-Din Khan Golconda19 Mughal 17 Haveli Muzaffar Khan Persia20/Tihanpur (Patiala)21/Wasit (Iraq), Ghazanavids22 Safavid/Mughal/ Ghazanavid 18 Haveli Mir Khan Chagta Yazd23/Governor of Kabul24 Safavid/Mughal 19 Haveli Mir Hashim 20 Haveli Azam Khan Persia25 Safavid 21 Haveli Bakhtawar Khan 22 Haveli Ahmad Ali Khan 23 Haveli Khan Dauran Rustaq, Badakhshan26 Khanate 1 Beveridge 1979:137 & 425(I) 2 Mohammad Afzal Khan 1983, Beveridge 1979:186(I) 3 Chenoy 2015: 78; Beveridge 1979, p. 840(I) 4 Beveridge 1979:407(II) 5 Ziauddin, M. 2005 6 Beveridge 1979: 611(II) 7 Chenoy 2015:73 8 Beveridge 1979:594(I) 9 Ziauddin, M. 2005 10 Beveridge 1979: 650(II) 11 Beveridge 1979:702(I) 12 Beveridge 1979:600(I) 13 Chenoy 2015: 79 14 Beveridge 1979: 837(II) 15 Irvine 1922: 258(II) 16 Chenoy 2015:79 17 Beveridge 1979: 873(II) 18 Beveridge 1979: 676(I) 19 Chenoy 2015: 77 20 Ziauddin, M. 2005 21 Beveridge 1979: 791(I), Beveridge 1979:355(II) 22 Umar 1994:432 23 Beveridge 1979:246(I) 24 Chenoy 2015:81 25 Ziauddin, M. 2005 26 Beveridge 1979: 775(I) Appendix II/1B 24 Haveli Sarbuland Khan Tun (Ferdows)27 Safavid 25 Haveli Ustad Hamid Persia28 Safavid 26 Haveli Shahji Balkh29 Khanate 27 Haveli Sa’adullah Khan/Ghazi al-Din Khan Lahore30 Mughal 28 Haveli Ustad Ahmad Isfahan31 Safavid 29 Haveli Ustad Hira 30 Haveli Rai Rayan Raghunath Das Native to India Mughal 31 Haveli Abdul Rahman Balkh32 Khanate 32 Haveli Khalilullah Khan Persia33/Yazd34 Safavid 33 Haveli Mir Jumla Persia35/Turani (Iran)36 Safavid 34 Haveli Iradatmand Khan, Sharaf al- Daulah Sava (Iraq)37 Ottoman 35 Haveli Tahawwur Khan 36 Haveli Kallu Khwas 37 Haveli Jafar Khan Bangash Farrukhabad/Northwest Frontier Region38 Mughal 38 Haveli Qasim Khan Bukhara39 Khanate 39 Haveli Mir Afzal 40 Haveli Sahiba Mahal (Jahanara, d/o Shahjahan) Mughal 41 Haveli Tansukh Rai Kagazi Native to India Mughal 42 Haveli Nawwab Shir Jung 43 Haveli Nawwab Shadil Khan Afghan40 Khanate/Mughal 44 Haveli Raja Jugal Kishore Native to India Mughal 45 Haveli Raja Gobind Rai Native to India Mughal 46 Haveli Malik Sabira 47 Haveli Hakim Sharif Khan 48 Haveli Alambadar Khan 49 Haveli Husamuddin Qazvin41 Safavid 50 Kothi Dilsukhrai 51 Haveli Mitiya Mahal/Azizabadi Begum References: 1. Beveridge, H. (1979), The Maathir-ul-Umara, Biographies of the Muhammadan and Hindu Officers of the Timurid Sovereigns of India from 1500 A.D. to about 1780 A.D., Nawwab Samsam-ud-Daula Shah Nawaz Khan & Abdul Havy, Vol I & Vol. II, Translated by H. Beveridge, Revised, Annotated and Completed by Baini Prashad, Janaki Prakashan, Patna. 2. Blake, Stephen P. (1991), Shahjahanabad: The Sovereign City in Mughal India, 1639-1739, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 3. Chenoy, Shama Mitra (2015), Shahjahanabad: A City of Delhi, 1638-1857, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. 27 Beveridge 1979: 704 (II) 28 Ziauddin, M. 2005 29 Chenoy 2015:84 30 Beveridge 1979:637(II) 31 Ziauddin, M. 2005 32 Chenoy 2015: 48 33 Ziauddin, M. 2005 34 Beveridge 1979:767&294(I) 35 Ziauddin, M. 2005 36 Beveridge 1979:74(II) 37 Beveridge 1979:683&315(I) 38 Chenoy 2015:84&83 39 Chenoy 2015:84 40 Chenoy 2015:85 41 Beveridge 1979:651&280(I) Appendix II/1B 4. Muhammad Afzal Khan (1983), Ali Mardan Khan: A Great Iranian Noble of Shahjahan, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Vol. 44 (1983), pp. 198-210 5. Umar, Muhammad (1994), The Barha Saiyids and Associated Clans (Summary), Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, Vol. 55 (1994), pp. 432-435 6. Ziauddin, Muhammad (2005), Role of Persians at the Mughal Court: A Historical Study, during 1526 A.D. to 1707 A.D., PhD Thesis, University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan Empire/Ruler Shahr Rūd Nahr/Band Qanat/Karez Hauz/Asi-ab City/Region River Canal/Dam Subterranean Channels Reservoir/Cistern/Water Mills (WM) TIMURIDS Timur Arran, Qarabgah Aras Rud8 Nahr-i Barlas8 -do- Kabul Ghurband Rud8 Juy-i-Mahigir8 stream-fed9 (WM) -do- Kabul Nahr-i-Badam8 stream-fed9 (WM) -do- Maruchaq & Panjdih Murghab Rud8 Nahr8 Kariz30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud8 Nahr-i Hasan Jandar8 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud8 Nahr-i-Aqbuqa8 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Delgosay30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Gang Ravan30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Darband30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Omar Tabban30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Qotloqtamur30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Seyh Bu-Said30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i- Seyh Ali30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Doulatsah Gandar30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Gol-e-Bagan30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Qotlog Hatun30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Sangdak30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Amir-e-Alaoddin30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr (Unnamed)30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Nouruz30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Mangoli Hvage30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Gang Hane30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Kabkgi30 -do- Herat Province Murghab Rud30 Nahr-i-Ali Malek30 -do- Shahr-i Sabz Nahr-i Shar-i Sabz27 -do- Samarqand Province Zaravshan Rud28 Nahr-i Dargom28 -do- Samarqand Province Zaravshan Rud28 Ab-i Rahmat Nahr28 -do- Samarqand Province Zaravshan Rud28 Ab-i Siyah Nahr28 -do- Moghan Aras Rud Nahr(Unnamed)29 Shahrukh Merv Province Murghab Rud1 Merv Feeder Canal8 Appendix II/2A: Turko-Mongolian Water Infrastructure -do- Merv Province Murghab Rud8 Band-i Murghab8 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Adine Masjid30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Argandab30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Hvage-ye30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Sahsarak30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Qizil Rebat30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Dastgerd30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Bahsur30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Band-e-Hendovan30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Hanhvage30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Kamberar30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Qodar30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Nur30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Qus Kand30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Ali Abad30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Mobarak Hvage30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Sah-e-guy30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Kankaran30 -do- Merv Province Merv Rud30 Nahr-i-Qovat30 -do- Nahr-i- Ali-Malik8 -do- Udvan-Tizan Nahr-i Fathabad8 -do- Pashtan Pashtan River8 Juy-i Sultani8 -do- Gazurgah Hauz-i Zamzam6 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Maladom31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Udvan31 Shahrukh & Abu-Said Mashhad Kashaf Rud1 Band-i Gulistan8 24 Qanats22 Abu Said Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Sultani31 Mir Ali Shir (Poet) Turaq, Mashhad Band-i Turaq6 -do- Herat Citadel Hauz-i Pahlavan6 -do- Herat Citadel Hauz-i Chahar Suq6 -do- Khorasan Region 19 Ponds, 16 Brick Bridges33 Sultan-Husain/Ali Shir Ziyaratgah, Masjid Jami Hauz6 Sultan-Husain Herat Hari Rud1 Feeder Canals6 Kariz25 -do- Bagh-i Nazargah, Herat Kariz25 Hauz6 -do- Merv Murghab Rud8 Subterranean Channels8 -do- Saraksh Murghab Rud8 Feeder Canals8 -do- Balkh, Khorasan Hazdah Nahr8 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Bosuran31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Kamizan31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Kartabar31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Natar-e Malek31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Nou-e Ziyaratgah31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Ciri31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Noubadan31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Sefid-e Ravan o Taryak31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Sadi Bare31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Juy-i Talab31 -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Natar-e Kusk-e Eshaq -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Natar-e Malatak -do- Herat Hari Rud31 Hauz-i Asgar Ab Baysunghur6 Akhlamad, Khorasan Akhlamad River Band-i Akhlamad6 30km S of Taybad Band-i Kirat6 Taybad Hauz6 Langar Hauz6 Ulugh Beg20 Samarqand Zaravshan Rud Nahr20 SAFAVIDS Shah Tahmasp I Isfahan Zayandah Rud7 Nahr4 13 stream-fed14 -do- Rudashtayn Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Bara'an Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Linjan Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Alinjan Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Marbin Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Jay Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Barzirud Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Kararij Zayandah Rud5 Nahr5 -do- Faridan Zayandah Rud4 Nahr4 Shah Abbas I Isfahan Zayandah Rud7,13 Nahr7,13 Qanat13,22 -do- Isfahan Zayandah Rud34 105 Irrigation Ditches34 Basins & Waterfalls7 (WM) -do- Isfahan Zayandah Rud7 Nahr-i Fadan13 -do- Isfahan Zayandah Rud7 Nahr-i Farshadi13 -do- Isfahan Zayandah Rud7 Nahr-i Niyasarm13 -do- Tehran Karaj Rud1 Qanat11,21,22 1 qanat-fed11, 3WM14 -do- Miyankal Water Basins7 -do- Lanjan Large Pond & Water Bridge7 Isfahan Zayandah Rud7 Juy-i Shah13 Yazd 21 Qanats10,21 1 qanat-fed10 (WM), 6 WM14, Cistern17 Shah Esmail Khoy, Urumi Hauz7 Ganj Ali Khan (Governor) Kirman Qanat15,16,21 4 WM14 Tabriz Sardorud34 Irrigation Channels34 Aqueducts34 Tabriz Mehranrud34 Irrigation Channels34 Aqueducts34 Maraqeh Safi Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Ardabil Andarbab Rud (a.k.a Abardabil Rud)34 Irrigation Channels34 Azerbaijan, Aran Aras Rud and Kor Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Merv Marqab Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Herat Hari Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Sistan State Hilmand Rud34 Ta’am or Kharobar ditch34 Sistan State Hilmand Rud34 Bashtrud ditch34 Sistan State Hilmand Rud34 Sanarud ditch34 Sistan State Hilmand Rud34 Sho’beh ditch34 Sistan State Hilmand Rud34 Mileh Ditch34 Ray Jajrud34 40 irrigation ditches34 Savajbolaq Region Kuhrud (Gohar Rud)34 Multiple Irrigation ditches34 Qazvin Qanats34 Aqueducts34 Saveh Mazdaqan Rud or Rud Saveh34 Streams, Irrigation Channels34 Aqueducts34 Saveh Mazdaqan Rud or Rud Saveh34 Dam34 Jarbadeqan, Qom Qom Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Khuzestan State Karun Rud34 Irrigation Channels34, Nahr Al-Sus34 Fars Kor Rud34, Sakan Rud34 Irrigation Channels34 Kerman Halilrud34, Divrud34 Irrigation Channels34 KHANATE Shaybani Khan Ferghana Nahr18 -do- Samarqand Zeravshan Rud, Aq Darya, Karadarya33 Water-Separator Bridge33 Abdullah Khan Bukhara Nahr18 Hauz18 ,Covered Reservoir18 Abdullah Khan II Samarqand Zarafshan, Syrdarya, Amudarya33 Irrigation Channels33 -do- Herat & Merv Chirchik, Vakhsh, Murgab33 Irrigation Channels33 -do- Kesh Region Kashkadarya Rud33 10 Canals33 -do- Nurota Okchob33 Band, at Beklarsoy gorge33 -do- Band, at Akchob gorge33 -do- Nurotaga Josh Okchob33 (Abdulla Khanbandi) River Embankment33 Imam Quli Khan Bukhara Nahr18 Khwarazm, Khiva Amu Darya26 Nahr18,26, Irrigation Ditches18 Umar Beg Turkestan Kara Darya18 Nahr-i Khan Say18 Muhammad Ali Tashkent Nahr-i Khan Harik18 Zeravshan Valley 85 Nahr19, Band19 Ferghana Valley Naryn and Kara Darya19 Nahr19 Urgench, Khiva Nahr19 Amu Darya, Syr Darya19 Band19, Dykes19 Bukhara Kara Darya19 Nahr19 Herat Hauz-i Mahiyan31 Hazrasp, Khanqah, Shahabad Amu Darya26 Nahr26 Bukhara Hauz-i Devonbegi32 Bukhara Hauz-i Rashid32 Bukhara Hauz-i Hoja Zainiddin32 Bukhara Hauz-i Labi32 Bukhara Hauz-i Bolo32 Khiva Khanate Shahabad Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Khiva Khanate Yarmanu Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Khiva Khanate Gazovot Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Khiva Khanate Polvonyob Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Khiva Khanate Qilich Niyozboy Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Khiva Khanate Dovdin Rud32 Irrigation Channels32 Kokand Khanate Andijonsoy32 Nahr-i Andijonsoy32 Kokand Khanate Aravansoy (Spring) Bukhara Khanate Syrdarya Rud33 Canals33, Irrigation Channels33 Undated Birjand, Khusf Khusf Rud1 Nahr23 Farah Farah Rud1 Sistan Rud-i Hilmand1 Qandahar Arghandab1 Rud-i Bampur1 Jiruft Halil Rud1 50 stream-fed3 (WM) Ban Tah Rud1 Isfahan Zayandah Rud1 Qanat3 68 Vitruvian Mills3, 20 stream-fed3 (WM) Rayy, Varamin Jaj Rud1 Khwar Hablah Rud1 Damghan Damghan Rud2 Qanat22 Nishapur Nishapur Rud1 Qanat21 40 stream-fed3 (WM) Kashan Rud-i Kashan3 Qanat22 33 stream-fed3 (WM) Qumm Qumm Rud1 Nahr23 Qanat23 1 stream-fed3 (WM) Fars Qarah Aghaz Rud 10 stream-fed3 (WM), 22 WM14 Siraf 10 drop-towers3 (WM) Qasr-i Dasht 2 drop-towers3(WM) Estaban, Fars Qarah Aghaz Rud 2 drop-towers3 (WM), 11 stream-fed3 (WM), 12 aqueducts3 Shushtar Ab-i Diz1 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Taft 1 drop-tower, qanat-fed3 (WM) Salameh, Khorasan 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Doshmanziari Mamasani 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Murghab 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Abianeh 2 stream-fed3 (WM) Hunejan Zarcheshmeh1 8 stream-fed3 (WM) Hamadan Darreh Moradbegh1 Qanat21,24 20 stream-fed3 (WM) Shiraz Sar-i Cheshmeh3, Chenar Rahdar 60 stream-fed3 (WM) Ardestan Qanat3 17 qanat-fed3 (WM) Zavareh Qanat3 1 qanat-fed3 (WM) Ardekan Qanat3 2 qanat-fed3 (WM) Sarvestan Qanat3 1 qanat-fed3 (WM) Firuzi Qanat3 1 qanat-fed3 (WM) Boshruyeh, Khorasan Nahr23 Qanat3 7 qanat-fed3 (WM), aqueduct3 Band-i Amir, Shiraz 28 stream-fed3 (WM) Dehagon 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Dizful 30 stream-fed3,12 (WM) Hajiabad 2 stream-fed3 (WM) Natanz 3 stream-fed3 (WM) Tee Zang 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Yazdikhast 1 qanat-fed3(WM), 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Zavareh 1 qanat-fed3, 1 drop-tower3 (WM) Qazvin Qanat21,22 2 WM14 Garmsar Qanat22 Semnam Qanat22 Shahrud Nahr23 Qanat22 Kashmar Nahr23 Bam Nahr23 16Philip Beckett & Anthony Smith (1953), Qanats around Kirman , Journal of The Royal Central Asian Society, 40:1, 47-58, DOI: 10.1080/03068375308731461 17https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/people-visit-the-safavid-era-bagh-gandom-ab-anbar-in-irans-news-photo/1544157578, Accessed on September 04 2023 18Mukminova, R.G., Mukhtarov, A. (2003), The Khanate (emirate) of Bukhara in History of civilizations of Central Asia, v. 5: Development in contrast, from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century, p. 33-62 19Conti, Patrick James (2004), Ties that bind: the traditional irrigation systems of Uzbekistan social capital and implications for current successful management, Graduate Thesis, The University of 20Mukminova, R.G.(2003), The Timurid States in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries in History of civilizations of Central Asia, v. 5: Development in contrast, from the sixteenth to the mid-nineteenth century, p. 350-366 21Lambton, A.K.S. (1989), The origin, diffusion and functioning of the qanat in Qanat, Kariz, and Khattara, Ed. Peter Beaumont, Michael Bonine and Keith Mclachlan, Middle East and North African Studies Press Limited, Cambridgeshire. 1Spooner, B. (1974). City and River in Iran: Urbanization and Irrigation of the Iranian Plateau . Iranian Studies, 7(3/4), 681–713. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4310182 2Trinkaus, K. M. (1985). Settlement of Highlands and Lowlands in Early Islamic Dāmghān . Iran, 23, 129–141. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299756 3Harverson, M. (1993). Watermills in Iran . Iran, 31, 149–177. https://doi.org/10.2307/4299897 4Ann K. S. Lambton. (1938). The Regulation of the Waters of the Zāyande Rūd. Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies, University of London, 9(3), 663–673. http://www.jstor.org/stable/608228 5Ann K.S. Lambton (1953). Landlord and Peasant in Persia: A Study of Land Tenure and Land Revenue Administration , Oxford University Press, London. 6O’Kane, Bernard (1982), Timurid Architecture in Khurasan , Doctoral Thesis, University of Edinburgh, https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/6981?show=full 7Alemi, Mahvash (2017), A Catalogue of Known Gardens in Safavid Iran . Middle East Garden Traditions. Dumbarton Oaks, May 8, 2017. https://www.doaks.org/resources/middle-east-garden- traditions/introduction/safavid. Archived at: https://perma.cc/8Z85-92VK 8Subtelny, Maria (2007), Timurids in Transition: Turko-Persian Politics and Acculturation in Medieval Iran , Brill's Inner Asian Library, Volume: 19 24Eckart, Ehlers with Abbas Saidi (1989), Qanats and pumped wells- the case of Assad'abad, Hamadan in Qanat, Kariz, and Khattara, Ed. Peter Beaumont, Michael Bonine and Keith Mclachlan, Middle East and North African Studies Press Limited, Cambridgeshire. 25McLachlan, Keith (1989), The kariz in the Herat Basin, Afghanistan in Qanat, Kariz, and Khattara, Ed. Peter Beaumont, Michael Bonine and Keith Mclachlan, Middle East and North African Studies Press 26Wood, W. (2019, May 23). Khorezm and the Khanate of Khiva. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Asian History. Retrieved 4 Sep. 2023, from https://oxfordre.com/asianhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-284. 27Sobti, Manu (1995). Timurid Central Asia and Mughal India: Some Correlations Regarding Urban Design Concepts and theTypology of the Muslim House, Graduate Thesis, MIT 22Beaumont, Peter(1989), The qanat: a means of water provision from groundwater sources in Qanat, Kariz, and Khattara, Ed. Peter Beaumont, Michael Bonine and Keith Mclachlan, Middle East and North African Studies Press Limited, Cambridgeshire. 23Bonine, Michael E.(1989), Qanats, field systems, and morphology: Rectangularity on the Iranian Plateau in Qanat, Kariz, and Khattara, Ed. Peter Beaumont, Michael Bonine and Keith Mclachlan, Middle East and North African Studies Press Limited, Cambridgeshire. 12Angelakis, Andreas N., Mohammad Valipour, Jörg Dietrich, Konstantinos Voudouris, Rohitashw Kumar, Miquel Salgot, Seyed Ali Mahmoudian, Anatoli Rontogianni, and Theocharis Tsoutsos (2022). "Sustainable and Regenerative Development of Water Mills as an Example of Agricultural Technologies for Small Farms" Water 14, no. 10: 1621. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14101621 13 Mahmoudian, Safa and Bidhendi, Mehrdad Qayyoomi (2017), The Norm of Mādī: Managing Water in Safavid Isfahan , in Beiträge zur Islamischen Kunst und Archäologie, Band 5, University of Vienna 14 Saatsaz, Masoud and Rezaie, Aboulfazl (2021), Water Resources Management, Technology, and Culture in Ancient Iran , in Hydrological and Earth System and Sciences, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2021-173 15https://www.eavartravel.com/blog/2023/5/8/130631/qanat/, Accessed on September 04, 2023 9Dale, S. F. (1998). The Legacy of the Timurids . Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 8(1), 43–58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25183465 10http://goingiran.com/ashkezar-water-mill-yazd-iran/, Accessed on September 4 2023 11https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/478114/Safavid-watermill-restored-for-tourism, Accessed on September 4 2023 33Rasulov, Elbe (2023), Land-Water Relations in the Khanate of Bukhara during the Shaybani Dynasty, in EPRA International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IJMR), Volume: 9, Issue: 8 34Ghasemi, S.S.M. , Orouji, Fateme, Khanmiri, Lili Nazari (2019), Water System during Safavid Era, in Specialty Journal of Humanities and Cultural Science, 2019, Vol, 4 (4): 37-44 28Sitora Sadikova and Malika Amindjanova (2022), GIS contribution to the collection and processing of the data for an architectural and graphic reconstruction of the Timurids’ gardens in Samarkand region , E3S Web of Conferences 386, 06005 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338606005 29Tapper, R. (1997). Moghan and Ardabil in Safavid times . In Frontier Nomads of Iran: A Political and Social History of the Shahsevan (Cambridge Middle East Studies, pp. 72-92). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511582257.008 30Krawulsky, von Dorothea (1982), Ḫorāsān zur Timuridenzeit nach dem Tārīḫ-e Ḥāfeẓ-e Abrū (verf. 817-823h.) des Nūrallāh ʻAbdallāh b. Luṭfallāh al-Ḫvāfī genannt Ḥāfeẓ-e Abrū , Wiesbaden : L. Reichert, 1982- 1984, https://wellcomecollection.org/works/eew22gr3 31Allen, Terry (1983), Timurid Herat , Wiesbaden 32Abdulladjanovna, Mulladjanova Rano (2022), Some Reflections on the Importance of Water in the Uzbek Khanate Statehood System , in American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences, Vol.5, Appendix II/3A: Sites of Mughal Waterworks in South Asia (1526-1857) Based on Archaeological Excavation Reports (1871-2014) & Fieldwork (2023-24) Reign 1526-1530: Babur 1530-1540 & 1555-1556: Humayun 1556-1605: Akbar 1605-1627: Jahangir 1628-1658: Shahjahan 1658-1707: Aurangzeb 1707-1857: Late Mughal Period S. No. Mughal Emperor Location Structure/ Complex Water Features Source 1 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Khushbu Khana & the Chapel Small Water Tank 1, for Hammam Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 11, Trench Xxx 51, Qdt. 3); Fieldwork 2023 2 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Khushbu Khana & the Chapel Small Water Tank 2, for Hammam Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 11, Trench Xxx 51, Qdt. 2); Fieldwork 2023 3 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings Water Chute (0.55m x 0.41m), Drain (1.40m x 0.20m), Water Runway (0.32m) with 06 water breakers. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 12, Trench yy-3, Qdt. 3); Fieldwork 2023 4 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings Drain on either side of the Gate (0.20m x0.20m) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 13, Trench yy-2, Qdt. 2); Fieldwork 2023 5 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Fountain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 14); Fieldwork 2023 6 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Small Fountain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 14, Trench CC-27); Fieldwork 2023 7 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Square-shaped reservoir, adjacent to courtyard wall (2.10m x 2.10m, depth 2.01m). Another reservoir (10.09m x11.06m, with four segments of 1.60m each) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 14, Plates b/w p. 46- 47); Fieldwork 2023 8 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Octagonal fountain (diameter 0.73m), Tank (1.09m x1.09m, depth 1.065m) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 14, Trench Z-28, 29); Fieldwork 2023 ; 9 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Long drains, connecting the tank to other drains, tanks and fountains. (22m x 15cm) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 14, Trench Z-28, 29); Fieldwork 2023 10 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Latrine, with shallow drain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 14 to p.15, Pl. XII) 11 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Latrine, with drains and passage to soak-pit Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1985-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 14 to p.15, Pl. XIV) 12 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Abdur Rahim Khan-I Khanan’s Palace Complex Stormwater drains Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 15); Fieldwork 2023 13 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri SE Corner of Diwan-i-Am Hakim’s bath Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 16, Trench Xrr-49, Qdt. 1); Fieldwork 2023 14 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Underground Hammam Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 17) 15 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Hammam, with heating device Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 17) 16 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Water tank, adjacent to southern wall. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 17) 17 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Garden causeways with a central fountain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 17) 18 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Water tank with steps, in halls Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates after p. 18, Pl. XXI, Pl. XXII) 19 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Hammams (with terracotta pipes), Reservoirs, Tanks, Fountains, Underground cell with water chutes, as part of a huge complex Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 18-19) 20 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Samosa Mahal surroundings (Akbar’s Haram- sara) Latrine drain connected to the night soil area for manual collection from soak-pit. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.19) 21 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Shabistan-i-Iqbal (Jodh Bai’s place) Channel, Tank (2m x 2m) and Fountain. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.20); Fieldwork 2023 22 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Rang Mahal Water Tank (7.70m x 2.10m) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.22); Fieldwork 2023 23 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Rang Mahal Underground cell with water channels, punctuated by shallow water chutes, connects residential unit to the surrounding gradens. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.22); Fieldwork 2023 24 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Rang Mahal Garden with an octagonal tank. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.22); Fieldwork 2023 25 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Toilet drain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 30-31, Pl. XXX1) 26 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Drain-pit Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 30-31, Pl. XXXIV, Pl. XXXV, Pl. XXXVI, Pl. XXXVIII, Pl. XXXIX, Pl. XL, Pl. XLII) 27 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Network of irrigation drains Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 30-31, Pl. XL IV); Fieldwork 2023 28 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Jharokha Darshan Garden, with walkway and drains. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1981-82, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 33) 29 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Hammam, at cardinal corners of the complex. Masonry brick-cisterns (3.5m x 2.5m) with terracotta pipes. Heating chambers below the floor level. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 36); Fieldwork 2023 30 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Gardens and water tanks within courtayds. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 37) 31 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Refuse water-pit Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 38) 32 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Drain connected to soakage pit Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 38, Mound FPS-VI) 33 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Stone-Fountain Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 38, Mound FPS-VI) 34 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Haram-sara Deep drain to flush out bathroom water Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 38-39, Pl. XLVI) 35 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Complex Raised-tank adjacent to Soakpit Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1977-78, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 39) 36 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri SE Corner of Diwan-i-Am Hammam Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1985-86, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 45, Trench XRR 49, Qdr. 3); Fieldwork 2023 37 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri b/w Karkhana and Chaharsuq Drain, connecting kitchen to verandah Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1985-86, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p. 46, FPS-II) 38 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Nobleman’s House Complex Latrine with drain outlets Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1978-80, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 46-47, Pl. LXV, Pl. LXVI) 39 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Servant Houses Drains Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1982-83, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, Plates b/w p. 46-47, Pl. XXXI, Pl. XXXII ) 40 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri In front of Treasury Hammam, with elaborate drainage system Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1985-86, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.47) 41 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Residential Area of Artisans and Palace Servants Wells, and long irrigation drain to adjacent agricultural fields. Earthen Pots to hold water Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1982-83, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.49) 42 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Adjoining Cheetah Khana Hauz-i- Shirin, Reservoir, large plastered tank for rainwater harvesting. Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1988, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.57-58) 43 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Stables, Cheetah Khana 11 water tanks Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1988, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.57) 44 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Camel Stables Series of water tanks (1.65m x 0.7m) Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1988, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.57) 45 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Grand House Complex Hammam, in SW corner Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1988, ASI by R.C. Gaur (2000, p.57) 46 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Anoop Talao Water Tank (96 ft x 96 ft.) Archaeology of Fatehpur Sikri: New Discoveries, D.V. Sharma (2008, p.96-100) Indian Archaeology: A Review, 1999-2000, p. 259; Fieldwork 2023 47 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Mitha Talao Large Water Tank Archaeology of Fatehpur Sikri: New Discoveries, D.V. Sharma (2008, p.110) 48 Babar and Shahjahan ( Agra Mahtab Khan ka Bagh (Garden) On the bank of river Yamuna, Hauz or water tank. A series of 09 wells with equal number of tanks. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 183); Fieldwork 2023 Excavations led to discovery of terracotta pipes joining waterworks. Further an octagonal tank of burnt bricks was also discovered. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1979-80, p. 74); Fieldwork 2023 49 Babar(?)/Humayu n (?) Agra Char or Chahar Bagh (Garden), b/w Taj Mahal and Agra Fort 09 old wells, one baori (stepwell), Embankment wall as it lies next to the river Yamuna. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 102); Fieldwork 2023 Silt cleared from a well in the garden complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1930-34, p. 2) 50 Babar(?)/Humayu n (?) Agra Achanak Bagh (Garden) Oblong-shaped Cistern, into which water was raised from the river for bathing/irrigation. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 104); Fieldwork 2023 51 Babar(?) Agra Zahara Bagh/Mahal (Garden); b/w Ram Bagh and Chini ka Roza Square-sunken area as ornamental tank, with an outlet for water towards the river. Octagonal- shaped tank/pond on NE corner of walled garden. Presence of a well. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 106). Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2000-2001, p. 207; Fieldwork 2023 52 Babar (?)/Jahangir (?)/ Shahjahan(?) Agra Zehra Bagh/Dehra Bagh; b/w Sultanpur and Khawaspura Large square tank (94 feet 6 inches sides), with a pavilion in the centre called Sakhin Mahal. Originally 60 wells connected to the garden, 09 remains. One well on the western side has a raised masonry with 16 sides of length 13’7” and thickness 9’6”. Four more wells on the west, with two ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-111); Fieldwork 2023 western corner wells. Two wells on the east. 53 Akbar (?)/Jahangir (?) Agra Ladli Bagh (Garden) Largest well in Agra. A Baori (stepwell) of three successive storey. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 123-124) 54 Jahangir/Shahjaha n Agra Hammam; b/w the palace of Jahangir and Shahjahan Bathing tanks, with a 09- series of 03 water holes each. Water holes lined with copper. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-131); Fieldwork 2023 55 Shahjahan Agra Fort Moat ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-132); Fieldwork 2023 56 Jahangir Agra Fort Hauz or great stone bathing tub; circular cistern made from one single stone. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-135); Fieldwork 2023 57 Jahangir Agra Itmad ud Daula’s Tomb Square tanks on east and west side of the tomb. Presence of a char-bagh garden. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-141). Indian Archaeology: A Review, 1998-99, p. 259.; Fieldwork 2023 Restoration of fountains in the tanks. Old water- channels were dug out and prepared for restoration. Old earthenware pipes were found choked with silt. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 15); Fieldwork 2023 Old causeways around the edge of the garden. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 6); Fieldwork 2023 58 Shahjahan Agra Fort Shish Hammam, royal baths. ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-143); Fieldwork 2023 59 Shahjahan Agra Moti Masjid, Fort Complex Central water/reservoir (37’7” sqyare) ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, p. 107-149); Fieldwork 2023 60 Shahjahan Agra Chini ka Roza Water tank ASI Report for the Year 1871- 72, Vol IV (1874, Plate XVI); Fieldwork 2023 Well supplies water to the small garden. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1929-30, p. 5- 6); Fieldwork 2023 61 Shahjahan/Akbar (?) Agra: Diwan I Aam On the western edge, Pipes connected to a large well for irrigation (2 feet below surface level probably dating to Akbar period). Also, an earthenware pipe laid in masonry full of water under pressure. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, p. 69); Fieldwork 2023 Tank with a fountain was unearthed. Also, a well was found (drawing) Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 11); Fieldwork 2023 62 Shahjahan Agra Anguri Bagh and Macchi Bhawan Form of a fish-pond discovered after excavation. Presence of water channel. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, p. 70). Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2000-2001, p. 214; Fieldwork 2023 Presence of garden causeways. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1906-07, p. 16); Fieldwork 2023 63 Shahjahan Agra: Fathpuri Masjid Ablution Tank , some remains excavated, under restoration. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, p. 71); Fieldwork 2023 Tank with an underground drain. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 10); Fieldwork 2023 64 Shahjahan Agra: Taj Mahal Gardens Restoration of central causeway (E to W). Reconstruction of water channels which were filled with flower beds. A new technique was introduced by the British archaeologist: 1000’ of iron piping for garden irrigation and branch pipes for fountains. All stoneware pipes replaced by cast-iron. Water supplied from a high-level tank. Copper pipes of fountains around central tank preserved. These pipes connected the fountain pipes to main-supply line. Also found was an earthenware pipe in the floor of a central channel. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, p. 73); Fieldwork 2023 65 Shahjahan Ajmer Pavilion over Ana- Sagar Lake Hammam or Turkish Bath, Garden adjacent to the lake with Mughal waterwork techniques. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, p. 83- 84; Fieldwork 2023 66 Shahjahan Lahore Fort Wells and Tanks within the Fort Complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, Plate XXXIII 67 Shahjahan Agra Taj Mahal Complex Fountain in the Central Tank connected to Taj irrigation mains. Tank and water-channels restored. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1903-04, p. 14; Fieldwork 2023 68 Shahjahan Delhi Fort, Sawan Bhadon Pavilion Central Water Tank known as Zafar Mahal. Also two marble tanks were found to the south of Shah Burj and beneath the floor of Sawan. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1903-04, p. 22; Fieldwork 2023-24 Restoration of tank and old water channels. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 17; Fieldwork 2023-24 69 Akbar Sikandara Restoration of platform and tanks, and gaps in garden causeways. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 15; Fieldwork 2023 70 Shahjahan Delhi Fort Marble tank connected to water channels, 9’6” wide, which ran on the east side of Hayat Baksh gardens. Sloping shoot, 3’3” above ground. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 17- 18; Fieldwork 2023-24 71 Shahjahan Lahore Dai Angah Mosque One water tank, and impression of second tank found in te courtyard. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, p. 21 72 Akbar Agra Akbari Mahal Six-storey Baoli (stepwell) connected to exterior wall for ventilation (17’6” diameter) Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 8, Plate II & III; Fieldwork 2023 73 Babar Agra b/w Ibrahim’s palace and ramparts Well (10 gaz by 10 gaz) Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 9 74 Jahangir Agra Jahangir Mahal Stormwater drains (3’ x4’) leading to the moat of the Fort complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 17; Fieldwork 2023 75 Jahangir Agra Fort Latrine courts with drainage system. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 18 76 Shahjahan Delhi Fort Complex, Rang Mahal or Imtiaz Mahal Marble-fountain basin with the central water- channel. Between this structure and Diwan-i-Am was an orchard garden. Water falls from this structure to adjoining tank. Traces of channels unearthed. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 25- 26; Fieldwork 2023-24 77 Akbar Kalanur Takht-i-Akbari Platform with a tank (13’9” square, 4’6” deep). Four miniature reservoirs at foot of the platform. Wells in the garden surrounding the platform. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, p. 32 78 Shahjahan Peshawar Bridge Epigraphic Evidence of a Bridge built by Shahjahan in Peshawar. Daud was the architect. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1908-09, p. 204. Ancient Pakistan, Vol 2, Issue II, 1966, p 13-16. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XV, 2002, p. 27-35. 79 Shahjahan Delhi Fort Complex, Shah Burj Old marble tank located centrally. Water duct with marble basin and channel (nahr-i-bihisht) Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1909-10, p. 26; Fieldwork 2023-24 80 Shahjahan Agra Jaswant Rai ki Chattri Garden complex with aqueducts on top of wall carrying water from a well in SW to basins and tanks in the garden through a scalloped cascade. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1910-11, p. 97; Fieldwork 2023 81 Akbar Agra Sikandara Causeway on the east of Akbar’s tomb. Also a well connected to the causeway. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 2; Fieldwork 2023 Earthen water channels. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 6; Fieldwork 2023 Stone causeways running from four cardinal directions to the center of the garden. Large masonry tank, for harvesting rainwater. Also contains fountains, fish-scale waterfalls. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 3; Fieldwork 2023 82 Shahjahan Lahore: Shalamar Bagh Water courses with marble work. Presence of fountains. Irrigation channel connected to the canal. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 3 Central water tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-26, p. 19. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 207 Shah Nahr Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 207 83 Akbar Lahore: Asaf Khan’s Tomb, Akbari Serai Old brick causeways. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 3 Small water tanks. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, p. 15) Presence of a well. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-36, p. 14 Axial waterways, three wells fed aqueducts to fountains. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 354 84 Akbar Delhi: Humayun’s Tomb 02 wells linked to the garden complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 6; Fieldwork 2023-24 85 Babur Agra Ram Bagh 02 wells in use in the garden complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 6; Fieldwork 2023 Old dilapidated drain in brickwork. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1958-59, p. 94; Fieldwork 2023 Excavation revealed an underground earthen pipe, connected with cascades. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, p. 49; Fieldwork 2023 Tanks and fountains Indian Archaeology: A Review 1999-2000, p. 262; Fieldwork 2023 86 Agra Kanch Mahal Large well Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, p. 7; Fieldwork 2023 87 Muhammad Shah Delhi Bagh-i Nazir Well, to supply water to the garden complex. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 9; Fieldwork 2024 88 Aurangzeb Palamau Fort Presence of wells Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p.32; Fieldwork 2023 89 Akbar Hadaf, Sahebganj Mosque & Bridge Central Hauz. 240-feet long Mughal Bridge with 6 openings. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 40. Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2001-02, p. 489 90 Shahjahan Asirgarh Mosque Well (?), Large Tank Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 45- 46 91 Akbar Burhanpur Fort Zenana Baths; Elaborate system of waterwork. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 47; Fieldwork 2023 92 Khimlassa Nagina Mahal Presence of Wells. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 48- 49 Rectangular well/stepwell. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-26, p. 37 93 Aurangzeb Balapur, Berar Fort Stepwell or Baoli, Moat around the mud fort. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 53- 54 94 Akbar Gujrat Akbari Baoli Stepwell. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 224 Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1930-34, p. 19 95 Aurangzeb Gujrat, Kharian Aurangzeb’s Baoli Stepwell Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 224 A small mosque rests on the baoli wall. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1930-34, p. 19 96 Attock Saidan Baoli Stepwell Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 224 97 Shahjahan Sheikhpura Hiran Minara & Tank Tank/Octagonal Tank Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23, p. 224. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 205, Pakistan Archaeology, Numver 25, 1990, p. 339. 98 Shahjahan Agra Khan-i-Alam Bagh Aqueduct; Iron Pipe Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, p. 4; Fieldwork 2023 Old Mughal aqueducts carrying river water to Taj gardens. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1958-59, p. 94; Fieldwork 2023 Three old-tanks over the main gate of Khan-i-Alam connected to fountain pipe-line. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, p. 124; Fieldwork 2023 99 Shahjahan Lahore Tomb of Ali Mardan Khan Series of water tanks. Each tank had a fountain in the centre with qalabas or earthen water pipes. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, p. 5 100 Shahjahan Shahi Bagh Waterways, fountains, and tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, p. 20 101 Aurangzeb Benares Aurangzeb’s Mosque Central water tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1924-25, p. 6 102 Jehangir Lahore Fort A square tank with fountains revealed to the north of Diwan-i-Am. Sunken fountain excavated in the courtyard adjacent to Chhoti Khwabgah. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-26, p. 18 Hammam adjacent to SW corner of Chhoti Khwabgah. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, p. 22 103 Akbar Jaunpur Bridge, divided into two sections by an island mid- river. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, p. 6 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1957-58, p. 86 104 Jehangir (?) Delhi to Attock (Trade Route) 05 baolis and 02 bridges. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, p. 17 105 Aurangzeb Farrukhnagar Baoli Ghaus Ali Shah Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, p. 124 106 Shahjahan Mehm/Maham Baoli or Stepwell. Brick structure with 100 steps in 3 flights leads to water. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, p. 125, Indian Archaeology: A Review, 1999-2000, p. 283 107 Shahjahan Multan Drains of the city wall. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1927-28, p. 90 107 Peshawar Rang Mahal, Walai Small square tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1927-28, p. 93 108 Akbar Itimadpur Burhia ka Taal Water tank with a central pavilion. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, p. 9 109 Jahangir/Akbar Shahdara Jahangir’s Tomb West causeway connected to central tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, p. 24 Kachcha causeway to the SE of the tomb. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1929-30, p. 23 Ornamental Tanks & Fountains Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 209 Marble channels, with octagonal pools. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 347-349 Eight large wells and four small wells, with aqueducts, and terracotta pipes. Presence of chutes and garden pools. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 349 110 Humayun/Kamran Shahdara: Kamran’s Baradari Water channel and causeway in old garden. Presence of a tank. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, p. 24. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 347. 111 Akbar Burhanpur: Rahim’s Hammam Bath house Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, p.36; Fieldwork 2023 112 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri: Dargah Sheikh Salim Chishti Birka or Rainwater collecting vessel from roofs. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1934-35, p.5 113 Aurangzeb Pinjore: Mughal Garden Indian Archaeology: A Review 1956-57, p. 4 114 Aurangzeb Aurangabad: Bibi ka Maqbara Cistern on the northern side of the tomb. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1956-57, p. 56 Cistern on the western side of the tomb. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, p. 108 115 Shahjahan Agra Taj Mahal Series of wells were found in foundation of the structure Indian Archaeology: A Review 1957-58, p. 83; Fieldwork 2023 Indian Archaeology: A Review 1958-59, p. 95; Fieldwork 2023 116 Shahjahan Agra Kali Masjid, Taj Complex Old well was renovated. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, p. 125; Fieldwork 2023 117 Akbar Jora-Allahpur: Faqiron ki Masjid. Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well and construction of a mosque. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1962-63, p. 57 118 Shahjahan Makrana Epigraphic evidence of a stepwell. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1962-63, p. 60 Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and excavation of a well. 119 Aurangzeb Mozamabad, Jaipur Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a Tank and construction of its four walls. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1962-63, p. 60 120 Shahjahan Dabhoi, Baroda Epigraphic evidence regarding cultivation of land. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 87 121 Aurangzeb Ranod, Chanderi Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 88 Epigraphic evidence of construction of a garden and a stepwell. Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. 122 Aurangzeb Chanderi Hathpure-ki Masjid Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well, garden, and a mosque. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 88 123 Ahmad Shah Ranod, Chanderi Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well and a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 89 124 Aurangzeb Nasik Jami Masjid, Gondigaon. Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well and a mosque. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 91 125 Aurangzeb Mirzapur Epigraphic evidence of excavating a canal for irrigation purposes. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, p. 92 126 Akbar Firozpur Silauni, Etah Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, p. 63 127 Shahjahan Bihar-Sharif Jami Mosque Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well and a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1960-61, p. 50 128 Aurangzeb Teonda, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well for public use. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1960-61, p. 52 129 Akbar Akbarpur, Faizabad Epigraphic evidence of construction of a bridge and a mosque. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1963-64, p. 82 130 Shahjahan Kapiladhara, Varanasi Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1963-64, p. 82 131 Aurangzeb Sidhpur, Mehsana Epigraphic evidence of construction of a stepwell. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1964-65, p. 65 132 Aurangzeb Auranagabad Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, tank and a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1964-65, p. 67 133 Jahangir Kalpi Epigraphic evidence of construction of mosque and excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1964-65, p. 69 134 Aurangzeb Kalpi Tomb of Sayyid Muhammmad Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1964-65, p. 69 135 Shahjahan Udaypur, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, p. 70 136 Shah Alam I Bir Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, p. 71 137 Akbar Nagaur: Akbari Masjid Epigraphic evidence of construction of a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, p. 73 138 Akbar Makanpur, Rae Bareilly Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, p. 74-75. 139 Akbar Amber: Akbar’s Mosque Water-tank Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, p. 119 140 Jahangir Kashmir, Srinagar Epigraphic evidence of completion of masonry bridge b/w Kashmir and Banihall road. Another bridge over Kadal Tal. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, p. 58 141 Jahangir Khutawad, Guna. Epigraphic evidence of construction of a fort and excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, p. 59 142 Aurangzeb Malhargarh, Guna Epigraphic evidence of construction of a stepwell. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, p. 59 143 Alamgir II Bedankheri, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, p. 59 144 Aurangzeb Tondapur, Jalgaon Epigraphic evidence of construction of a stepwell. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1968-69, p. 56 145 Aurangzeb Didwana, Nagaur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, well, and a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1968-69, p. 57 146 Shahjahan Delhi Jama Masjid Water tank Indian Archaeology: A Review 1969-70, p. 89; Fieldwork 2023-24 147 Akbar Delhi Humyaun’s Tomb Water-tanks and channels. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1969-70, p. 90; Fieldwork 2023-24 148 Shahjahan (Dara Shukoh) Delhi Epigraphic evidence of construction of a reservoir (hauz) for drinking water for public. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, p. 57 149 Bahadur Shah Zafar Garhi, Delhi Epigraphic evidence of construction of a bridge for protecting area from floods. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, p. 57 150 Akbar Sironj, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, p. 58 151 Akbar Bhonrasa, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of construction of a serai and excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, p. 58 152 Muhammad Shah Bhonrasa, Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of repair of the fountain of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, p. 58 153 Akbar Barwala, Hissar Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, p. 62 154 Shahjahan Hansi Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, p. 62 155 Akbar Batala, Gurdaspur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a reservoir, mosque and a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, p. 64 156 Humayun Qasba, Azamgarh Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, a guest house and excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, p. 64 157 Humayun Joginipura, Delhi Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, p. 40 158 Aurangzeb Kathua Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, p. 48 159 Shahjahan Barambad, Bharatpur Mughal Baoli Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Presence of a stepwell. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, p. 49. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 2011, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 36 160 Humayun Pilkhana, Aligarh Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, p. 50 161 Shah Alam II Bahadurpur, Aligarh Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, p. 51 162 Akbar Narnaul, Mahendragarh Epigraphic evidence of construction of a ‘pleasant building’ and a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, p. 43 163 Jahangir Allahabad Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, p. 45 164 Aurangzeb Allahabad Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, p. 45 165 Shahjahan Delhi: Roshanara Baradari A tank, a fountain system, and a connecting drain was discovered on excavation. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, p. 70; Fieldwork 2023-24 166 Shah Alam I Aurangabad Epigraphic evidence of repairs of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1974-75, p. 63 167 Akbar Mallawan, Hardoi Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1974-75, p. 63 168 Aurangzeb Sojat, Pali Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and a cistern with fountain. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1975-76, p. 69 169 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Two tanks over the hammam or bath house. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, p. 49 170 Aurangzeb Bilgi, Bijapur Epigraphic evidence of excavation of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, p. 67 171 Akbar/Shahjahan Agra: Fort Moat Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, p. 110; Fieldwork 2023 172 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri A large house-complex consisting of three big rooms, a bath, two latrines, two big out houses, large courtyard with an octagonal tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 51 173 Aurangzeb Bari, Guna Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well in a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 69 174 Akbar Chhintanwala, Patiala Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and digging of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 70 175 Aurangzeb Ghatampur, Kanpur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 71 176 Shahjahan Shahjahanpur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and digging of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 72 177 Jahangir Allahabad: Khusro Bagh Presence of old fountains and ancient well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, p. 110 178 Aurangzeb Chainpur, Nimar Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1978-79, p. 86 179 Aurangzeb Kotra, Jalaun Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1978-79, p. 88 180 Jahangir Dakhni, Jalandhar Mughal bridge; brickwork and arches. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1978-79, p. 139, Indian Archaeology: A Review, 1998- 99, p. 285. 181 Shahjahan Kalabag, Guna Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, a well and a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, p. 85 182 Aurangzeb Kalabag, Guna Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, p. 85 183 Aurangzeb Nander Epigraphic evidence of completion of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, p. 86 184 Shahjahan Bilara, Jodhpur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a cenotaph and a tank. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, p. 86 185 Aurangzeb Jaitaran, Pali Epigraphic evidence of completion of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, p. 86 186 Akbar Toda Bhim, Sawai Madhopur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1982-83, p. 127 187 Aurangzeb Vidisha Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1983-84, p. 159 188 Aurangzeb Kant, Shahjahanpur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, a well and a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1985-86, p. 103 189 Shah Alam I Ashti, Bhir Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1986-87, p. 112 190 Aurangzeb Georai, Bhir Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1986-87, p. 113 191 Aurangzeb Sholapur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well for divine favours. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1986-87, p. 114 192 Shahjahan Ranod, Shivpuri Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque, a well and a market. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1987-88, p. 126 193 Shahjahan Salimpur, Deoria Epigraphic evidence of construction of a mosque and a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1989-90, p. 118 194 Shah Alam I Shujalpur, Shajapur Epigraphic evidence of construction of a step-well. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1994-95, p. 86 195 Muhammad Shah Kara, Allahabad Epigraphic evidence of construction of well and the foundation of a garden. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1994-95, p. 87 196 Muhammad Shah Peshawar Nasir Bagh Mughal Garden Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVI, 2005, p. 49-52 197 Aurangzeb Dhaka Mughal Baoli Stepwell Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 20 198 Shahjahan Lahore Khwabgah-e- Shahjahani Old water reservoir at the NW corner, with marble fountains. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, 1968, p. 219 199 Akbar Bayana A garden and a Baoli. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 7, 1970-71, p.124 200 Akbar Lahore Mosque of Maryam Zamani Ablution tank within mosque Pakistan Archaeology, Number 7, 1970-71, p.124 201 Shahjahan Lahore Shahjahani Hammam Hammam or Bath House. Presence of a circular masnory well. Water was raised using Persian Wheel, and water channel brught water to the Hammam. Presence of a rectangular tank on the roof. Terracotta pipes embedded in the walls. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 10-22, 1974-86, p. 259 202 Akbar Lahore Akbari Hammam Hammam or Bath House. Water Tank and Masonry channels. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 10-22, 1974-86, p. 264 203 Shahjahan Lahore Hammam inside Shalamar Gardens Main supply to the garden by the canal. Additionally two large wells supplied water. Western well was known as Bara Harta (12 wheeled). Eastern well supplied water to Hammam through masonry channels to the reservoir. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 10-22, 1974-86, p. 265 204 Shahjahan Lahore Wazir Khan Baradari Tank and a central fountain. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 11, 1987-88, p. 240. 205 Jahangir Jandiala Sher Khan, near Sheikhupura Mughal Baoli Stepwell Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 339. 206 Jahangir Jandiala Sher Khan, Degh Nala, Bedh Nala Mughal bridges Bridge, connecting Jandiala Sher Khan to Lahore. All three bridges are at an equidistant of 15kms each. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 338-339. 207 Jahangir Shahdara Mughal wells at Turgur, Kt Abdul Malik and Begumkot. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 340. 208 Jahangir Shahdara Noor Jahan's Tomb Mughal well. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, 1990, p. 341. 209 Kandahar Hammam Bath House, with a well, two sunken octagonal pool or tank, and a system of water conduits. Excavations at Kandahar 1974 and 1975, 1996, p. 73-74 and p. 402. 210 Babur Kabul Bagh-i-Babur Octagonal tanks and fountains. The Monuments of Afghanistan, 2008, PL. 141, p. 224-225. 211 Akbar Hassan Abdal, Wah Garden at Wah Large central tank (214' x 220'), Fountains, Single- arched water channels, terracotta pipes An Introduction to the Historical, Architectural and Hydraulic Studies of the Mughal Garden at Wah, Pakistan, Makin Khan, 1996, p. 457-472. 212 Aurangzeb Dhaka Lalbagh Gardens Garden water features Lalbagh: an Incomplete Depiction of Mughal Garden in Bangladesh, Sharmin, Farzana, 2019, p. 6 213 Jahangir Delhi, Arakpur Bagh Mochi Well and Garden Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1959-61, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 10 214 Aurangzeb Ajmer Mosque and Garden; Water channel from Ana Sagar Lake to the garden. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1959-61, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 46 215 Shahjahan Kesiari, Kharagpur Mughalpura Well Well and Shrine Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1959-61, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 71 216 Jahangir Sasaram Mosque and Well. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 5 217 Shahjahan Khargone Well and garden. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 24 218 Shahjahan Jafarabad Well and step-well. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 35 219 Shahjahan Ausa, Osmanabad Well and step-well. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 37 220 Aurangzeb Ausa, Osmanabad Reservoir Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 38 221 Shahjahan Hindaun, Sawai Madhopur Well Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 2011, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 21 222 Shahjahan Gunaoti, Makrana Pahad Kunwa Well and Mosque for villagers. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 2011, Archaeological Survey Of India, p. 40-41, 46 223 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Baoli Octagonal Baoli Indian Archaeology: A Review, 1999-2000, p. 261; Fieldwork 2023 224 Akbar Agra Hijdon ki Masjid Hauz (Water tank) Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2000-2001, p. 213 225 Akbar Agra Akbari Masjid Hauz (Water tank) Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2000-01, p. 213 226 Aurangzeb Gingee (also known as Nusratgarh), Villupuram Gingee Fort & surroundings Epigraphic evidence of construction of a canal and a reservoir Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2001-02, p. 318 227 Thanesar, Kurukshetra Excavation revealed a Mughal Garden-complex [Harshvardhan Garden complex (?)]. Adjacent to the garden is a hammam. Presence of wells, drains and other water features. Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2002-03, p. 75-77 228 Faridabad, Budhiya Nala Mughal Bridge Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2002-03, p. 421 229 Delhi Red Fort Baoli or Stepwell Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2002-03, p. 441; Fieldwork 2023-24 230 Farrukh Siyar Farrukhnagar Baoli Ghaus Ali Shah Baoli or Stepwell Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2002-03, p. 453 231 Aurangzeb Khajua, Fatehpur Aurangzeb’s Pavilion and Bagh Badshahi Bagh Badshahi Garden Compex with water features. Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2003-04, p. 546 232 Shahjahan Burhanpur Ahukhana Brick-built water channel. Ornamental water tank., Sedimentation Tanks, Wells, Cascades, Reservoir adjacent to Ahukhana. Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2005-06, p. 197; Fieldwork 233 Jehangir Modasa, Sabarkantha Epigraphic evidence of construction of a well. Indian Archaeology: A Review, 2010-11, p. 124 234 Akbar Burhanpur Qanat system Fieldwork 2023 235 Shahjahan Burhanpur Eidgah and Water Tank Fieldwork 2023 236 Shahjahan Burhanpur Fort Hammam Fieldwork 2023 238 Shahjahan Burhanpur Tomb of Mumtaz Mahal Water Tank, Water channels, Wells Fieldwork 2023 239 Shahjahan Burhanpur Mahal Gulara Reservoir, Tank Fieldwork 2023 240 Shahjahan Burhanpur Mahal Gulara to Ahukhana Underground water channel from the river Bada Utaoli to Ahukhana reservoir, connected through a series of wells located in agricultural fields Fieldwork 2023 241 Jehangiri Burhanpur Hammam; Tanks, water channels; pipes Fieldwork 2023 242 Akbar Burhanpur Akbari Serai Well and Tank Fieldwork 2023 References: 1. Archaeological Survey of India, Four Reports during the Year 1962-63-64-65, Vol I, Simla, 1871 2. Archaeological Survey of India, Four Reports during the Year 1962-63-64-65, Vol II, Simla, 1871 3. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1871-72, Vol. III, Calcutta, 1873 4. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1871-72, Vol. IV, Calcutta, 1874 5. Archaeological Survey of India, Report for the Year 1872-73, Vol. V, Calcutta, 1875 6. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Eastern Rajputana, 1871-72 and 1872-73, Vol. VI, Calcutta, 1878 7. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Bundelkhand and Malwa, 1871-72 and in The Central Provinces, Vol. VII, Calcutta, 1878 8. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour through the Bengal Provinces, Vol. VIII, Calcutta, 1878 9. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in The Central Provinces, 1873-74 and 1874-75, Vol. IX, Calcutta, 1879 10. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in Bundelkhand and Malwa in 1874-75 and 1876-77, Vol. X, Calcutta, 1880 11. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the Gangetic Provinces from Badaon to Bihar in 1875-76 and 1877-78, Vol. XI, Calcutta, 1880 12. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the Central Doab and Gorakhpur in 1874-75 and 1875-76, Vol. XII, Calcutta, 1879 13. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in the South-Eastern Provinces in 1874-75 and 1875-76, Vol. XIII, Calcutta, 1882 14. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Punjab in 1878-79, Vol. XIV, Calcutta, 1882 15. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Bihar and Bengal in 1879-80, Vol. XV, Calcutta, 1882 16. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of Tours in North and South Bihar in 1880-81, Vol. XVI, Calcutta, 1883 17. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Central Provinces and Lower Gangetic Doab in 1881-82, Vol. XVII, Calcutta, 1884 18. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Gorakhpur District in 1875-76 and 1876-77, Vol. XVIII, Calcutta, 1883 19. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour through Behar, Central India, Peshawar, and Yusufzai, 1881-82, Vol. XIX, Calcutta, 1885 20. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Eastern Rajputana in 1882-83, Vol. XX, Calcutta, 1885 21. Archaeological Survey of India, Reports of a Tour in Bundelkhand and Rewa in 1883-84 and of A Tour in Rewa, Bundelkhand, Malwa, and Gwalior in 1884-85, Vol. XXI- Parts I & II, Calcutta, 1885 22. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in Gorakhpur, Saran, and Ghazipur in 1877-78-79 and 80, Vol. XXII, Calcutta, 1885 23. Archaeological Survey of India, Report of a Tour in the Punjab and Rajputana in 1883-84, Vol. XXIII, Calcutta, 1887 24. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1902-03, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1904 25. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1903-04, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1906 26. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1904-05, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1908 27. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1905-06, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1909 28. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1906-07, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 29. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1907-08, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1911 30. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1908-09, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 31. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1909-10, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1914 32. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1910-11, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1914 33. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1911-12, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1915 34. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1912-13, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1916 35. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1913-14, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1917 36. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1914-15, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1920 37. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1915-16, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1918 38. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1916-17, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1918 39. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1917-18, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1920 40. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1918-19, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1921 41. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1919-20, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1922 42. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1920-21, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1913 43. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1921-22, Simla, Government of India Press, 1924 44. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1922-23 45. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1923-24, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1926 46. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1924-25, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1927 47. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1925-26, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1928 48. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1926-27, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1930 49. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1927-28, Calcutta, Government of India, Central Publication Branch, 1931 50. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1928-29, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1933 51. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1929-30, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1935 52. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1930-34, Part I & Part II, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1936 53. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1934-35, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1937 54. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1935-36, Delhi: Manager of Publications, 1938 55. Archaeological Survey of India, Annual Report 1936-37, Swati Publications, Delhi, Reprinted 1990 56. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1953-54, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1954 57. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1954-55, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1955 58. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1955-56, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1956 59. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1956-57, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1957 60. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1957-58, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1958 61. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1958-59, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1959 62. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1959-60, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1960 63. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1960-61, Department of Archaeology, Government of India, New Delhi, 1961 64. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1961-62, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1964 65. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1962-63, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1965 66. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1963-64, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1967 67. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-65, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1969 68. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1965-66, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1973 69. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1967-68, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1968 70. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1968-69, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1971 71. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1969-70, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1973 72. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1970-71, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1974 73. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1971-72, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1975 74. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1972-73, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1978 75. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1973-74, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 76. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1974-75, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 77. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1975-76, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1979 78. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1976-77, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1980 79. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1977-78, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1980 80. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1978-79, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1981 81. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1979-80, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1983 82. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1981-82, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1984 83. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1982-83, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1985 84. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1983-84, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1986 85. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1985-86, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1990 86. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1986-87, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1992 87. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1987-88, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1993 88. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1988-89, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1993 89. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1989-90, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1994 90. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1990-91, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1995 91. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1991-92, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1996 92. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1992-93, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 1997 93. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1993-94, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2000 94. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1994-95, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2000 95. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1998-99, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2004 96. Indian Archaeology: A Review 1999-2000, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2005 97. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2000-01, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2006 98. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2001-02, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2008 99. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2002-03, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2009 100. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2003-04, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2011 101. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2004-05, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2014 102. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2005-06, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 103. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2006-07, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 104. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2007-08, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 105. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2008-09, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2015 106. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2009-10, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 107. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2010-11, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 108. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2011-12, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 109. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2012-13, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2015 110. Indian Archaeology: A Review 2013-14, Archaeological Survey of India, Government of India, New Delhi, 2016 111. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 1, January 1946, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 112. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 2, July 1946, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 113. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 3, January 1947, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 114. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 4, July 1947-January 1948, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 115. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 5, January 1949, Baptist Mission Press, Calcutta 116. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 6, January 1950, Job Press Ltd., Kanpur 117. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 7, January 1951, Lakshmi Book House, Delhi 118. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 8, 1952, Job Press Ltd., Kanpur 119. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 9, 1953 120. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 10 & 11, 1954 & 1955, ASI New Delhi, 1985 121. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 12, 1956, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur 122. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 13, 1957, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur 123. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 14, 1958, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur 124. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 15, 1959, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur 125. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 16, 1960, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1962 126. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 17, 1961, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1961 127. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 18 & 19, 1962 & 1963, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1963 128. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 20 & 21, 1964 & 1965, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1967 129. Ancient India: Bulletin of the Archaeological Survey of India, Number 22, 1966, Job Press Private Ltd., Kanpur, 1973 130. Gaur, R.C. (2000), Excavations at Fatehpur Sikri 1984-85, Archaeological Survey of India 131. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. I, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1964 132. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. II, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1965 133. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. III, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1967 134. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. IV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1968 135. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. V, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1970 136. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1988 137. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1991 138. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. VIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1991 139. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. IX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1994 140. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. X, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1994 141. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1995 142. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1995 143. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 1999 144. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2001 145. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2002 146. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2005 147. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2006 148. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XVIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2007 149. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XIX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2008 150. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2009 151. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2010 152. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2011 153. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2012 154. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2013 155. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXV, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2014 156. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVI, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2015 157. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2016 158. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXVIII, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2017 159. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXIX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2018 160. Ancient Pakistan, Vol. XXX, Department of Archaeology, University of Peshawar, 2019 161. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 1, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1964 162. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 2, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1965 163. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 3, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1966 164. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 4, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1967 165. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 5, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1968 166. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 6, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1969 167. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 7, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1970-71 168. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 8, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1972 169. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 9, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1973 170. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 10-22, Department of Archaeology, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1974-86 171. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 23, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1987-88 172. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 24, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1989 173. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 25, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1990 174. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 26, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1991 175. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 27, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1992 176. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 28, Department of Archaeology & Museums, Government of Pakistan, Karachi, 1993 177. Pakistan Archaeology, Number 29, Department of Archaeology, Karachi, 1994-1996 178. Excavations At Kandahar 1974 and 1975: The First Two Seasons At Shahr-I Kohna (Old Kandahar), McNicoll, Anthony, and Warwick Ball. Conducted by the British Institute of Afghan Studies. 179. The Monuments of Afghanistan: History, Archaeology and Architecture, Warwick Ball, I.B. Tauris, London, 2008. 180. The Archaeology of Afghanistan, Ed. by R. Allchin, W. Ball and N. Hammond, Edinburgh University Press, 2019 181. Khan, M. (1996). An Introduction to the Historical, Architectural and Hydraulic Studies of the Mughal Garden at Wah, Pakistan. East and West, 46(3/4), 457–472. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757289 182. Sharmin, Farzana (2019) "Lalbagh: an Incomplete Depiction of Mughal Garden in Bangladesh," Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning: Vol. 6 , Article 21. 183. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1959-61, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1987 184. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1969, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1969 185. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1975, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1983 186. Epigraphia Indica Arabic And Persian Supplement 1951-54, Archaeological Survey Of India, New Delhi, 1987 http://www.jstor.org/stable/29757289 Appendix II/3B: Potential Sites of Mughal Waterworks Based on Mughal Chronicles and Other Sources Reign 1526-1530: Babur 1530-1540 & 1555-1556: Humayun 1556-1605: Akbar 1605-1627: Jahangir 1628-1658: Shahjahan 1658-1707: Aurangzeb 1707-1857: Late Mughal Period S. No. Mughal Emperor Place Project Source 1 Babur Kabul Bagh-i Wafa (Garden of Fidelity) b/w Fort and River Baburnama I, p. 208 2 Babur Kabul Garden Baburnama I, p. 336 3 Babur Kalda-kahar, Bhira Bagh-i Safa, close to the lake. Baburnama I, p. 381 4 Babur Agra Garden, well and mosque. Baburnama I, p. xx 5 Babur Agra Well & Hammam Baburnama II, p. 531- 32 6 Babur Agra Tank Baburnama II, p. 532 7 Babur Agra Khana-bagh or House gardens Baburnama II, p. 532 8 Babur Agra Tanks & Gardens on the opp. Bank of Yamuna Baburnama II, p. 532 9 Babur Agra 03- storey Stepwell in Agra Fort, measuring 10 x 10 gaz. Baburnama II, p. 532 10 Babur Agra Well with Persian Wheel Baburnama II, p. 533 11 Babur Agra Aram Bagh (Ram Bagh) or Garden of Eight Paradises Baburnama II, p. 544 12 Babur Fatehpur Sikri Garden of Victory (Bagh-i Fateh) and a Well. Baburnama II, p. 581, p. 584, p. 616. 13 Babur Chanderi Garden of Eight Paradises or Char-Bagh Baburnama II, p. 605n 14 Babur Dholpur Bagh-i Niufar, Lotus-Garden, House and Mosque. Octagonal Tank (10 x 10 gaz). Baburnama II, p. 606, p. 639, The Baburnama, 2002, p. 431. 15 Babur Jalisir Gold-scattering Garden or Bagh-i Zarafshan Baburnama II, p. 640 and 640n 16 Prince Kamran Lahore Garden Baburnama II, p. 699 17 Babur Kabul Bagh-i Babur, Three big Reservoirs Baburnama II, p. 710 18 Babur Kabul Garden at Shahr-ara Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 19 Babur Kabul Char-Bagh Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 20 Babur Kabul Bagh-i Jalau Khana Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 21 Babur Kabul Aurta Bagh Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 22 Babur Kabul Saurat Bagh Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 23 Babur Kabul Bagh-i Mahtab Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 24 Babur Kabul Bagh-I Ahu Khana Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 25 Babur Kabul Three small gardens Baburnama II, p. 1xxx 26 Babur Madhakur Series of wells Baburnama II, p. 548 27 Babur Fatehpur Sikri Series of wells Baburnama II, p. 548 28 Babur Dholpur Stone Well, Water courses, Water-chamber, Small tank Baburnama II, p. 606, p. 634, p. 615 29 Babur Gwalior 20-30 wells Baburnama II, p. 612 30 Babur Kutila Lake Reservoir Baburnama II, p. 580 31 Babur b/w Busawar and Chausa (Jusa) Octagonal Reservoir Baburnama II, p. 581 32 Babur Hupian or Upian Reservoir Baburnama II, p. 647 33 Akbar Sirhind Garden Akbarnama I, p. 451 34 Akbar Ghaznin Reservoir Akbarnama I, p. 252 35 Akbar Hasan Abdal Reservoir Akbarnama I, p. 397 36 Akbar Yamuna Edge Octagonal Reservoir Akbarnama I, p. 647 37 Akbar Ajmer Revival of Lakes: Shukr Talao Akbarnama II, p. 517 38 Akbar Agra Irrigation channels Akbarnama II, p. 372 39 Akbar Kalanur Bridge Akbarnama III, p. 513 40 Akbar Nandana Garden Akbarnama III, p. 513 41 Akbar Bihat Garden Akbarnama III, p. 513 42 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Reservoir (20 x 20 yards) Akbarnama III, p. 354 43 Akbar Madaha-Gandak Bridge Akbarnama III, p. 196 44 Shahjahan Kayrana Garden and water Tank Ain-i Akbari, 1927, p. 613 45 Akbar Lahore Hakim Ali’s Reservoir (6 gaz x 6 gaz) Ain-i Akbari, 1927, p. 520. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 152 46 Babar Agra Bagh-i Gul Afshan Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 4-5. 47 Jahangir Khawaspur Bridge Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 92 48 Jahangir Vir-nag, Kashmir Garden and canal. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 92 49 Jahangir Kabul Canal and Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 106 50 Jahangir Kabul Farah-baksh & Saya-baksh Gardens Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 107 51 Jahangir Nakodar Building and a Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 136 52 Jahangir Fatehpur Sikri Building and a Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 152 53 Jahangir Ahmadabad Garden or Bari Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 427 54 Akbar Ahmadabad Bagh-i Fath or Fath Bari Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 429 55 Akbar Sarkhej Bagh on Sabarmati River Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 431 56 Jahangir Sikandra-Mathura Serai and a Garden. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 103 57 Akbar- Jahangir Delhi Garden, Serai & Tomb Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 111 58 Jahangir Sirhind Revival of Gardens Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 113 59 Jahangir Srinagar, Kashmir Building and a Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 142 60 Akbar Srinagar, Kashmir Hari Parbat Fort Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 150 61 Jahangir Srinagar, Kashmir Nur-Afza Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 151 62 Jahangir Srinagar, Kashmir Ishrat Afza Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 159 63 Jahangir Panj Brara, Kakapur Small building and a Garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 171 64 Jahangir Lar to Nur Afza Canal Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 238 65 Jahangir Ajmer Repair of Bisal/Bisalya Tank Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 341 66 Shahjahan Ahmadabad Shahi Bagh or Royal Garden. Also a reservoir. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 30 67 Jahangir Agra Nur Manzil gardens. Presence of reservoir, well and canal. Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 76 68 Akbar Badnor Step-well Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 410 69 Akbar Barah/Barmadh Mata, Bharatpur Step-well and garden Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 64 70 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri Well for Dargah Salim Chishti Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, 1914, p. 72 71 Babur Chitar, Ghaggar River Garden The Baburnama, 2002, p. 320 72 Babur Kabul Repair of Ghazni Dam, Bagh-i Khiaban; Introduction of Water-wheel; Construction of a Reservoir along a stream. The Baburnama, 2002, p. 435 73 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Farah Bakhsh; irrigated by a 10 yards wide canal Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 126 74 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Zafarbad Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 127 74 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Husnabad Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 127 75 Shahjahan Nimla. Lahore Bagh-i Farah Afza, with a 4 yard wide cana Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 394, p. 364 76 Sirhind Bagh-i Hafiz Rakhna Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 123 77 Shahjahan Balkh Bagh-i Murad Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 126, p. 350 78 Shahjahan Qandahar Bagh-i Nazar Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 428 79 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Nishat Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 126 80 Shahjahan Burhanpur Zainabad Gardens Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 70 81 Shahjahan Bandar Hubli Canals and Drain from Church moat. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 8682 82 Shahjahan Shahabad, Kashmir (?) Gardens, baths, reservoirs, cascades and fountains. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 138 83 Shahjahan Lahore Canal, under the supervision of Ali Mardan Khan. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 277 84 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Faiz Baksh, canal under the direction of Ali Mardan Khan. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 298 85 Shahjahan Agra Taj Mahal gardens Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 299 86 Shahjahan Badli, Delhi Bagh-i A’izzabad Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 451 87 Babur Qandahar Bagh-i Mirza Kamran Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 485 88 Shahjahan Faizabad, Mukhlispur Fort and gardens Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 536 89 Shahjahan Lahore Reservoirs, Cascades, Fountains, Canals in the Royal Garden Complex. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 277 90 Akbar Khizrabad, Safidun Repair of Firuz Shah canal. (Nahr-i Shihab) Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 407 91 Shahjahan Safidun to Delhi Nahr-i Bihisht or Shah Nahr Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 407 92 Shahjahan Shibarghan Repair of Shibarghan Dam for improving the country and increasing of crops. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 368 93 Shahjahan Kashmir Shalamar Bagh, central canal. Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 9 94 Achbal Garden-palace History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 7 95 Aurangzeb Delhi Garden of Thirty Thousand Trees or Tees Hazari Bagh History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 37 96 Aurangzeb Hyderabad A tank, a garden and a mansion History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 121 97 Aurangzeb Fatihabad, Agra A garden, mosque and a serai History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 232 98 Shahjahan Delhi Shalamar Bagh & Sahibabad History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 277 99 Aurangzeb Sahibganj Nageswar Bagh History of Aurangzib, Vol. I & II, 1912, p. 356 100 Aurangzeb Aurangabad Canal & Water Tank (4 miles round) History of Aurangzib, Vol. III, 1912, p. 97 101 Aurangzeb Bijapur Canal from Krishna to the city. History of Aurangzib, 1912, Vol. IV, p. 7 102 Aurangzeb Kalian Mosque, Turkish Bath, Garden, Reservoir with fountains in the garden, besides a Governor’s Residence and a private mansion (Haveli). History of Aurangzib, 1912, Vol. V, p. 117 103 Aurangzeb Saniala Tank History of Aurangzib, 1912, Vol. V, p. 117 104 Aurangzeb Barha Fort History of Aurangzib, 1912, Vol. V, p. 117 105 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Gulshan Ashfaque, F. (2011), p. 311 106 Shahjahan Kashmir Bagh-i Inayat Ashfaque, F. (2011), p. 311 107 Shahjahan Kashmir Barahdari Kadal (Bridge) Ashfaque, F. (2011), p. 311 108 Shahjahan Tejbal Bagh-i Aliabad Ashfaque, F. (2011), p. 313 109 Shahjahan Ahmadabad Rustam Bagh, Had 6 wells. Fatma, S. (2011), p. 442 110 Jahangir Ahmadabad Jit Bagh Fatma, S. (2011), p. 442 & 445. 111 Aurangzeb Surat Princes Garden, served by a canal. Water drawn out of well by oxen. Fatma, S. (2011), p. 442-443 112 Aurangzeb Surat Garden Fatma, S. (2011), p. 443 113 Jahangir Kirana Garden/Orchard Fatma, S. (2011), p. 443 114 Bhadra Garden Fatma, S. (2011), p. 444 115 Akbar Ahmadnagar Naim Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 116 Akbar Ahmadnagar Farah Baksh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 117 Akbar Bijapur Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 118 Akbar Sherpur Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 119 Akbar Munger Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 120 Akbar Golkonda Fort Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 121 Shahjahan Rohtas Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 143 122 Shahjahan Udgir, Bidar Bagh-i Husam Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 123 Shahjahan Ekdil, Etawah Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 124 Shahjahan Lucknow Dostan-i Bustan Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 125 Aurangzeb Bidar Farh Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 126 Aurangzeb Patna Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 127 Aurangzeb Thane Bagh Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 128 Muhammad Shah Delhi Bagh-i Mahaldar Khan Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 129 Muhammad Shah Kallur, Kalnur Bagh-i Muhammadi Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 130 Bahadur Shah Delhi Bagh-i Nazir Fatma, S. (2016), p. 144 131 Akbar Burhanpur Qanat and Lal Bagh Koch, E. (1991), p. 91 132 Akbar Burhanpur Public Hammam Koch, E. (1991), p. 92 133 Shahjahan Agra Bagh-i Jahan Ara Koch, E. (1991), p. 117 134 Akbar Jaunpur Bridge Koch, E. (1991), p. 66 135 Akbar Bidar Farah Bagh Palace Koch, E. (1991), p. 51 136 Jahangir Bairat Water palace Koch, E. (1991), p. 53 137 Akbar Fatehpur Sikri City Koch, E. (1991), p. 56 137 Akbar Agra Agra Fort Koch, E. (1991), p. 56 138 Shahjahan Delhi City of Shahjahanabad Shah Jahan Nama, 1990, p. 407 139 Shahjahan Kashmir Peri Mahall Koch, E. (1991), p. 116 140 Shahjahan Delhi Jama Masjid, central ablution tank Koch, E. (1991), p. 119 141 Shahjahan Agra Moti Masjid or Pearl Mosque, ablution tank. Koch, E. (1991), p. 121 141 Shahjahan Delhi Fatehpuri Masjid Koch, E. (1991), p. 123 142 Akbar Shah II Delhi Zafar Mahal, Mehrauli Koch, E. (1991), p. 127 143 Shah Bahadur II Zafar Delhi Zafar Mahal, Red Fort Koch, E. (1991), p. 127 144 Aurangzeb Delhi Roshanara Gardens Koch, E. (1991), p. 127 145 Aurangzeb Delhi Moti Masjid or Pearl Mosque Koch, E. (1991), p. 129 146 Akbar Delhi Humayun’s Tomb Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 71 147 Akbar Kashmir Nasim Bagh Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 83 148 Akbar Sikandra Akbar’s Tomb Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 87 149 Jahangir Kashmir Achabal Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 104 150 Shahjahan Kashmir Char-Chinar Gardens, presence of water wheel. Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 145 151 Aurangzeb Rajauri Garden Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 179 152 Aurangzeb Aurangabad Water Mill Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 183 153 Aurangzeb Pinjaur Gardens Crowe, S. et.al. (1972), p. 185 References: 1. Baburnama, Vol. I and II, Translated by A.S. Beveridge, London, 1912. 2. The Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur Prince and Emperor, Translated by Wheeler M. Thackston, 2002 3. The History of Humayun (Humayun Nama), Translated by A.S. Beveridge, London, 1902 4. The Akbarnama of Abu’l Fazal, Vol. I, II, and III, Translated by H. Beveridge, The Asiatic Society, 1939 5. Ain-i Akbari, Translated by H. Blochmann, The Asiatic Society if Bengal, Calcutta, 1927 6. The Tuzuk-i Jahangiri of Memoirs of Jahangir, Translated by Alexander Rogers, Edited by Henry Beveridge, Delhi, 1914 7. The Shah Jahan Nama of Inayat Khan, Ed. by W.E. Begley and Z.A. Desai, Oxford University Press, 1990 8. History of Aurangzib, Volume I, II, III, IV and V, Jadunath Sarkar, Orient Longman, 1912 9. Ashfaque, F. (2011). “Subedars” of Kashmir under Shahjahan. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 72, 308–318. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44146723 10. Fatma, S. (2011). Gardens in Mughal Gujarat. Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 72, 441–452. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44146737 11. Fatma, S. (2016), Gardens in Mughal India, PhD Thesis, Department of History, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. 12. Koch, E. (1991), Mughal Architecture: An Outline of Its History and Development (1526-1858), Prestel-Verlag, Munich. 13. Crowe, S. et. al. (1972), The Gardens of Mughul India: A History and a Guide, Thames and Hudson, London. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44146723 http://www.jstor.org/stable/44146737 Appendix II/4A Details of the Shah Nahr Map from the Andhra Pradesh State Archives, Hyderabad 43cm x 1250 cm, c. 1750 S. No. Nahr Stretch Emperor (Period/Year) Engineer Settlements Associated Water Features Other Features Bunds (Dams) & Puls (Bridges) Nallah (Irrigation Channels: Settlements, Agricultural Lands & Gardens) Water Lifting Devices (Rehat/Dhenkli) Waterwheels; Chak (Watermills); Chah (Wells) 1 Naya Bans to Karnal Firoz Shah Tughlaq (Tughlaq Era/~1350s A.D.). Akbar (Mughal Era/1568 A.D.) Shihabuddin (Mughal Era) [East of the Canal] Naya Bans, Khizrabad & Karnal; [West of the Canal] Ladwa 05 Bunds (with iron shutters /sluice gates), 01 Pul 04 Nallahs (to agricultural fields) Presence of 02 significant Muslim shrines (Shah Sarf, Ladwa & Bu Ali Qalandar, Karnal), Forest land abutting the canal. Mughal Hunting Grounds close to Karnal. 2 Karnal to Panipat Shahjahan (Mughal Era/~1640s) Ali Mardan Khan (Mughal- Era) [East of the Canal] (14) Gharaunda, Sheikhupura, Gudha, Kohand, Kaghrauli, Hukumpur, Razapur, Dudlana, Kutana, Mohammadpur, Baholee, Sitana, Kabri, Panipat; [West of the Canal] (9) Munak, Halalad, Rer, Bal Makan, Khandra, Thirana, Uthalia, Assan Kalan, Assan Khurd 03 Bunds [East of the Canal] 32 Nallahs (14 to settlements & agricultural fields; 15 to agricultural fields; 03 garden irrigation channels); [West of the Canal] 12 Nallahs (all 12 to agricultural fields) 01 Rehat (Sithana) 05 Waterwheels (Dadri, Dalalpur, Rohtak, Bahrki & Turki Kalan) Presence of Mughal Hunting Grounds close to Karnal. 03 large irrigation channels with bunds to the west of the canal. 3 Panipat to Samalkha Shahjahan (Mughal Era/~1640s) Ali Mardan Khan (Mughal- Era) [East of the Canal] (16) Nouhurah, Imam Shohdah, Jataul, Binjhol, Mehrana, Dahar, Hartari, Dewana, Bursham, Khalila, Manana, Didwari, Naraina, Tatyana, Dhodpur, Samalkha; [West - [East of the Canal] 47 Nallahs (10 to settlements & agricultural fields; 37 to agricultural fields); [West of the Canal] 47 Nallahs 10 Rehats (Imam Shohdah to Jataul); 05 Rehats (Jataul to Binjhol); 01 Rehat & 02 05 Chahs (Naultha) of the Canal] (14) Untla, Khukhrana, Lohari, Kalkha, Sutana, Bhadar, Bahdana, Karad, Jawahra, Shahpur, Majra, Jondhan, Israna, Naultha. (13 to settlements and agricultural fields; 34 to agricultural fields) Dhenkli (Dewana to Bursham); 11 Rehats (Khukhrana to Lohari); 04 Water Lifting Devices (Bhadar to Bahdana) 4 Samalkha to Sonipat Shahjahan (Mughal Era/~1640s) Ali Mardan Khan (Mughal- Era) [East of the Canal] (25) Kiwana, Namunda, Gawalra, Dindhar, Chalkana, Majri, Ahulana, Kheri, Miana, Gumar, Gannaur, Bhanwar, Sheikhpurah, Machhrauli, Alhwanpur, Siah, Jani Pur, Kailana, Pur, Dabarpur, Panchi, Chak Sheikh Lal, Mahara, Sitawali, Sonipat; [West of the Canal] (34) Sujadna, Buana Lakhu, Balana, Bandh, Palri, Maandi, Chamrara, Shaamri, Balli, Pugthala, Mehrana, Khanpur, Bajana, Gangauri, Kasandi, Do Bheta, Saragthal, Dodwah, Moi, Majri, Rolad, Majra, Bhidaal, Bidhal, Pinana, Bohla, Rehmana, Chati Deva, Torali, Majra Barwala, Nain, Tihar, Mohan Majra, Mohana. - [East of the Canal] 86 Nallahs ( 09 to settlements & agricultural fields; 76 agricultural fields; 01 garden irrigation channel. [West of the Canal] 83 Nallahs (25 to settlements & agricultural fields;57 to agricultural fields; 01 garden irrigation channel) 05 Rehats (Ahulana to Kheri); 06 Water Lifting Devices (Gannaur to Bhanwar); 04 Rehats (Pur to Dabarpur); 13 Water Lifting Devices (Sitawali to Sonipat); 05 Water Lifting Devices (Sujadna) 01 Chak (Sheikh Lal) Presence of Mughal Hunting Grounds near Dodwah and Rolad. 5 Sonipat to Bawana Shahjahan (Mughal Era/~1640s) Ali Mardan Khan (Mughal- Era) [East of the Canal] (41) Sandal Buzurg, Jawahri, Sandal Khurd, Uldepur, Kilorad, Barwasni, Hullaheri, Chitana, Juan, Karewari, Muhammad - [East of the Canal] 122 Nallahs (18 to settlements & agricultural fields; 104 to agricultural fields); [West of the 11 Water Liftings Devices (Muhammad Majri to Majra Sagarpur); 04 05 Chahs (Bhadan to Jharoti) Depth of the Canal equals 01 elephant height (Sandal Khurd) Majri, Majra Sagarpur, Mehlana, Bagru, Goharfiya, Kanu, Tihara, Gohar, Kakroi, Lohrara, Bayanpur, Harsana, Rohat, Nasirpur, Bidhnoli, Jorsara, Kanwali, Jhoran, Manduara, Safiabad, Turakpur, Majra, Mandauri, Halalpur, Nahari, Kathipur, Jhinjoli, Harewali, Bankner, Razapur, Sanoth; [West of the Canal] (43) Pus Pur, Ruj Nagar, Farmana, Ridhau, Salimpur, Guhna, Mahi, Lohadpur, Silana, Bidhan, Sisana, Nakloi, Sehri, Kheri, Khanda, Bhadana, Jharoti, Karkhauda, Thana Khurd, Nabua, Nilauthi, Gopalpur, Nasia, Thana Kalan, Khiroli, Juni, Rampur, Kataul, Nizampur, Jataula, Firozpur, Ratupur, Mungeshpur, Katewara, Urekpur, Auchandi, Majra Dabas, Bajitpur, Nangal, Daryapur, Ladpur, Chandpur, Bawana. Canal] 196 Nallahs (25 to settlements and agricultural fields; 171 to agricultural fields) Water Lifting Devices (Mehlana to Bagru); 06 Water Lifting Devices (Kakroi to Lohrara); 08 Water Lifting Devices (Jhinjoli to Harewali); 01 Water Lifting Device (Sehri to Kheri); 09 Water Lifting Devices (Chandpur to Bawana) 6 Bawana to Shahjahanabad Shahjahan (Mughal Era/~1640s) Ali Mardan Khan (Mughal- Era) [East of the Canal] (17) Holambi Kalan, Holambi Khurd, Naya Bans, Alipur, Khera Khurd, Khera Kalan, Budhpur, Siraspur, Raspur, Samaipur, Badli, Shalimar Bagh, Azadpur, Bharola, Malikpur, Darsarpur, Jogri, Katra & Bagh Mahaldar Khan, Bagh Qudsia Begum, Haveli Ali Mardan Khan, 04 Puls (Lal Pul, Pul Arjamand, Pul Mahtabi, Kodiya Pul) [East of the Canal] 112 Nallahs ( 09 to settlements & agricultural fields; 62 to agricultural fields; 41 garden irrigation channels); [West of the Canal] 75 Nallahs (17 to settlements & agricultural fields; 03 Water Lifting Devices (Sanoth to Holambi Kalan); 03 Water Lifting Devices (Jogri to Garden Suburbs); Shaduf or Camel’s Neck Mughal Hunting Grounds near Barwala and Rithala. Haveli Jaffar Khan, Haveli Bangash, Haveli Abdul Majid Khan, Haveli Dara Shikoh Shahzaade, Haveli Mazhar Bhawan, Haveli Raushan ud-Daula, Anguri Bagh, Qila: Red Fort, Delhi Darwaza (Fort), Chauk Sa’ad-ullah Khan, Daryaganj, Delhi Darwaza (City); [West of the Canal] (17) Sultanpur, Puth, Kanjhawala, Karala, Barwala, Pahladpur, Shahbad, Rithala, Alamgirpur, Razapur, Khaspur, Ibtampur, Salimpur, Maqubpur, Shakurpur, Mandipur, Mubarakpur, Serai Sitaram, Serai Rohilla Khan, Bagh Chandni Chowk, Karkhana Badshahi, Katra Topkhana Badshahi, Haveli, Anguri Bagh, Qila: Red Fort, Delhi Darwaza (Fort), Akbarabadi Masjid, Masjid Roshan ud-Daulah, Delhi Darwaza (City). 42 to agricultural fields; 16 garden irrigation channels) Water Lifting Device (Fort Walls) ~250 kms (~100 kms from Naya Bans to Karnal, ~150 kms from Karnal to Shahjahanabad) 230 settlements and Shahjahanabad 08 Bunds & 05 Puls 399 Nallahs (East of Canal) and 417 Nallahs (West of Canal) = 816 Nallahs (includes 62 garden irrigation channels, mostly in the city suburbs) 113 Water Lifting Devices (Rehat, Dhenkli, Shaduf) 06 Waterwheels and 10 Wells (Chah) All the hunting grounds are located West of the Canal. Al the important shrines are found to be built to the East of the Canal, between the river Yamuna and the Canal. The map uses elephant as a unit of measurement for illustrating the depth if the Canal. Appendix II/4B: Change in Settlement Areas with introduction of the British Canal, parallel to the Mughal Canal [Canal Section: North (Raeepoor to Nouluthuh)] S. No. Settlement Name Location (w.r.t. the Mughal Shah Canal/Ali Mardan Khan Canal) Coordinates (in dd mm ss.ss) Distance (from the Mughal Shah Canal/Ali Mardan Khan Canal, in kms) Distance (from the British Western Jamuna Canal, in kms) Area (during Mughal Period, in sq.kms.) Area (Present day, in sq.kms) Area (Growth Factor) 1 Raeepoor East 29 32 53.48N 76 54 37.54E 0.35 5.43 0.014 0.12 8.5 2 Shahjuhapoor East 29 32 29.44N 76 54 18.57E 0.22 5.38 0.018 0.09 5 3 Khoora Kheree West 29 31 47.79N 76 54 23.34E 0.73 6.47 0.026 0.11 4.23 4 Kheree Kaproun East 29 31 32.64N 76 53 26.36E 1.71 5.23 5 Moonuk East 29 31 07.29N 76 50 54.87E 4.54 0.97 0.043 0.56 13 6 Kootanuh West 29 30 15.37N 76 52 40.45E 0.41 3.55 0.007 0.14 20 7 Site of Old Village West 29 29 54.76N 76 54 16.68E 1.63 6.04 0.023 0.023 1 8 Dudlanuh West 29 29 35.91N 76 53 40.65E 2.95 4.86 0.034 0.52 15.29 9 Rer East (the Canal turns South-West) 29 29 19.03N 76 49 52.67E 1.35 1.35 0.047 0.19 4 10 Bahoolee West (the Canal turns South-West) 29 26 49.07N 76 55 13.19E 1.68 0.71 0.060 0.68 11.33 11 Site of Old Village West 29 28 08.40N 76 52 38.21E 1.33 1.23 0.047 0.047 1 12 Sithanuh East 29 26 50.32N 76 54 06.19E 1.92 0.90 0.035 0.35 10 13 Nouhuruh East 29 25 10.77N 76 54 10.77E 1.64 1.35 0.015 0.21 14 14 Asun (Kalan) West 29 24 31.44N 76 52 36.25E 2.25 5.45 0.069 0.27 3.9 15 Asun Khoord West 29 24 17.61N 76 52 17.61E 2.78 6.26 0.021 0.14 6.66 16 Shohdapoor East 29 23 46.87N 76 55 23.46E 2.20 1.62 0.025 0.35 14 17 Khookranuh East 29 23 43.95N 76 53 38.77E 0.57 4.45 0.011 0.12 10.9 18 Jatoul West 29 22 07.88N 76 54 38.04E 0.83 3.45 0.035 0.27 7.7 19 Sootanuh West 29 22 06.71N 76 52 48.33E 2.08 6.41 0.040 0.47 11.75 20 Bhadour West 29 20 51.26N 76 53 23.53E 1.40 6.25 0.025 0.27 10.8 21 Nouluthuh West 29 18 32.21N 76 54 00.56E 1.79 5.54 0.12 0.80 6.66 Folio Number Settlement Name Total Area (in Bighas) Irrigated Area (in Bighas) Unlined Wells Lined Wells F-01/31 Ahulana 5183 2677 12 6 F-02/5 Alipur 3384 2115 44 10 F-02/6 Auchandi 2172 1357 7 1 F-02/4 Azadpur 1020 638 0 4 F-02/5 Badli 3685 2303 0 15 F-03/15 Bandh 3804 1965 0 3 F-01/23 Bharola 4812 2485 0 0 F-01/31 Bidhal 3186 1646 2 2 F-02/3 Bidhan 4001 2501 42 4 F-02/7 Bidhnauli 1901 1488 4 4 F-02/6 Bawana 6659 4162 1 14 F-03/15 Bawana Makan 6092 3147 0 10 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Bohla 2214 1144 2 7 F-02/5 Budhpur 643 402 1 4 F-01/31 Bhanwar 14124 7295 0 0 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Bajana Kalan 4305 2224 2 12 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Bujana Khurd 3061 1581 9 17 F-03/15 Balli 3981 2050 0 0 F-02/6 Bankner 3640 2275 9 25 F-02/6 Barwala 2312 1445 2 2 F-02/6 Bajidpur 2314 1446 12 2 F-02/6 Chandpur 1003 627 0 0 F-02/6 Chandpur Wahidu 71 45 0 0 F-01/24 Chatia Dena 706 365 0 0 F-03/15 Chamrara 3261 1684 0 0 F-03/15 Dahar 4694 2575 0 0 1/27 & 1/28 Dodwah 2658 1373 6 0 1/27 & 1/28 Do Bheta 2750 1420 2 2 F-02/6 Daryapur 3103 1939 4 7 F-02/6 Firozpur 1566 979 8 2 F-01/24 Farmana 4253 2197 27 3 F-01/23 Gannauri-Gannaur 4954 2559 5 24 F-02/3 Gopalpur 2763 1727 8 3 F-02/7 Halalpur 2833 1771 3 25 F-02/7 Holambi Kalan 2129 1351 2 15 F-02/7 Holambi Khurd 1636 1023 2 1 F-02/5 Hyderpur 1505 940 0 6 F-03/15 Israna 5860 3030 0 7 F-02/7 Jhinjoli 1838 1149 7 1 F-02/3 Jharot 1559 975 7 1 F-02/3 Jharoti 1679 1049 9 4 F-01/33 Joara 4196 2168 12 0 F-01/24 Juan 7232 3736 7 25 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Juni 7477 3802 13 1 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Kasanda 2281 1178 16 4 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Kasandi 3591 1855 27 35 F-02/3 Khanda 6251 3907 28 10 F-01/23 Khanpur 8599 4442 8 56 Appendix II/4C: Details of Mughal Canal Villages (based on 1823-24 Survey by Capt. T. Oliver) F-02/5 Khanpur 1360 850 3 5 F-02/3 Kharkhauda 6886 4303 1 33 F-01/31 Kheri 4164 2151 7 1 F-01/31 Kheri 843 435 0 0 F-02/7 Khera Khurd 3451 2157 0 5 F-02/5 Khera Kalan 3023 1890 0 32 F-01/33 Khalila 1287 665 7 0 02-Jul Kanwali 1860 1163 9 2 1/27 & 1/28 Katana 2916 1500 2 0 F-02/6 Kanjhawala 3516 2198 11 4 F-02/6 Karala 3472 2170 16 12 F-02/6 Katewara 1168 730 19 1 F-01/31 Kataul 5224 2698 5 0 F-01/23 Kailana 4861 2511 0 0 F-02/6 Ladpur 2630 1644 10 5 F-01/24 Lohari Teeba 1181 610 4 0 F-01/31 Mahara 3262 1685 7 4 F-01/24 Majri 834 431 0 6 F-03/15 Maandi 6732 3477 0 0 F-02/4 Mubarakpur 918 574 3 1 F-01/24 Mohana 7457 3852 17 16 F-02/6 Muhammadpur 1274 796 6 2 F-02/6 Mungeshpur 1052 658 30 1 F-02/7 Mohan Majra 1423 889 0 1 F-02/7 Mandauri 1620 1012 4 2 F-02/7 Mandaura 2519 1574 5 5 F-02/7 Nahara 2960 1850 18 7 F-02/7 Nahari 3643 2277 0 56 F-02/6 Nangal 2096 1310 4 7 F-01/33 Nain 4130 2133 5 0 F-02/3 Nakloi 1545 965 22 1 F-02/3 Nizampur 1150 722 3 0 F-02/4 Nizampur 2541 1588 7 1 F-01/24 Nizampur Majra 2790 1441 4 1 F-02/7 Naya Bans 1546 966 0 0 F-01/31 Pinana 4619 2386 12 2 F-03/15 Pugthala 4161 2169 0 19 F-02/6 Puth Khurd 3944 2465 0 7 F-02/5 Puth Kulan 2705 1691 0 14 F-03/15 Patri 2284 1180 0 0 F-02/3 Rampur 1519 949 7 2 F-01/24 Ridhau 3042 1571 2 11 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Rolad 2768 1430 0 0 F-01/24 Rahmana 1562 807 0 0 F-02/7 Razapur 979 612 0 1 F-02/4 Saouduh 753 471 3 1 F-02/3 Sehri 2744 1715 18 2 F-02/3 Sisana 12082 7551 25 4 F-01/33 Shahpur 3200 1684 8 0 F-02/7 Shahpur 584 365 0 5 F-03/15 Shaamri 9435 4874 0 26 F-02/5 Shakurpur 2125 1328 3 4 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Saragthal 3891 2810 7 1 F-02/6 Sultanpur 2977 1860 0 0 F-02/5 Sultanpur Majra 1069 668 1 0 F-01/24 Salimpur Tourali 1509 779 0 0 F-0/24 Salimsar Majra 2560 1322 37 4 F-02/6 Sanoth 1665 1041 0 7 F-02/3 Thana Kalan 4165 2603 2 0 F-02/3 Thana Khurd 2193 1370 2 0 F-01/27 & F-01/28 Tihar 2947 1522 13 2 F-02/3 Tihara Khurd 1177 736 9 0 F-02/3 Tihara Kalan 1085 678 11 1 F-02/7 Turkpur 961 601 0 0 Appendix II/5A Gardens in Mughal Delhi (Watered Retreats, Tomb Gardens, Paradise Gardens etc.) S. No. Year Name of the Garden Location 01 1639-48 Khizrabad Garden (North of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 02 Tis Hazari Garden (Opposite the Kabuli Gate of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 03 d. 1556* Humayun’s Tomb Garden (South of Shahjahanabad) 04 1650 Raushan Ara Tomb Garden (Sabzi Mandi, North-West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 05 Sirhindi Begum Tomb Garden (Sabzi Mandi, North-West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 06 1706 Zinat al-Nisa Tomb Garden (within Tis Hazari Garden) City Suburbs 07 Malka Zamani Tomb Garden (within Tis Hazari Garden) City Suburbs 08 1653-54 Shalamar Garden (Originally known as Azzabad Garden or Garden of Akbarabadi, built by Azz al-Nisa Begum or Akbarabadi Mahal, wife of Shahjahan) City Suburbs 09 Ali Mardan Khan Garden (North of Shahjahanabad, Opposite Kashmiri Gate) City Suburbs 10 Jaffar Khan Garden (next to Ali Mardan Khan Garden) City Suburbs 11 Mohsan Khan Garden (in the area next to Jaffar Khan Garden) City Suburbs 12 1710-11 Mahaldar Khan Garden (beyond Sabzi Mandi) City Suburbs 13 1639-48 Hayat Baksh Garden (within Red Fort, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 14 1650 Begam Bagh or Sahib-a-bad (North of Chandni Chowk, Shahjahanabad – built by Shahjahan’s daughter, Jahan Ara – was later known as Queen’s Garden) Shahjahanabad 15 Hakim Ji’s Garden (Raisina, on Delhi Qutb Road) 16 Kamlapati’s Garden (Sarban Sarai, East of Delhi Qutb Road) 17 Bagh wali (Babarpur, it has a mosque in the centre) 18 Fazil Khan Garden (Nizampur, South of Shahjahanabad, near Humayun’s Tomb) 19 1626* Tomb Garden of Khan-i-Khanan Abdur Rahim Khan (near Humayun’s Tomb) 20 Garden of Bu Halima (Opp. West Gate of Huamyun’s Tomb) 21 Isa Khan Baghichi, Garden (Jorbagh, east of Aliganj) 22 1853-54 Najaf Khan Tomb Garden (Bibipur) 23 1753-54 Safdarjung’s Tomb Garden (Jorbagh) 24 Baghichi (Gateway of Old Karbala, Jorbagh) 25 * Bagh Mochi (built during Jehangir’s reign, Arakpur) Appendix 5A 26 Tal Katora Garden (03 miles out of Shahjahanabad, south- west of Jami Masjid) 27 Sangam Lal Garden (Sabzi Mandi, North West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 28 James Skinner’s Garden (Sabzi Mandi, North West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 29 Farrashwala Bagh (Sabzi Mandi, North West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 30 1748 Qudsiya Bagh (North of Shahjanabad) City Suburbs 31 Garden of Bakhshi Mahmud – Walled Garden (Mehrauli) 32 Baghichi of Zinat Mahal (Zinat Mahal was wife of Bahadur Shah II, Mehrauli) 33 1748 Bagh Nazir (Ladha Sarai) 34 1715 Baghichi (Adhchini) 35 Garden of Najaf Khan (Najafgarh) 36 Mahtab Bagh (within Red Fort, Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 37 Company Bagh or Lady Hardinge Purdah Bagh or Zenana Bagh (within Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 38 Moti Bagh (North West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 39 Mubarak Bagh, was later known as Ochterlony Gardens (North West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 40 Jhalra Bagh (Baburpur) 41 Daulat Beg ka Bagh ?? (Kotla Mubarak Pur) 42 Gulabi Bagh (within Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 43 Sirhindi Bagh (within Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 44 Angoori Bagh (within Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 45 Bagh Sihezari (between Kashmiri and Kabuli Gates of Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 46 Baghwa Bari (Enclosed Garden within Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 47 Baghicha of Tansukh Rai Kagazi (near Turkman Darwaza, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 48 Baghicha Khan Begum (close to Tripualiya, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 49 Bagh Begum Samru (Opp, Dariba Kalan, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 50 1804-05 Bagh of Munshi Kanwal Nain (North of Jama Masjid, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 51 Baghichas (between Qassabpura and Ganj Mir Khan, Shahjahanabad) Shahjahanabad 52 Bagh-i-Fidai Khan (Subzi Mandi) City Suburbs 53 Bagh Karre Khan (Subzi Mandi) City Suburbs 54 Bagh-i-Chak Bakram (Subzi Mandi) City Suburbs Appendix 5A 55 1665 Bagh Jawahar Khan (between Subzi Mandi and Shalamar Bagh) City Suburbs 56 Bagh Kakwan (next to Bagh Mahaldar Khan) City Suburbs 57 General Sahib Bagh (next to Bagh Mahaldar Khan) City Suburbs 58 Bagh Siddi Gauhar Khan (West of Shahjahanabad) City Suburbs 59 * Karaul Bagh (West of Shahjahanabad), predates Shahjahanabad City Suburbs 60 Bagh Kalali (south of Bhuli Bhatiyari) 61 Bagh Muhammad Yar Khan 62 Baghicha of Gardaiji Pandit 63 Mochi Bagh (near Moti Bagh) Appendix II/5B Elevation_1800 Calculation for Foothill ID wkt_geom Elevation_1850 Elevation_1900 Elevation_1950 1950-1900 1900-1850 Proportionate factor of change (100 years) 1 PointZM (77.17126004436681797 28.71921914445660207 0 0) 208.35 208.00 207.99 1.000 1.002 1.002 208.34 2 PointZM (77.17367952151181498 28.71904241743036579 0 0) 208.83 208.00 207.46 1.003 1.004 1.001 209.12 3 PointZM (77.17533318154306698 28.71892880719920882 0 0) 207.58 207.00 207.66 0.997 1.003 1.006 208.83 4 PointZM (77.17048581168042176 28.71791893847783683 0 0) 209.14 209.00 208.99 1.000 1.001 1.001 209.27 5 PointZM (77.17448320870255429 28.7176496401521355 0 0) 207.06 207.00 208.12 0.995 1.000 1.006 208.24 6 PointZM (77.1723540688149825 28.71642517432745123 0 0) 209.39 209.42 209.98 0.997 1.000 1.003 209.92 7 PointZM (77.17520694795288705 28.71620216165148065 0 0) 207.80 207.91 208.80 0.996 0.999 1.004 208.58 8 PointZM (77.17004399411483462 28.71528907201589931 0 0) 211.30 210.65 207.70 1.014 1.003 0.989 208.99 9 PointZM (77.1727496007308531 28.71512496834867534 0 0) 210.18 210.30 210.42 0.999 0.999 1.000 210.17 10 PointZM (77.17653660843603802 28.71487250116833323 0 0) 207.76 207.71 208.79 0.995 1.000 1.005 208.88 11 PointZM (77.17000191625145078 28.71395099596007228 0 0) 211.88 211.04 209.74 1.006 1.004 0.998 211.41 12 PointZM (77.17146201811111439 28.71383317794257906 0 0) 213.34 212.19 210.87 1.006 1.005 0.999 213.16 13 PointZM (77.17262336714068738 28.71375743778847323 0 0) 212.04 211.89 210.42 1.007 1.001 0.994 210.72 14 PointZM (77.17412554686374904 28.71362699641196414 0 0) 208.83 209.92 210.27 0.998 0.995 0.996 208.09 15 PointZM (77.1762252322469493 28.71349655503545151 0 0) 208.03 208.10 210.00 0.991 1.000 1.009 209.85 16 PointZM (77.16995773449490059 28.71263816662228052 0 0) 212.50 211.50 210.53 1.005 1.005 1.000 212.52 17 PointZM (77.17151882322670531 28.71298951678159384 0 0) 210.46 211.81 210.60 1.006 0.994 0.988 207.93 18 PointZM (77.17273066569235596 28.7125224524979572 0 0) 213.65 212.66 210.41 1.011 1.005 0.994 212.38 19 PointZM (77.17360588525089327 28.71249299799358212 0 0) 211.22 211.00 210.39 1.003 1.001 0.998 210.84 20 PointZM (77.1761642193450399 28.71234572547171737 0 0) 208.21 208.75 210.13 0.993 0.997 1.004 209.05 21 PointZM (77.16994300724269351 28.71132323339131531 0 0) 212.80 211.87 210.81 1.005 1.004 0.999 212.66 22 PointZM (77.17147464147011249 28.7112096231601619 0 0) 212.23 211.72 210.57 1.005 1.002 0.997 211.59 23 PointZM (77.17260863988852293 28.71117806476261691 0 0) 212.39 211.81 210.51 1.006 1.003 0.997 211.67 24 PointZM (77.17440115686896718 28.71102658445440881 0 0) 211.95 211.22 210.47 1.004 1.003 1.000 211.92 25 PointZM (77.17584021979693887 28.71102658445441236 0 0) 210.03 209.74 210.31 0.997 1.001 1.004 210.90 26 PointZM (77.16990303327249023 28.7099620145106158 0 0) 212.90 212.38 211.03 1.006 1.002 0.996 212.05 27 PointZM (77.17358063853285444 28.70917095067887104 0 0) 210.82 210.73 210.47 1.001 1.000 0.999 210.65 28 PointZM (77.17184282277480634 28.70850191265095575 0 0) 212.92 211.93 210.97 1.005 1.005 1.000 212.95 29 PointZM (77.17584021979693887 28.70829573112034083 0 0) 211.21 210.12 210.39 0.999 1.005 1.006 212.58 30 PointZM (77.16985674762273106 28.70726482346725916 0 0) 213.11 212.84 212.48 1.002 1.001 1.000 213.03 31 PointZM (77.17293263943659554 28.70704181079128858 0 0) 211.73 211.59 211.14 1.002 1.001 0.999 211.42 32 PointZM (77.17623154392643414 28.70662944773005876 0 0) 210.12 210.06 210.55 0.998 1.000 1.003 210.67 33 PointZM (77.17131264169603355 28.70583417611197419 0 0) 211.90 212.29 212.57 0.999 0.998 0.999 211.79 34 PointZM (77.17465993572875504 28.70563430626086543 0 0) 212.19 211.75 211.00 1.004 1.002 0.999 211.88 35 PointZM (77.16971157899401135 28.70458025578292549 0 0) 213.61 213.38 213.48 1.000 1.001 1.002 213.95 36 PointZM (77.1709192136733293 28.70454238570587435 0 0) 212.63 212.59 213.14 0.997 1.000 1.003 213.22 37 PointZM (77.17342705433142669 28.70443298326106074 0 0) 212.27 212.24 212.01 1.001 1.000 0.999 212.07 38 PointZM (77.16965266998526829 28.70324428362026836 0 0) 213.65 213.59 213.49 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.61 39 PointZM (77.17365217090059559 28.70302547873063048 0 0) 212.75 212.65 212.62 1.000 1.000 1.000 212.82 40 PointZM (77.17626099843081988 28.70288662178143824 0 0) 210.75 211.00 211.51 0.998 0.999 1.001 211.01 41 PointZM (77.16962742326720104 28.70256893391283981 0 0) 213.82 213.75 213.51 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.64 42 PointZM (77.17059311023204771 28.70185781802153713 0 0) 213.77 213.45 213.49 1.000 1.001 1.002 214.13 43 PointZM (77.1720321731600194 28.7017820778674313 0 0) 212.15 212.76 213.08 0.998 0.997 0.999 211.87 44 PointZM (77.17252869194803111 28.70171475328600508 0 0) 213.00 212.99 212.91 1.000 1.000 1.000 212.94 45 PointZM (77.17519642848699846 28.70160114305485166 0 0) 212.76 212.63 212.79 0.999 1.001 1.001 213.05 46 PointZM (77.16955799479262623 28.70121823449799692 0 0) 213.99 213.83 213.48 1.002 1.001 0.999 213.81 47 PointZM (77.17312619760816972 28.70036405387116218 0 0) 213.65 213.50 213.12 1.002 1.001 0.999 213.43 48 PointZM (77.17608006361820117 28.70018732684492591 0 0) 213.14 213.07 213.15 1.000 1.000 1.001 213.29 49 PointZM (77.16948646242485665 28.699846496151455 0 0) 213.84 213.33 213.53 0.999 1.002 1.003 214.54 50 PointZM (77.1711695769604944 28.69909330239675782 0 0) 213.88 213.49 213.53 1.000 1.002 1.002 214.32 51 PointZM (77.17333658692511733 28.69900073109729988 0 0) 213.78 213.73 213.47 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.56 52 PointZM (77.17424546877435887 28.69915641919184424 0 0) 214.18 214.01 213.52 1.002 1.001 0.999 213.87 53 PointZM (77.17529741535912535 28.6989796921656044 0 0) 214.06 213.97 213.51 1.002 1.000 0.998 213.69 54 PointZM (77.16938968333906246 28.69780151199065443 0 0) 213.87 213.70 213.58 1.001 1.001 1.000 213.92 55 PointZM (77.17034905862435323 28.69609315073699207 0 0) 213.57 213.58 213.61 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.59 56 PointZM (77.17404770281640936 28.69603003394190566 0 0) 213.80 213.77 213.51 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.57 57 PointZM (77.16921716409913756 28.69511273651998451 0 0) 213.69 213.68 213.64 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.65 Factor of Change Factor of change for the known elevations of 1950, 1900 and 1850 were calculated by dividing the elevations with the past elevation (50 year interval) e.g. Elev of 1950/Elev of 1900, and then Elev 0f 1900/elev of 1850. The resulting factors were further divided with each other to get proportionate factorial change in 100 years which gives a value of the factor of change..This was then multiplied to the previous known elevation to get the value of the unknown elevation. For areas which witnessed a major change such as the Aravalli foothills the slope was calculated from the top of the hill to the Najafgarh Nallah and then those foactors were used to extrapolate the value for the fotthill. Extrapolation Technique for Calculating Mughal-Era Elevation of Shahjahanabad Garden Suburb 58 PointZM (77.17157352444901619 28.69495915231862071 0 0) 212.70 212.99 213.58 0.997 0.999 1.001 212.99 59 PointZM (77.17453370213854669 28.69475086689483589 0 0) 213.45 213.47 213.56 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.52 59 PointZM (77.17600011567770935 28.69467091895439381 0 0) 213.79 213.80 213.53 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.51 61 PointZM (77.16913932005184051 28.69374730985296651 0 0) 213.82 213.76 213.65 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.78 62 PointZM (77.17146622589734761 28.69363369962180954 0 0) 212.79 212.95 213.60 0.997 0.999 1.002 213.28 63 PointZM (77.17442429969372597 28.69348642709993769 0 0) 213.20 213.26 213.58 0.998 1.000 1.001 213.46 64 PointZM (77.16908041104306903 28.69240923379713948 0 0) 213.51 213.49 213.67 0.999 1.000 1.001 213.72 65 PointZM (77.17070040878361681 28.69230403913866212 0 0) 213.09 213.14 213.63 0.998 1.000 1.002 213.54 66 PointZM (77.17335552196358606 28.69221146783920062 0 0) 213.10 213.03 213.52 0.998 1.000 1.003 213.66 67 PointZM (77.17550990856919668 28.69203474081296079 0 0) 213.73 213.67 213.47 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.60 68 PointZM (77.17286321096192125 28.69105853438229303 0 0) 212.28 212.58 213.61 0.995 0.999 1.003 213.01 69 PointZM (77.17571609009982581 28.69085656063801792 0 0) 213.94 213.91 213.65 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.71 70 PointZM (77.1690299176070198 28.68950375733000513 0 0) 213.50 213.40 213.61 0.999 1.000 1.001 213.81 71 PointZM (77.17007765640545358 28.68945747168027793 0 0) 213.81 213.41 213.61 0.999 1.002 1.003 214.42 72 PointZM (77.17207214713016583 28.68946588725294689 0 0) 213.84 212.98 213.62 0.997 1.004 1.007 215.36 73 PointZM (77.17328398959581648 28.68887679716547723 0 0) 213.88 213.74 213.83 1.000 1.001 1.001 214.11 74 PointZM (77.17482824718227619 28.68837607059112571 0 0) 213.91 213.90 214.03 0.999 1.000 1.001 214.04 75 PointZM (77.1689331385212256 28.68816568127417455 0 0) 213.50 213.45 213.54 1.000 1.000 1.001 213.64 76 PointZM (77.17191645903564279 28.68770282477687772 0 0) 214.05 213.87 213.77 1.000 1.001 1.000 214.14 77 PointZM (77.16889526844417446 28.68745877316921167 0 0) 213.63 213.62 213.53 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.56 78 PointZM (77.1706793698519391 28.68665508597844038 0 0) 213.58 213.90 213.67 1.001 0.999 0.997 213.03 79 PointZM (77.1725139646957814 28.68661721590138924 0 0) 213.92 213.99 214.18 0.999 1.000 1.001 214.04 80 PointZM (77.17564455773205623 28.68639841101175492 0 0) 214.79 214.73 214.14 1.003 1.000 0.998 214.27 81 PointZM (77.16880269714469875 28.68614173604506945 0 0) 213.80 213.83 213.60 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.54 82 PointZM (77.17028383793605428 28.68530859434993374 0 0) 214.09 214.07 213.88 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.92 83 PointZM (77.17266544500398595 28.68518236075976091 0 0) 214.08 214.04 214.36 0.999 1.000 1.002 214.43 84 PointZM (77.17438642961667483 28.68515290625538938 0 0) 214.20 214.10 214.17 1.000 1.000 1.001 214.37 85 PointZM (77.16872274920426378 28.68476368601902848 0 0) 214.10 214.07 213.97 1.000 1.000 1.000 214.04 86 PointZM (77.1686596324091596 28.68409464799112385 0 0) 214.28 214.19 214.16 1.000 1.000 1.000 214.35 87 PointZM (77.17047529221447633 28.68403153119603743 0 0) 214.14 214.03 214.37 0.998 1.001 1.002 214.60 88 PointZM (77.17285269149606108 28.68378747958836428 0 0) 214.71 214.03 214.38 0.998 1.003 1.005 215.75 89 PointZM (77.17144308307246092 28.68246202689156021 0 0) 213.41 213.52 214.29 0.996 0.999 1.003 214.06 90 PointZM (77.17499445474263098 28.68233158551504758 0 0) 212.39 212.93 213.63 0.997 0.997 1.001 212.55 91 PointZM (77.1685712688960308 28.68199285871475368 0 0) 214.35 213.42 214.42 0.995 1.004 1.009 216.30 92 PointZM (77.17277484744876404 28.68121441824202122 0 0) 212.39 212.74 213.53 0.996 0.998 1.002 212.82 93 PointZM (77.16847448981020818 28.679931043408601 0 0) 213.06 212.71 213.05 0.998 1.002 1.003 213.76 94 PointZM (77.17427281938545036 28.67959862828781681 0 0) 210.75 211.98 214.04 0.990 0.994 1.004 211.57 95 PointZM (77.16838402240388461 28.67860769460495618 0 0) 212.54 212.22 212.66 0.998 1.002 1.004 213.31 96 PointZM (77.17265702943122108 28.67838678582215906 0 0) 211.51 211.93 216.07 0.981 0.998 1.017 215.21 97 PointZM (77.17142625192703065 28.67774299451227549 0 0) 213.05 211.87 215.80 0.982 1.006 1.024 218.21 98 PointZM (77.16988620212691785 28.67753050130214731 0 0) 210.85 211.92 215.58 0.983 0.995 1.012 213.41 99 PointZM (77.16830617835661599 28.67723806015158061 0 0) 212.07 211.92 211.53 1.002 1.001 0.999 211.84 100 PointZM (77.17087292802347065 28.67713496938627316 0 0) 214.51 211.89 213.46 0.993 1.012 1.020 218.76 101 PointZM (77.17444533862534684 28.6768867099922673 0 0) 211.74 211.99 208.41 1.017 0.999 0.982 207.91 102 PointZM (77.16826410049324636 28.67627237318676592 0 0) 211.78 211.90 214.09 0.990 0.999 1.010 213.84 103 PointZM (77.17062256473629134 28.67578847775777007 0 0) 211.61 212.02 205.99 1.029 0.998 0.970 205.20 104 PointZM (77.17230778316510964 28.67570852981732088 0 0) 212.42 212.40 210.62 1.008 1.000 0.992 210.65 105 PointZM (77.17325032730506962 28.67568117920611925 0 0) 212.32 212.43 211.92 1.002 0.999 0.997 211.70 106 PointZM (77.16817573698014598 28.6746081936896573 0 0) 211.74 212.25 207.90 1.021 0.998 0.977 206.90 107 PointZM (77.16983570869091125 28.67446723284729515 0 0) 216.55 212.97 205.09 1.038 1.017 0.979 212.05 108 PointZM (77.17179232933858657 28.67430312918007829 0 0) 214.34 213.09 214.93 0.991 1.006 1.014 217.45 109 PointZM (77.17276012019658538 28.67438728490686017 0 0) 213.38 213.24 219.51 0.971 1.001 1.030 219.79 110 PointZM (77.17475040313496493 28.67431996032543395 0 0) 213.52 213.44 219.15 0.974 1.000 1.027 219.31 111 PointZM (77.17120955093062662 28.6737350780243041 0 0) 213.81 213.37 207.43 1.029 1.002 0.974 208.27 112 PointZM (77.17259601652934009 28.6730050270944794 0 0) 216.43 214.07 213.20 1.004 1.011 1.007 217.93 113 PointZM (77.16723108894703387 28.67193624936434304 0 0) 213.30 215.00 217.55 0.988 0.992 1.004 214.12 114 PointZM (77.16848500927606835 28.67191100264630776 0 0) 213.05 213.90 216.22 0.989 0.996 1.007 214.50 115 PointZM (77.16961269601495133 28.67184788585122135 0 0) 213.50 214.10 217.15 0.986 0.997 1.011 215.93 116 PointZM (77.17046687664178251 28.67183526249220904 0 0) 213.81 214.29 216.54 0.990 0.998 1.008 215.57 117 PointZM (77.17167030353475354 28.67165432767962585 0 0) 214.23 214.85 216.94 0.990 0.997 1.007 215.69 118 PointZM (77.16713430986118283 28.67060658888119917 0 0) 213.62 215.00 217.63 0.988 0.994 1.006 214.85 119 PointZM (77.16957482593785755 28.6705350565134367 0 0) 215.31 215.14 217.99 0.987 1.001 1.014 218.33 120 PointZM (77.1699514228152168 28.67059606941535677 0 0) 214.68 215.14 217.47 0.989 0.998 1.009 216.53 121 PointZM (77.17079508397620202 28.67064235506508751 0 0) 215.05 214.97 217.47 0.989 1.000 1.012 217.62 122 PointZM (77.17206162766424882 28.67042986185495579 0 0) 215.84 215.41 219.07 0.983 1.002 1.019 219.95 123 PointZM (77.17403507945729757 28.67019843360630915 0 0) 216.18 215.68 219.97 0.980 1.002 1.022 221.00 124 PointZM (77.17370687212286384 28.66854687746821995 0 0) 217.43 218.94 223.65 0.979 0.993 1.014 220.56 125 PointZM (77.16784332185936535 28.66789887837201078 0 0) 216.98 219.00 222.92 0.982 0.991 1.008 218.82 126 PointZM (77.16927396921465743 28.66782734600424476 0 0) 219.18 218.80 225.08 0.972 1.002 1.030 225.85 127 PointZM (77.17005030579420577 28.66777054088866095 0 0) 217.96 219.81 225.15 0.976 0.992 1.016 221.38 128 PointZM (77.17170817361180468 28.66769690462773212 0 0) 219.15 222.07 223.89 0.992 0.987 0.995 218.03 129 PointZM (77.17252238026841837 28.66765693065751108 0 0) 219.04 222.15 224.87 0.988 0.986 0.998 218.62 130 PointZM (77.16780124399598151 28.66725508706212722 0 0) 218.52 221.00 223.72 0.988 0.989 1.001 218.73 131 PointZM (77.16778441285060808 28.66655238674349704 0 0) 220.27 222.00 223.37 0.994 0.992 0.998 219.90 132 PointZM (77.1696084882285902 28.66647875048256466 0 0) 223.21 225.18 228.10 0.987 0.991 1.004 224.13 133 PointZM (77.1698378125840776 28.66647243880305496 0 0) 224.48 225.18 228.17 0.987 0.997 1.010 226.76 134 PointZM (77.17035537030378123 28.66643036093966401 0 0) 228.55 226.94 227.70 0.997 1.007 1.010 230.93 135 PointZM (77.1708624085576389 28.66642404926015431 0 0) 231.18 228.26 226.78 1.007 1.013 1.006 232.62 136 PointZM (77.17144518696559885 28.66635462078556884 0 0) 226.08 229.01 225.37 1.016 0.987 0.971 219.64 137 PointZM (77.17184071888146946 28.66632937406753356 0 0) 234.67 229.01 224.73 1.019 1.025 1.006 235.96 138 PointZM (77.17258760095666048 28.66619682879785103 0 0) 226.42 229.18 225.87 1.015 0.988 0.974 220.47 139 PointZM (77.1732818857026075 28.66619051711833066 0 0) 224.10 228.78 224.93 1.017 0.980 0.963 215.82 140 PointZM (77.17480510435736107 28.66615475093444942 0 0) 223.03 226.42 222.16 1.019 0.985 0.967 215.57 141 PointZM (77.16771708826918541 28.6652143106876629 0 0) 222.00 223.00 225.38 0.989 0.996 1.006 223.37 142 PointZM (77.16865963240913118 28.66513857053356062 0 0) 227.09 226.52 229.04 0.989 1.003 1.014 230.20 143 PointZM (77.16931604707802705 28.66511332381552535 0 0) 230.89 228.90 230.05 0.995 1.009 1.014 234.07 144 PointZM (77.16999350067862906 28.6651175316018616 0 0) 235.88 231.07 229.57 1.007 1.021 1.014 239.24 145 PointZM (77.17088765527569194 28.66514698610623668 0 0) 239.26 234.20 230.56 1.016 1.022 1.006 240.63 146 PointZM (77.17217944568180599 28.66505231091361594 0 0) 241.20 235.24 229.09 1.027 1.025 0.999 240.85 147 PointZM (77.173260846770944 28.6649197656439334 0 0) 237.14 234.92 228.71 1.027 1.009 0.983 233.04 148 PointZM (77.17416131304750593 28.66483140213080461 0 0) 233.01 232.11 228.02 1.018 1.004 0.986 229.79 149 PointZM (77.17463468901064516 28.66478301258790751 0 0) 228.01 232.11 226.73 1.024 0.982 0.960 218.79 150 PointZM (77.17484507832760698 28.66472620747232725 0 0) 228.55 229.70 225.83 1.017 0.995 0.978 223.58 151 PointZM (77.17679959508210175 28.7188257164338907 0 0) 206.54 206.00 207.53 0.993 1.003 1.010 208.62 152 PointZM (77.17846167068603336 28.71871210620273729 0 0) 207.74 207.00 207.17 0.999 1.004 1.004 208.65 153 PointZM (77.18137766661904209 28.71848698963358615 0 0) 205.81 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.999 1.004 206.71 154 PointZM (77.1857495566253391 28.71815878229913821 0 0) 205.62 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.998 1.003 206.33 155 PointZM (77.17741603578079435 28.71745608198051514 0 0) 207.50 207.00 207.63 0.997 1.002 1.005 208.63 156 PointZM (77.18028364217087756 28.71725200434307368 0 0) 206.47 207.00 207.13 0.999 0.997 0.998 206.07 157 PointZM (77.18164906883791332 28.71715101747093613 0 0) 206.01 206.50 207.12 0.997 0.998 1.001 206.14 158 PointZM (77.18445040259312862 28.71692905674154517 0 0) 205.82 207.00 207.09 1.000 0.994 0.995 204.74 159 PointZM (77.17855424198549485 28.71586238290458937 0 0) 207.03 207.00 207.43 0.998 1.000 1.002 207.48 160 PointZM (77.18228234068187987 28.71552575999746537 0 0) 206.08 206.37 207.09 0.997 0.999 1.002 206.51 161 PointZM (77.1854129337181547 28.71532589014636017 0 0) 205.47 206.81 207.09 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.41 162 PointZM (77.17803037258624954 28.71474731952473292 0 0) 206.61 206.95 207.81 0.996 0.998 1.002 207.13 163 PointZM (77.18121777073811529 28.71454955356680117 0 0) 207.12 206.30 207.09 0.996 1.004 1.008 208.74 164 PointZM (77.18563173860779614 28.71447170951952188 0 0) 205.13 206.74 207.09 0.998 0.992 0.994 203.88 165 PointZM (77.17781367158978867 28.71337768507136445 0 0) 208.01 207.82 208.49 0.997 1.001 1.004 208.87 166 PointZM (77.180474044502688 28.71317571132708579 0 0) 207.77 207.42 207.29 1.001 1.002 1.001 207.99 167 PointZM (77.18364987124211041 28.71293271166600292 0 0) 206.38 206.74 207.09 0.998 0.998 1.000 206.38 168 PointZM (77.17816607369567805 28.71222580356102938 0 0) 206.61 207.31 208.32 0.995 0.997 1.001 206.90 169 PointZM (77.18277780752332262 28.71182290801906944 0 0) 206.93 206.63 207.43 0.996 1.001 1.005 208.04 170 PointZM (77.18487538901334233 28.71166196019160211 0 0) 206.24 206.79 207.09 0.999 0.997 0.999 205.99 171 PointZM (77.17786626891894741 28.71079936399208421 0 0) 208.60 208.18 209.18 0.995 1.002 1.007 210.03 172 PointZM (77.18105366707079895 28.71059423440805247 0 0) 207.86 206.17 207.64 0.993 1.008 1.015 211.06 173 PointZM (77.18249220402542221 28.71047852028372205 0 0) 207.11 206.23 207.47 0.994 1.004 1.010 209.24 174 PointZM (77.18393179292668549 28.71038279314450747 0 0) 207.44 206.44 207.29 0.996 1.005 1.009 209.31 175 PointZM (77.18567276452452575 28.71024709203507541 0 0) 206.68 206.79 207.09 0.999 0.999 1.001 206.87 176 PointZM (77.17836489160006863 28.7097547810334035 0 0) 207.27 207.12 209.05 0.991 1.001 1.010 209.35 177 PointZM (77.18338478070263875 28.70902893788990085 0 0) 205.70 206.46 207.57 0.995 0.996 1.002 206.06 178 PointZM (77.18510576531532763 28.70874806815177038 0 0) 205.74 206.22 207.43 0.994 0.998 1.003 206.46 179 PointZM (77.17940421482580859 28.70809375737603375 0 0) 209.02 208.53 209.11 0.997 1.002 1.005 210.09 180 PointZM (77.18244644434901147 28.70778974481304147 0 0) 207.77 207.64 207.97 0.998 1.001 1.002 208.23 181 PointZM (77.18582634872588244 28.70747205694443238 0 0) 207.11 206.92 207.50 0.997 1.001 1.004 207.88 182 PointZM (77.17978291559631998 28.70662313605050997 0 0) 208.70 209.23 209.52 0.999 0.997 0.999 208.47 183 PointZM (77.18390444231545189 28.70638750001551642 0 0) 207.76 207.94 207.98 1.000 0.999 0.999 207.63 184 PointZM (77.17861525488720531 28.70542812473020788 0 0) 212.19 211.21 210.14 1.005 1.005 1.000 212.10 185 PointZM (77.1824169898445831 28.70513883941938715 0 0) 209.36 209.37 209.53 0.999 1.000 1.001 209.51 186 PointZM (77.18510471336870182 28.7049494890341208 0 0) 208.01 208.61 208.44 1.001 0.997 0.996 207.25 187 PointZM (77.17775213271441714 28.70422469783720842 0 0) 212.93 211.63 210.50 1.005 1.006 1.001 213.09 188 PointZM (77.18570642681521576 28.70372870502247764 0 0) 211.41 210.05 209.19 1.004 1.006 1.002 211.91 189 PointZM (77.18063657024985957 28.70259628452396683 0 0) 211.74 211.59 210.67 1.004 1.001 0.996 210.97 190 PointZM (77.18485750592128625 28.70249687557170404 0 0) 212.24 211.80 210.29 1.007 1.002 0.995 211.17 191 PointZM (77.1769700104286045 28.70150962370189163 0 0) 211.67 211.89 212.16 0.999 0.999 1.000 211.72 192 PointZM (77.17995964262254915 28.70124348121594338 0 0) 212.87 212.67 211.77 1.004 1.001 0.997 212.16 193 PointZM (77.18339635211499683 28.70123085785693462 0 0) 212.27 212.31 211.14 1.006 1.000 0.994 211.06 194 PointZM (77.17756225635579881 28.70004321016270765 0 0) 213.33 213.04 213.20 0.999 1.001 1.002 213.79 195 PointZM (77.18091901790781151 28.69974024954629499 0 0) 212.81 212.97 212.99 1.000 0.999 0.999 212.66 196 PointZM (77.18281357370699425 28.69973288592020211 0 0) 213.11 213.00 212.61 1.002 1.001 0.999 212.83 197 PointZM (77.18503738878723652 28.70031145654183291 0 0) 212.90 212.81 210.97 1.009 1.000 0.992 211.15 198 PointZM (77.18538663505336217 28.69916167892467485 0 0) 213.24 213.25 211.66 1.008 1.000 0.992 211.63 199 PointZM (77.17675436137865574 28.69878613399391298 0 0) 213.68 213.66 213.51 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.54 200 PointZM (77.17953886398855445 28.69832643333636568 0 0) 214.04 213.91 213.43 1.002 1.001 0.998 213.68 201 PointZM (77.17703943890316509 28.69751117473316171 0 0) 214.33 214.25 213.47 1.004 1.000 0.997 213.63 202 PointZM (77.181470237918262 28.69721136995649857 0 0) 213.72 213.70 213.51 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.54 203 PointZM (77.18365092318850884 28.69703779877000827 0 0) 213.77 213.62 213.43 1.001 1.001 1.000 213.73 204 PointZM (77.17939790314623849 28.69585015107579196 0 0) 213.89 213.92 213.50 1.002 1.000 0.998 213.43 205 PointZM (77.18202250987525304 28.69573338500488191 0 0) 213.79 213.75 213.49 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.57 206 PointZM (77.18428524697914384 28.69565554095760973 0 0) 213.66 213.59 213.38 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.52 207 PointZM (77.17745916559053398 28.69457519181503358 0 0) 213.97 213.98 213.49 1.002 1.000 0.998 213.47 208 PointZM (77.17989968166720871 28.69439004921610348 0 0) 214.02 214.00 213.50 1.002 1.000 0.998 213.54 209 PointZM (77.18285459962385175 28.69385145256469372 0 0) 213.80 213.75 213.53 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.63 210 PointZM (77.185519180323098 28.69377992019693124 0 0) 213.58 213.78 213.23 1.003 0.999 0.996 212.83 211 PointZM (77.17739394490224925 28.69336334934935095 0 0) 213.96 213.95 213.47 1.002 1.000 0.998 213.49 212 PointZM (77.18283671653190936 28.69235558452113821 0 0) 215.70 214.13 213.52 1.003 1.007 1.004 216.67 213 PointZM (77.18427788335303319 28.69238924681184599 0 0) 213.72 213.72 213.46 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.46 214 PointZM (77.17801459338726033 28.69184013069459738 0 0) 213.93 213.91 213.76 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.80 215 PointZM (77.18084748554008456 28.691528754505498 0 0) 213.78 213.75 213.49 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.55 216 PointZM (77.18355940383564473 28.69133730022706885 0 0) 213.64 213.67 213.46 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.40 217 PointZM (77.18552128421626435 28.69132783270780251 0 0) 213.13 213.31 213.32 1.000 0.999 0.999 212.95 218 PointZM (77.17659762133756374 28.69076819712469728 0 0) 214.07 213.99 213.86 1.001 1.000 1.000 214.02 219 PointZM (77.1801500449543596 28.69052414551702412 0 0) 214.06 213.64 214.00 0.998 1.002 1.004 214.84 220 PointZM (77.17765061986888497 28.68884734266088543 0 0) 214.04 214.12 214.02 1.001 1.000 0.999 213.85 221 PointZM (77.18066129099452155 28.68869796624584367 0 0) 214.19 213.52 213.83 0.999 1.003 1.005 215.17 222 PointZM (77.17840907335650513 28.68759552622499953 0 0) 214.65 214.48 213.96 1.002 1.001 0.998 214.29 223 PointZM (77.18362883231019111 28.6876386560349772 0 0) 213.05 213.12 213.43 0.999 1.000 1.001 213.30 224 PointZM (77.1773907890624713 28.68623904110393852 0 0) 215.12 214.74 214.01 1.003 1.002 0.998 214.77 225 PointZM (77.17927640331568284 28.68621432035919483 0 0) 214.40 213.99 213.69 1.001 1.002 1.001 214.52 226 PointZM (77.18241330803149935 28.68600393104224011 0 0) 213.95 213.84 213.52 1.001 1.001 0.999 213.74 227 PointZM (77.17700945842550198 28.68498564674817075 0 0) 213.95 214.08 213.96 1.001 0.999 0.999 213.70 228 PointZM (77.18035885635143245 28.68468373807833416 0 0) 214.43 214.12 213.52 1.003 1.001 0.999 214.13 229 PointZM (77.18334638465221076 28.68454593307573219 0 0) 213.91 213.80 213.51 1.001 1.001 0.999 213.73 230 PointZM (77.18455822711787562 28.68449543963966519 0 0) 212.87 212.98 213.91 0.996 0.999 1.004 213.69 231 PointZM (77.18024419417365323 28.68335723343492916 0 0) 214.38 214.16 214.01 1.001 1.001 1.000 214.45 232 PointZM (77.18214085386601653 28.68327938938764987 0 0) 213.61 213.65 213.93 0.999 1.000 1.001 213.85 233 PointZM (77.18460451276756373 28.68316893499624598 0 0) 213.09 212.99 213.70 0.997 1.000 1.004 213.90 234 PointZM (77.17676330292464115 28.68225584536065398 0 0) 213.20 212.65 213.71 0.995 1.003 1.008 214.82 235 PointZM (77.18146340026544294 28.68192027440010605 0 0) 213.79 213.16 214.10 0.996 1.003 1.007 215.37 236 PointZM (77.1845182531476155 28.68180666416894908 0 0) 214.19 213.24 214.91 0.992 1.004 1.012 216.82 237 PointZM (77.17579340817346178 28.68107661323910307 0 0) 211.40 212.09 213.70 0.992 0.997 1.004 212.31 238 PointZM (77.18034833688555807 28.68093460045016485 0 0) 212.43 212.54 214.13 0.993 0.999 1.007 213.91 239 PointZM (77.18336216385094417 28.68077470456927713 0 0) 211.24 212.09 214.88 0.987 0.996 1.009 213.16 240 PointZM (77.1781813269208925 28.679537615385577 0 0) 211.26 211.93 214.00 0.990 0.997 1.007 212.66 241 PointZM (77.18136241339327341 28.67925569370085981 0 0) 214.85 212.02 211.80 1.001 1.013 1.012 217.49 242 PointZM (77.18280463216099463 28.67903583686463875 0 0) 212.39 212.00 206.79 1.025 1.002 0.977 207.56 243 PointZM (77.18507894067725772 28.67892538247323841 0 0) 209.25 211.54 204.41 1.035 0.989 0.956 200.01 244 PointZM (77.17640879692551437 28.67814904589366876 0 0) 210.98 212.03 215.55 0.984 0.995 1.012 213.42 245 PointZM (77.17907022178501109 28.67801755257057295 0 0) 211.01 212.00 207.92 1.020 0.995 0.976 205.98 246 PointZM (77.18172743885814668 28.67735798206192044 0 0) 211.45 211.98 212.82 0.996 0.998 1.001 211.76 247 PointZM (77.17601221306304637 28.67573588042818855 0 0) 212.27 212.36 215.56 0.985 1.000 1.015 215.37 248 PointZM (77.17850006673603502 28.67547078988883058 0 0) 211.72 212.29 219.16 0.969 0.997 1.030 218.00 249 PointZM (77.18013899951510837 28.67561595851753253 0 0) 211.56 212.02 217.42 0.975 0.998 1.023 216.48 250 PointZM (77.18342528064596308 28.67534455629865775 0 0) 211.96 212.01 211.79 1.001 1.000 0.999 211.68 251 PointZM (77.17580708347901464 28.6742621032629188 0 0) 213.98 213.50 217.85 0.980 1.002 1.023 218.84 252 PointZM (77.178817754604637 28.67421266177343497 0 0) 212.24 213.26 217.89 0.979 0.995 1.017 215.81 253 PointZM (77.1809605697978327 28.67412535020689646 0 0) 212.51 212.80 215.65 0.987 0.999 1.012 215.06 254 PointZM (77.18187260748683798 28.67412219436713983 0 0) 212.89 212.33 215.08 0.987 1.003 1.016 216.21 255 PointZM (77.18304237208909058 28.67402541528133852 0 0) 215.01 213.00 214.67 0.992 1.009 1.017 218.73 256 PointZM (77.1848538241080746 28.67317386452096173 0 0) 213.26 213.71 217.07 0.984 0.998 1.014 216.17 257 PointZM (77.17563035645274283 28.6727173197031675 0 0) 214.12 214.50 217.51 0.986 0.998 1.012 216.75 258 PointZM (77.17733661381328147 28.6728961506225879 0 0) 212.54 214.48 213.92 1.003 0.991 0.988 210.07 259 PointZM (77.17914385804594701 28.67279095596410698 0 0) 214.20 214.55 216.17 0.993 0.998 1.006 215.46 260 PointZM (77.18158016633628904 28.67281725462873254 0 0) 213.07 213.85 216.26 0.989 0.996 1.008 214.69 261 PointZM (77.18312442392274875 28.67274887810072315 0 0) 213.91 213.50 216.11 0.988 1.002 1.014 216.94 262 PointZM (77.17714621148147103 28.67136136055540163 0 0) 216.34 215.21 209.86 1.025 1.005 0.980 212.07 263 PointZM (77.17819605417305695 28.67139397089953334 0 0) 214.84 215.07 209.30 1.028 0.999 0.972 208.85 264 PointZM (77.18005799962811864 28.67117726990307247 0 0) 215.45 215.45 210.54 1.023 1.000 0.977 210.54 265 PointZM (77.18149916644927089 28.67100895844951935 0 0) 215.20 215.46 216.66 0.994 0.999 1.004 216.14 266 PointZM (77.1835830726336809 28.67023577770969922 0 0) 213.99 215.40 217.23 0.992 0.993 1.002 214.39 267 PointZM (77.18480333067201116 28.67078699772011419 0 0) 214.13 214.62 217.89 0.985 0.998 1.013 216.89 268 PointZM (77.1768106405208556 28.67009481686732997 0 0) 215.66 216.07 213.41 1.012 0.998 0.986 212.60 269 PointZM (77.17822024894445576 28.66982972632796489 0 0) 216.29 216.78 208.62 1.039 0.998 0.960 207.67 270 PointZM (77.17910388407567268 28.66988232365720535 0 0) 215.94 216.89 206.87 1.048 0.996 0.950 205.07 271 PointZM (77.18035149272519391 28.66976240174654222 0 0) 216.07 216.89 205.22 1.057 0.996 0.943 203.67 272 PointZM (77.1831244239226919 28.66939422044187324 0 0) 216.43 216.02 211.16 1.023 1.002 0.979 211.96 273 PointZM (77.18489800586459637 28.66951624624570982 0 0) 214.66 215.41 206.05 1.045 0.996 0.953 204.61 274 PointZM (77.17655186166095405 28.66868100065739355 0 0) 216.22 216.96 219.37 0.989 0.997 1.008 217.87 275 PointZM (77.17816344382883642 28.66861157218279743 0 0) 217.05 217.37 216.50 1.004 0.999 0.995 215.87 276 PointZM (77.17966351965873173 28.66796146919340771 0 0) 216.60 218.10 216.92 1.005 0.993 0.988 213.94 277 PointZM (77.18205143840616245 28.66845588408825307 0 0) 215.33 218.09 217.24 1.004 0.987 0.983 211.77 278 PointZM (77.18247221704007188 28.66847481912677864 0 0) 218.09 217.95 217.35 1.003 1.001 0.998 217.62 279 PointZM (77.18286985284912305 28.66840959843852232 0 0) 215.65 217.95 217.16 1.004 0.989 0.986 212.59 280 PointZM (77.18407959142160735 28.66822235194642943 0 0) 216.11 217.11 214.99 1.010 0.995 0.986 213.01 281 PointZM (77.18467709708177438 28.66830650767321487 0 0) 215.36 216.52 216.70 0.999 0.995 0.995 214.38 282 PointZM (77.17545783721276109 28.66755121002535134 0 0) 219.20 220.08 221.59 0.993 0.996 1.003 219.82 283 PointZM (77.17628256333523495 28.66752175552097626 0 0) 218.01 219.06 220.99 0.991 0.995 1.004 218.88 284 PointZM (77.17741866564679754 28.66716619757532314 0 0) 218.83 219.70 219.46 1.001 0.996 0.995 217.73 285 PointZM (77.17850953425518412 28.66692004207448718 0 0) 217.54 219.40 219.05 1.002 0.992 0.990 215.35 286 PointZM (77.17917857228310652 28.66692635375399689 0 0) 218.08 219.43 218.88 1.002 0.994 0.991 216.20 287 PointZM (77.18172007523195077 28.66745022315321023 0 0) 216.71 218.86 217.02 1.008 0.990 0.982 212.79 288 PointZM (77.1832979951091005 28.66738500246495391 0 0) 218.31 218.19 216.27 1.009 1.001 0.992 216.50 289 PointZM (77.18440674680950053 28.66729032727232607 0 0) 218.46 217.24 216.65 1.003 1.006 1.003 219.08 290 PointZM (77.18500004468330644 28.66738289857178756 0 0) 218.21 217.24 217.54 0.999 1.004 1.006 219.48 291 PointZM (77.17571240828625889 28.66584495266483756 0 0) 220.70 224.97 221.71 1.015 0.981 0.967 213.38 292 PointZM (77.17636566711539103 28.6658060306411997 0 0) 219.75 222.94 221.77 1.005 0.986 0.980 215.46 293 PointZM (77.17757961347422224 28.6657334463268505 0 0) 221.18 220.99 220.31 1.003 1.001 0.998 220.69 294 PointZM (77.17794779477888767 28.66568295289077994 0 0) 220.38 220.99 220.31 1.003 0.997 0.994 219.10 295 PointZM (77.17946680564732276 28.66565560227957121 0 0) 221.50 220.98 219.96 1.005 1.002 0.998 221.00 296 PointZM (77.1811109981593404 28.66550727781111974 0 0) 223.86 222.11 221.00 1.005 1.008 1.003 224.50 297 PointZM (77.18152756900691713 28.66547887525333138 0 0) 225.91 222.11 221.00 1.005 1.017 1.012 228.63 298 PointZM (77.18434573390750586 28.66541786235141132 0 0) 222.07 220.30 218.51 1.008 1.008 1.000 222.04 299 PointZM (77.18458662967542239 28.66536421307558768 0 0) 221.39 219.71 218.21 1.007 1.008 1.001 221.56 300 PointZM (77.17518433110066667 28.66474672043032612 0 0) 226.01 229.70 224.96 1.021 0.984 0.964 217.79 301 PointZM (77.17545257747978837 28.66467203222280702 0 0) 224.79 229.70 224.09 1.025 0.979 0.955 214.61 302 PointZM (77.17578920038691592 28.66466046081037433 0 0) 221.21 227.01 223.32 1.016 0.974 0.959 212.06 303 PointZM (77.17669492639639373 28.66460681153455781 0 0) 220.27 224.60 223.16 1.006 0.981 0.974 214.64 304 PointZM (77.17863997563161149 28.66479405802664715 0 0) 219.89 221.96 221.16 1.004 0.991 0.987 217.05 305 PointZM (77.17951729908331515 28.66494133054851545 0 0) 223.09 222.23 220.96 1.006 1.004 0.998 222.66 306 PointZM (77.17999803867256503 28.66452791554070245 0 0) 227.75 222.76 222.52 1.001 1.022 1.021 232.60 307 PointZM (77.1801663501261288 28.66463311019918336 0 0) 227.50 222.76 222.19 1.003 1.021 1.019 231.75 308 PointZM (77.18047772631523173 28.66462785046625683 0 0) 223.62 223.38 222.42 1.004 1.001 0.997 222.90 309 PointZM (77.18212297077383255 28.66455000641898465 0 0) 221.83 223.75 223.10 1.003 0.991 0.989 219.29 310 PointZM (77.18225025631058145 28.66454685057923157 0 0) 222.06 223.75 223.10 1.003 0.992 0.990 219.75 311 PointZM (77.18857666307144427 28.71794365922261605 0 0) 205.37 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.997 1.002 205.82 312 PointZM (77.19151790572249183 28.71770802318762605 0 0) 205.35 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.997 1.002 205.78 313 PointZM (77.1943266031038462 28.7174176859302257 0 0) 205.35 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.997 1.002 205.78 314 PointZM (77.18739427511015094 28.71667501164137448 0 0) 205.37 206.83 207.09 0.999 0.993 0.994 204.17 315 PointZM (77.19029764768416157 28.71643306392687123 0 0) 205.18 206.75 207.09 0.998 0.992 0.994 203.96 316 PointZM (77.19334198110045975 28.71610906437875954 0 0) 205.36 206.74 207.09 0.998 0.993 0.995 204.34 317 PointZM (77.1948315374645091 28.71599545414759902 0 0) 205.44 206.74 207.09 0.998 0.994 0.995 204.49 318 PointZM (77.18905319487431882 28.71510129955053614 0 0) 205.41 206.81 207.09 0.999 0.993 0.995 204.29 319 PointZM (77.19252672249726288 28.71489932580625393 0 0) 205.37 206.81 207.09 0.999 0.993 0.994 204.21 320 PointZM (77.19557526369993639 28.71462161190787654 0 0) 207.33 206.74 207.09 0.998 1.003 1.005 208.27 321 PointZM (77.18809381958894278 28.71395467777312405 0 0) 205.74 206.75 207.09 0.998 0.995 0.997 205.07 322 PointZM (77.19328202014509088 28.71348971738265732 0 0) 205.35 206.76 207.09 0.998 0.993 0.995 204.28 323 PointZM (77.18857981891109432 28.7125071992724763 0 0) 205.68 206.76 207.09 0.998 0.995 0.996 204.93 324 PointZM (77.1914505811409839 28.71230101774186139 0 0) 205.70 206.75 207.09 0.998 0.995 0.997 204.99 325 PointZM (77.19284020257947532 28.71211903098269858 0 0) 205.58 206.78 207.09 0.999 0.994 0.996 204.69 326 PointZM (77.19551319885138696 28.71198858960618239 0 0) 205.56 206.87 207.09 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.48 327 PointZM (77.1863286532196895 28.71151626558961212 0 0) 205.58 206.77 207.09 0.998 0.994 0.996 204.71 328 PointZM (77.18918889598367628 28.7113079801658202 0 0) 205.46 206.84 207.09 0.999 0.993 0.995 204.34 329 PointZM (77.19065215368311783 28.71116175959054218 0 0) 205.40 206.81 207.09 0.999 0.993 0.995 204.28 330 PointZM (77.19210804775646295 28.71106498050474443 0 0) 205.54 206.80 207.09 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.56 331 PointZM (77.18924044136633711 28.7099793716292524 0 0) 205.61 207.05 207.09 1.000 0.993 0.993 204.22 332 PointZM (77.19381640901009689 28.7095080995592653 0 0) 205.71 207.03 207.09 1.000 0.994 0.994 204.45 333 PointZM (77.18686093819150074 28.70862867221438819 0 0) 205.72 206.95 207.23 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.77 334 PointZM (77.18971907706232116 28.70842038679060337 0 0) 204.60 207.18 207.10 1.000 0.988 0.987 201.98 335 PointZM (77.19411305794696432 28.70812163396052341 0 0) 204.44 207.24 207.09 1.001 0.986 0.986 201.53 336 PointZM (77.1915925939298404 28.70702129783283496 0 0) 206.50 207.22 207.09 1.001 0.997 0.996 205.66 337 PointZM (77.19539222499408027 28.70671202553690904 0 0) 199.84 206.97 207.09 0.999 0.966 0.966 193.07 338 PointZM (77.18704923663018747 28.70617763667184263 0 0) 207.21 207.62 207.55 1.000 0.998 0.998 206.72 339 PointZM (77.19089304945097751 28.70591990975857044 0 0) 206.86 207.95 207.09 1.004 0.995 0.991 204.92 340 PointZM (77.19505244624718898 28.70559906605020828 0 0) 208.12 207.82 207.11 1.003 1.001 0.998 207.71 341 PointZM (77.19554896503521491 28.70558118295826588 0 0) 207.82 207.02 207.24 0.999 1.004 1.005 208.84 342 PointZM (77.1951618486918818 28.70510780699509112 0 0) 206.57 208.66 207.24 1.007 0.990 0.983 203.11 343 PointZM (77.18849461123754452 28.7047017556133639 0 0) 207.34 209.03 207.10 1.009 0.992 0.983 203.77 344 PointZM (77.19534278350444367 28.70417367842781431 0 0) 207.33 209.03 207.74 1.006 0.992 0.986 204.37 345 PointZM (77.18702609380518709 28.7032542771127126 0 0) 208.95 210.79 208.95 1.009 0.991 0.983 205.32 346 PointZM (77.19139167213204189 28.70330266665560615 0 0) 210.22 210.80 207.28 1.017 0.997 0.981 206.15 347 PointZM (77.19478735570767469 28.70305440726160029 0 0) 209.60 209.87 209.28 1.003 0.999 0.996 208.75 348 PointZM (77.18889224704656726 28.70186149983446455 0 0) 212.73 212.17 209.52 1.013 1.003 0.990 210.62 349 PointZM (77.19171672362669767 28.70194460361466327 0 0) 212.36 212.00 209.78 1.011 1.002 0.991 210.49 350 PointZM (77.1956047182040237 28.70171107147283962 0 0) 211.42 211.04 209.57 1.007 1.002 0.995 210.32 351 PointZM (77.18755417099069405 28.70152750679378784 0 0) 212.49 212.11 209.96 1.010 1.002 0.992 210.72 352 PointZM (77.18672734097505383 28.70129713049171727 0 0) 212.57 212.49 210.00 1.012 1.000 0.989 210.16 353 PointZM (77.19219220348297483 28.70088792327023697 0 0) 212.53 212.15 209.84 1.011 1.002 0.991 210.59 354 PointZM (77.19020086859804053 28.70056181982895538 0 0) 212.90 212.65 209.45 1.015 1.001 0.986 209.95 355 PointZM (77.1881958584074539 28.69996852195513881 0 0) 212.47 212.54 209.71 1.013 1.000 0.986 209.57 356 PointZM (77.19108450372921482 28.69904912064005487 0 0) 211.51 211.73 209.20 1.012 0.999 0.987 208.77 357 PointZM (77.19495566716121004 28.69869566658756099 0 0) 212.42 212.36 209.98 1.011 1.000 0.989 210.11 358 PointZM (77.18665580860732689 28.69809395314106837 0 0) 213.59 213.52 211.24 1.011 1.000 0.990 211.37 359 PointZM (77.19084886769427101 28.69777416137929649 0 0) 211.95 211.80 209.81 1.009 1.001 0.991 210.11 360 PointZM (77.19452857684782998 28.69748382412190324 0 0) 211.87 211.90 210.03 1.009 1.000 0.991 209.96 361 PointZM (77.18699348346109446 28.69743648652559287 0 0) 213.83 213.65 211.59 1.010 1.001 0.991 211.96 362 PointZM (77.18687145765726143 28.69689368208784686 0 0) 213.33 213.41 211.75 1.008 1.000 0.992 211.59 363 PointZM (77.18903005204921897 28.69694417552391386 0 0) 212.54 212.62 210.69 1.009 1.000 0.991 210.54 364 PointZM (77.19487256338111081 28.69635087765010795 0 0) 211.38 211.50 210.38 1.005 0.999 0.994 210.14 365 PointZM (77.18640439337364967 28.69557454107053829 0 0) 213.31 213.33 212.81 1.002 1.000 0.998 212.78 366 PointZM (77.18988633656925913 28.69537887900577289 0 0) 212.50 212.17 211.49 1.003 1.002 0.998 212.15 367 PointZM (77.19421299287247962 28.69523897010999747 0 0) 211.33 211.26 210.66 1.003 1.000 0.998 210.81 368 PointZM (77.18901637674366611 28.69412811451645595 0 0) 211.99 212.13 212.01 1.001 0.999 0.999 211.73 369 PointZM (77.19207122962586709 28.694033439323821 0 0) 210.51 210.72 210.99 0.999 0.999 1.000 210.58 370 PointZM (77.19526809529698141 28.69394928359703556 0 0) 210.93 210.86 211.06 0.999 1.000 1.001 211.20 371 PointZM (77.18633391295244905 28.69248812979078878 0 0) 214.91 214.44 213.19 1.006 1.002 0.996 214.12 372 PointZM (77.18955602534161642 28.69269851910774705 0 0) 211.90 211.88 212.07 0.999 1.000 1.001 212.11 373 PointZM (77.19148319148494863 28.69277846704818913 0 0) 211.02 211.03 211.32 0.999 1.000 1.001 211.29 374 PointZM (77.19550162743885835 28.69277425926184577 0 0) 210.38 210.34 210.58 0.999 1.000 1.001 210.66 375 PointZM (77.19168095744292657 28.69122789778221971 0 0) 211.31 211.00 211.46 0.998 1.001 1.004 212.09 376 PointZM (77.19556474423393411 28.69107431358084526 0 0) 208.84 209.80 205.51 1.021 0.995 0.975 203.64 377 PointZM (77.18811275462734045 28.69020750959498756 0 0) 210.96 211.26 212.85 0.993 0.999 1.006 212.24 378 PointZM (77.1939447464933437 28.6901549122657471 0 0) 211.67 211.32 208.85 1.012 1.002 0.990 209.56 379 PointZM (77.18638861417487362 28.68768914947102999 0 0) 211.80 211.98 213.11 0.995 0.999 1.004 212.74 380 PointZM (77.18995997283019506 28.68719789041594126 0 0) 209.89 210.05 212.38 0.989 0.999 1.010 212.05 381 PointZM (77.19275604685253711 28.68719789041593771 0 0) 210.28 210.31 210.49 0.999 1.000 1.001 210.43 382 PointZM (77.19534067961129153 28.68724627995883836 0 0) 212.23 209.84 209.64 1.001 1.011 1.010 214.44 383 PointZM (77.18640649726677339 28.68582930790914531 0 0) 212.26 212.23 213.76 0.993 1.000 1.007 213.83 384 PointZM (77.19195867134124001 28.68539695786280319 0 0) 210.39 210.75 212.62 0.991 0.998 1.007 211.89 385 PointZM (77.19363757809051663 28.68559367187415887 0 0) 210.15 210.71 212.04 0.994 0.997 1.004 210.91 386 PointZM (77.19593397748509744 28.68576934695381908 0 0) 210.27 210.13 212.06 0.991 1.001 1.010 212.34 387 PointZM (77.18821268955281312 28.68415776478593671 0 0) 210.89 210.97 214.29 0.985 1.000 1.015 214.13 388 PointZM (77.19392055172178857 28.68401995978333119 0 0) 211.66 211.91 213.45 0.993 0.999 1.006 212.96 389 PointZM (77.19530912121369681 28.68391897291119008 0 0) 209.08 211.37 212.44 0.995 0.989 0.994 207.86 390 PointZM (77.19553213388967094 28.68393685600313248 0 0) 213.47 211.37 211.48 0.999 1.010 1.010 215.70 391 PointZM (77.18782241736984417 28.683053220871912 0 0) 210.68 210.79 215.80 0.977 0.999 1.023 215.58 392 PointZM (77.18972433679509493 28.68296696125196021 0 0) 210.55 210.96 215.88 0.977 0.998 1.021 215.04 393 PointZM (77.19317682548633286 28.68304270140606604 0 0) 213.50 212.98 211.78 1.006 1.002 0.997 212.80 394 PointZM (77.19492305681706057 28.68319207782110425 0 0) 213.58 212.46 207.72 1.023 1.005 0.983 209.92 395 PointZM (77.18790446920341708 28.68131330122068334 0 0) 210.66 210.80 209.86 1.005 0.999 0.995 209.57 396 PointZM (77.19160942507501488 28.68123756106657041 0 0) 216.03 215.06 210.62 1.021 1.005 0.984 212.53 397 PointZM (77.19005464802266658 28.68060639311569915 0 0) 211.03 213.07 205.89 1.035 0.990 0.957 201.97 398 PointZM (77.19086885467929449 28.68059587364984964 0 0) 217.39 214.39 208.17 1.030 1.014 0.985 214.03 399 PointZM (77.18742478156070774 28.67919257690576273 0 0) 210.89 211.24 205.88 1.026 0.998 0.973 205.19 400 PointZM (77.18978640164351646 28.67920414831819187 0 0) 211.71 211.90 208.94 1.014 0.999 0.985 208.57 401 PointZM (77.19277918967719643 28.67893379804591092 0 0) 212.15 212.79 215.19 0.989 0.997 1.008 213.89 402 PointZM (77.19504718651396047 28.67938823897053169 0 0) 212.11 214.71 216.01 0.994 0.988 0.994 210.80 403 PointZM (77.19317682548623338 28.67830683788137947 0 0) 213.61 213.29 215.52 0.990 1.002 1.012 216.18 404 PointZM (77.19482417383801476 28.67846883765543353 0 0) 217.38 215.80 216.22 0.998 1.007 1.009 219.41 405 PointZM (77.1874900022488788 28.67787343588845417 0 0) 212.32 212.59 207.53 1.024 0.999 0.975 207.01 406 PointZM (77.19040073844892902 28.67747685202599328 0 0) 212.31 212.55 213.57 0.995 0.999 1.004 213.09 407 PointZM (77.18863136429332883 28.67638072368464819 0 0) 212.97 213.01 215.10 0.990 1.000 1.010 215.03 408 PointZM (77.19087095857227609 28.67632602246223783 0 0) 212.64 213.19 215.86 0.988 0.997 1.010 214.75 409 PointZM (77.19276130658512614 28.67627026929324785 0 0) 213.14 213.48 215.96 0.989 0.998 1.010 215.26 410 PointZM (77.19390161668303563 28.67625238620130901 0 0) 215.97 213.63 216.38 0.987 1.011 1.024 221.15 411 PointZM (77.19532069262589857 28.67631971078272812 0 0) 212.89 214.04 216.34 0.989 0.995 1.005 214.03 412 PointZM (77.18665054887418364 28.67579584138350768 0 0) 210.25 213.06 206.63 1.031 0.987 0.957 201.22 413 PointZM (77.18646540627526065 28.67541714061298563 0 0) 213.16 213.06 205.04 1.039 1.000 0.963 205.24 414 PointZM (77.18935089575728625 28.67540241336080342 0 0) 213.19 213.25 217.48 0.981 1.000 1.020 217.35 415 PointZM (77.19178510015446193 28.67525303694576522 0 0) 213.34 213.30 216.17 0.987 1.000 1.014 216.25 416 PointZM (77.18598256279278758 28.67483436220501147 0 0) 213.30 213.29 207.00 1.030 1.000 0.971 207.02 417 PointZM (77.1859068226386853 28.67403067501424729 0 0) 212.96 213.56 211.46 1.010 0.997 0.987 210.27 418 PointZM (77.18700084708684983 28.67391916867626023 0 0) 216.72 213.48 205.46 1.039 1.015 0.977 211.75 419 PointZM (77.18848619566453806 28.67400227245645894 0 0) 213.84 213.36 214.40 0.995 1.002 1.007 215.36 420 PointZM (77.19052066035952464 28.67396019459306444 0 0) 212.77 213.34 216.49 0.985 0.997 1.012 215.33 421 PointZM (77.19246465764820186 28.67413481772614858 0 0) 213.43 213.31 217.01 0.983 1.001 1.018 217.25 422 PointZM (77.19516395258474972 28.67425263574364536 0 0) 215.98 213.59 216.57 0.986 1.011 1.025 221.45 423 PointZM (77.18680518502206667 28.67309759839355365 0 0) 216.37 213.58 207.23 1.031 1.013 0.983 212.68 424 PointZM (77.18943294759081653 28.67284302732004164 0 0) 213.32 213.57 213.30 1.001 0.999 0.998 212.80 425 PointZM (77.19125912686197921 28.67274835212740669 0 0) 213.74 213.60 216.57 0.986 1.001 1.015 216.85 426 PointZM (77.1878224173694889 28.670833809343101 0 0) 214.33 214.31 212.53 1.008 1.000 0.992 212.57 427 PointZM (77.18930355816085864 28.6708380171294408 0 0) 214.72 214.27 216.11 0.991 1.002 1.011 217.02 428 PointZM (77.19225532027773795 28.67091796506988288 0 0) 215.09 214.26 217.73 0.984 1.004 1.020 219.42 429 PointZM (77.19352607175211745 28.67108312068369003 0 0) 214.45 214.51 217.68 0.985 1.000 1.015 217.57 430 PointZM (77.1860172770299755 28.6698744340577818 0 0) 215.94 214.95 207.70 1.035 1.005 0.971 209.61 431 PointZM (77.18968857061086908 28.66923905832057429 0 0) 216.18 214.98 209.57 1.026 1.006 0.980 211.91 432 PointZM (77.19193342462274643 28.66906864297384061 0 0) 214.72 214.73 209.55 1.025 1.000 0.976 209.53 433 PointZM (77.19342718877312848 28.66904970793531504 0 0) 213.91 214.91 216.50 0.993 0.995 1.003 214.49 434 PointZM (77.18530300529887711 28.66817659226995119 0 0) 216.16 216.06 217.89 0.992 1.000 1.009 218.09 435 PointZM (77.18642753619799635 28.66813030662022044 0 0) 215.03 215.46 218.37 0.987 0.998 1.011 217.50 436 PointZM (77.18977062244441356 28.66806087814562432 0 0) 215.03 215.19 207.47 1.037 0.999 0.963 207.16 437 PointZM (77.19107398426297095 28.66808717681023921 0 0) 214.60 215.05 204.39 1.052 0.998 0.948 203.54 438 PointZM (77.1946358753990296 28.66798829383127156 0 0) 215.82 214.98 211.68 1.016 1.004 0.989 213.35 439 PointZM (77.18788237832474408 28.66728559351263783 0 0) 215.92 215.76 213.88 1.009 1.001 0.992 214.21 440 PointZM (77.19262665742208185 28.6671614638156349 0 0) 216.59 215.42 207.16 1.040 1.005 0.967 209.41 441 PointZM (77.18640754921284497 28.66549307653216871 0 0) 218.76 218.63 217.93 1.003 1.001 0.997 218.18 442 PointZM (77.18675679547898483 28.66546151813462373 0 0) 220.38 218.19 217.71 1.002 1.010 1.008 222.11 443 PointZM (77.18764043061020175 28.66553094660921985 0 0) 220.64 217.86 217.35 1.002 1.013 1.010 222.94 444 PointZM (77.18852406574140446 28.66566559577207229 0 0) 217.27 217.37 217.36 1.000 1.000 1.000 217.16 445 PointZM (77.18951079163792883 28.66564455684037682 0 0) 218.17 217.10 217.27 0.999 1.005 1.006 219.40 446 PointZM (77.19027871264481178 28.66563403737453442 0 0) 218.17 216.90 216.38 1.002 1.006 1.003 218.92 447 PointZM (77.19099824410879762 28.66562562180185481 0 0) 219.11 216.59 215.85 1.003 1.012 1.008 220.90 448 PointZM (77.1913201397637323 28.66554988164775253 0 0) 218.66 216.38 216.57 0.999 1.011 1.011 221.17 449 PointZM (77.19165045099133238 28.66550569989118458 0 0) 218.45 216.38 216.85 0.998 1.010 1.012 221.03 450 PointZM (77.1923489435236263 28.66556040111359493 0 0) 218.13 216.23 217.76 0.993 1.009 1.016 221.61 451 PointZM (77.19337353949718761 28.66546782981412989 0 0) 218.21 216.01 215.37 1.003 1.010 1.007 219.78 452 PointZM (77.19453488852678902 28.6653615832090658 0 0) 219.66 216.08 206.22 1.048 1.017 0.970 213.10 453 PointZM (77.19498932945141689 28.66546782981412633 0 0) 218.09 216.29 215.74 1.003 1.008 1.006 219.36 454 PointZM (77.18549971931011555 28.66449267533003464 0 0) 219.64 220.80 219.33 1.007 0.995 0.988 217.03 455 PointZM (77.18588683565332076 28.66449688311637445 0 0) 219.25 220.03 219.41 1.003 0.996 0.994 217.85 456 PointZM (77.18691143162689627 28.66445901303931976 0 0) 217.80 219.45 219.04 1.002 0.992 0.991 215.75 457 PointZM (77.18895010410820134 28.66453896097976894 0 0) 217.93 217.89 218.77 0.996 1.000 1.004 218.84 458 PointZM (77.1901756218794759 28.6644989870095479 0 0) 215.84 217.84 217.51 1.002 0.991 0.989 213.54 459 PointZM (77.19046280329712317 28.66459786998851555 0 0) 217.42 217.40 217.21 1.001 1.000 0.999 217.24 460 PointZM (77.19122651651763078 28.66481351903840036 0 0) 216.31 216.75 216.62 1.001 0.998 0.997 215.74 461 PointZM (77.19184400916290656 28.66468728544822753 0 0) 215.88 216.75 216.37 1.002 0.996 0.994 214.64 462 PointZM (77.19239628111992602 28.664919765643468 0 0) 216.19 216.57 217.35 0.996 0.998 1.002 216.60 463 PointZM (77.19308530613298558 28.66479353205329161 0 0) 215.70 216.38 216.65 0.999 0.997 0.998 215.29 464 PointZM (77.19382587652866334 28.66438327288522814 0 0) 214.57 216.60 212.98 1.017 0.991 0.974 209.01 465 PointZM (77.19426769409427891 28.66420023417947505 0 0) 218.51 216.85 206.05 1.052 1.008 0.957 209.22 466 PointZM (77.19722787178385204 28.71723517319770025 0 0) 205.72 206.00 207.09 0.995 0.999 1.004 206.53 467 PointZM (77.19985984213899144 28.71703109556025169 0 0) 205.84 206.00 207.16 0.994 0.999 1.005 206.83 468 PointZM (77.20104012620710421 28.71697008265833517 0 0) 205.58 206.42 207.13 0.997 0.996 0.999 205.44 469 PointZM (77.20250233195993417 28.71689223861106299 0 0) 204.29 207.15 207.08 1.000 0.986 0.986 201.40 470 PointZM (77.2045515239070852 28.71678388811283611 0 0) 205.72 207.31 207.11 1.001 0.992 0.991 203.96 471 PointZM (77.19724996266215555 28.71587079847725121 0 0) 205.00 206.74 207.10 0.998 0.992 0.993 203.63 472 PointZM (77.19923288197446709 28.71575087656658809 0 0) 205.41 206.29 207.13 0.996 0.996 1.000 205.37 473 PointZM (77.20214677401426684 28.7155615261813324 0 0) 206.61 207.26 207.19 1.000 0.997 0.997 205.89 474 PointZM (77.20206156634091599 28.71422660596524778 0 0) 213.01 207.78 207.44 1.002 1.025 1.023 218.01 475 PointZM (77.20088654200566225 28.71390471031030245 0 0) 209.93 207.78 207.19 1.003 1.010 1.007 211.49 476 PointZM (77.20157872285844292 28.71386473634008141 0 0) 212.64 207.78 207.32 1.002 1.023 1.021 217.13 477 PointZM (77.19892360967850209 28.71310733479904087 0 0) 205.32 206.84 207.08 0.999 0.993 0.994 204.04 478 PointZM (77.20068562020800584 28.71299898430080333 0 0) 207.43 207.67 207.14 1.003 0.999 0.996 206.66 479 PointZM (77.20523213334740831 28.71276334826580978 0 0) 206.73 207.59 207.43 1.001 0.996 0.995 205.72 480 PointZM (77.20078029540060527 28.71165038877911257 0 0) 206.50 207.71 207.12 1.003 0.994 0.991 204.72 481 PointZM (77.20388984950523081 28.71150311625723717 0 0) 208.86 208.27 207.50 1.004 1.003 0.999 208.67 482 PointZM (77.19662089860443643 28.7106941693335358 0 0) 205.10 206.93 207.09 0.999 0.991 0.992 203.45 483 PointZM (77.20050363344884659 28.71043749436685388 0 0) 206.19 207.15 207.15 1.000 0.995 0.995 205.24 484 PointZM (77.2034385644203951 28.7104143515419814 0 0) 209.17 208.40 207.35 1.005 1.004 0.999 208.89 485 PointZM (77.20486552996266028 28.71030810493692087 0 0) 207.74 209.14 208.30 1.004 0.993 0.989 205.53 486 PointZM (77.19698119030972805 28.7093450478385499 0 0) 205.81 206.90 207.10 0.999 0.995 0.996 204.93 487 PointZM (77.19902512252393478 28.70923038566080976 0 0) 206.36 206.62 207.19 0.997 0.999 1.001 206.67 488 PointZM (77.20223566350067301 28.70908626897870164 0 0) 207.81 208.71 207.54 1.006 0.996 0.990 205.74 489 PointZM (77.20492864675772182 28.70895056786926602 0 0) 208.99 210.06 209.52 1.003 0.995 0.992 207.39 490 PointZM (77.19941749860007008 28.70800802372930249 0 0) 205.33 207.80 207.27 1.003 0.988 0.986 202.37 491 PointZM (77.20088075629948321 28.70797436143859116 0 0) 205.96 208.57 207.48 1.005 0.987 0.982 202.31 492 PointZM (77.20320240241210286 28.70794595888080636 0 0) 208.39 210.01 208.64 1.007 0.992 0.986 205.43 493 PointZM (77.19689703458293195 28.70661209061131203 0 0) 207.19 206.64 207.11 0.998 1.003 1.005 208.22 494 PointZM (77.1995879139468002 28.70644693499750133 0 0) 208.34 208.12 207.40 1.003 1.001 0.998 207.83 495 PointZM (77.20279424713720573 28.70626284434516862 0 0) 211.82 210.84 209.89 1.005 1.005 1.000 211.84 496 PointZM (77.19847390251354113 28.70547283246000347 0 0) 206.73 208.74 207.71 1.005 0.990 0.985 203.72 497 PointZM (77.2015119242503971 28.70529610543376364 0 0) 211.71 210.97 209.01 1.009 1.004 0.994 210.48 498 PointZM (77.20427223208885437 28.70523614447843386 0 0) 213.02 212.18 210.17 1.010 1.004 0.994 211.84 499 PointZM (77.19776489051545809 28.70406690584944798 0 0) 209.92 209.96 209.36 1.003 1.000 0.997 209.29 500 PointZM (77.20089969133809404 28.70391279567478193 0 0) 212.39 211.16 209.88 1.006 1.006 1.000 212.35 501 PointZM (77.20430694632621282 28.70379602960387189 0 0) 213.06 212.59 210.05 1.012 1.002 0.990 210.97 502 PointZM (77.19986878368501948 28.70293027756460091 0 0) 211.82 211.22 210.21 1.005 1.003 0.998 211.40 503 PointZM (77.20432640733801577 28.7028271867992899 0 0) 212.78 212.51 210.07 1.012 1.001 0.990 210.60 504 PointZM (77.19888573960149358 28.70154170807269267 0 0) 210.83 211.12 210.00 1.005 0.999 0.993 209.42 505 PointZM (77.20227616344425314 28.70150594188880433 0 0) 212.11 212.14 209.85 1.011 1.000 0.989 209.79 506 PointZM (77.19744667667356453 28.70066754046073498 0 0) 212.01 211.78 209.86 1.009 1.001 0.992 210.32 507 PointZM (77.20073295780439082 28.70059600809296896 0 0) 212.59 212.53 209.92 1.012 1.000 0.988 210.04 508 PointZM (77.20246130604319035 28.70050238484692073 0 0) 212.69 212.50 210.04 1.012 1.001 0.989 210.42 509 PointZM (77.20425277107706563 28.70041507328038577 0 0) 211.81 211.64 210.55 1.005 1.001 0.996 210.89 510 PointZM (77.1964941390410786 28.6985941537421283 0 0) 213.08 212.89 210.01 1.014 1.001 0.987 210.38 511 PointZM (77.20009232233429941 28.69866200429684611 0 0) 213.06 212.92 210.11 1.013 1.001 0.987 210.39 512 PointZM (77.20504909464176535 28.69880822487212768 0 0) 211.05 210.79 211.38 0.997 1.001 1.004 211.90 513 PointZM (77.19782695536399331 28.69743175276594016 0 0) 212.74 212.48 210.33 1.010 1.001 0.991 210.84 514 PointZM (77.20095071074746329 28.69741755148704598 0 0) 212.93 212.24 210.57 1.008 1.003 0.995 211.93 515 PointZM (77.20440740722504813 28.69747120076286961 0 0) 211.14 210.95 211.47 0.998 1.001 1.003 211.85 516 PointZM (77.19627586012470033 28.69633404650473096 0 0) 212.31 212.04 210.63 1.007 1.001 0.995 211.16 517 PointZM (77.19934438831246837 28.69623831936551994 0 0) 211.44 211.03 210.54 1.002 1.002 1.000 211.36 518 PointZM (77.20094071725490892 28.69623621547235004 0 0) 211.58 211.16 210.87 1.001 1.002 1.001 211.71 519 PointZM (77.20432903720447371 28.69623621547235004 0 0) 211.07 210.84 211.40 0.997 1.001 1.004 211.86 520 PointZM (77.20040317255005391 28.69512956766516254 0 0) 210.15 210.03 210.43 0.998 1.001 1.003 210.68 521 PointZM (77.20355427854474328 28.69514902867698325 0 0) 210.27 210.26 211.41 0.995 1.000 1.005 211.42 522 PointZM (77.19683023597482929 28.69391088754670349 0 0) 210.27 210.38 211.33 0.996 0.999 1.004 211.10 523 PointZM (77.20003551721866586 28.69387932914916206 0 0) 209.41 209.46 208.11 1.006 1.000 0.993 208.01 524 PointZM (77.20323659067616973 28.69392245895914328 0 0) 209.17 209.52 210.43 0.996 0.998 1.003 209.74 525 PointZM (77.20509117250507813 28.69395191346351837 0 0) 208.41 209.98 210.93 0.996 0.993 0.997 207.78 526 PointZM (77.19743194942127218 28.6926874736686166 0 0) 209.85 209.70 208.62 1.005 1.001 0.996 208.91 527 PointZM (77.19903301212332281 28.6926832658822768 0 0) 207.77 208.63 205.88 1.013 0.996 0.983 204.19 528 PointZM (77.2007298019645134 28.6926832658822768 0 0) 207.40 207.94 205.66 1.011 0.997 0.986 204.58 529 PointZM (77.20356479801048977 28.69275269435686937 0 0) 209.26 209.36 207.48 1.009 1.000 0.991 207.28 530 PointZM (77.20614837882271786 28.69289575909239787 0 0) 209.24 209.88 208.25 1.008 0.997 0.989 206.98 531 PointZM (77.20578861309073204 28.69199318892264827 0 0) 209.61 209.95 207.28 1.013 0.998 0.986 206.61 531 PointZM (77.20578861309073204 28.69199318892264827 0 0) 209.61 209.95 207.28 1.013 0.998 0.986 212.82 3.212906272 532 PointZM (77.20103802231388102 28.69124841074062715 0 0) 207.74 208.01 205.77 1.011 0.999 0.988 205.23 533 PointZM (77.20301147410691556 28.69135360539910451 0 0) 209.49 209.40 207.32 1.010 1.000 0.991 207.51 534 PointZM (77.20436217352180108 28.69142303387369708 0 0) 209.83 209.82 209.44 1.002 1.000 0.998 209.46 535 PointZM (77.19628743153698736 28.69106326814170771 0 0) 211.10 209.57 205.31 1.021 1.007 0.987 208.31 536 PointZM (77.19661143108508838 28.6905267753834714 0 0) 207.86 209.57 204.56 1.025 0.992 0.968 201.23 537 PointZM (77.19909612891832751 28.69052782733005813 0 0) 209.64 208.91 208.34 1.003 1.003 1.001 209.80 538 PointZM (77.19830611703316947 28.68868166107377249 0 0) 209.45 209.65 210.70 0.995 0.999 1.004 210.30 539 PointZM (77.19794845519433579 28.68725206566506003 0 0) 210.54 210.39 211.24 0.996 1.001 1.005 211.55 540 PointZM (77.19697961238975381 28.6844833422539125 0 0) 208.37 210.15 208.93 1.006 0.992 0.986 205.40 541 PointZM (77.19879106440875205 28.68410990121631343 0 0) 212.71 212.42 211.76 1.003 1.001 0.998 212.35 542 PointZM (77.19960947885169844 28.68462325114968436 0 0) 212.57 212.54 213.62 0.995 1.000 1.005 213.68 543 PointZM (77.2024749813486153 28.68469057573111058 0 0) 213.33 213.31 212.43 1.004 1.000 0.996 212.46 544 PointZM (77.20616941775438136 28.68502719863823813 0 0) 217.06 213.34 213.52 0.999 1.017 1.018 221.02 544 PointZM (77.20616941775438136 28.68502719863823813 0 0) 217.06 213.34 213.52 0.999 1.017 1.018 219.12 2.062719009 545 PointZM (77.20677533898721379 28.68506296482212292 0 0) 224.41 213.64 213.47 1.001 1.050 1.050 235.54 545 PointZM (77.20677533898721379 28.68506296482212292 0 0) 224.41 213.64 213.47 1.001 1.050 1.050 226.54 2.132565986 546 PointZM (77.20611471653198521 28.68394790144225937 0 0) 214.49 213.72 213.68 1.000 1.004 1.003 215.23 547 PointZM (77.19713109269792994 28.68310634417443694 0 0) 212.56 211.95 211.51 1.002 1.003 1.001 212.73 548 PointZM (77.19818303928271064 28.68254250080499546 0 0) 212.52 212.38 213.77 0.994 1.001 1.007 214.05 549 PointZM (77.20051836070091156 28.68240364385580676 0 0) 212.27 212.50 214.48 0.991 0.999 1.008 214.03 550 PointZM (77.20201212485129361 28.68235946209924592 0 0) 213.26 213.27 213.25 1.000 1.000 1.000 213.24 551 PointZM (77.20651656012731223 28.68264769546348347 0 0) 215.03 214.26 214.10 1.001 1.004 1.003 215.65 552 PointZM (77.19896358364857747 28.68108976257142828 0 0) 212.08 212.36 213.68 0.994 0.999 1.005 213.12 553 PointZM (77.20301988967948148 28.68132750249958818 0 0) 213.88 213.34 213.17 1.001 1.003 1.002 214.25 554 PointZM (77.1991413626213614 28.67985793312065113 0 0) 212.42 212.81 214.41 0.993 0.998 1.006 213.62 555 PointZM (77.20321344785101303 28.68006727049102267 0 0) 213.38 213.50 213.92 0.998 0.999 1.001 213.67 556 PointZM (77.20600321019384182 28.68042282843668289 0 0) 216.48 214.27 215.42 0.995 1.010 1.016 219.89 557 PointZM (77.19640945734069248 28.67892064871360702 0 0) 216.76 215.57 215.96 0.998 1.006 1.007 218.35 558 PointZM (77.19898672647337889 28.67897534993602093 0 0) 212.44 212.87 214.86 0.991 0.998 1.007 214.00 559 PointZM (77.2022162024886569 28.67907423291498858 0 0) 213.35 213.76 214.33 0.997 0.998 1.001 213.51 560 PointZM (77.20600321019385603 28.67916259642810672 0 0) 215.82 215.09 216.36 0.994 1.003 1.009 217.84 561 PointZM (77.20104012620687683 28.67779716976107096 0 0) 212.96 213.73 214.84 0.995 0.996 1.002 213.29 562 PointZM (77.19711426155245704 28.67712497589339549 0 0) 212.98 214.16 216.11 0.991 0.994 1.004 213.74 563 PointZM (77.20179963164105175 28.67684726199501455 0 0) 210.23 214.40 215.38 0.995 0.981 0.985 207.09 564 PointZM (77.20562240553013567 28.67668526222095693 0 0) 216.21 217.16 218.04 0.996 0.996 1.000 216.13 565 PointZM (77.1984092077983064 28.67609617213348017 0 0) 215.76 213.30 216.33 0.986 1.012 1.026 221.34 566 PointZM (77.19662089860416643 28.67515152410035384 0 0) 213.85 213.58 216.42 0.987 1.001 1.015 216.96 567 PointZM (77.19747718312417817 28.67518097860472537 0 0) 214.24 213.71 216.87 0.985 1.002 1.017 217.94 568 PointZM (77.20043420497404441 28.67522095257494996 0 0) 213.78 214.28 216.50 0.990 0.998 1.008 215.50 569 PointZM (77.20228352707005115 28.67509051119843733 0 0) 213.89 214.85 218.98 0.981 0.996 1.015 217.03 570 PointZM (77.20500596483147149 28.67518518639107228 0 0) 214.26 217.22 222.11 0.978 0.986 1.009 216.10 571 PointZM (77.19707639147542011 28.67418583713553559 0 0) 214.30 213.93 216.97 0.986 1.002 1.016 217.72 572 PointZM (77.19945589465018543 28.67351364326785657 0 0) 213.80 214.20 217.12 0.987 0.998 1.012 216.31 573 PointZM (77.20225196867254169 28.67334743570745559 0 0) 214.45 215.38 221.99 0.970 0.996 1.026 220.08 574 PointZM (77.20378149900679432 28.67303395562518986 0 0) 215.16 216.61 225.86 0.959 0.993 1.036 222.83 575 PointZM (77.2055824315599466 28.6731970073458271 0 0) 215.53 219.01 229.03 0.956 0.984 1.029 221.82 576 PointZM (77.20377518732726685 28.67290877398160021 0 0) 216.22 216.61 226.43 0.957 0.998 1.043 225.61 577 PointZM (77.20283159124073791 28.67209772316472893 0 0) 214.47 216.17 224.12 0.965 0.992 1.029 220.61 578 PointZM (77.2027306043685968 28.67170639903519103 0 0) 215.48 215.81 224.07 0.963 0.998 1.037 223.38 579 PointZM (77.1965030805866661 28.67105103631288188 0 0) 215.12 214.85 217.34 0.989 1.001 1.013 217.89 580 PointZM (77.19968732289878233 28.67099002341096181 0 0) 214.66 214.97 218.46 0.984 0.999 1.015 217.83 581 PointZM (77.20559189907915254 28.67101842596875727 0 0) 217.30 219.62 230.41 0.953 0.989 1.038 225.56 582 PointZM (77.20202580015674698 28.67033466068865266 0 0) 216.50 215.95 222.55 0.970 1.003 1.033 223.69 583 PointZM (77.19747823507076134 28.6691449091012629 0 0) 215.31 214.96 219.03 0.981 1.002 1.021 219.75 584 PointZM (77.20010704958606595 28.66901341577815998 0 0) 214.70 216.31 219.30 0.986 0.993 1.006 216.06 585 PointZM (77.2011831909423023 28.66883353291216707 0 0) 215.97 216.58 220.37 0.983 0.997 1.015 219.13 586 PointZM (77.20472825093304436 28.66896818207501951 0 0) 217.62 218.48 226.03 0.967 0.996 1.030 224.25 587 PointZM (77.19593082164455211 28.66756278143775205 0 0) 216.66 215.20 207.83 1.035 1.007 0.972 210.65 588 PointZM (77.19758027388948562 28.66768901502792488 0 0) 216.22 215.88 217.77 0.991 1.002 1.010 218.46 589 PointZM (77.20054676325854359 28.66784470312246924 0 0) 215.98 217.18 218.85 0.992 0.994 1.002 216.44 590 PointZM (77.20466197829820487 28.66773530067764497 0 0) 218.45 218.85 224.00 0.977 0.998 1.022 223.19 591 PointZM (77.1970122227336617 28.66649821149394128 0 0) 217.43 216.53 209.16 1.035 1.004 0.970 210.90 592 PointZM (77.19821564962664695 28.66624364042042217 0 0) 216.08 217.07 207.54 1.046 0.995 0.952 205.65 593 PointZM (77.20140515167172168 28.66634462729256327 0 0) 217.10 218.72 210.48 1.039 0.993 0.955 207.37 594 PointZM (77.20208050137914313 28.666420367446662 0 0) 216.60 218.89 218.24 1.003 0.990 0.987 213.69 595 PointZM (77.20350904484126886 28.6665592243958578 0 0) 217.84 218.96 221.37 0.989 0.995 1.006 219.10 596 PointZM (77.19539853667261298 28.66532634299849391 0 0) 217.93 216.50 218.29 0.992 1.007 1.015 221.19 597 PointZM (77.19593713332402274 28.66533055078483372 0 0) 217.62 216.50 218.93 0.989 1.005 1.017 221.22 598 PointZM (77.19639578203498331 28.66546099216134635 0 0) 218.27 216.65 219.26 0.988 1.007 1.020 222.56 599 PointZM (77.19731518335004239 28.66535369360970265 0 0) 218.21 216.80 219.41 0.988 1.006 1.019 222.27 600 PointZM (77.19779907877904179 28.66505494077962624 0 0) 219.01 217.40 219.71 0.989 1.007 1.018 222.99 601 PointZM (77.19884681757748979 28.66482351253097249 0 0) 220.73 218.25 214.78 1.016 1.011 0.995 219.69 602 PointZM (77.19986299797835727 28.66496236948017184 0 0) 219.58 218.74 209.94 1.042 1.004 0.963 211.56 603 PointZM (77.20042894524097221 28.66484244756950517 0 0) 219.89 219.00 210.57 1.040 1.004 0.965 212.29 604 PointZM (77.20157767091153289 28.66492660329628706 0 0) 220.85 219.40 212.34 1.033 1.007 0.974 215.15 605 PointZM (77.20241081260668636 28.66470990229982263 0 0) 219.80 219.51 218.94 1.003 1.001 0.999 219.51 606 PointZM (77.20370575885252151 28.66458051286990028 0 0) 219.25 219.98 219.92 1.000 0.997 0.996 218.46 607 PointZM (77.20495547139523751 28.66429333145225655 0 0) 219.40 221.33 220.71 1.003 0.991 0.988 216.88 608 PointZM (77.19525021220405847 28.66426177305471512 0 0) 215.95 217.05 217.71 0.997 0.995 0.998 215.51 609 PointZM (77.1959087307661207 28.66413343557137239 0 0) 215.99 217.24 220.22 0.986 0.994 1.008 217.69 610 PointZM (77.19708059926156807 28.6640492798445905 0 0) 216.79 217.56 221.23 0.983 0.996 1.013 219.66 611 PointZM (77.19808941603636754 28.66394513713269987 0 0) 216.72 218.24 220.23 0.991 0.993 1.002 217.16 612 PointZM (77.19887206429544335 28.66369161800577103 0 0) 218.03 219.11 218.35 1.003 0.995 0.992 216.20 613 PointZM (77.20066773711565133 28.66357379998827781 0 0) 218.33 219.85 215.22 1.021 0.993 0.972 212.26 614 PointZM (77.20274217578086962 28.66346544949004738 0 0) 218.79 220.04 220.65 0.997 0.994 0.997 218.15 615 PointZM (77.20440635527796758 28.66346965727639073 0 0) 220.32 221.11 222.61 0.993 0.996 1.003 221.02 616 PointZM (77.20632300195546804 28.71668763500036903 0 0) 204.60 207.20 207.53 0.998 0.987 0.989 202.36 617 PointZM (77.20801873985013231 28.716616102632603 0 0) 204.19 206.71 207.02 0.998 0.988 0.989 202.00 618 PointZM (77.21154276090911139 28.71641623278149424 0 0) 205.40 206.77 206.01 1.004 0.993 0.990 203.29 619 PointZM (77.21552122289274678 28.7162815836186418 0 0) 204.81 205.63 205.72 1.000 0.996 0.996 204.08 620 PointZM (77.20687211807270955 28.71532852001283942 0 0) 204.88 207.03 207.33 0.999 0.990 0.991 203.05 621 PointZM (77.20891499834034732 28.71522542924753196 0 0) 205.88 206.52 206.93 0.998 0.997 0.999 205.66 622 PointZM (77.21188990328207069 28.71508026061883712 0 0) 206.57 205.73 205.77 1.000 1.004 1.004 207.44 623 PointZM (77.21315855086328384 28.71505922168713099 0 0) 205.44 206.05 206.56 0.998 0.997 0.999 205.33 624 PointZM (77.21493108085864776 28.71503397496909571 0 0) 204.32 205.97 207.01 0.995 0.992 0.997 203.71 625 PointZM (77.21245059081178397 28.71352548356653145 0 0) 205.90 207.00 206.06 1.005 0.995 0.990 203.87 626 PointZM (77.20907173838146775 28.71259977057192003 0 0) 205.94 207.10 206.86 1.001 0.994 0.993 204.55 627 PointZM (77.21518985971856353 28.71238201762886533 0 0) 205.77 206.56 205.96 1.003 0.996 0.993 204.40 628 PointZM (77.20631143054299628 28.71137530474723221 0 0) 206.70 208.50 207.43 1.005 0.991 0.986 203.86 629 PointZM (77.20781361026608636 28.71132481131116521 0 0) 206.90 207.96 207.19 1.004 0.995 0.991 205.08 630 PointZM (77.2121060783052684 28.71109285708923053 0 0) 205.92 207.36 207.42 1.000 0.993 0.993 204.55 631 PointZM (77.20632773571507812 28.71030179325747156 0 0) 206.51 209.26 208.36 1.004 0.987 0.983 202.92 632 PointZM (77.20811604490918967 28.7102186894772764 0 0) 206.39 208.49 207.50 1.005 0.990 0.985 203.34 633 PointZM (77.20871670640910622 28.7102186894772764 0 0) 208.20 208.07 207.39 1.003 1.001 0.997 207.65 634 PointZM (77.21199457196728133 28.71004617023737282 0 0) 206.01 207.29 207.43 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.89 635 PointZM (77.21471595778211849 28.70997568981620063 0 0) 205.98 207.15 207.31 0.999 0.994 0.995 204.98 636 PointZM (77.20782781154498764 28.70884274334438757 0 0) 206.77 209.50 208.59 1.004 0.987 0.983 203.19 637 PointZM (77.21042191182300485 28.70874596425858627 0 0) 207.50 208.10 207.70 1.002 0.997 0.995 206.51 638 PointZM (77.2124963504881805 28.70867443189082024 0 0) 206.10 207.27 207.51 0.999 0.994 0.996 205.18 639 PointZM (77.20697573481128018 28.70779290065277678 0 0) 206.27 210.03 210.15 0.999 0.982 0.983 202.70 640 PointZM (77.21192619543924707 28.70751939454073209 0 0) 206.77 207.40 207.51 0.999 0.997 0.997 206.25 641 PointZM (77.21498946389409923 28.70746258942515183 0 0) 206.54 207.27 208.42 0.994 0.996 1.002 206.95 642 PointZM (77.20640557976233254 28.70613713672834066 0 0) 209.85 210.19 210.67 0.998 0.998 1.001 209.98 643 PointZM (77.20932999126800667 28.70604246153570216 0 0) 207.34 210.23 209.84 1.002 0.986 0.984 204.11 644 PointZM (77.21357985547051328 28.705933059090885 0 0) 206.68 208.00 208.82 0.996 0.994 0.998 206.19 645 PointZM (77.2082496421254092 28.70504521617332827 0 0) 209.02 210.35 210.53 0.999 0.994 0.995 207.89 646 PointZM (77.21112671603481203 28.70493370983534476 0 0) 206.72 209.93 209.81 1.001 0.985 0.984 203.44 647 PointZM (77.2138859719266577 28.70493265788875803 0 0) 206.69 208.03 207.80 1.001 0.994 0.993 205.14 648 PointZM (77.20793826593630627 28.70367032198701907 0 0) 212.89 210.37 210.56 0.999 1.012 1.013 215.64 649 PointZM (77.21167057241910925 28.70356828316829478 0 0) 207.71 210.13 210.20 1.000 0.988 0.989 205.38 650 PointZM (77.21463600984161246 28.70367032198701907 0 0) 196.12 208.13 207.42 1.003 0.942 0.939 184.17 651 PointZM (77.21045136632734796 28.70263520654759759 0 0) 211.05 210.25 210.42 0.999 1.004 1.005 212.02 652 PointZM (77.21391016669808494 28.70250476517109206 0 0) 207.61 208.93 209.92 0.995 0.994 0.998 207.29 653 PointZM (77.21602983906639395 28.70242902501698623 0 0) 209.41 209.17 209.04 1.001 1.001 1.001 209.52 653 PointZM (77.21602983906639395 28.70242902501698623 0 0) 209.41 209.17 209.04 1.001 1.001 1.001 213.03 3.618003793 654 PointZM (77.20793721398970888 28.7013833901117188 0 0) 208.18 209.08 210.71 0.992 0.996 1.003 208.89 655 PointZM (77.21218392235248018 28.70123401369668059 0 0) 208.95 209.07 210.13 0.995 0.999 1.004 209.88 656 PointZM (77.21023256143773494 28.700283053984041 0 0) 208.96 208.98 208.18 1.004 1.000 0.996 208.15 657 PointZM (77.21536816466461062 28.70048502772830545 0 0) 208.32 210.11 209.91 1.001 0.991 0.991 206.35 657 PointZM (77.21536816466461062 28.70048502772830545 0 0) 208.32 210.11 209.91 1.001 0.991 0.991 211.92 3.599171722 658 PointZM (77.21686403270805954 28.69992959993152226 0 0) 199.58 211.54 210.30 1.006 0.943 0.938 187.19 658 PointZM (77.21686403270805954 28.69992959993152226 0 0) 199.58 211.54 210.30 1.006 0.943 0.938 203.03 3.448169605 659 PointZM (77.2083348497987032 28.69882505601750466 0 0) 207.93 208.15 207.76 1.002 0.999 0.997 207.32 660 PointZM (77.21375658249660034 28.698808224872149 0 0) 208.09 210.42 210.61 0.999 0.989 0.990 205.98 660 PointZM (77.21375658249660034 28.698808224872149 0 0) 208.09 210.42 210.61 0.999 0.989 0.990 211.53 3.442349634 661 PointZM (77.21586889123884134 28.69912170495440762 0 0) 208.43 211.35 210.45 1.004 0.986 0.982 204.67 661 PointZM (77.21586889123884134 28.69912170495440762 0 0) 208.43 211.35 210.45 1.004 0.986 0.982 211.88 3.447974118 662 PointZM (77.20745121466741523 28.6976531875220644 0 0) 208.34 208.71 208.24 1.002 0.998 0.996 207.49 663 PointZM (77.21193250711854716 28.69772051210349062 0 0) 208.09 209.12 208.97 1.001 0.995 0.994 206.91 663 PointZM (77.21193250711854716 28.69772051210349062 0 0) 208.09 209.12 208.97 1.001 0.995 0.994 210.42 2.332062549 664 PointZM (77.21391016669794283 28.69769947317179515 0 0) 208.98 210.91 210.35 1.003 0.991 0.988 206.51 664 PointZM (77.21391016669794283 28.69769947317179515 0 0) 208.98 210.91 210.35 1.003 0.991 0.988 211.32 2.34203677 665 PointZM (77.20873879728715394 28.69646238398809857 0 0) 206.30 207.76 207.54 1.001 0.993 0.992 204.63 666 PointZM (77.21287505125850714 28.69650025406514615 0 0) 209.84 210.47 209.97 1.002 0.997 0.995 208.71 666 PointZM (77.21287505125850714 28.69650025406514615 0 0) 209.84 210.47 209.97 1.002 0.997 0.995 212.19 2.351674782 667 PointZM (77.21649374751015671 28.6963613971159468 0 0) 213.92 213.33 213.37 1.000 1.003 1.003 214.56 667 PointZM (77.21649374751015671 28.6963613971159468 0 0) 213.92 213.33 213.37 1.000 1.003 1.003 216.32 2.397399301 668 PointZM (77.20678007274632648 28.69523371037706383 0 0) 208.62 209.01 209.40 0.998 0.998 1.000 208.62 669 PointZM (77.20962664020473198 28.69533785308895091 0 0) 208.60 208.85 208.92 1.000 0.999 0.999 208.42 669 PointZM (77.20962664020473198 28.69533785308895091 0 0) 208.60 208.85 208.92 1.000 0.999 0.999 211.01 2.406830972 670 PointZM (77.21309911588107866 28.69537046343308972 0 0) 212.15 211.51 210.83 1.003 1.003 1.000 212.10 670 PointZM (77.21309911588107866 28.69537046343308972 0 0) 212.15 211.51 210.83 1.003 1.003 1.000 214.60 2.447790943 671 PointZM (77.21615817654964076 28.69525264541559295 0 0) 214.50 213.15 213.68 0.997 1.006 1.009 216.40 671 PointZM (77.21615817654964076 28.69525264541559295 0 0) 214.50 213.15 213.68 0.997 1.006 1.009 216.97 2.47490529 672 PointZM (77.21443929583007559 28.6946277891442314 0 0) 216.20 212.91 212.72 1.001 1.015 1.015 219.34 672 PointZM (77.21443929583007559 28.6946277891442314 0 0) 216.20 212.91 212.72 1.001 1.015 1.015 218.69 2.494519924 673 PointZM (77.21748994092592966 28.69486342517922495 0 0) 215.00 213.99 214.93 0.996 1.005 1.009 216.96 673 PointZM (77.21748994092592966 28.69486342517922495 0 0) 215.00 213.99 214.93 0.996 1.005 1.009 217.48 2.4806743 674 PointZM (77.21127924828937239 28.69357584255945071 0 0) 209.80 211.02 210.63 1.002 0.994 0.992 208.19 674 PointZM (77.21127924828937239 28.69357584255945071 0 0) 209.80 211.02 210.63 1.002 0.994 0.992 213.60 3.802790742 675 PointZM (77.21583102116171915 28.69389142653488278 0 0) 214.23 213.54 214.27 0.997 1.003 1.007 215.65 675 PointZM (77.21583102116171915 28.69389142653488278 0 0) 214.23 213.54 214.27 0.997 1.003 1.007 216.70 2.471790025 676 PointZM (77.20723661756409228 28.6929730771663607 0 0) 209.95 209.91 207.33 1.012 1.000 0.988 207.42 676 PointZM (77.20723661756409228 28.6929730771663607 0 0) 209.95 209.91 207.33 1.012 1.000 0.988 213.17 3.218117799 677 PointZM (77.21048502861788165 28.69301725892292154 0 0) 209.59 210.79 210.20 1.003 0.994 0.992 207.82 677 PointZM (77.21048502861788165 28.69301725892292154 0 0) 209.59 210.79 210.20 1.003 0.994 0.992 213.39 3.798984326 678 PointZM (77.21141284550566297 28.69299201220488627 0 0) 210.58 211.28 210.96 1.002 0.997 0.995 209.56 678 PointZM (77.21141284550566297 28.69299201220488627 0 0) 210.58 211.28 210.96 1.002 0.997 0.995 214.40 3.816928858 679 PointZM (77.21806745960094531 28.69289312922591506 0 0) 215.43 215.60 216.98 0.994 0.999 1.006 216.63 679 PointZM (77.21806745960094531 28.69289312922591506 0 0) 215.43 215.60 216.98 0.994 0.999 1.006 219.33 3.90483894 680 PointZM (77.20871355056908669 28.69168759843975636 0 0) 210.22 210.54 210.59 1.000 0.999 0.999 209.95 680 PointZM (77.20871355056908669 28.69168759843975636 0 0) 210.22 210.54 210.59 1.000 0.999 0.999 213.44 3.222256364 681 PointZM (77.21149489733925009 28.69178227363239131 0 0) 212.23 211.83 211.30 1.003 1.002 0.999 212.09 681 PointZM (77.21149489733925009 28.69178227363239131 0 0) 212.23 211.83 211.30 1.003 1.002 0.999 215.48 3.253065685 682 PointZM (77.21404902364709244 28.69176123470069584 0 0) 214.68 214.20 213.60 1.003 1.002 0.999 214.56 682 PointZM (77.21404902364709244 28.69176123470069584 0 0) 214.68 214.20 213.60 1.003 1.002 0.999 218.57 3.891244597 683 PointZM (77.21740052546618926 28.69181383202993985 0 0) 216.92 215.55 216.83 0.994 1.006 1.012 219.59 683 PointZM (77.21740052546618926 28.69181383202993985 0 0) 216.92 215.55 216.83 0.994 1.006 1.012 220.85 3.931846367 684 PointZM (77.21522299603567774 28.69149404026816086 0 0) 215.03 214.97 215.61 0.997 1.000 1.003 215.74 684 PointZM (77.21522299603567774 28.69149404026816086 0 0) 215.03 214.97 215.61 0.997 1.000 1.003 218.93 3.897588624 685 PointZM (77.20838323934142977 28.68912505655924505 0 0) 211.43 211.46 212.06 0.997 1.000 1.003 212.00 685 PointZM (77.20838323934142977 28.68912505655924505 0 0) 211.43 211.46 212.06 0.997 1.000 1.003 214.74 3.313429474 686 PointZM (77.20988541906449143 28.6892218356450428 0 0) 211.89 212.46 213.19 0.997 0.997 1.001 212.06 686 PointZM (77.20988541906449143 28.6892218356450428 0 0) 211.89 212.46 213.19 0.997 0.997 1.001 215.21 3.320638373 687 PointZM (77.21713964271314978 28.68967627656967068 0 0) 219.73 221.90 217.85 1.019 0.990 0.972 213.61 687 PointZM (77.21713964271314978 28.68967627656967068 0 0) 219.73 221.90 217.85 1.019 0.990 0.972 223.10 3.368025835 688 PointZM (77.21817896593891817 28.68968469214235029 0 0) 227.54 222.70 219.38 1.015 1.022 1.006 229.02 689 PointZM (77.21441720495175787 28.68860749883953076 0 0) 216.99 219.48 218.01 1.007 0.989 0.982 213.08 689 PointZM (77.21441720495175787 28.68860749883953076 0 0) 216.99 219.48 218.01 1.007 0.989 0.982 220.39 3.400563125 690 PointZM (77.21661787720711345 28.68834661608650549 0 0) 225.04 225.26 222.87 1.011 0.999 0.988 222.42 690 PointZM (77.21661787720711345 28.68834661608650549 0 0) 225.04 225.26 222.87 1.011 0.999 0.988 228.57 3.526718861 691 PointZM (77.21736475928227605 28.68827508371874302 0 0) 230.53 226.06 225.02 1.005 1.020 1.015 234.02 692 PointZM (77.20883978415920978 28.68683391689759432 0 0) 212.62 213.53 212.79 1.003 0.996 0.992 210.98 692 PointZM (77.20883978415920978 28.68683391689759432 0 0) 212.62 213.53 212.79 1.003 0.996 0.992 214.64 2.020525734 693 PointZM (77.21382811486422781 28.68695383880825744 0 0) 220.70 221.26 221.16 1.000 0.997 0.997 220.04 693 PointZM (77.21382811486422781 28.68695383880825744 0 0) 220.70 221.26 221.16 1.000 0.997 0.997 224.16 3.458704464 694 PointZM (77.21603930658544357 28.68688441033366843 0 0) 219.51 226.97 227.98 0.996 0.967 0.971 213.24 694 PointZM (77.21603930658544357 28.68688441033366843 0 0) 219.51 226.97 227.98 0.996 0.967 0.971 222.95 3.440055355 695 PointZM (77.20744279909462193 28.68505612716931807 0 0) 221.68 214.35 213.46 1.004 1.034 1.030 228.30 695 PointZM (77.20744279909462193 28.68505612716931807 0 0) 221.68 214.35 213.46 1.004 1.034 1.030 223.79 2.106622823 696 PointZM (77.20802978528892879 28.68495093251084072 0 0) 219.28 215.10 213.48 1.008 1.019 1.012 221.85 696 PointZM (77.20802978528892879 28.68495093251084072 0 0) 219.28 215.10 213.48 1.008 1.019 1.012 221.36 2.083815647 697 PointZM (77.21083743072369998 28.68514554262903005 0 0) 215.99 215.73 216.32 0.997 1.001 1.004 216.85 697 PointZM (77.21083743072369998 28.68514554262903005 0 0) 215.99 215.73 216.32 0.997 1.001 1.004 218.04 2.05255081 698 PointZM (77.21480747713465576 28.68540221759571551 0 0) 218.52 225.13 225.07 1.000 0.971 0.970 212.04 698 PointZM (77.21480747713465576 28.68540221759571551 0 0) 218.52 225.13 225.07 1.000 0.971 0.970 220.60 2.076593375 699 PointZM (77.21685877297497314 28.68572200935749095 0 0) 224.35 228.29 230.49 0.990 0.983 0.992 222.60 700 PointZM (77.21865970552813963 28.6854884772156673 0 0) 234.74 224.85 222.12 1.012 1.044 1.031 242.10 701 PointZM (77.20897127748227717 28.68404310260818235 0 0) 215.82 215.14 214.35 1.004 1.003 0.999 215.71 701 PointZM (77.20897127748227717 28.68404310260818235 0 0) 215.82 215.14 214.35 1.004 1.003 0.999 217.87 2.050935302 702 PointZM (77.21464126957422991 28.68395473909506066 0 0) 220.11 226.40 226.67 0.999 0.972 0.973 214.24 702 PointZM (77.21464126957422991 28.68395473909506066 0 0) 220.11 226.40 226.67 0.999 0.972 0.973 222.20 2.091703129 703 PointZM (77.21566586554780542 28.6839926091721118 0 0) 228.07 226.96 230.14 0.986 1.005 1.019 232.40 703 PointZM (77.21566586554780542 28.6839926091721118 0 0) 228.07 226.96 230.14 0.986 1.005 1.019 230.24 2.167346929 704 PointZM (77.21788968062801928 28.68387058336827522 0 0) 235.31 222.80 225.92 0.986 1.056 1.071 252.01 705 PointZM (77.21184940333820634 28.6833761684734263 0 0) 216.62 219.12 221.00 0.991 0.989 0.997 215.99 705 PointZM (77.21184940333820634 28.6833761684734263 0 0) 216.62 219.12 221.00 0.991 0.989 0.997 218.68 2.058537694 706 PointZM (77.21013262651185016 28.68290489640344632 0 0) 215.56 216.14 216.55 0.998 0.997 0.999 215.38 707 PointZM (77.20860309617758332 28.68262087082555212 0 0) 216.05 215.14 215.36 0.999 1.004 1.005 217.19 708 PointZM (77.21042085987609482 28.68214118318288897 0 0) 213.67 217.05 217.51 0.998 0.984 0.986 210.78 709 PointZM (77.21415527025206416 28.68242941654711586 0 0) 218.15 225.93 228.00 0.991 0.966 0.974 212.57 709 PointZM (77.21415527025206416 28.68242941654711586 0 0) 218.15 225.93 228.00 0.991 0.966 0.974 220.22 2.073077269 710 PointZM (77.21562168379122681 28.68277866281326283 0 0) 229.86 226.64 233.10 0.972 1.014 1.043 239.78 711 PointZM (77.21789178452118563 28.68242520876077606 0 0) 228.10 219.55 222.81 0.985 1.039 1.054 240.50 712 PointZM (77.20746278607964541 28.68052749712184024 0 0) 214.18 215.05 216.28 0.994 0.996 1.002 214.55 713 PointZM (77.2118809617357158 28.68064952292566261 0 0) 221.32 220.85 221.65 0.996 1.002 1.006 222.59 714 PointZM (77.21413423132028697 28.68091461346502413 0 0) 219.47 226.55 230.55 0.983 0.969 0.986 216.36 715 PointZM (77.21581524196277257 28.68105978209372253 0 0) 229.07 223.54 230.26 0.971 1.025 1.056 241.80 716 PointZM (77.21690716251778497 28.68104084705520052 0 0) 233.33 221.52 225.43 0.983 1.053 1.072 250.11 717 PointZM (77.21796121299573201 28.68106609377323579 0 0) 223.72 217.36 222.39 0.977 1.029 1.053 235.59 718 PointZM (77.20960665321938166 28.67918521327964854 0 0) 218.08 219.50 217.67 1.008 0.994 0.985 214.85 719 PointZM (77.21461286701635629 28.67928725209837992 0 0) 224.33 224.96 230.32 0.977 0.997 1.021 229.04 720 PointZM (77.21532187901449618 28.67931355076299837 0 0) 233.28 223.23 228.27 0.978 1.045 1.069 249.30 721 PointZM (77.21615502070963544 28.67946082328486312 0 0) 234.58 221.23 223.47 0.990 1.060 1.071 251.26 722 PointZM (77.21769086272341553 28.67961440748624113 0 0) 224.39 217.81 218.44 0.997 1.030 1.033 231.84 723 PointZM (77.20675482602804607 28.67802386425005778 0 0) 217.00 216.76 216.50 1.001 1.001 1.000 216.98 724 PointZM (77.2094856793621318 28.67791235791206716 0 0) 218.29 221.77 220.11 1.008 0.984 0.977 213.25 725 PointZM (77.21402167303570252 28.67819638348996136 0 0) 233.80 226.46 228.25 0.992 1.032 1.041 243.28 726 PointZM (77.21478749014937648 28.67819427959678791 0 0) 234.76 224.93 227.86 0.987 1.044 1.057 248.21 727 PointZM (77.21649585140303884 28.67810381219049631 0 0) 211.87 218.60 220.61 0.991 0.969 0.978 207.24 728 PointZM (77.21241640254724814 28.67766620241122411 0 0) 230.94 229.30 227.58 1.008 1.007 1.000 230.86 729 PointZM (77.20773944803129041 28.67683306071607774 0 0) 217.76 219.78 220.22 0.998 0.991 0.993 216.20 730 PointZM (77.21051027533559363 28.67660373636059035 0 0) 222.10 230.36 227.79 1.011 0.964 0.953 211.76 731 PointZM (77.21146333894139957 28.67648802223626348 0 0) 229.04 232.42 231.21 1.005 0.985 0.980 224.54 732 PointZM (77.21387019272735586 28.67715074858467617 0 0) 237.80 228.21 230.70 0.989 1.042 1.053 250.49 733 PointZM (77.21581839780236578 28.6765069572747926 0 0) 228.03 220.28 219.68 1.003 1.035 1.032 235.41 734 PointZM (77.21712281156752056 28.67632391856903951 0 0) 224.20 216.74 215.74 1.005 1.034 1.030 230.85 735 PointZM (77.21316749240874344 28.6762713212398026 0 0) 238.96 231.51 237.45 0.975 1.032 1.059 252.99 736 PointZM (77.2142993869339449 28.67593680222584496 0 0) 239.05 229.08 229.33 0.999 1.044 1.045 249.73 737 PointZM (77.20685160511372658 28.67562963382308894 0 0) 217.08 218.76 223.16 0.980 0.992 1.012 219.74 738 PointZM (77.20826752521684 28.67577690634495724 0 0) 218.24 223.73 224.85 0.995 0.975 0.980 213.96 739 PointZM (77.21004321105195345 28.67575797130643522 0 0) 221.72 229.11 228.01 1.005 0.968 0.963 213.54 740 PointZM (77.21104045641432378 28.67563173771626239 0 0) 226.04 234.01 232.69 1.006 0.966 0.961 217.11 741 PointZM (77.21427414021590607 28.67569485451134526 0 0) 241.77 229.08 232.50 0.985 1.055 1.071 258.98 742 PointZM (77.21234907796578284 28.67490799846592964 0 0) 237.26 234.65 237.18 0.989 1.011 1.022 242.48 743 PointZM (77.2137060890601532 28.67478807655526651 0 0) 234.29 228.83 233.47 0.980 1.024 1.045 244.73 744 PointZM (77.21576790436630233 28.67470181693531472 0 0) 222.70 220.11 219.92 1.001 1.012 1.011 225.13 745 PointZM (77.21651899422784027 28.67469760914897492 0 0) 218.32 218.41 215.76 1.012 1.000 0.987 215.59 746 PointZM (77.20796456460040247 28.67413376577952988 0 0) 218.52 222.93 230.87 0.966 0.980 1.015 221.83 747 PointZM (77.2091427447753631 28.67422633707899138 0 0) 220.87 227.77 231.21 0.985 0.970 0.984 217.41 748 PointZM (77.2101189512060273 28.67409589570247874 0 0) 222.84 230.51 232.01 0.994 0.967 0.973 216.83 749 PointZM (77.2106954179344882 28.67416742807024477 0 0) 234.54 233.11 232.97 1.001 1.006 1.006 235.84 750 PointZM (77.21240167529505527 28.67401594776203666 0 0) 235.48 232.95 237.06 0.983 1.011 1.029 242.24 751 PointZM (77.21310016782732077 28.6742894538740849 0 0) 236.49 231.22 235.96 0.980 1.023 1.044 246.83 752 PointZM (77.21384915379569236 28.67375085722267869 0 0) 230.24 226.95 230.21 0.986 1.015 1.029 236.93 753 PointZM (77.21459813976406394 28.67361410416664569 0 0) 223.41 224.14 222.11 1.009 0.997 0.988 220.66 754 PointZM (77.21545863207037996 28.67343737714040941 0 0) 216.97 221.76 217.82 1.018 0.978 0.961 208.50 755 PointZM (77.2166536433906856 28.67330272797755342 0 0) 214.83 218.11 214.87 1.015 0.985 0.970 208.45 756 PointZM (77.20612996975654596 28.67180475604082801 0 0) 216.13 219.40 231.81 0.946 0.985 1.041 224.96 757 PointZM (77.20802978528864458 28.67207195047336299 0 0) 220.34 223.39 233.02 0.959 0.986 1.029 226.70 758 PointZM (77.20933209516059037 28.6722718203244753 0 0) 224.53 228.25 233.09 0.979 0.984 1.005 225.55 759 PointZM (77.20999061372266681 28.67221080742255879 0 0) 236.78 230.87 234.53 0.984 1.026 1.042 246.68 760 PointZM (77.21077957366125588 28.6720319765031455 0 0) 240.64 232.79 236.98 0.982 1.034 1.052 253.23 761 PointZM (77.21222284437554606 28.67194150909685035 0 0) 237.50 231.14 232.83 0.993 1.028 1.035 245.82 762 PointZM (77.21284349286057136 28.67172901588672218 0 0) 233.30 229.26 228.57 1.003 1.018 1.015 236.69 763 PointZM (77.21402167303550357 28.6718826000881073 0 0) 222.78 224.51 221.64 1.013 0.992 0.980 218.23 764 PointZM (77.21535974909133415 28.67149758763807554 0 0) 215.64 220.34 217.92 1.011 0.979 0.968 208.72 765 PointZM (77.21562904741703903 28.6714555097746846 0 0) 218.87 220.34 216.57 1.017 0.993 0.976 213.68 766 PointZM (77.21039245731802225 28.67054662792543951 0 0) 228.39 228.73 235.01 0.973 0.999 1.026 234.31 767 PointZM (77.20615416452793056 28.67000908322061647 0 0) 218.19 219.88 230.06 0.956 0.992 1.038 226.54 768 PointZM (77.21363560863888154 28.67018791414002976 0 0) 228.67 224.69 227.84 0.986 1.018 1.032 235.98 769 PointZM (77.2140416600205981 28.67012269345177344 0 0) 229.04 222.65 223.88 0.995 1.029 1.034 236.92 770 PointZM (77.21487480171573736 28.67005747276351713 0 0) 221.47 220.71 217.78 1.013 1.003 0.990 219.28 771 PointZM (77.21602563127946439 28.66981342115585463 0 0) 220.03 217.11 214.97 1.010 1.013 1.003 220.79 772 PointZM (77.20901545923850051 28.66963038245010509 0 0) 215.65 225.54 225.52 1.000 0.956 0.956 206.16 773 PointZM (77.21152119600343156 28.66900973396508689 0 0) 229.38 225.90 229.08 0.986 1.015 1.030 236.19 774 PointZM (77.20665068331589964 28.66873833174621566 0 0) 219.70 220.97 228.98 0.965 0.994 1.030 226.37 775 PointZM (77.20926371863247084 28.66836383876203342 0 0) 217.37 223.96 226.31 0.990 0.971 0.981 213.18 776 PointZM (77.21194407853049313 28.66864996823309397 0 0) 231.22 225.08 227.02 0.991 1.027 1.036 239.57 777 PointZM (77.21582365753518218 28.66794726791446735 0 0) 218.46 216.98 215.82 1.005 1.007 1.001 218.77 778 PointZM (77.21298129786308095 28.66751386592153494 0 0) 222.72 222.36 223.63 0.994 1.002 1.007 224.36 779 PointZM (77.20727133180088231 28.66760012554149029 0 0) 220.46 221.20 228.12 0.970 0.997 1.028 226.60 780 PointZM (77.21555856699578158 28.66707204835591938 0 0) 218.27 217.96 214.90 1.014 1.001 0.987 215.51 781 PointZM (77.20960665321908323 28.66675225659414394 0 0) 220.83 222.93 226.81 0.983 0.991 1.008 222.56 782 PointZM (77.2136292969592688 28.66607059520721279 0 0) 221.91 220.92 221.93 0.995 1.004 1.009 223.92 783 PointZM (77.20671380011093277 28.66596329665556908 0 0) 220.14 220.40 227.72 0.968 0.999 1.032 227.17 784 PointZM (77.20860309617719963 28.66569820611620401 0 0) 220.93 221.97 226.47 0.980 0.995 1.015 224.35 785 PointZM (77.21154644272139933 28.66555934916701176 0 0) 220.10 222.14 225.78 0.984 0.991 1.007 221.65 786 PointZM (77.20684950122037549 28.66516066141138097 0 0) 213.70 221.09 218.12 1.014 0.967 0.954 203.77 787 PointZM (77.20608578799982524 28.66426019513481549 0 0) 221.61 221.87 216.63 1.024 0.999 0.975 216.12 788 PointZM (77.20904806958255051 28.66410240314709768 0 0) 217.83 222.22 210.41 1.056 0.980 0.928 202.19 789 PointZM (77.20940152363503728 28.66430016910503653 0 0) 221.96 222.22 214.28 1.037 0.999 0.963 213.78 790 PointZM (77.21016102906924061 28.66411081871977728 0 0) 223.10 222.24 221.58 1.003 1.004 1.001 223.29 791 PointZM (77.21223125994808356 28.66431279246405239 0 0) 220.17 221.88 223.50 0.993 0.992 1.000 220.07 792 PointZM (77.21289188240334056 28.66445375330641099 0 0) 224.80 221.69 222.90 0.995 1.014 1.020 229.19 793 PointZM (77.21382180318428823 28.6645168701014974 0 0) 219.02 220.26 220.95 0.997 0.994 0.997 218.47 794 PointZM (77.21402588082173679 28.66414658490365497 0 0) 220.49 220.62 220.01 1.003 0.999 0.997 219.74 795 PointZM (77.21523141160785997 28.66431068857088604 0 0) 219.68 219.03 217.10 1.009 1.003 0.994 218.39 796 PointZM (77.20543568501038578 28.66333868992655098 0 0) 218.32 221.78 224.11 0.990 0.984 0.995 217.17 797 PointZM (77.20717876050132134 28.66267491163155512 0 0) 228.19 223.15 225.56 0.989 1.023 1.034 235.86 798 PointZM (77.20781308429194212 28.66254447025504248 0 0) 226.86 223.19 226.25 0.986 1.016 1.030 233.75 799 PointZM (77.211119352407934 28.66304204098964803 0 0) 223.14 222.92 206.44 1.080 1.001 0.927 206.84 800 PointZM (77.21192093570552117 28.66265492464644993 0 0) 220.47 222.47 206.58 1.077 0.991 0.920 202.89 801 PointZM (77.21317695992776464 28.66214683444600198 0 0) 219.25 221.93 216.71 1.024 0.988 0.965 211.52 802 PointZM (77.21484008747829364 28.66197326325951522 0 0) 218.28 220.69 212.19 1.040 0.989 0.951 207.57 803 PointZM (77.21147280646040656 28.66149357561685918 0 0) 223.54 224.91 223.09 1.008 0.994 0.986 220.38 804 PointZM (77.2145255554494554 28.66037220055748236 0 0) 219.84 219.00 219.21 0.999 1.004 1.005 220.89 805 PointZM (77.21515672340031244 28.66056155094274516 0 0) 218.86 218.00 218.40 0.998 1.004 1.006 220.13 806 PointZM (77.21827048529129911 28.71624739535460691 0 0) 204.24 204.95 206.97 0.990 0.997 1.006 205.53 807 PointZM (77.21881328972905578 28.71621162917072567 0 0) 205.22 204.96 206.43 0.993 1.001 1.008 206.96 808 PointZM (77.21988837913868053 28.71624529146144411 0 0) 203.02 205.17 205.82 0.997 0.990 0.993 201.54 809 PointZM (77.22301266049545632 28.7161485123756357 0 0) 205.55 205.40 208.80 0.984 1.001 1.017 209.11 810 PointZM (77.21632859189577403 28.71496822830751938 0 0) 205.86 205.59 206.95 0.993 1.001 1.008 207.49 811 PointZM (77.21944445767988441 28.71491352708511258 0 0) 205.44 205.68 206.12 0.998 0.999 1.001 205.64 812 PointZM (77.22318728362853335 28.71485251418319606 0 0) 205.78 205.94 208.65 0.987 0.999 1.012 208.33 813 PointZM (77.22450432075267202 28.71484725445027664 0 0) 206.60 206.54 209.94 0.984 1.000 1.017 210.07 814 PointZM (77.21792123902510241 28.71335454224647421 0 0) 205.47 205.99 205.17 1.004 0.997 0.994 204.14 815 PointZM (77.22202803849206987 28.71328721766504088 0 0) 205.31 206.50 207.83 0.994 0.994 1.001 205.43 816 PointZM (77.21707757786408877 28.71237307608286216 0 0) 205.64 206.33 205.83 1.002 0.997 0.994 204.46 817 PointZM (77.22013558658606769 28.71233520600581102 0 0) 205.49 206.00 207.02 0.995 0.998 1.002 205.99 818 PointZM (77.22401937337703259 28.71230890734118901 0 0) 205.05 207.50 208.66 0.994 0.988 0.994 203.76 819 PointZM (77.21959330812158839 28.71106287661152479 0 0) 205.50 206.10 207.74 0.992 0.997 1.005 206.54 820 PointZM (77.22437650924256047 28.71103184418727494 0 0) 205.47 207.01 208.51 0.993 0.993 1.000 205.41 821 PointZM (77.2162965075248735 28.70995885867079522 0 0) 206.31 207.09 207.78 0.997 0.996 1.000 206.22 822 PointZM (77.21741472674449369 28.71001461183979231 0 0) 203.34 207.00 207.98 0.995 0.982 0.987 200.69 823 PointZM (77.22085879986306622 28.70983157313403211 0 0) 205.70 206.58 209.62 0.986 0.996 1.010 207.83 824 PointZM (77.22407144473295659 28.70974531351408032 0 0) 206.39 207.35 209.03 0.992 0.995 1.003 207.10 825 PointZM (77.22618585736836394 28.70972217068921495 0 0) 208.27 207.99 208.48 0.998 1.001 1.004 209.03 826 PointZM (77.21698342864468145 28.70872071754050125 0 0) 206.10 207.08 207.82 0.996 0.995 0.999 205.85 827 PointZM (77.22071994291381714 28.70879645769460708 0 0) 205.41 207.36 209.28 0.991 0.991 1.000 205.36 828 PointZM (77.22368222449657083 28.70880276937411679 0 0) 206.52 208.73 209.83 0.995 0.989 0.995 205.41 829 PointZM (77.21760828491606787 28.70737843369832376 0 0) 206.50 207.29 207.21 1.000 0.996 0.996 205.64 830 PointZM (77.2200803593903089 28.70739000511076 0 0) 205.92 208.05 208.43 0.998 0.990 0.992 204.19 831 PointZM (77.22265447268324579 28.70730374549080821 0 0) 208.23 210.99 211.29 0.999 0.987 0.988 205.80 832 PointZM (77.22455744405510814 28.70722695339011921 0 0) 212.84 213.44 210.08 1.016 0.997 0.981 208.90 833 PointZM (77.21762827190117662 28.70616553928607928 0 0) 207.43 207.50 207.41 1.000 1.000 0.999 207.27 834 PointZM (77.22270075833296232 28.70630334428868835 0 0) 212.87 212.71 212.48 1.001 1.001 1.000 212.80 835 PointZM (77.22574824758908107 28.70621287688239676 0 0) 215.56 215.29 218.74 0.984 1.001 1.017 219.29 836 PointZM (77.21751255777684264 28.70483377490975485 0 0) 207.34 207.80 208.96 0.994 0.998 1.003 208.03 836 PointZM (77.21751255777684264 28.70483377490975485 0 0) 207.34 207.80 208.96 0.994 0.998 1.003 211.33 3.987307852 837 PointZM (77.21936819155239107 28.7048295671234186 0 0) 211.52 209.58 210.19 0.997 1.009 1.012 214.09 837 PointZM (77.21936819155239107 28.7048295671234186 0 0) 211.52 209.58 210.19 0.997 1.009 1.012 215.59 4.06769247 838 PointZM (77.22272284921123742 28.70484534632218043 0 0) 213.58 215.40 216.41 0.995 0.992 0.996 212.78 839 PointZM (77.22392312026447314 28.70484008658926101 0 0) 217.40 217.82 220.93 0.986 0.998 1.012 220.09 840 PointZM (77.22574088396295622 28.70482535933707524 0 0) 219.29 216.09 222.45 0.971 1.015 1.045 229.09 841 PointZM (77.21808692061210877 28.70367663366650746 0 0) 207.86 209.42 210.12 0.997 0.993 0.996 206.99 841 PointZM (77.21808692061210877 28.70367663366650746 0 0) 207.86 209.42 210.12 0.997 0.993 0.996 211.86 3.997307852 842 PointZM (77.22185183743904702 28.70372923099573725 0 0) 211.93 215.08 216.39 0.994 0.985 0.991 210.11 842 PointZM (77.22185183743904702 28.70372923099573725 0 0) 211.93 215.08 216.39 0.994 0.985 0.991 216.01 4.075577086 843 PointZM (77.22416506797895863 28.70367768561308353 0 0) 217.75 217.69 221.17 0.984 1.000 1.016 221.29 844 PointZM (77.22575350732198274 28.70369030897209939 0 0) 216.13 215.63 221.25 0.975 1.002 1.028 222.27 845 PointZM (77.21768718090987704 28.70236485627528111 0 0) 207.94 209.91 210.24 0.998 0.991 0.992 206.30 845 PointZM (77.21768718090987704 28.70236485627528111 0 0) 207.94 209.91 210.24 0.998 0.991 0.992 211.53 3.592606412 846 PointZM (77.22026234614943974 28.70258366116491544 0 0) 210.11 213.91 211.97 1.009 0.982 0.973 204.50 846 PointZM (77.22026234614943974 28.70258366116491544 0 0) 210.11 213.91 211.97 1.009 0.982 0.973 214.15 4.040577085 847 PointZM (77.22329721204653197 28.70253211578226527 0 0) 215.55 217.34 218.04 0.997 0.992 0.995 214.46 847 PointZM (77.22329721204653197 28.70253211578226527 0 0) 215.55 217.34 218.04 0.997 0.992 0.995 219.70 4.145192474 848 PointZM (77.22489196306908354 28.70251212879715297 0 0) 219.54 216.33 219.67 0.985 1.015 1.030 226.23 849 PointZM (77.22550840376776193 28.70251107685056624 0 0) 219.63 214.20 219.38 0.976 1.025 1.050 230.65 850 PointZM (77.21835516699124469 28.70128450713271917 0 0) 209.75 211.62 210.64 1.005 0.991 0.987 206.93 850 PointZM (77.21835516699124469 28.70128450713271917 0 0) 209.75 211.62 210.64 1.005 0.991 0.987 213.37 3.623878018 851 PointZM (77.22167721430595577 28.70132027331660041 0 0) 212.07 216.64 218.55 0.991 0.979 0.988 209.42 851 PointZM (77.22167721430595577 28.70132027331660041 0 0) 212.07 216.64 218.55 0.991 0.979 0.988 216.15 4.078269394 852 PointZM (77.22251877157378885 28.70132027331660041 0 0) 217.91 217.64 218.17 0.998 1.001 1.004 218.72 852 PointZM (77.22251877157378885 28.70132027331660041 0 0) 217.91 217.64 218.17 0.998 1.001 1.004 222.10 4.190577091 853 PointZM (77.22378741915501621 28.70128450713271917 0 0) 221.87 219.19 219.53 0.998 1.012 1.014 224.92 854 PointZM (77.22433863916543828 28.70126977988052985 0 0) 218.82 218.08 219.37 0.994 1.003 1.009 220.85 855 PointZM (77.22603648095326889 28.70124453316249813 0 0) 213.21 208.72 218.39 0.956 1.021 1.069 227.88 856 PointZM (77.2189084908948189 28.70056287177556342 0 0) 211.13 212.76 211.95 1.004 0.992 0.989 208.71 856 PointZM (77.2189084908948189 28.70056287177556342 0 0) 211.13 212.76 211.95 1.004 0.992 0.989 214.78 3.647720457 857 PointZM (77.22211482408522443 28.70011684642361871 0 0) 216.44 218.75 219.18 0.998 0.989 0.991 214.57 857 PointZM (77.22211482408522443 28.70011684642361871 0 0) 216.44 218.75 219.18 0.998 0.989 0.991 220.18 3.739462017 858 PointZM (77.22358123762442972 28.70008949581240998 0 0) 221.27 219.80 221.11 0.994 1.007 1.013 224.08 859 PointZM (77.22513811856987331 28.70003900237634653 0 0) 214.68 215.53 215.17 1.002 0.996 0.994 213.47 860 PointZM (77.22638993500575566 28.700009547871975 0 0) 208.55 208.20 216.66 0.961 1.002 1.042 217.39 861 PointZM (77.21799750515241101 28.6994288733571743 0 0) 211.97 212.77 211.37 1.007 0.996 0.990 209.78 861 PointZM (77.21799750515241101 28.6994288733571743 0 0) 211.97 212.77 211.37 1.007 0.996 0.990 215.48 3.506534922 862 PointZM (77.21895688043771599 28.69902702976179043 0 0) 212.08 213.90 214.09 0.999 0.992 0.992 210.47 862 PointZM (77.21895688043771599 28.69902702976179043 0 0) 212.08 213.90 214.09 0.999 0.992 0.992 215.59 3.508354608 863 PointZM (77.22096609841463533 28.69892814678281923 0 0) 214.60 217.26 218.78 0.993 0.988 0.995 213.46 863 PointZM (77.22096609841463533 28.69892814678281923 0 0) 214.60 217.26 218.78 0.993 0.988 0.995 218.31 3.707672098 864 PointZM (77.2217592661395571 28.69893866624866874 0 0) 217.01 218.81 219.89 0.995 0.992 0.997 216.28 864 PointZM (77.2217592661395571 28.69893866624866874 0 0) 217.01 218.81 219.89 0.995 0.992 0.997 220.76 3.749309981 865 PointZM (77.22269760249317017 28.69891973121014317 0 0) 222.88 220.47 222.52 0.991 1.011 1.020 227.41 866 PointZM (77.21737054498782982 28.69854103043962468 0 0) 212.09 213.01 211.56 1.007 0.996 0.989 209.73 866 PointZM (77.21737054498782982 28.69854103043962468 0 0) 212.09 213.01 211.56 1.007 0.996 0.989 215.60 3.508520034 867 PointZM (77.21859921859882547 28.69763425248353883 0 0) 214.52 214.31 214.42 0.999 1.001 1.001 214.84 867 PointZM (77.21859921859882547 28.69763425248353883 0 0) 214.52 214.31 214.42 0.999 1.001 1.001 218.07 3.548718552 868 PointZM (77.22157412354057726 28.6978025639371026 0 0) 216.19 219.27 219.27 1.000 0.986 0.986 213.15 868 PointZM (77.22157412354057726 28.6978025639371026 0 0) 216.19 219.27 219.27 1.000 0.986 0.986 219.77 3.576344694 869 PointZM (77.22380425030029016 28.69776258996688156 0 0) 221.37 218.40 218.50 1.000 1.014 1.014 224.49 870 PointZM (77.2250118849795939 28.6976952653854589 0 0) 217.12 214.27 213.97 1.001 1.013 1.012 219.70 871 PointZM (77.21880540012938354 28.69700308453266402 0 0) 215.73 214.58 214.99 0.998 1.005 1.007 217.30 871 PointZM (77.21880540012938354 28.69700308453266402 0 0) 215.73 214.58 214.99 0.998 1.005 1.007 218.15 2.417683953 872 PointZM (77.22143211075155023 28.69665594215969051 0 0) 219.01 219.44 218.96 1.002 0.998 0.996 218.10 872 PointZM (77.22143211075155023 28.69665594215969051 0 0) 219.01 219.44 218.96 1.002 0.998 0.996 222.63 3.622994826 873 PointZM (77.22221160317087651 28.69660334483045361 0 0) 221.03 219.85 220.58 0.997 1.005 1.009 222.95 874 PointZM (77.22334244574950901 28.69658966952485457 0 0) 223.08 217.95 218.54 0.997 1.024 1.026 228.95 875 PointZM (77.22425237954534794 28.69665594215969762 0 0) 216.13 216.23 216.05 1.001 1.000 0.999 215.85 876 PointZM (77.21899580246119399 28.69616257921141766 0 0) 214.79 214.87 215.22 0.998 1.000 1.001 215.07 876 PointZM (77.21899580246119399 28.69616257921141766 0 0) 214.79 214.87 215.22 0.998 1.000 1.001 217.20 2.407149382 877 PointZM (77.22019081378151384 28.69589854061864997 0 0) 216.34 217.31 216.75 1.003 0.996 0.993 214.83 877 PointZM (77.22019081378151384 28.69589854061864997 0 0) 216.34 217.31 216.75 1.003 0.996 0.993 218.76 2.424520217 878 PointZM (77.22136478617012756 28.69556612549785868 0 0) 215.32 220.47 219.32 1.005 0.977 0.972 209.19 878 PointZM (77.22136478617012756 28.69556612549785868 0 0) 215.32 220.47 219.32 1.005 0.977 0.972 217.73 2.413089087 879 PointZM (77.2227491478757031 28.69562187866685221 0 0) 218.44 218.44 217.38 1.005 1.000 0.995 217.37 880 PointZM (77.2238316009114385 28.6955103723288687 0 0) 223.62 216.98 213.93 1.014 1.031 1.016 227.24 881 PointZM (77.2247289113482509 28.69533259335603859 0 0) 216.06 213.81 214.03 0.999 1.011 1.012 218.56 882 PointZM (77.22671498650032618 28.69517269747514732 0 0) 213.94 205.34 212.83 0.965 1.042 1.080 231.03 883 PointZM (77.21874859501379262 28.6951116845732308 0 0) 212.04 215.16 216.30 0.995 0.986 0.991 210.07 883 PointZM (77.21874859501379262 28.6951116845732308 0 0) 212.04 215.16 216.30 0.995 0.986 0.991 214.49 2.446521761 884 PointZM (77.22078095581558443 28.69453942563110971 0 0) 214.25 220.13 220.79 0.997 0.973 0.976 209.15 885 PointZM (77.22281331661734782 28.694244880587366 0 0) 219.67 216.92 214.87 1.010 1.013 1.003 220.35 886 PointZM (77.22672235012639419 28.69394612775728959 0 0) 215.61 205.30 211.00 0.973 1.050 1.079 232.74 887 PointZM (77.21898002326240373 28.69388511485536952 0 0) 215.61 215.41 217.55 0.990 1.001 1.011 217.96 887 PointZM (77.21898002326240373 28.69388511485536952 0 0) 215.61 215.41 217.55 0.990 1.001 1.011 218.10 2.487712492 888 PointZM (77.22031389153190162 28.69353586858922256 0 0) 217.15 218.84 221.03 0.990 0.992 1.002 217.64 888 PointZM (77.22031389153190162 28.69353586858922256 0 0) 217.15 218.84 221.03 0.990 0.992 1.002 219.66 2.505481043 889 PointZM (77.22429656130188391 28.69372732286765171 0 0) 209.40 212.73 213.40 0.997 0.984 0.987 206.77 890 PointZM (77.22584923446100902 28.69360108927747532 0 0) 205.06 209.23 212.40 0.985 0.980 0.995 204.02 891 PointZM (77.21871914050937846 28.69276794758233251 0 0) 216.79 216.57 217.40 0.996 1.001 1.005 217.84 891 PointZM (77.21871914050937846 28.69276794758233251 0 0) 216.79 216.57 217.40 0.996 1.001 1.005 220.72 3.929490014 892 PointZM (77.22675601241708421 28.69255755826537424 0 0) 205.24 205.16 210.63 0.974 1.000 1.027 210.79 893 PointZM (77.22101028017101498 28.69190745527598096 0 0) 220.62 217.24 218.15 0.996 1.016 1.020 225.00 893 PointZM (77.22101028017101498 28.69190745527598096 0 0) 220.62 217.24 218.15 0.996 1.016 1.020 224.62 3.99891179 894 PointZM (77.22156150018143705 28.69178332557897804 0 0) 224.37 216.28 216.77 0.998 1.037 1.040 233.29 895 PointZM (77.22240936912876919 28.69186116962625022 0 0) 219.27 215.17 213.89 1.006 1.019 1.013 222.11 896 PointZM (77.22284487501487149 28.69187800077160588 0 0) 215.17 214.18 213.89 1.001 1.005 1.003 215.87 897 PointZM (77.22403567854884443 28.69180015672433726 0 0) 207.29 212.03 213.36 0.994 0.978 0.984 203.92 898 PointZM (77.22798468602810829 28.69132467686801391 0 0) 203.98 205.33 210.39 0.976 0.993 1.018 207.63 899 PointZM (77.22431760023351899 28.69045576898898986 0 0) 211.85 212.40 212.97 0.997 0.997 1.000 211.86 900 PointZM (77.22139318872783065 28.6894353808017506 0 0) 225.08 217.94 216.69 1.006 1.033 1.027 231.11 901 PointZM (77.22627211698801375 28.68965418569138492 0 0) 214.79 210.37 211.03 0.997 1.021 1.024 220.00 902 PointZM (77.22807094564798547 28.68921026423261011 0 0) 207.80 205.52 210.88 0.975 1.011 1.037 215.59 903 PointZM (77.21924511380167644 28.68818566825903815 0 0) 202.40 226.77 225.90 1.004 0.893 0.889 179.96 904 PointZM (77.22137846147560936 28.68796265558306402 0 0) 209.92 219.26 219.08 1.001 0.957 0.957 200.81 905 PointZM (77.22572931255024287 28.68758395481254553 0 0) 213.24 212.90 212.51 1.002 1.002 1.000 213.19 906 PointZM (77.22794891984412402 28.68743037061116752 0 0) 212.41 207.40 211.74 0.980 1.024 1.046 222.09 907 PointZM (77.21901999723249332 28.6868370727373474 0 0) 230.80 227.78 224.40 1.015 1.013 0.998 230.38 908 PointZM (77.22010981389432516 28.68675291701056551 0 0) 227.28 223.73 220.95 1.013 1.016 1.003 228.03 909 PointZM (77.22172139606220753 28.68660985227503701 0 0) 216.20 218.78 218.06 1.003 0.988 0.985 212.94 910 PointZM (77.22466895039273993 28.68650676150972956 0 0) 213.70 213.19 213.56 0.998 1.002 1.004 214.60 911 PointZM (77.22786055633093838 28.68593555451420229 0 0) 212.05 207.17 212.09 0.977 1.024 1.048 222.19 912 PointZM (77.22710105089672084 28.68557894462196245 0 0) 204.53 208.97 212.53 0.983 0.979 0.995 203.59 913 PointZM (77.22056109897911824 28.68539906175595888 0 0) 219.31 218.80 219.81 0.995 1.002 1.007 220.85 914 PointZM (77.22295217356628427 28.68515501014828928 0 0) 214.66 214.24 213.49 1.004 1.002 0.998 214.32 915 PointZM (77.2256441048767357 28.6847510626597284 0 0) 214.77 212.36 213.07 0.997 1.011 1.015 217.93 916 PointZM (77.21932190590219136 28.68372541473957327 0 0) 220.67 218.91 221.80 0.987 1.008 1.021 225.38 917 PointZM (77.22132060441325052 28.6835350124077344 0 0) 216.48 213.89 216.00 0.990 1.012 1.022 221.26 918 PointZM (77.22322988746465455 28.68334566202248226 0 0) 213.58 213.26 213.48 0.999 1.001 1.002 214.11 919 PointZM (77.22645094790728137 28.68320996091304664 0 0) 211.63 211.04 212.43 0.993 1.003 1.009 213.61 920 PointZM (77.21854662126925462 28.68241363734836824 0 0) 214.82 217.65 221.91 0.981 0.987 1.006 216.18 921 PointZM (77.2211912149833779 28.68219483245873391 0 0) 211.95 213.72 214.65 0.996 0.992 0.996 211.10 922 PointZM (77.22419767832266757 28.68188871600256462 0 0) 211.67 213.15 213.29 0.999 0.993 0.994 210.34 923 PointZM (77.22556941666921659 28.68160679431784743 0 0) 214.19 212.20 212.07 1.001 1.009 1.009 216.06 924 PointZM (77.22669394756832162 28.68182665115407204 0 0) 210.49 210.08 210.78 0.997 1.002 1.005 211.60 925 PointZM (77.22777534865748805 28.68199496260763226 0 0) 205.73 208.38 211.29 0.986 0.987 1.001 205.94 926 PointZM (77.21931138643635961 28.68085254861656708 0 0) 219.54 214.09 219.22 0.977 1.025 1.050 230.52 927 PointZM (77.22159831831164922 28.6805390685342978 0 0) 213.59 213.41 213.49 1.000 1.001 1.001 213.85 928 PointZM (77.22335927689455559 28.68036549734781104 0 0) 218.20 213.23 213.30 1.000 1.023 1.024 223.36 929 PointZM (77.22429971714134922 28.68043176998265054 0 0) 215.02 213.01 212.97 1.000 1.009 1.009 217.01 930 PointZM (77.21833728389883333 28.67983636821567117 0 0) 222.98 216.20 217.37 0.995 1.031 1.037 231.21 931 PointZM (77.22039173557888603 28.67923255087600864 0 0) 215.61 213.70 213.93 0.999 1.009 1.010 217.78 932 PointZM (77.22236097958560208 28.67914418736287629 0 0) 215.55 213.25 213.36 0.999 1.011 1.011 217.98 933 PointZM (77.22462266474286707 28.6788096683489151 0 0) 214.03 213.16 212.09 1.005 1.004 0.999 213.83 934 PointZM (77.22609223412177926 28.67868133086557592 0 0) 212.74 213.34 210.80 1.012 0.997 0.985 209.62 935 PointZM (77.22729881685454245 28.67876233075260473 0 0) 215.62 213.33 210.60 1.013 1.011 0.998 215.14 936 PointZM (77.21952282769981935 28.67836364299696683 0 0) 214.92 214.05 215.12 0.995 1.004 1.009 216.88 937 PointZM (77.21814372572717389 28.67809960440418848 0 0) 214.88 215.90 217.48 0.993 0.995 1.003 215.42 938 PointZM (77.22275756344802744 28.67737586515385928 0 0) 216.52 212.91 213.20 0.999 1.017 1.018 220.49 939 PointZM (77.22564410487663622 28.67722017705931137 0 0) 213.69 213.06 210.55 1.012 1.003 0.991 211.79 940 PointZM (77.21765457056527282 28.67685094380804856 0 0) 218.83 216.91 215.99 1.004 1.009 1.005 219.84 941 PointZM (77.22171929216885644 28.67636284059271645 0 0) 214.62 213.32 213.57 0.999 1.006 1.007 216.18 942 PointZM (77.21869494573763859 28.67616823047452712 0 0) 214.80 215.07 215.58 0.998 0.999 1.001 215.04 943 PointZM (77.22450800256510206 28.67540872504031313 0 0) 215.51 210.61 212.02 0.993 1.023 1.030 222.00 944 PointZM (77.22057372233801686 28.67541082893348658 0 0) 214.66 213.64 213.77 0.999 1.005 1.005 215.82 945 PointZM (77.22381371781912662 28.67515836175314092 0 0) 215.00 211.13 213.54 0.989 1.018 1.030 221.44 946 PointZM (77.21887377665703411 28.67452929769544312 0 0) 215.01 215.10 216.70 0.993 1.000 1.007 216.52 947 PointZM (77.22055163145971335 28.67431785643190523 0 0) 216.23 213.54 213.77 0.999 1.013 1.014 219.18 948 PointZM (77.22286065421330647 28.67410851906153013 0 0) 215.50 211.31 213.70 0.989 1.020 1.031 222.27 949 PointZM (77.22470997630932743 28.67401805165523498 0 0) 209.69 209.91 213.10 0.985 0.999 1.014 212.67 950 PointZM (77.22565357239588479 28.67392968814211685 0 0) 212.12 211.08 212.20 0.995 1.005 1.010 214.30 951 PointZM (77.21768086922983798 28.67331745522977471 0 0) 218.31 216.97 215.97 1.005 1.006 1.002 218.64 952 PointZM (77.21865076398100314 28.67312600095134556 0 0) 216.32 215.12 215.94 0.996 1.006 1.009 218.36 953 PointZM (77.22009824248162602 28.67304394911773002 0 0) 215.95 213.98 214.06 1.000 1.009 1.010 218.01 954 PointZM (77.22068522867593288 28.67331535133660125 0 0) 216.29 213.21 213.86 0.997 1.014 1.017 220.07 955 PointZM (77.22432496385927436 28.67271153399694228 0 0) 211.10 208.79 213.12 0.980 1.011 1.032 217.87 956 PointZM (77.2262584416820772 28.67210350887093995 0 0) 212.72 211.82 212.61 0.996 1.004 1.008 214.42 957 PointZM (77.22237675878423602 28.67165537962582889 0 0) 214.27 211.05 213.45 0.989 1.015 1.027 220.02 958 PointZM (77.21794385587597276 28.67134821122306576 0 0) 216.65 215.51 215.00 1.002 1.005 1.003 217.28 959 PointZM (77.21907364650802208 28.67136293847525508 0 0) 211.33 214.96 214.19 1.004 0.983 0.980 207.02 960 PointZM (77.21908206208070169 28.67103683503397349 0 0) 209.90 214.70 214.02 1.003 0.978 0.975 204.55 961 PointZM (77.22220423954432533 28.67090008197795115 0 0) 212.16 210.50 213.44 0.986 1.008 1.022 216.81 962 PointZM (77.22374428934445234 28.67086221190089645 0 0) 212.29 209.11 213.43 0.980 1.015 1.036 219.97 963 PointZM (77.22401358767015722 28.67083275739652137 0 0) 208.91 208.98 213.41 0.979 1.000 1.021 213.26 964 PointZM (77.22605646793779499 28.67069179655416633 0 0) 210.11 210.17 213.05 0.987 1.000 1.013 212.92 965 PointZM (77.22626896114792316 28.67069179655416633 0 0) 208.91 210.17 213.01 0.987 0.994 1.007 210.46 966 PointZM (77.21654055913190007 28.66948836966117753 0 0) 210.11 216.02 215.06 1.004 0.973 0.968 203.45 967 PointZM (77.21787863518773065 28.66954727866992414 0 0) 216.03 214.50 214.64 0.999 1.007 1.008 217.72 968 PointZM (77.22042119008312966 28.6694673307294785 0 0) 215.27 212.76 213.57 0.996 1.012 1.016 218.63 969 PointZM (77.22219161618529881 28.66931900626103058 0 0) 215.05 210.61 213.49 0.986 1.021 1.035 222.59 970 PointZM (77.22518861200535412 28.66926009725228042 0 0) 211.40 207.80 213.29 0.974 1.017 1.044 220.74 971 PointZM (77.2166531174164561 28.66779157981992654 0 0) 217.51 215.95 215.60 1.002 1.007 1.006 218.71 972 PointZM (77.21946181479778204 28.66774950195653204 0 0) 215.30 211.61 213.64 0.990 1.017 1.027 221.16 973 PointZM (77.22171718827556219 28.66776422920871781 0 0) 211.98 210.07 213.46 0.984 1.009 1.025 217.36 974 PointZM (77.22403567854840389 28.66750545034886244 0 0) 208.85 208.33 213.42 0.976 1.003 1.027 214.49 975 PointZM (77.22572300087038855 28.66800828081638741 0 0) 206.30 207.10 213.23 0.971 0.996 1.026 211.59 976 PointZM (77.2173200515511553 28.66682378896192418 0 0) 216.53 214.77 214.29 1.002 1.008 1.006 217.82 977 PointZM (77.21970271056568436 28.66644403624481541 0 0) 213.82 213.15 213.50 0.998 1.003 1.005 214.84 978 PointZM (77.22248931706876363 28.66631569876147267 0 0) 213.76 211.84 213.37 0.993 1.009 1.016 217.26 979 PointZM (77.21673727314322377 28.66520905095428873 0 0) 218.64 216.62 215.02 1.007 1.009 1.002 219.06 980 PointZM (77.21868442627163631 28.66500076553050391 0 0) 215.93 215.14 213.55 1.007 1.004 0.996 215.13 981 PointZM (77.21650058516162574 28.66423179257702714 0 0) 216.99 217.51 215.64 1.009 0.998 0.989 214.61 982 PointZM (77.21716751929636757 28.66408872784149509 0 0) 216.33 216.81 214.98 1.008 0.998 0.989 214.04 983 PointZM (77.21849717977953276 28.66387623463137402 0 0) 216.04 215.64 213.87 1.008 1.002 0.994 214.66 984 PointZM (77.21869073795110694 28.66386150737918825 0 0) 216.80 215.64 213.87 1.008 1.005 0.997 216.17 985 PointZM (77.21779447946089192 28.6634260014930895 0 0) 216.77 216.84 214.54 1.011 1.000 0.989 214.41 986 PointZM (77.21867601069894249 28.66328714454389726 0 0) 215.59 216.17 214.02 1.010 0.997 0.987 212.87 987 PointZM (77.21737790861331518 28.66284953476463215 0 0) 217.15 218.15 215.02 1.015 0.995 0.981 213.05 988 PointZM (77.21600406637359981 28.66272330117445932 0 0) 216.16 219.39 215.01 1.020 0.985 0.966 208.73 989 PointZM (77.21678881852584198 28.6627064700291001 0 0) 217.35 218.76 215.91 1.013 0.994 0.981 213.14 990 PointZM (77.21583365102685548 28.661543017106343 0 0) 219.18 220.04 216.41 1.017 0.996 0.980 214.73 991 PointZM (77.21639749439628986 28.66155564046536242 0 0) 217.19 220.04 216.16 1.018 0.987 0.970 210.60 992 PointZM (77.21739473975866019 28.66144623802054525 0 0) 217.44 219.32 215.66 1.017 0.991 0.975 211.97 993 PointZM (77.21610715713887885 28.66026805784558462 0 0) 218.17 217.00 216.93 1.000 1.005 1.005 219.28 994 PointZM (77.2166415460039417 28.660240707234383 0 0) 218.57 217.00 216.60 1.002 1.007 1.005 219.74 995 PointZM (77.21773977823843893 28.66012709700322603 0 0) 218.40 216.00 215.41 1.003 1.011 1.008 220.23 996 PointZM (77.22703477826154028 28.71615797989489494 0 0) 205.10 206.42 209.18 0.987 0.994 1.007 206.52 997 PointZM (77.23023900755877946 28.71610748645882794 0 0) 206.08 205.55 210.02 0.979 1.003 1.024 211.10 998 PointZM (77.2320988491206748 28.71603174630472566 0 0) 205.45 206.71 209.02 0.989 0.994 1.005 206.47 999 PointZM (77.22815825721406213 28.71487250116830481 0 0) 211.84 209.87 208.00 1.009 1.009 1.000 211.93 1000 PointZM (77.22929225563244415 28.71484094277075982 0 0) 207.80 207.95 211.00 0.986 0.999 1.014 210.69 1001 PointZM (77.23050830588444171 28.71482411162540416 0 0) 206.57 206.94 212.90 0.972 0.998 1.027 212.15 1002 PointZM (77.23215775812936101 28.71476099483031774 0 0) 205.21 205.94 210.42 0.979 0.996 1.018 208.93 1003 PointZM (77.22955945006492584 28.71347972389006387 0 0) 209.11 205.35 212.59 0.966 1.018 1.054 220.44 1004 PointZM (77.22670236314064596 28.71329878907748778 0 0) 207.36 208.05 208.03 1.000 0.997 0.997 206.65 1005 PointZM (77.22843176332602866 28.71325039953458713 0 0) 213.87 208.30 209.85 0.993 1.027 1.034 221.23 1006 PointZM (77.23029370878109034 28.71329668518431433 0 0) 205.41 206.73 212.88 0.971 0.994 1.023 210.18 1007 PointZM (77.2270347782614266 28.71233099821948898 0 0) 207.60 207.51 208.13 0.997 1.000 1.003 208.30 1008 PointZM (77.22915129479000029 28.7120175181372268 0 0) 208.49 204.98 209.02 0.981 1.017 1.037 216.24 1009 PointZM (77.23081547428711247 28.71226577753123266 0 0) 204.93 206.61 210.03 0.984 0.992 1.008 206.63 1010 PointZM (77.23082914959270795 28.71165985629840023 0 0) 204.90 205.99 208.98 0.986 0.995 1.009 206.77 1011 PointZM (77.22767962151790755 28.71109180514262249 0 0) 202.48 206.10 208.13 0.990 0.982 0.992 200.88 1012 PointZM (77.23087438329586973 28.71100975330900695 0 0) 204.76 205.39 209.10 0.982 0.997 1.015 207.81 1013 PointZM (77.22767120594519952 28.70964117080221101 0 0) 212.48 206.78 209.16 0.989 1.028 1.039 220.84 1014 PointZM (77.22991395606395315 28.70977371607189355 0 0) 204.85 204.96 211.51 0.969 0.999 1.031 211.30 1015 PointZM (77.23093434425116754 28.70975057324701751 0 0) 203.69 204.27 210.97 0.968 0.997 1.030 209.76 1016 PointZM (77.22711157036208363 28.70868600330322096 0 0) 210.61 209.57 209.11 1.002 1.005 1.003 211.19 1017 PointZM (77.22868107466656795 28.70860605536277532 0 0) 211.61 205.12 214.68 0.955 1.032 1.080 228.48 1018 PointZM (77.22997391701922254 28.70851243211673065 0 0) 205.04 205.06 212.97 0.963 1.000 1.038 212.92 1019 PointZM (77.22915234673648399 28.70781709542419335 0 0) 204.76 205.39 213.65 0.961 0.997 1.037 212.35 1020 PointZM (77.22812038713682625 28.70730269354423214 0 0) 207.19 205.07 214.10 0.958 1.010 1.055 218.56 1021 PointZM (77.22851591905272528 28.70723852480256255 0 0) 213.95 205.07 214.12 0.958 1.043 1.089 233.07 1022 PointZM (77.2295405150263008 28.70727113514669071 0 0) 204.90 204.65 213.67 0.958 1.001 1.045 214.19 1023 PointZM (77.2300727999981973 28.70727323903986061 0 0) 202.31 203.50 213.34 0.954 0.994 1.042 210.86 1024 PointZM (77.22777324476385274 28.70630544818186181 0 0) 210.50 206.54 216.52 0.954 1.019 1.068 224.89 1025 PointZM (77.22844228279177514 28.70610347443758315 0 0) 211.91 205.11 216.92 0.946 1.033 1.093 231.54 1026 PointZM (77.2301380206864394 28.70602773428348087 0 0) 203.92 204.20 213.11 0.958 0.999 1.042 212.52 1027 PointZM (77.22740716735233946 28.70483061907000177 0 0) 211.27 205.24 217.99 0.941 1.029 1.093 231.00 1028 PointZM (77.22939113861124838 28.70476329448857555 0 0) 204.99 204.90 217.45 0.942 1.000 1.062 217.63 1029 PointZM (77.22719467414222549 28.70365243889504825 0 0) 209.06 208.26 217.13 0.959 1.004 1.047 218.79 1030 PointZM (77.22947529433800185 28.70355145202290714 0 0) 203.29 204.30 217.96 0.937 0.995 1.062 215.80 1031 PointZM (77.22864846432234742 28.70223441489877203 0 0) 208.02 206.00 218.32 0.944 1.010 1.070 222.62 1032 PointZM (77.22957628121012874 28.702348025129929 0 0) 203.98 204.81 217.90 0.940 0.996 1.060 216.13 1033 PointZM (77.22800046522611694 28.70139706541728941 0 0) 211.62 205.19 218.11 0.941 1.031 1.096 231.99 1034 PointZM (77.22818350393187359 28.70123927342957515 0 0) 210.85 207.46 217.89 0.952 1.016 1.067 225.07 1035 PointZM (77.22893459379339731 28.70115722159595961 0 0) 203.44 206.59 217.97 0.948 0.985 1.039 211.38 1036 PointZM (77.22973617709098448 28.70064387166258513 0 0) 204.34 205.18 217.51 0.943 0.996 1.056 215.74 1037 PointZM (77.22768488125065289 28.70000218424586791 0 0) 209.41 206.60 216.82 0.953 1.014 1.064 222.75 1038 PointZM (77.22828659469715262 28.69996010638247697 0 0) 208.48 207.72 216.68 0.959 1.004 1.047 218.26 1039 PointZM (77.2298098133519062 28.69988436622837469 0 0) 204.52 205.19 216.52 0.948 0.997 1.052 215.11 1040 PointZM (77.22782794598619205 28.69875036780998201 0 0) 208.90 206.79 214.47 0.964 1.010 1.048 218.87 1041 PointZM (77.22808882873920311 28.69871460162610077 0 0) 209.85 207.59 214.47 0.968 1.011 1.044 219.18 1042 PointZM (77.22923965830295856 28.6986935626944053 0 0) 205.58 206.47 214.51 0.962 0.996 1.034 212.67 1043 PointZM (77.22991290411721366 28.69861992643346937 0 0) 204.72 205.14 213.91 0.959 0.998 1.041 213.04 1044 PointZM (77.22890093150260782 28.69780151199051588 0 0) 204.56 205.83 213.22 0.965 0.994 1.029 210.58 1045 PointZM (77.22824451683371194 28.69752379809213139 0 0) 206.57 206.79 213.25 0.970 0.999 1.030 212.80 1046 PointZM (77.23004334549365524 28.69739546060878865 0 0) 204.67 204.96 212.24 0.966 0.999 1.034 211.63 1047 PointZM (77.22813301049572487 28.69646133204150473 0 0) 204.83 206.69 212.98 0.970 0.991 1.021 209.18 1048 PointZM (77.2293196062433509 28.69597954050567523 0 0) 203.53 205.82 212.11 0.970 0.989 1.019 207.42 1049 PointZM (77.23011487786145324 28.69615416363874871 0 0) 204.50 204.87 211.97 0.967 0.998 1.033 211.20 1050 PointZM (77.22941428143597875 28.69508117812227255 0 0) 210.56 206.66 211.58 0.977 1.019 1.043 219.64 1051 PointZM (77.22945846319254315 28.69472982796295568 0 0) 204.28 206.66 211.33 0.978 0.988 1.011 206.50 1052 PointZM (77.23020744916090052 28.69490445109602916 0 0) 206.54 206.07 211.75 0.973 1.002 1.030 212.72 1053 PointZM (77.22942690479497685 28.69374310206643131 0 0) 208.39 206.28 210.86 0.978 1.010 1.033 215.19 1054 PointZM (77.23007700778437368 28.6936421151942902 0 0) 204.24 205.20 211.01 0.972 0.995 1.023 209.03 1055 PointZM (77.23028950099448764 28.69299937583098625 0 0) 204.19 204.92 210.57 0.973 0.996 1.024 209.08 1056 PointZM (77.22873682783534832 28.69282054491157297 0 0) 205.72 206.97 210.52 0.983 0.994 1.011 207.98 1057 PointZM (77.2290503079176176 28.69260594780827844 0 0) 209.70 206.97 210.50 0.983 1.013 1.030 216.09 1058 PointZM (77.23031474771252647 28.69235558452110268 0 0) 204.14 204.81 210.18 0.974 0.997 1.023 208.81 1059 PointZM (77.22847804897550361 28.69233454558940721 0 0) 206.41 206.42 210.45 0.981 1.000 1.020 210.44 1060 PointZM (77.2286148020315153 28.69122158610271001 0 0) 204.36 205.57 210.48 0.977 0.994 1.018 208.01 1061 PointZM (77.22947950212419244 28.69115426152128379 0 0) 204.47 204.95 210.52 0.974 0.998 1.025 209.53 1062 PointZM (77.23035472168271554 28.69106379411499219 0 0) 204.19 204.66 209.91 0.975 0.998 1.023 208.95 1063 PointZM (77.22851802294567847 28.6904873273865384 0 0) 205.30 205.70 210.65 0.976 0.998 1.022 209.84 1064 PointZM (77.23036313725538093 28.69037582104855133 0 0) 204.23 204.87 210.22 0.975 0.997 1.023 208.90 1065 PointZM (77.22931329456376659 28.68998449691901342 0 0) 208.88 206.59 211.02 0.979 1.011 1.033 215.72 1066 PointZM (77.22909028188777825 28.68848231719595177 0 0) 205.13 205.90 211.01 0.976 0.996 1.021 209.43 1067 PointZM (77.23023479977202044 28.68840236925550613 0 0) 203.97 204.93 211.44 0.969 0.995 1.027 209.46 1068 PointZM (77.22926280112770314 28.68730624091416814 0 0) 210.10 206.42 210.38 0.981 1.018 1.037 217.94 1069 PointZM (77.23021376084034273 28.6870264231226173 0 0) 203.74 205.10 209.83 0.977 0.993 1.016 207.06 1070 PointZM (77.2295005410558133 28.68573884050284661 0 0) 205.80 206.30 211.20 0.977 0.998 1.021 210.19 1071 PointZM (77.23014222847253052 28.68563785363070906 0 0) 203.27 205.44 207.83 0.989 0.989 1.001 203.46 1072 PointZM (77.23111422711684781 28.68501720514568731 0 0) 204.23 204.52 205.41 0.996 0.999 1.003 204.83 1073 PointZM (77.22875786676692655 28.68436710215629759 0 0) 207.89 206.42 212.22 0.973 1.007 1.035 215.26 1074 PointZM (77.22966254082983539 28.68396315466774027 0 0) 214.41 208.04 212.02 0.981 1.031 1.050 225.20 1075 PointZM (77.2305377603883727 28.68413988169398365 0 0) 204.12 207.02 210.49 0.983 0.986 1.003 204.64 1076 PointZM (77.22846332172316863 28.68305427281848097 0 0) 209.73 205.70 211.88 0.971 1.020 1.050 220.26 1077 PointZM (77.22962046296642313 28.68281022121081136 0 0) 210.05 206.12 211.47 0.975 1.019 1.046 219.61 1078 PointZM (77.23045360466156239 28.68265032532992365 0 0) 203.65 205.69 210.84 0.976 0.990 1.015 206.67 1079 PointZM (77.23095433123590681 28.68265663700944401 0 0) 204.08 204.59 210.66 0.971 0.998 1.027 209.61 1080 PointZM (77.23083020153890743 28.68126280778461634 0 0) 204.06 203.66 211.44 0.963 1.002 1.040 212.26 1081 PointZM (77.23197471942314962 28.68053486074795089 0 0) 201.81 202.65 211.56 0.958 0.996 1.040 209.82 1082 PointZM (77.23077550031649707 28.68044439334165929 0 0) 201.81 203.16 211.37 0.961 0.993 1.034 208.57 1083 PointZM (77.23101744803098256 28.67975642027521133 0 0) 203.62 203.41 211.32 0.963 1.001 1.040 211.76 1084 PointZM (77.23166123934086613 28.67973538134351585 0 0) 202.17 202.79 211.42 0.959 0.997 1.039 210.13 1085 PointZM (77.22887568478437004 28.67971434241182038 0 0) 210.96 205.15 211.03 0.972 1.028 1.058 223.14 1086 PointZM (77.23025583870361288 28.67957969324896794 0 0) 205.05 204.38 211.19 0.968 1.003 1.037 212.58 1087 PointZM (77.23137931765614894 28.67933984942763814 0 0) 203.84 203.81 211.33 0.964 1.000 1.037 211.39 1088 PointZM (77.23028950099431711 28.67922623919648117 0 0) 203.74 204.35 211.13 0.968 0.997 1.030 209.87 1089 PointZM (77.22805095866191039 28.67928935599156759 0 0) 212.97 208.90 210.92 0.990 1.019 1.029 219.22 1090 PointZM (77.22822978958133433 28.67849829215981572 0 0) 214.63 209.73 210.74 0.995 1.023 1.028 220.69 1091 PointZM (77.22797521850780811 28.67702346304795569 0 0) 215.22 211.91 210.52 1.007 1.016 1.009 217.15 1092 PointZM (77.23047464359322589 28.67673733357689159 0 0) 203.34 204.90 211.15 0.970 0.992 1.023 207.94 1093 PointZM (77.23094170787686608 28.67672891800421198 0 0) 203.59 204.94 211.19 0.970 0.993 1.024 208.41 1094 PointZM (77.23174749896081437 28.67665948952961585 0 0) 201.94 205.03 211.30 0.970 0.985 1.015 204.98 1095 PointZM (77.22769329682307671 28.67518466041775582 0 0) 209.14 211.91 211.15 1.004 0.987 0.983 205.67 1096 PointZM (77.2277900759088709 28.67531089400792865 0 0) 211.89 211.91 211.14 1.004 1.000 0.996 211.10 1097 PointZM (77.22937641135871445 28.67542871202542543 0 0) 215.15 207.37 211.12 0.982 1.038 1.056 227.25 1098 PointZM (77.2302137608401722 28.67515205007363122 0 0) 210.60 206.44 211.32 0.977 1.020 1.044 219.91 1099 PointZM (77.23114683746085518 28.67517834873824967 0 0) 202.27 205.25 211.45 0.971 0.985 1.015 205.35 1100 PointZM (77.23194631686529021 28.67493008934424381 0 0) 202.46 204.56 211.58 0.967 0.990 1.024 207.25 1101 PointZM (77.22775746556472143 28.67383185710973237 0 0) 213.64 212.19 211.81 1.002 1.007 1.005 214.72 1102 PointZM (77.22843281527215709 28.67386341550727735 0 0) 214.25 211.02 211.71 0.997 1.015 1.019 218.25 1103 PointZM (77.22932696986920575 28.67381292207121035 0 0) 210.34 209.50 211.64 0.990 1.004 1.014 213.34 1104 PointZM (77.23080179898106223 28.67385605188118447 0 0) 210.04 205.98 211.71 0.973 1.020 1.048 220.14 1105 PointZM (77.23094275982343504 28.67354572763867537 0 0) 207.86 205.98 211.77 0.973 1.009 1.037 215.65 1106 PointZM (77.22713260929334922 28.67181843134646257 0 0) 213.07 211.02 212.52 0.993 1.010 1.017 216.67 1107 PointZM (77.22873156810221928 28.67178266516257779 0 0) 208.80 207.98 212.30 0.980 1.004 1.025 213.99 1108 PointZM (77.23011172202144792 28.67215926203992993 0 0) 206.45 206.32 212.00 0.973 1.001 1.028 212.26 1109 PointZM (77.2311804997515452 28.67204565180877296 0 0) 203.93 205.87 212.05 0.971 0.991 1.020 208.07 1110 PointZM (77.23202416091253042 28.67206669074046843 0 0) 203.09 205.34 212.01 0.969 0.989 1.021 207.39 1111 PointZM (77.2321440828231971 28.67189627539373475 0 0) 203.35 205.27 212.01 0.968 0.991 1.023 208.07 1112 PointZM (77.22711788204112793 28.67158910699097873 0 0) 209.99 211.02 212.71 0.992 0.995 1.003 210.64 1113 PointZM (77.2275723229657558 28.67139344492620978 0 0) 210.51 210.28 212.67 0.989 1.001 1.012 213.14 1114 PointZM (77.22706318081871757 28.67080225094556312 0 0) 211.49 209.81 212.96 0.985 1.008 1.023 216.38 1115 PointZM (77.22736403754196033 28.67072651079146084 0 0) 210.11 208.97 212.90 0.982 1.005 1.024 215.23 1116 PointZM (77.22669079172773365 28.66906864297384772 0 0) 204.27 206.69 213.10 0.970 0.988 1.019 208.15 1117 PointZM (77.22803728335624385 28.66849007235222047 0 0) 208.67 206.66 213.06 0.970 1.010 1.041 217.22 1118 PointZM (77.22917338566779222 28.6686667993784603 0 0) 209.50 206.25 213.00 0.968 1.016 1.049 219.76 1119 PointZM (77.23141613578654585 28.6691023052645555 0 0) 205.21 206.35 212.76 0.970 0.994 1.025 210.40 1120 PointZM (77.23256486145713495 28.66891716266563606 0 0) 202.79 206.77 212.74 0.972 0.981 1.009 204.63 1121 PointZM (77.22623424690992522 28.66736028172016049 0 0) 207.84 207.38 213.19 0.973 1.002 1.030 214.13 1122 PointZM (77.22774063441933379 28.66729716492507407 0 0) 210.05 207.13 213.12 0.972 1.014 1.043 219.18 1123 PointZM (77.22639835057715629 28.66614423146815582 0 0) 211.22 209.21 213.21 0.981 1.010 1.029 217.33 1124 PointZM (77.23421220980890212 28.66654817895670959 0 0) 201.83 209.90 212.90 0.986 0.962 0.975 196.85 1125 PointZM (77.23502431257234946 28.66629150399002413 0 0) 201.96 210.47 212.74 0.989 0.960 0.970 195.89 1126 PointZM (77.24926766933025135 28.67952919981289028 0 0) 204.11 204.00 204.21 0.999 1.001 1.002 204.43 1127 PointZM (77.25009660323907212 28.67574008821451415 0 0) 203.87 204.00 204.80 0.996 0.999 1.003 204.54 1128 PointZM (77.24966740903246887 28.67544869901052351 0 0) 204.89 204.50 204.94 0.998 1.002 1.004 205.73 1129 PointZM (77.24984098021896273 28.67529301091597915 0 0) 203.69 204.00 204.97 0.995 0.998 1.003 204.35 1130 PointZM (77.24836404721395411 28.67503002426978398 0 0) 202.25 206.84 205.50 1.007 0.978 0.971 196.48 1131 PointZM (77.24810737224726154 28.67501740091076812 0 0) 202.16 206.84 205.65 1.006 0.977 0.972 196.44 1132 PointZM (77.24632116694630213 28.6733132474434278 0 0) 205.97 207.01 207.21 0.999 0.995 0.996 205.14 1133 PointZM (77.24623280343317333 28.67311758537865884 0 0) 203.26 207.01 206.87 1.001 0.982 0.981 199.44 1134 PointZM (77.24629802412142965 28.67300397514750543 0 0) 204.33 207.01 207.24 0.999 0.987 0.988 201.91 1135 PointZM (77.24629381633508274 28.67279779361687986 0 0) 203.75 207.01 206.96 1.000 0.984 0.984 200.50 1136 PointZM (77.24639690710036177 28.67019317387296695 0 0) 202.72 208.00 207.62 1.002 0.975 0.973 197.21 1137 PointZM (77.24643688107057926 28.66814398192581592 0 0) 202.85 209.01 207.89 1.005 0.971 0.965 195.83 1138 PointZM (77.24652945237001234 28.66585073837099884 0 0) 201.95 211.41 208.40 1.014 0.955 0.942 190.16 1139 PointZM (77.24676929619133148 28.6640750525358925 0 0) 201.76 211.94 208.96 1.014 0.952 0.939 189.37 Asar-us-Sanadid, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, 1846- 1854 Waqiat-i-Dar-ul Hukumat, 1919 [1873] - Bashiruddin Ahmad List of Muhammadan and Hindu Monuments, Volume I, Shahjahanabad, 1916 [ASI] - Zafar Hasan Delhi The Built Heritage: A Listing 1999 [Intach] - Ratish Nanda S.No. Listing No. Name of the Monument/Structure Year/Period Location Remarks Remarks Remarks Remarks 1 23 Moti Masjid 1659-1660 Fort It has a water tank in its courtyard which is fed by the waters directed from the Bhadon Pavilion. [Pg. 73] [23] There a central ablution tank [10' x 8'] which was fed by the canal. The mosque has a central ablution tank in the courtyard. [A157] 2 32 Mosque 1837-1857 Fort Chubi Masjid, built by Ahmad Shah.[Pg. 92] [32] 3 33 Sunheri Masjid (Golden Mosque) I 1751 Daryanganj [Pg. 93] Presence of a water tank. [33] Presence of water tank on the right side of the courtyard. There is a fountain located centrally in the tank. The tank is fed by the well present within the premises. The inscription on the central arch refers to the presence of well and tank within the mosque compound. [A166] 4 36 Zinat-ul-Masjid 1707 Parade Ground A water tank is located in its courtyard. The tank is filled from the waters drawn from an adjoining well. [Pg. 78] [36] A water tank is located centrally in the courtyard of the mosque. It is fed by a well located within the mosque complex. Presence of central water tank within the moqsue courtyard. [A226] Presence of a tank in the centre 5 37 Mosque Late Mughal Period Faiz Bazaar [37] 6 38 Dargah Shah Sabir Baksh, Mosque & Musafir Khana 1720-1721 Faiz Bazaar [38] A water tank (22'x18') is located in the courtyard of the mosque. There is fountain located centrally in the water tank. The courtyard also has a well. [A218] 7 39 Sunheri Masjid (Golden Mosque) II (also called Qazi Zaadon ki Masjid) 1744-1745 Faiz Bazaar [39] On an elevated ground. A water tank was lcoated in the courtyard of the mosque. The inscription on the central arch refers to the presence of a water tank. [A208] 8 40 Nabi Baksh's Mosque Late Mughal Period Delhi Gate [40] Nabi Baksh was a water carrier 9 43 Gaddiyan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Jatwara, near Delhi Gate 43 10 44 Qassaban's (Butcher's) Mosque Late Mughal Period Chatta Lal Miyan 44 11 45 Mosque (Known as Choti Masjid) Late Mughal Period Chatta Lal Miyan 45 12 46 Mosque Bhatyariwali Late Mughal Period Chatta Lal Miyan 46 13 47 Masjid Dhobiyan (Washermen's Mosque) Late Mughal Period Mohalla Dhobiyan 47 Washermen's Mosque 14 48 Unchi Masjid Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Sadullah Khan 48 15 49 Mosque Daiwali 1653-1654 Tiraha Bairam Khan 49 [A210] 16 52 Masjid Khajurwali I Late Mughal Period Tiraha Bairam Khan [52] Same description as Zafar Hasan's. The inscription at the entrance mentions six shops with the well and upper storeys are dedicated to the mosque (Waqf) 17 54 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Rekab 54 18 55 Mosque (called Sheesh Mahal ki Masjid) Late Mughal Period Haveli Mir Khan 55 19 60 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Chellan 60 20 61 Kaharwali Masjid Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Chellan 61 21 62 Aqa Masita's Mosque Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Chellan 62 22 63 Mosque of Kale Khan Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Chellan 63 23 64 Auliya Mosque 1845 Phul ki Mandi 64 24 65 Khwaja Mir Dard's Mosque Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Faulad Khan 65 25 66 Hakim Agha Jan's Mosque Mughal (c. 1646) Kucha-i-Faulad Khan 66 [A141] 26 67 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Nahar Khan 67 27 68 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Mahr Parwar [68] 28 69 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Dakhni Rao [69] 29 70 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Naqqar Khana Road [70] It dates Shahjahan Period. It has a large central water tank located in the courtyard. It is known as the Shahjahani Mosque or Pataudi Mosque. It also has a well. Water Tank is located on the eastern side within the mosque premises. The mosque is on a raised ground. 30 71 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Haveli or Khirki Khan Dauran [71] 31 72 Mosque Gondniwali I Late Mughal Period Gali Gondniwali (near Kalan Mahal) [72] 32 73 Mosque (Unnamed) Pre Mughal Muhalla Garhaiya/ Haveli Nawab Ahmad) [73] Listing of Mosque within Shahjahanabad, with water features Appendix II/5C 33 74 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Katra Gokal Shah [74] It is known as Mosque and Madarsa of Maulvi Mohammad Husain Fakir. It has a water tank in its courtyard. 34 75 Matya Mahal Mosque Pre Mughal Matya Mahal 75 Adjoining the mosque is a large well called Banjaron ki Baoli, belonging to the Pre Mughal Period. 35 76 Mosque (Unnamed) Middle Mughal Matya Mahal [76] It has well located within the mosque complex. It is known as Mosque Azizabadi. Contains a well, and remains of Matya Mahal which was built as a temporary residence of Shahjahan when Shahjahanabad was being built. [A204] A water tank is located at the north-east corner of the mosque complex. 36 77 Mosque Kunwewali 1849-1850 Muhalla Azam Khan ki Haveli 77 Mosque with the well. 37 78 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Muhalla Azam Khan ki Haveli 78 38 79 Mosque Jamanwali Late Mughal Period Kalan Mahal 79 39 80 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Mochion ki Gali 80 40 81 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Road from Jami Masjid to Delhi Gate 81 41 82 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Road from Jami Masjid to Delhi Gate 82 42 87 Shah Afaq's Mosque Late Mughal Period Haveli of Mir Hashim 87 43 88 Khanqah of Shah Ghulam Ali Late Mughal Period (1781-1835)Dugdugi Shah Kalan 88 [A205] 44 89 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Suiwalan 89 45 90 Mosque of Patli Gali Late Mughal Period Muhalla Suiwalan 90 46 91 Mosque of Patli Gali Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Muhallah Suiwalon ka Hauz (Water Tank) 91 47 92 Hauzwali Masjid I Late Mughal Period Muhallah Suiwalon ka Hauz (Water Tank) 92 near a Water Tank 48 94 Pipalwali Mosque I Late Mughal Period Ganj Mir Khan 94 49 97 Mosque (Unnamed) 1676 Turkman Gate 97 50 98 Gudarya Mosque Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Muhalla Gudarya 98 51 99 Qalandar Beg's Mosque Date Unknown Muhalla Qabrastan [99] A water tank and well is located in the courtyard of the mosque. 52 100 Hafiz Daud's Mosque Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Muhalla Qabrastan 100 53 101 Pulaowali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Qabrastan 101 54 106 Haji Amanullah's Mosque 1784-1785 Road from Turkman Gate to Chitli Qabr 106 55 107 Hafiz Nizam Ali Attar's Mosque Late Mughal Period Road from Turkman Gate to Chitli Qabr 107 56 108 Sayyid Rafai's Mosque Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Bazaar Chitli Qabr 108 Inscription on the mosque structure mention shops, bath, ablution tank, apartment and staircase dedicated to the expense of the 57 109 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bhojla Pahari 109 58 110 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bhojla Pahari 110 59 111 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bhojla Pahari 111 60 112 Ustad Karim Baksh's Mosque Late Mughal Period Bhojla Pahari 112 61 113 Gadh Kaptan's Mosque 1819-1820 Bhojla Pahari 113 62 114 Mosque (Unnamed) Mughal (Shahjahan Period) Gali Mashalchiyan 114 63 115 Mosque if Imli ki Pahadi Late Mughal Period Imli ki Pahadi 115 64 116 Yek Burji (One Domed) Mosque I Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Imli ki Pahadi 116 65 118 Unchi Masjid II Late Mughal Period Gali Surkh Poshan 118 66 119 Mosque and Madarsa of Husain Baksh 1851-1852 Haveli Bakhtawar Khan 119 67 120 Maulvi Mahbub Ali's Mosque Late Mughal Period Chatta Shaikh Manglu 120 68 121 Burhiya's Mosque Late Mughal Period Chitli Darwaza 121 69 122 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chitli Darwaza 122 70 123 Masjid Choti (Small) II Date Unknown Kucha Mir Ashiq 123 71 124 Mosque Bari (Big) Late Mughal Period Kucha Mir Ashiq 124 72 126 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Gali Murghan 126 73 127 Temple (Unnamed) Date Unknown Gali Murghan 127 74 129 Mosque Hammamwali Late Mughal Period Muhalla Churiwalan [129] Mosque with a bath. Mosque with a Bath 75 130 Jutewalan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Churiwalan [130] Presence of a water tank. The mosque has a water tank. 76 134 Munshi Sher Ali's Mosque 1680-1681 Bulbuli Khana 134 77 135 Tomb of Raziya Sultan Date Unknown (Pre Mughal) Bulbuli Khana 135 [A203] 78 136 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bulbuli Khana 136 79 137 Nawwab Maulvi Qutub-ud Din's Mosque 1735-1736 Bulbuli Khana 137 [A199] 80 138 Kalan Masjid 1387 Kalan Masjid/Kali Masjid [138] On an elevated ground. On an elevated ground [A192] On an elevated ground. A water tank is located in the courtyard. 81 139 Mosque of Naqib-ul Auliya Late Mughal Period Muhalla Aqab Khan Masjid 139 82 140 Beriwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Aqab Khan Masjid 140 [A219] 83 142 Ghulam Chishti's Mosque 1781 Gali Singhi Wali (Aqab Kalan Masjid) 142 Presence of a well. Inscription on mihrab mentions the well, graveyard and the piece of land dedicated to the mosque. (Waqf) 84 143 Chanda Ghosi's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ghosiyaan 143 85 144 Mominan's Mosque 1791-1792 Gali Dakotan (Aqab Kalan Masjid) 144 86 145 Hafiz Habibullah's Mosque Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Gokal Shah 145 87 147 Khwaja Turab's Mosque 1652-1653 Bazaar Sita Ram 147 Inscription on central arch mentions the well and rent of 06 shops dedicated to the salary of the imam and muezzin . 88 148 Pipalwali Mosque II Late Mughal Period Bazaar Sita Ram 148 89 150 Kashmiriyan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Bazaar Sita Ram 150 90 158 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Namdewalan 158 91 159 Mochiyan's Mosque 1698-1699 Ajmer Gate [159] A water tank is located in the courtyard. Presence of a tank in the courtyard of the mosque compound. Also, it is on an elevated ground. 92 161 Unchi Masjid III Late Mughal Period Ajmer Gate 161 On an elevated ground. [A177] On an elevated ground. 93 162 Qabronwali Mosque 1786-1787 Ajmer Gate 162 [A178] 94 164 Koelewalan's (Charcoal Seller's) Mosque Late Mughal Period Road from Ajmer Gate to Qazi ka Hauz 164 95 168 Mosque of Qazi ka Hauz 1718-1719 Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz [168] Qazi ka Hauz was a large water tank which was fed by the canal. There was once a garden located here with the name Bagh Nabiullah. Hauz means Water Tank/Reservoir. The inscription over the entrance mentions the presence of a garden. [A111] 96 169 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz 169 97 170 Lal Masjid I 1822-1823 Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz 170 [A110] 98 172 Sirkiwalan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz 172 [A109] 99 174 Hakim Ahsanullah Khan's Mosque, built during Muhammad Shah's reign Late Mughal Period Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz [174] Same description as of Zafar Hasan's. Presence of a Hammam in its enclosure. [A104] 100 178 Mirza Mughal Beg Khan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Qazi ka Hauz 178 101 179 Khojan Sahib's Mosque 1751-1752 Kucha-i-Pandit 179 102 180 Miyanji Sahib's Mosque Mughal (Shahjahan Period) Kucha-i-Pandit 180 103 181 Sawar Khan's Mosque 1794-1795 Kucha-i-Pandit 181 104 182 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Niyaryan 182 105 183 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Fasilen Farrashkhana 183 106 185 Anarwali Masjid I 1660-1661 Muhalla Farrashkhana 185 107 186 Mir Madari's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 186 108 187 Mosque (Unnamed) Mughal (Shahjahan Period) Muhalla Farrashkhana 187 109 189 Akhundji's Mosque Late Mughal Period (1693-1694)Muhalla Farrashkhana 189 110 190 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 190 111 191 Mirza Fakhrullah Beg's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 191 112 192 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 192 113 193 Hakim's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 193 114 194 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 194 115 195 Gularwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 195 [A176] 116 196 Gondniwali Mosque II Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 196 117 197 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 197 118 198 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Farrashkhana 198 119 202 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Rodgaran 202 120 203 Grave of Sayyid Mansur Ali Date Unknown Muhalla Rodgaran 203 121 204 Maidanwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Rodgaran 204 122 205 Imliwali Mosque I Late Mughal Period Muhalla Rodgaran 205 123 206 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Katra Shaikh Chand 206 124 207 Mir Afzal's Mosque 1806 Bazaar Lal Kuan 207 125 208 Sabz Masjid 1781-1782 Bazaar Lal Kuan 208 126 210 Sannuji's Mosque Late Mughal Period Bazaar Lal Kuan 210 127 211 Well (Lal Kuan) Pre Mughal Bazaar Lal Kuan 211 Well made of sandstone [A107] 128 212 Lal Masjid II Late Mughal Period Bazaar Lal Kuan 212 129 215 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bazaar Lal Kuan 215 130 216 Tahawwur Khan's Mosque 1727-1728 Masjid Tahawwur Khan 216 [A38} 131 217 Imliwali Mosque II Late Mughal Period Masjid Tahawwur Khan 217 132 223 Mosque (Unnamed), built during Shershah's reign Afghan Period Khari Baoli Khari Baoli was built by Islam Shah. Initially a well was constructed in 1545. Six years later a baoli was added. [223] Khari Baoli was located next to the mosque. The form of the baoli still remains. It has been taken over by the local shops. The baoli was built by Islam Shah. An isncription on the site mentions the building of the well which was later converted to a baoli. The mosque has a well which has turned brackish. It also has a hammam. [A37] Suri Period building. A water tank is located within the courtyard. It is called the Hauzwali Masjid. 133 225 Fathpuri Mosque 1650 Masjid Fathpuri A water tank made of red sandtone is located centrally in the courtyard of the mosque. It measures 16 gaz x14 gaz.[Pg. 70] [225] A water tank of size 14'x16' is located in the courtyard. Presence of a large central tank in the courtyard of the mosque compound. [A40] A large water tank is centrally located within the mosque courtyard. 134 226 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bazaar Fathpuri 226 On an elevated ground. 135 227 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Bazaar Fathpuri 227 136 228 Panjabiyan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 228 137 229 Imliwali Mosque III Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 229 138 230 Kuppewalan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 230 139 232 Hakim Sharif Khan's Mosque 1845 Muhalla Ballimaran 232 140 234 Yek Burji (One Domed) Mosque II Late Afghan Period Muhalla Ballimaran 234 141 235 Unchi Masjid IV 1812-1813 Muhalla Ballimaran 235 142 236 Pirjiwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 236 143 241 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 241 144 242 Pipal Mahadeva's Sivalaya c. 1809 Muhalla Ballimaran 242 145 243 Charandasi's Temple c. 1670 Muhalla Ballimaran 243 146 244 Sivalaya (Unnamed) c. 1840 Muhalla Ballimaran 244 147 249 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 249 148 250 Kaptanwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Ballimaran 250 149 251 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown Gali Qasim Jan 251 150 252 Nawwab Mahmad Said Khan's Mosque 1779 Gali Qasim Jan 252 Presence of a well. Inscription on northern arch mentions the well and 04 shops are dedicated to the mosque. (Waqf) 151 254 Karora's Mosque 1808-1809 Gali Qasim Jan [254] On an elevated ground. On an elevated ground. 152 256 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Gali Hakim Baqa 256 153 258 Saddho Ghosan's Mosque 1837-1838 Bazaar Chaori 258 Presence of well within mosque premises. Inscription on central arch mentions the school, well, dwelling house dedicated for 154 259 Sarakwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Egerton Raod/ Nai Sarak 259 155 260 Rahim Ali Wakil's Mosque Late Mughal Period Egerton Raod/ Nai Sarak 260 156 261 Dargahwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Egerton Raod/ Nai Sarak 261 157 266 Hauzwali Mosque II Late Mughal Period Egerton Raod/ Nai Sarak [266] A water tank is located in its courtyard. Central Water Tank in the Mosque Courtyard 158 267 Pipalwali Mosque III, with Madarsa Date Unknown Kucha-i-Raiman [267] Presence of a water tank. 159 268 Baghishewali Mosque Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Raiman 268 160 269 Unchi Masjid V 1845 Kucha-i-Raiman 269 161 270 Anarwali Masjid II Late Mughal Period Kucha-i-Raiman 270 162 272 Mosque (Unnamed) Date Unknown Chandni Chauk 272 163 273 Khalifaji's Mosque Date Unknown Chandni Chauk 273 164 274 Sunheri Masjid (Golden Mosque) III, built by Raushan ud-Daulah 1721-1722 Chandni Chauk [Pg. 90] [274] On an elevated ground. [A86] 165 283 Khunbaha Mosque, built during Muhammad Shah's reign. Late Mughal Period Maliwara [283] A water tank is located in its courtyard. Presence of an octagonal tank in the southeast corner. 166 286 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chirakhana 286 167 288 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chirakhana 288 168 289 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chirakhana 289 169 290 Shahtutwali Mosque Late Mughal Period Chirakhana 290 170 291 Sivalaya (Unnamed) c. 1810 Muhalla Khajur ki Masjid 291 171 292 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Muhalla Khajur ki Masjid 292 172 295 Mosque Khajurwali II Late Mughal Period Muhalla Khajur ki Masjid 295 173 296 Jain Temple c. 1750 Muhalla Khajur ki Masjid 296 [A121] 174 302 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chatta Shahji 302 175 309 Chandiwalan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Rehat ka Kuwan 309 Name of the neighbourhood is after a well. 176 313 Barhwali Mosque 1650 Chatta Partab Singh or Gali Pipal Wali 313 177 314 Rajan's Mosque 1651 Chatta Partab Singh or Gali Pipal Wali [314] Presence of well in the lane adjoining the mosque. Inscription on the gateway of the mosque mentions the presence of a well for masons located in the gateway. 178 317 Nawwab Sahib's Mosque 1722-1723 Dariba Kalan 317 [A131] 179 319 Mosque (Unnamed) Mughal Period Dariba Kalan 319 180 320 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Dariba Kalan 320 On an elevated ground. 181 321 Badr-ud-Din Mohrkan's Mosque 1838-1839 Dariba Kalan [321] on an elevated ground. 182 324 Phulwalan's Mosque Late Mughal Period Dariba Kalan 324 183 326 Mosque (Unnamed), built on Gateway Mughal Period Dariba Kalan 326 184 327 Jami Masjid 1650 Jami Masjid A water tank is located centrally in the courtyard. It measures 15 gazx 12 gaz. Two water tanks were located outside the mosque premises towards the north of the structure. [Pg. 66] [327] Presence of a central water tank about a hand gaz above the floor level. It measures 15 gazx12 gaz. There is a fountain at the centre of the tank. The tank was fed by well located in the north-west corner of the mosque. The technique incorporated was the rahat system. The inscription on the 7th arch of the mosque mentions the centrally located ablution tank and its sweet water representing Salsabil, the spring in Paradise. It is located on an elevated reached by a series of steps from three sides. The balustrade around the tank was erected by Muhammad Tahsin Khan who saw in his dream Prophet Muhammad at the tank. It stand on an elevated ground. [A138] 185 338 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kauriya Pul 338 186 341 Mosque of the Phiranchas Late Mughal Period Chandni Chauk 341 187 342 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Chandni Chauk 342 188 344 Hakim Mehr Ali Shah's Mosque Late Mughal Period Muhalla Kachcha Bagh 344 [A81] 189 348 Imambara Late Mughal Period Natwon ka Kucha 348 190 349 Mosque (Unnamed) 1752-1753 Natwon ka Kucha 349 191 350 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Katra Nil 350 On an elevated ground. 192 355 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Katra Nil 355 193 372 Yek Burji (One Domed) Mosque III Tughlaq Period (Pre-Mughal) Phatak Habsh Khan 372 194 373 Miyan Sahib's Mosque Mughal (Aurangzeb Period) Phatak Habsh Khan 373 195 375 Ramazan Shah's Mosque 1801-1802 Phatak Habsh Khan [375] on an elevated ground. On an elevated ground. On an elevated ground [A33] 196 376 Muhtasib's Mosque 1723-1724 Phatak Habsh Khan [376] A water tank is located in the courtyard. A large ablution tank is located close to the madarsa, in the mosque courtyard. A large hauz with a fountain is located within the courtyard [A31] 197 377 Yek Burji (One Domed) Mosque IV Tughlaq Period (Pre-Mughal) Muhalla Patte Walan 377 198 378 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Nahr Saadat Khan 378 Neighbourhood named after the Canal. 199 379 Mosque of the Sarban (camel driver) Late Mughal Period Nahr Saadat Khan 379 [A30] 200 387 Ghazi-ud Din's Mosque, also known as Maulvi Hafizullah Khan's Mosque 1727-28 Nahr Saadat Khan 387 Built over the canal. The inscription on the central arch mentions the details of the building over the canal. Built over Nahr Saadat Khan [A30] 201 388 Rai Bels' Mosque Mughal Period Mori Gate Road 388 202 389 Shia's Mosque Late Mughal Period Mori Gate Road [389] A water tank is located in the south east corner of the courtyard. On an elevated ground. Small water tank called Qullatain (bucket of water carried on camel) located at the South East corner of the courtyard. 203 390 Imambara of Sayyid Ahmad Mirza Late Mughal Period Mori Gate 390 204 391 Ghulam Nabi's Mosque Date Unknown Mori Gate 391 205 392 Burhiya's Mosque II Late Mughal Period Mori Gate 392 206 393 Barhwali Mosque II Late Mughal Period Ganda Nala 393 207 394 Takyawali Mosque Unknown Mori Gate 394 208 395 Maulvi Muhammad Baqar's Mosque 1854-1855 Kashmir Gate [395] A small water tank is located in the courtyard which is called Qullatain . A small water tank located towards the east of the courtyard. 209 399 Maulvi Ataullah's Mosque Mughal Period Kashmir Gate 399 210 401 Mosque (Unnamed) Late Mughal Period Kashmir Gate 401 211 404 Mosque (Unnamed) 1606-1607 Kashmir Gate 404 212 405 Mosque of Panipatyan 1725-1726 Masjid Panipatyan [405] A water tank is located on the courtyard of the mosque. Neighbourhood named after people who are associated with water distribution. 213 406 Fakhrul Masajid 1728-1729 Masjid Panipatyan A water tank is located in its courtyard. The tank also has fountains, [Pg. 88] [406] On an elevated ground(8'). . On an elevated ground. 214 408 Hamid Ali Khan's Mosque 1841-1842 Hamilton Road [408] A water tank is located in the courtyard. A Shia Mosque. The tank is referred as Qullatain . On an elevated ground. A small tank is located at the southeast corner of the mosque. 215 Akbarabadi Mosque It has a red sandstone water tank measuring 154 gaz x 104 gaz. [Pg. 71] This was demolished during the 1857 mutiny. It had a centrally located water tank measuring 12'x12'. The tank was fed by the canal waters. 216 Aam wali Masjid Kabuli Gate Made on top of the canal close to the Kabuli Gate. There is also a well outside the mosque. 217 Mosque of Panjabi Katra The mosque had a water tank in its courtayd. Tme mosque no longer exists. It was located at the present day railway station. 218 Masjid Aurangabadi This is made entirely of red sandstone. It has a water tank in its courtyard which is fed by the canal waters. [Pg. 77] S. No. Site Code Building/Precinct Latitude (N) Longitude (E) Epigraphical Evidence of Water Features on Site (if any) Landform Indicator (Hilly Terrain) 1 SJB/01/001 Fatehpuri Masjid 28.656793 77.222642 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 2 SJB/01/002 Fatehpuri Masjid 28.656526 77.222887 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 3 SJB/01/003 Fatehpuri Masjid 28.656682 77.222709 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 4 SJB/01/004 Fatehpuri Masjid 28.656954 77.222490 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Stormwater Channel 5 SJB/01/005 Town Hall Gardens/Begum ka Bagh 28.658037 77.227572 Fountains/Cascades 6 SJB/01/006 Hauzwali Masjid 28.656296 77.226984 Tank 7 SJB/01/007 Masjid Peepalwali 28.656215 77.226973 Tank 8 SJB/01/008 Masjid Peepalwali 28.656215 77.226973 Well 9 SJB/01/009 Hauzwali Masjid 28.656001, 77.231828 Well 10 SJB/01/010 Zeenatul Masajid 28.646487 77.245203 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 11 SJB/01/011 Masjid Chatta Lal Miyan 28.642336 77.237819 Well 12 SJB/01/012 Madarsa & Masjid Husainiya 28.648837 77.233948 Tank 13 SJB/01/013 Madarsa aur Masjid Husainiya 28.648837 77.233948 Well 14 SJB/01/014 Masjid Husain Baksh 28.648613 77.232876 Well 15 SJB/01/015 Masjid Husain Baksh 28.648613 77.232876 Tank 16 SJB/01/016 Masjid Do Jaana House 28.647789 77.233822 Well Tank 17 SJB/01/017 Masjid Do Jaana House 28.647789 77.233823 Well 18 SJB/01/018 Masjid Hauzwali 28.648498 77.231415 Tank 19 SJB/01/019 Masjid Imli Wali 28.651833 77.224267 Well 20 SJB/01/020 Lal Kuan 28.653506 77.222796 Well 21 SJB/01/021 Banjaron ki Baoli 28.648160 77.234178 Stepwell 22 SJB/01/022 Chah Rahat (Jama Masjid) 28.651824 77.232349 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 23 SJB/01/023 Masjid Chatta Sheikh Manglu 28.649078 77.232561 Well 24 SJB/01/024 Masjid Hauz Wali (Gali Chandi Wali) 28.646436 77.232264 Tank 25 SJB/01/025 Masjid Anjuman 28.646392 77.232219 Well 26 SJB/01/026 Masjid Hauzwali (Mohalla Qabristan) 28.644456 77.232564 Tank 27 SJB/01/027 Mohalla Qabristan Chowk 28.644900 77.231656 Well 28 SJB/01/028 Kalan Masjid 28.645111 77.230776 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 29 SJB/01/029 Dargah Shah Turkman 28.645069 77.232056 Well 30 SJB/01/030 Gali Kuen Wali 28.645883 77.234097 Well 31 SJB/01/031 Pahadi Imli Water Tank 28.646952 77.233094 Tank 32 SJB/01/032 Dargah & Masjid Shah Ali Qadri 28.647492 77.232575 Well 33 SJB/01/033 Banjaron ki Baoli 28.647953 77.234356 Stepwell 34 SJB/01/034 Masjid Roshan-ud Daula 28.645687 77.240026 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well Tank 35 SJB/01/035 Masjid Sabir Baksh 28.646738 77.240491 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 36 SJB/01/036 Dargah Sarmad 28.651015 77.234671 Well 37 SJB/01/037 Residence (Roshanpura) 28.652658 77.229556 Tank 38 SJB/01/038 Residence (Demolished, Roshanpura) 28.652672 77.230206 Tank 39 SJB/01/039 Temple Well 28.652483 77.230835 Well 40 SJB/01/040 Residence (Stormwater Outlet) 28.653033 77.230706 Stormwater Channel 41 SJB/01/041 Community Well 28.653217 77.230897 Well 42 SJB/01/042 Shri Digambar Jain Panchayati Mandir 28.653192 77.230907 Well 43 SJB/01/043 Shri Digamabar Jain Naya Mandi 28.652903 77.231803 Well 44 SJB/01/044 Community Well (Covered, Pahadi Imli) 28.647614 77.233183 Well 45 SJB/01/045 Masjid Syed Rafai 28.646961 77.233975 Well 46 SJB/01/046 Masjid Kuen Wali, Gali Azam Khan 28.647067 77.235025 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 47 SJB/01/047 Masjid Dai Wali 28.643550 77.238128 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 48 SJB/01/048 Madarsa Anarwali 28.642514 77.239747 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 49 SJB/01/049 Masjid Kaptaan Wali 28.644823 77.238507 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 50 SJB/01/050 Masjid Kikar Wali 28.645825 77.238269 Well 51 SJB/01/051 Public Well 28.645664 77.236181 Well 52 SJB/01/052 Masjid Shah Jahani 28.648172 77.238049 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 53 SJB/01/053 Masjid Chah Hathi 28.653670 77.234175 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 54 SJB/01/054 Masjid Chatta Shah Ji 28.651400 77.231106 Well 55 SJB/01/055 Masjid Hauz Qazi 28.649002 77.226818 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well Tank Type of Water Features (Extant) Appendix II/5D: Shahjahanabad & Garden Suburbs Fieldsurvey Details (2023-24) 56 SJB/01/056 Masjid Adina 28.652200 77.223577 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 57 SJB/01/057 Lal Masjid 28.653839 77.222315 Well 58 SJB/01/058 Masjid Hauz Wali 28.655862 77.220615 Well Tank 59 SJB/01/059 Masjid Hammam Wali 28.655922 77.222439 Well 60 SJB/01/060 Masjid Nawab Ruk-ud Daula 28.649981 77.228717 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 61 SJB/01/061 Piyau (Drinking Fountain) 28.649894 77.228592 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Fountain 62 SJB/01/062 Masjid Yek Burj Wali 28.653861 77.226592 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 63 SJB/01/063 Sabeel (Drinking Fountain) 28.656444 77.225611 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Fountain 64 SJB/01/064 Masjid Gali Qasim Jaan 28.653408 77.225022 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 65 SJB/01/065 Masjid Chah Shirin (Sweet Water Well) 28.653725 77.219525 Well 66 SJB/01/066 Masjid Maidan Wali 28.652106 77.222456 Well 67 SJB/01/067 Jangi Kuan 28.651397 77.222744 Well 68 SJB/01/068 Changa Kuan 28.648825 77.223222 Well 69 SJB/01/069 Gali Khazanchi (Well) 28.655783 77.233753 Well 70 SJB/01/070 Residence 28.655783 77.233817 Stormwater Channel 71 SJB/01/071 Haveli Khazanchi 28.655786 77.234028 Tank 72 SJB/01/072 Haveli Khazanchi 28.655786 77.234028 Stromwater Channel 73 SJB/01/073 Gurudwara Shishganj Sahib 28.655994 77.232417 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 74 SJB/01/074 Residence (Jogiwara) 28.653389 77.227411 Stormwater Channel 75 SJB/01/075 Jogiwara Temple Well 28.652770 77.227909 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 76 SJB/01/076 Jogiwara Residence 28.652770 77.227909 Stormwater Channel 77 SJB/01/077 Residence Rainwater Channel 28.653244 77.228583 Stormwater Channel 78 SJB/01/078 Residence Rainwater Channel 28.653328 77.228325 Stormwater Channel 79 SJB/01/079 Haveli Haidar Quli 28.655886 77.224292 Well 80 SJB/01/080 Residence Rainwater Channels 28.655906 77.224364 Stormwater Channel 81 SJB/01/081 Hauzwali Masjid 28.648731 77.235072 Well 82 SJB/01/082 Masjid Anar Wali 28.648731 77.235072 Well 83 SJB/01/083 Masjid (Unknown) 28.648919 77.232911 Well 84 SJB/01/084 Masjid Maulana Ahmad Saeed 28.648086 77.240281 Well 85 SJB/01/085 Masjid (Unknown) 28.646340 77.239466 Well 86 SJB/01/086 Masjid Sabzi Mandi 28.644397 77.239308 Well 87 SJB/01/087 Badi Masjid 28.641644 77.238142 Well 88 SJB/01/088 Choti Masjid 28.642264 77.235061 Well 89 SJB/01/089 Public Well 28.644986 77.231450 Well 90 SJB/01/090 Masjid Quwwatul Islam 28.645674 77.234581 Well 91 SJB/01/091 Masjid Rang Mahal 28.645106 77.238339 Well 92 SJB/01/092 Masjid Hanfiya 28.648111 77.236361 Well 93 SJB/01/093 Masjid Kuen Wali 28.649631 77.231008 Well 94 SJB/01/094 Masjid Hafeezullah Khan 28.660786 77.221964 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Canal 95 SJB/01/095 Madarsa Aminia 28.663644 77.230033 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well Tank 96 SJB/01/096 Masjid Mahbub Baksh 28.663811 77.221414 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 97 SJB/01/097 Masjid Budhia Wali 28.663900 77.224128 Well 98 SJB/01/098 Public Well (Place Name)_Begum ka Bagh 28.660092 77.230578 Well 99 SJB/01/099 Jama Masjid 28.650913 77.233437 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 100 SJB/01/100 Jama Masjid 28.650913 77.233437 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Stormwater Channel 101 SJB/01/101 Jama Masjid 28.651009 77.233942 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Stormwater Channel 102 SJB/01/102 Jama Masjid 28.650330 77.233760 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Stormwater Channel 103 SJB/01/103 Sunehri Masjid 28.650500 77.239468 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well Tank 104 SJB/01/104 Dargah Bhure Shah 28.652879 77.237985 Well 105 SJB/01/105 Shahi Masjid, Qudsia Bagh 28.670597 77.230763 Tank Stormwater Channel 106 SJB/01/106 Well, Shahi Masjid 28.670378 77.230473 Tank 107 SJB/01/107 Well, Qudsia Bagh 28.670364 77.230734 Well 108 SJB/01/108 Well, Qudsia Bagh 28.671331 77.230661 Well 109 SJB/01/109 Roshan Ara Bagh 28.673663 77.201049 Tank 110 SJB/01/110 Roshan Ara Tomb Garden 28.673669 77.200294 Tank 111 SJB/01/111 Garden Well: Roshan Ara Bagh 28.673481 77.200126 Well 112 SJB/01/112 Roshan Ara Bagh: Tank 28.673761 77.198078 Tank 113 SJB/01/113 Shah Nahr: Shalimar Bagh 28.716595 77.146053 Canal 114 SJB/01/114 Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh 28.720359 77.154286 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well Tank Stormwater Channel Fountains/Cascades 115 SJB/01/115 Garden Well, Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh 28.720210 77.154016 Well 116 SJB/01/116 Garden Well, Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh 28.719561 77.153131 Well 117 SJB/01/117 Sheesh Mahal, Shalimar Bagh 28.721060 77.154299 Tank 118 SJB/01/118 Dara Shukoh Haveli 28.663611 77.233027 Stormwater Channel 119 SJB/01/119 Residence (Haveli) 28.648355 77.226127 Fountain 120 SJB/01/120 Masjid Gali Rajan 28.654025 77.220331 Well 121 SJB/01/121 Anglo-Arabic School (College Bastion) 28.646084 77.222180 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Well 122 SJB/01/122 Esplanade Road (Animal Drinking Tanks) 28.653831 77.234625 Tank 123 SJB/01/123 Opp. Badi Masjid (Animal Drinking Tanks) 28.642839 77.232514 Tank 124 SJB/01/124 Eidgah 28.653844 77.205925 Epigraphical Evidence on Site Tank 125 SJB/01/125 Eidgah (Animal Drinking Tanks) 28.653867 77.207639 Tank 126 SJB/01/126 Eidgah Community Well 28.653867 77.207522 Well 127 SJB/01/127 Temple, Katra Neel 28.657886 77.225397 Well 128 SJB/01/128 Haveli, Katra Neel 28.657057 77.225720 Well 129 SJB/01/129 Residence, Kucha Mir Ashiq 28.650379 77.231035 Well 130 SJB/01/130 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.647639 77.245000 131 SJB/01/131 Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.665686 77.233930 132 SJB/01/132 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.666178 77.229519 133 SJB/01/133 Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.667054 77.228815 134 SJB/01/134 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.665778 77.227569 135 SJB/01/135 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.664914 77.222914 136 SJB/01/136 Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.646296 77.224004 137 SJB/01/137 Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.642325 77.232772 138 SJB/01/138 Gate, City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.641184 77.240577 139 SJB/01/139 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.641192 77.241819 140 SJB/01/140 City Wall & Moat, Shahjahanabad 28.640909 77.244308 141 SJB/01/141 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.640827 77.245033 142 SJB/01/142 City Wall, Shahjahanabad 28.643325 77.245736 143 SJB/01/143 Piyau (Drinking Fountain) 28.649431 77.227200 Fountain 144 Masjid Nawab Wali 28.654803 77.233324 145 Masjid Chatta Aga Jaan 28.645678 77.236194 146 Masjid Gondni Wali 28.648700 77.235875 147 Masjid Baradari 28.645508 77.237043 148 Masjid Kucha Chelan 28.645428 77.236517 149 Masjid Badal Beg 28.650434 77.225374 150 Dargah & Masjid Shah Abdul Khair 28.645136 77.233806 151 Gali Kuen wali 28.645914 77.233942 152 Bhojla Pahadi 28.646722 77.233572 Landform 153 Pahadi Rajan 28.646722 77.233572 Landform 154 Pahadi Rajan 28.646689 77.233856 Landform 155 Pahadi Imli 28.646917 77.233956 Landform 156 Pahadi Imli 28.646917 77.233956 Landform 157 Pahadi Imli 28.646872 77.233031 Landform 158 Pahadi Imli 28.646844 77.233039 Landform 159 Pahadi Imli 28.647625 77.233072 Landform 160 Lal Masjid 28.647989 77.238303 161 Dargah Shah Kalimullah 28.651972 77.236594 162 Residence 28.652635 77.229679 Tank 163 Residence 28.652650 77.230142 164 Haveli Dharampura 28.653250 77.232306 Well 165 Pahad Wali Gali 28.652181 77.231172 Landform 166 Temple 28.652506 77.230722 167 Pahad Wali Gali 28.652436 77.230817 Landform 168 Pahadi Bhojla 28.645411 77.233667 Landform 169 Masjid Mustafa 28.645944 77.233139 170 Masjid 28.645700 77.234583 171 Masjid Khajurwali 28.644642 77.236463 172 Masjid Aulia 28.644339 77.238722 173 Masjid Suraj Wali 28.654075 77.233503 174 Masjid Chah Rahat 28.652072 77.232960 175 Masjid Chatta Shah Ji 28.651400 77.231106 176 Masjid Abdul Ghani 28.644111 77.233864 177 Hauz Wali Masjid 28.643797 77.234544 178 Masjid Pipal Wali 28.642964 77.234444 179 Badi Masjid 28.642776 77.232431 180 Masjid Beri Wali 28.642454 77.232063 181 Oonchi Masjid 28.642397 77.232094 182 Haksar Haveli 28.646136 77.230661 183 Masjid Dargah Wali 28.646136 77.230136 184 Masjid Phatak Namak 28.649158 77.225214 185 Oonchi Masjid 28.648767 77.225942 186 Masjid Ahl e Hadees 28.648794 77.225906 187 Masjid Rahmani 28.646564 77.224267 188 Masjid Gali Shah Tara 28.646356 77.225431 189 Masjid Imli Wali 28.651792 77.224197 190 Untitled Mosque 28.654450 77.222581 Well 191 Khidki (Gali Chabuk Sawar) 28.654878 77.223347 192 Masjid Tehwar Khan 28.655694 77.220761 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 193 Masjid Mohtasib 28.659637 77.220126 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 194 Masjid Qutubi Begum 28.649989 77.229014 195 Masjid Yaad Ali Shah 28.652667 77.226667 196 Masjid Kaptaan Wali 28.652587 77.225497 197 Oonchi Masjid 28.654531 77.225761 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 198 Masjid Imli Wali 28.655372 77.225447 199 Masjid Haveli Hisamuddin 28.654994 77.224494 200 Lal Masjid 28.654858 77.224650 201 Masjid Kular Wali 28.654617 77.223103 202 Masjid Umrao Wali 28.654444 77.221319 203 Masjid Hanfiyan 28.653592 77.219617 204 Masjid Phatak Dhobiyaan 28.653197 77.219922 205 Masjid Khair-un Nisa 28.651642 77.220550 206 Masjid Madarsa Iradatullah Khan 28.651564 77.222306 207 Masjid Chandi Wali 28.651056 77.223369 208 Masjid Gali Wakil Wali 28.650172 77.223319 209 Masjid Hanfiya 28.650133 77.223283 210 Unknown Mosque 28.648769 77.223236 211 Community Space 28.655325 77.227186 212 Community Space 28.653083 77.227094 213 Residential Quartre 28.654786 77.226353 214 Temple, Katra Neel 28.657544 77.225800 215 Temple, Katra Neel 28.658267 77.225881 216 Temple-Shrine Canopy 28.658675 77.226458 217 Masjid Chand Wali 28.644233 77.232313 218 Masjid Beri Wali 28.646464 77.240344 219 Masjid Dai Wali 28.646403 77.240481 220 Hindi Masjid 28.643353 77.241799 221 Masjid Anar Wali 28.642928 77.239522 222 Masjid Dhobiyaan 28.642750 77.238483 223 Masjid Sharfiya 28.642811 77.236822 224 Masjid Bati Bani 28.642028 77.237161 225 Masjid Barh Wali 28.643450 77.238017 226 Masjid Teliyaan 28.643997 77.237122 227 Masjid Chand Wali 28.643606 77.232564 228 Masjid Pulao Wali 28.644300 77.232269 229 Masjid Turkman Gate 28.644481 77.231825 230 Masjid Mashal Chiyan 28.645514 77.232214 231 Masjid Amrud Wali 28.645514 77.232214 232 Masjid Nawab Qutubuddin 28.645611 77.231664 233 Pahadi Bhojla 28.645597 77.231686 Landform 234 Masjid Rahmani 28.646747 77.232992 235 Masjid Nawab Abdul Qadir 28.645886 77.237461 236 Masjid Gali Katra Mehrparwar 28.646639 77.238192 237 Choti Masjid 28.646514 77.238183 238 Masjid Dai Wali 28.646931 77.234917 239 Masjid Musharraf Ali 28.646372 77.234989 240 Masjid Rangrezan 28.645325 77.233614 241 Masjid Pir Jee Wali 28.644644 77.233397 242 Masjid Hafiz Miyan Jaan 28.645733 77.231106 243 Masjid Gadhaiya Wali 28.649414 77.232208 244 Sabz Masjid 28.651639 77.229539 245 Masjid Maliwara 28.655331 77.229472 246 Masjid Gali Parathe Wali 28.656072 77.230489 247 Shahi Masjid Bagh Wali 28.656886 77.226983 248 Masjid Kucha Ustad Dagh 28.655947 77.226172 249 Masjid Jan Nisar 28.658489 77.223428 250 Masjid Ibrahim Badi 28.661400 77.219814 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 251 Masjid Aam Wali 28.655492 77.220403 252 Masjid Imli Wali 28.655500 77.220328 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 253 Fakhr-ul Masajid 28.665207 77.229613 254 Panja Sharif 28.664108 77.227575 255 Oonchi Masjid 28.663236 77.228192 256 Choti Masjid 28.662747 77.230203 257 Madarsa Abdur Rab 28.662936 77.226292 258 Masjid Kakwan 28.662983 77.223222 259 Masjid Rai Ber wali 28.663817 77.221406 260 Masjid Nawab Syed Ahmad Mirza 28.664586 77.221469 261 City Wall 28.664851 77.221766 262 Oonchi Masjid 28.664039 77.221189 263 Masjid Sui Wali 28.664109 77.222392 264 Masjid Ghulam Nabi Muhammad Ali 28.663994 77.223578 265 Masjid Barh Wali 28.663789 77.224878 266 Baghwali Masjid 28.665305 77.226176 267 Masjid Top Khana 28.658967 77.231703 268 Structure, Qudsia Bagh 28.671572 77.229403 269 Gateway, Qudsia Bagh 28.670031 77.226444 270 Gateway, Roshan Ara Bagh 28.673670 77.201685 271 Ruins, Shalimar Bagh 28.717347 77.152630 272 Ruins Pavilion, Shalimar Bagh 28.717513 77.151131 273 Ruins, Platform, Shalimar Bagh 28.718030 77.151543 274 Masjid Alif Khan 28.648056 77.232711 275 Masjid Sang-e Marmar 28.648542 77.230594 Epigraphical Evidence on Site 276 Masjid Kucha Rahman 28.648542 77.230589 277 Masjid Mulla Ahmad Wali 28.655381 77.226561 278 Masjid Ahl-e Hadees 28.655381 77.226561 279 Masjid Millia Hanfia 28.654647 77.219961 280 Masjid Chatta Rajan 28.653122 77.221197 281 Eidgah 28.653900 77.207231 Landform S. No. Code Latitude (N) Longitude (E) 1 SJB/F/001 28.652176 77.239218 Moat 2 SJB/F/002 28.652053 77.241331 Moat Well 3 SJB/F/003 28.652036 77.242493 Moat 4 SJB/F/004 28.658808 77.238846 Moat 5 SJB/F/005 28.652402 77.243452 Moat 6 SJB/F/006 28.652536 77.243455 7 SJB/F/007 28.653956 77.243565 Stormwater Channel 8 SJB/F/008 28.654511 77.243594 Stormwater Channel 9 SJB/F/009 28.654913 77.243622 Stormwater Channel 10 SJB/F/010 28.655298 77.243650 11 SJB/F/011 28.655666 77.243685 Stormwater Channel 12 SJB/F/012 28.656106 77.243796 13 SJB/F/013 28.656054 77.243735 Stormwater Channel 14 SJB/F/014 28.656786 77.243759 Stormwater Channel 15 SJB/F/015 28.657280 77.243815 Tank 16 SJB/F/016 28.658131 77.243876 Stormwater Channel 17 SJB/F/017 28.656333 77.238461 Moat 18 SJB/F/018 28.656015 77.238070 Moat Well 19 SJB/F/019 28.654940 77.238485 Moat Recharge Well 20 SJB/F/020 28.656320 77.238433 Moat 21 SJB/F/021 28.655944 77.238146 Moat Stormwater Channel 22 SJB/F/022 28.655211 77.238607 Moat Stormwater Channel 23 SJB/F/023 28.654367 77.238547 Moat Recharge Well Stormwater Channel 24 SJB/F/024 28.653410 77.238484 Stormwater Channel 25 SJB/F/025 28.652530 77.238838 Stormwater Channel 26 SJB/F/026 28.656252 77.238658 Stormwater Channel 27 SJB/F/027 28.658920 77.241086 Stepwell 28 SJB/F/028 28.658920 77.241086 Stepwell 29 SJB/F/029 28.660317 77.242168 Bridge 30 SJB/F/030 28.660143 77.242731 31 SJB/F/031 28.661447 77.240999 32 SJB/F/032 28.661753 77.241363 33 SJB/F/033 28.662190 77.242183 34 SJB/F/034 28.662187 77.243560 Well Type of Water Features (Extant) Appendix II/5E: Qila-i Mualla or Delhi Fort, Shahjahanabad Fieldsurvey Details (2023-24) 35 SJB/F/035 28.658544 77.243749 Canal 36 SJB/F/036 28.658120 77.243861 Canal 37 SJB/F/037 28.657864 77.243736 Canal 38 SJB/F/038 28.658726 77.243701 39 SJB/F/039 28.658600 77.243803 Canal Tank 40 SJB/F/040 28.658465 77.243798 Canal Tank 41 SJB/F/041 28.658407 77.243794 Canal 42 SJB/F/042 28.657717 77.243740 Canal 43 SJB/F/043 28.657740 77.243214 Canal Fountains/Cascades 44 SJB/F/044 28.657276 77.243757 Canal Tank 45 SJB/F/045 28.656734 77.243660 Canal 46 SJB/F/046 28.656810 77.243671 Canal 47 SJB/F/047 28.656793 77.243727 Canal Tank 48 SJB/F/048 28.656805 77.243554 Canal Tank Fountains/Cascades 49 SJB/F/049 28.656805 77.243554 Canal Tank 50 SJB/F/050 28.656805 77.243554 Canal Tank 51 SJB/F/051 28.656805 77.243554 52 SJB/F/052 28.656805 77.243554 Canal Tank 53 SJB/F/053 28.656847 77.243226 Canal Tank 54 SJB/F/054 28.656686 77.243676 Canal 55 SJB/F/055 28.656256 77.243620 Canal 56 SJB/F/056 28.656503 77.243591 Canal 57 SJB/F/057 28.656191 77.243610 Canal 58 SJB/F/058 28.656191 77.243610 Canal 59 SJB/F/059 28.655900 77.243609 Canal 60 SJB/F/060 28.655673 77.243558 Canal Fountains/Cascades 61 SJB/F/061 28.655673 77.243558 Canal Tank Fountains/Cascades 62 SJB/F/062 28.655673 77.243558 Canal Tank Fountains/Cascades 63 SJB/F/063 28.655673 77.243558 Canal 64 SJB/F/064 28.654469 77.243450 Canal 65 SJB/F/065 28.652548 77.243379 Stepwell 66 SJB/F/066 28.653093 77.243433 Well Tank Fountains/Cascades 67 SJB/F/067 28.652563 77.242595 Well 68 SJB/F/068 28.653820 77.242408 Well 69 SJB/F/069 28.658780 77.238894 Canal 70 SJB/F/070 28.657709 77.243680 Canal Tank 71 SJB/F/071 28.655667 77.241035 Stormwater Channel 72 SJB/F/072 28.654393 77.243445 Stormwater Channel 73 SJB/F/073 28.655674 77.243036 Stormwater Channel Canal Tank Fountains/Cascades 74 SJB/F/074 28.655695 77.243053 Stormwater Channel 75 SJB/F/075 28.656972 77.242682 Canal Fountains/Cascades 76 SJB/F/076 28.656972 77.242682 Canal Fountains/Cascades 77 SJB/F/077 28.658540 77.242744 Tank 78 SJB/F/078 28.655778 77.239493 Stormwater Channel 79 SJB/F/079 28.655229 77.240345 Canal 80 SJB/F/080 28.656845 77.238802 Stormwater Channel 81 SJB/F/081 28.657832 77.240777 Canal 82 SJB/F/082 28.657856 77.240936 Canal 83 SJB/F/083 28.657817 77.241308 Canal 84 SJB/F/084 28.657808 77.241854 Canal 85 SJB/F/085 28.656358 77.240815 Well 86 SJB/F/086 28.657653 77.242847 Canal Tank 87 SJB/F/087 28.657327 77.242960 Canal 88 SJB/F/088 28.657302 77.243184 Well 89 SJB/F/089 28.657044 77.243452 Well 90 SJB/F/090 28.655123 77.242078 Well S. No. Ownership Well_ID Platform Feature around well Mean Catchment Radius of Public Wells (in m) Area (North/South/Fort) 1 Public W_C_1 56.6 North 2 Public W_C_10 54.6 North 3 Public W_C_100 71.7 South 4 Public W_C_101 108.75 South 5 Public W_C_102 81.66 South 6 Public W_C_103 86.26 South 7 Public W_C_104 105 South 8 Public W_C_105 112.87 South 9 Public W_C_106 Platform 69.2 South 10 Public W_C_107 85.4 South 11 Public W_C_108 Platform 65.16 South 12 Public W_C_109 Platform 78.8 South 13 Public W_C_11 Platform 89.1 North 14 Public W_C_110 56.33 South 15 Public W_C_111 Platform 94.87 South 16 Public W_C_112 51.7 South 17 Public W_C_113 60.16 South 18 Public W_C_114 118.66 South 19 Public W_C_115 104.3 South 20 Public W_C_116 106 South 21 Public W_C_117 79.3 South 22 Public W_C_118 80.5 South 23 Public W_C_119 65.75 South 24 Public W_C_12 98.66 North 25 Public W_C_120 88.25 South 26 Public W_C_121 93.83 South 27 Public W_C_122 45.13 South 28 Public W_C_123 33.16 South 29 Public W_C_124 36.5 South 30 Public W_C_125 90.8 South 31 Public W_C_126 85.5 South 32 Public W_C_127 89.1 South 33 Public W_C_128 86.5 South 34 Public W_C_129 68.87 South 35 Private W_C_13 Platform North 36 Public W_C_130 78.8 South 37 Public W_C_131 Platform 82.87 South 38 Public W_C_132 Platform 84 South 39 Public W_C_133 38 South 40 Public W_C_134 60.12 South 41 Public W_C_135 Platform 76.33 South 42 Public W_C_136 89.66 South 43 Public W_C_137 72.12 South 44 Public W_C_138 105.6 South 45 Private W_C_139 South 46 Public W_C_14 60.5 North 47 Public W_C_140 Platform 104.83 South 48 Public W_C_141 53.75 South 49 Public W_C_142 Platform 82.75 South 50 Public W_C_143 70.62 South 51 Public W_C_144 Platform 88.3 South 52 Public W_C_145 Platform 71.6 South Appendix II/6A Mean Catchment Radius of Public Wells 53 Private W_C_146 Platform South 54 Public W_C_147 Platform 136.62 South 55 Private W_C_148 South 56 Public W_C_149 Platform 139 South 57 Private W_C_15 North 58 Public W_C_150 Platform 125.5 South 59 Private W_C_151 South 60 Private W_C_152 South 61 Public W_C_153 Platform 69.14 South 62 Public W_C_154 55.87 South 63 Public W_C_155 99 South 64 Public W_C_156 58.16 South 65 Public W_C_157 52.25 South 66 Public W_C_158 100.66 South 67 Private W_C_16 North 68 Public W_C_17 Platform 194.16 North 69 Private W_C_18 Platform North 70 Private W_C_19 Platform North 71 Public W_C_2 68.75 North 72 Private W_C_20 North 73 Private W_C_21 North 74 Private W_C_22 North 75 Public W_C_23 Platform 78.3 North 76 Public W_C_24 31.5 North 77 Private W_C_25 North 78 Private W_C_26 North 79 Public W_C_27 143.6 North 80 Private W_C_28 Platform North 81 Private W_C_29 Platform North 82 Public W_C_3 112.5 North 83 Private W_C_30 North 84 Public W_C_31 128.5 North 85 Private W_C_32 North 86 Private W_C_33 North 87 Public W_C_34 123.83 North 88 Public W_C_35 124.8 North 89 Private W_C_36 North 90 Private W_C_37 North 91 Private W_C_38 North 92 Private W_C_39 Platform North 93 Private W_C_4 North 94 Private W_C_40 Platform North 95 Private W_C_41 North 96 Private W_C_42 North 97 Public W_C_43 91.6 North 98 Public W_C_44 67 North 99 Public W_C_45 Platform 92.6 North 100 Public W_C_46 Platform 70.7 North 101 Public W_C_47 Platform 65.25 North 102 Public W_C_48 Platform 67.9 North 103 Private W_C_49 North 104 Public W_C_5 Platform 86.1 North 105 Private W_C_50 North 106 Private W_C_51 North 107 Private W_C_52 North 108 Public W_C_53 95.3 South 109 Public W_C_54 64 South 110 Public W_C_55 103 South 111 Public W_C_56 Platform 91.5 South 112 Public W_C_57 168.75 South 113 Public W_C_58 67 South 114 Private W_C_59 South 115 Public W_C_6 91.5 North 116 Public W_C_60 Platform 96.3 South 117 Public W_C_61 64.66 South 118 Private W_C_62 South 119 Public W_C_63 Platform 117 South 120 Private W_C_64 North 121 Private W_C_65 North 122 Public W_C_66 Platform 65.5 North 123 Public W_C_67 49.75 North 124 Public W_C_68 61.33 North 125 Public W_C_69 57 North 126 Public W_C_7 86.1 North 127 Public W_C_70 80.6 North 128 Public W_C_71 133.83 North 129 Public W_C_72 92.5 North 130 Private W_C_73 North 131 Public W_C_74 31.6 North 132 Public W_C_75 52.75 North 133 Public W_C_76 126.83 North 134 Public W_C_77 110.5 South 135 Public W_C_78 Platform 74.8 South 136 Public W_C_79 81 South 137 Private W_C_8 North 138 Public W_C_80 114.5 South 139 Public W_C_81 98.16 South 140 Public W_C_82 110.16 South 141 Public W_C_83 138.25 South 142 Public W_C_84 56.8 South 143 Public W_C_85 99.5 South 144 Public W_C_86 57.6 South 145 Public W_C_87 64 South 146 Public W_C_88 Platform 156.5 South 147 Private W_C_89 South 148 Public W_C_9 114.1 North 149 Private W_C_90 North 150 Private W_C_91 North 151 Public W_C_92 Platform 150.33 North 152 Public W_C_93 68.75 South 153 Private W_C_94 South 154 Public W_C_95 22 South 155 Private W_C_96 South 156 Public W_C_97 97.5 South 157 Public W_C_98 43.5 South 158 Public W_C_99 65 South 159 Private W_F_1 Fort 160 Private W_F_2 Platform Fort 161 Private W_F_3 Fort 162 Private W_F_4 Platform Fort 163 Private W_F_5 Fort 164 Private W_F_6 Fort 165 Private W_F_7 Fort Average Mean Catchment Radius pf Public Wells in Shahjahanabad = 86.30m ) Average Mean Catchment Radius of Public Well is 88.57m in the North of Shahjahanabad and 84.01m to the South of Shahjahanabad Wells with a Platform Feature has an average Mean Catchment Radius of 95.5m . All these wells were located on public streets and squares. Rest of the Public Wells located predominantly within Mosques & Temples have an average Mean Catchment Radius of 77.10m Appendix II/6B Appendix III/4A Ali Mardan Khan Canal Map of 1750 (with English Translation of Place Names & Hydraulic Features) (i) (ii) (iii) Map of Ali Mardan Khan removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Map of Ali Mardan Khan removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. (viii) (ix) (x) Map of Ali Mardan Khan removed for copyright reasons. Copyright holder is Telangana State Archives. Appendix III/4B Sectional Profile Appendix III/4C Appendix III/4D 750' 775' 800' 825' 850' 875' 900' 5 km 10 km 15 km 20 km 25 km 30 km 35 km 40 km 45 km 50 km 55 km 60 km 65 km 70 km 75 km 80 km 85 km 90 km 100 km 105 km 110 km 115 km 120 km 125 km 130 km 135 km 140 km 145 km 150 km 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 0 km K ar n al R as in R ai p u r Ja tt an R e r K al an S it h an a Ja tt al B al an a B al li Q u ta b p u r M ah ar a B h at ga o n K h e ri D ah iy a 95 km T h an a K h u rd H ar e w al i B aw an a S h al im ar B ag h R o sh an A ra B ag h S h ah ja h an ab ad S o n ip at P an ip at 725' Spring Level = 20' Spring Level = 11' Spring Level = 11' Spring Level = 7' K h u k ra n a Spring Level=5' Spring Level=14' S ir is p u r Spring Level=15' Spring Level=15' G ar d e n S u b u rb s Invert Level = 16' Invert Level = 12' Invert Level = 30' Length of Canal (in kms.) E le va ti o n ( in f e e ts ) Invert Level = 16' Invert Level = 20' 26 Water Lifting Devices 08 Water Lifting Devices 11 Water Lifting Devices & 01 Water Mill 13 Water Lifting Devices 16 Water Lifting Devices 06 Water Lifting Devices 08 Water Lifting Devices 12 Water Lifting Devices 01 Water Lifting Device Appendix III/4E Sectional Profile of the Mughal Canal-Bed Appendix III/5B Appendix III/5C FATEHPURI MASJID FATEHPURI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID MADARSA & MASJID HUSAINIYA MASJID HUSAINBAKSH MASJID IMLIWALI LAL KUAN CHAH RAHAT, JAMA MASJID MASJID CHATTA SHEIKH MANGLU MASJID ANJUMAN MOHALLA QABRISTAN CHOWK DARGAH & MASJID SHAH ALI QADRI BANJARON KI BAOLI DARGAH SARMAD TEMPLE, ROSHANPURA COMMUNITY WELL ROSHANPURA SRI DIGAMBAR JAIN PANCHAYATI MANDIR SRI DIGAMBAR JAIN NAYA MANDIR MASJID SYED RAFAI MASJID DAI WALI MASJID KIKAR WALI LAL MASJID MASJID HAMMAM WALI MASJID YEK BURJ WALI GALI KHAZANCHI GURUDWARA SHISH GANJ SAHIB JOGIWARA TEMPLE HAVELI HAIDER QULI HAUZWALI MASJID MASJID ANARWALI UNKNOWN MOSQUE MASJID SABZI MANDI MASJID MAULANA AHMAD SAEED UNKNOWN MOSQUE CHOTI MASJID PUBLIC WELL MASJID HANFIYA MASJID BUDHIA WALI SHAHI MASJID QUDSIA BAGH QUDSIA BAGH ROSHANARA BAGH SHEESH MAHAL, SHALIMAR BAGH SHEESH MAHAL, SHALIMAR BAGH ANGLO-ARABIC SCHOOL EIDGAH TEMPLE, KATRA NEEL HAVELI, KUCHA MIR ASHIQ Documentation of Wells, Shahjahanabad0 5 10 15ft. FATEHPURI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID MASJID PEEPALWALI ZEENAT UL MASAJID MADARSA & MASJID HUSAINIYA MASJID HUSAINBAKSH MASJID DO JAANA HOUSE MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID HAUZWALI MASJID HAUZWALI KALAN MASJID MASJID SABIR BAKSH HAVELI, ROSHANPURA MASJID SHAHJAHANI MASJID HAUZ QAZI MASJID HAUZWALI HAVELI KHAZANCHI MADRASA AMINIA JAMA MASJID SHAHI MASJID, QUDSIA BAGH ESPLANADE ROAD EIDGAH Documentation of Tanks/Cisterns, Shahjahanabad 0 5 10 15ft. Appendix III/5D Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Floor Plan of Extant Structures Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Stormwater Outlets & Storage Tanks Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam Stormwater Outlets Water Storage Tanks Shah Burj Shahi Hammam Diwan-i Khas Rang Mahal Mumtaz Mahal Asad Burj Khas Mahal Diwan-i Am Naubat Khana Chatta Bazaar Saawan Moti Masjid Bhadon Zafar Mahal B agh -i H ayat B ak sh (E x cavate d in 2 0 1 4 ) M ah tab B agh N ah r-i B ih ish t (C an al) Canal Network (Conjectural) Delhi Fort Fieldwork 2023-24 0 25 50 75ft. N (floor plan of buildings & gardens were developed based on Sanderson Report, 1914; canal network diagram based on fieldwork and cartographic sources of Mughal Period) Lahore Gate Delhi Gate S h ah N ah r (C an al) Baoli Baoli Chota Hammam M o at Hammam towards Yamuna towards Yamuna towards Faiz Bazaar towards Yamuna towards moat Shah N ah r (C an al) Cover Page.pdf Declaration Abstract Acknowledgement Table of Contents List of Illustrations List of Tables Note on Transliteration 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Waterscapes as Powerscapes 3.0 Water Management Practices in pre-Mughal South Asia 4.0 Archaeology of Water Management in Mughal SouthAsia: An Overview 5.0 Shah Nahr: Mapping the Waterscape of the Mughal Canal 6.0 Water Map of Shahjahanabad and its Garden Suburbs 7.0 The Making of an Infrastructural Monument: MappingWater, Mapping Empire in Shahjahanabad 8.0 Conclusion Bibliography List of Appendices.pdf Appendix_PhD_IAlam2025.pdf Appendix I/A Appendix I/B Appendix II/1A Appendix II/1B Appendix II/2A Appendix II/3A Appendix II/3B Appendix II/4A Appendix II/4B Appendix II/4C Appendix II/5A Appendix II/5B Appendix II/5C Appendix II/5D Appendix II/5E Appendix II/6A Appendix II/6B Appendix III/1A Appendix III/4A Appendix III/4B Appendix III/4C Appendix III/4D Appendix III/4E Appendix III/4F Appendix III/5A Appendix III/5B Appendix III/5C Appendix III/5D