The only way in which I can account for the great difference of 5 feet in the height of the lower storey between Blunt's measurements taken in 1794 and the actual height as it now stands, is by supposing that there must have been an accumulation of rubbish at the foot of the tower which would have diminished the actual height of the basement storey. His heights of the second and third storeys agree very closely with my measurements, but that of the fourth storey is more than 2 feet short of the true height. The height of the fifth storey is not given.

In recording Blunt's measurements Mr. Fergusson has, I think, made a mistake in excluding the cupola from the ascertained height of 242 feet 6 inches. Blunt distinctly states that the height of the third storey was 180 feet, which, deducted from 2421, will give no less than 62 feet for the height of the two upper storeys. But this height, as we know from present measurements, is only 25 feet 4 inches, plus 22 feet 4 inches, or altogether 47 feet 8 inches, which, deducted from 62 feet, leaves 14 feet 10 inches unaccounted for. I conclude, therefore, that this must have been the height of the cupola as it stood in A. D. 1794. Accepting this view as correct, the true height of the Kutb Minar in 1794 must have been 236 feet 1 inch, plus 14 feet 10 inches, or 250 feet 11 inches.

The base or plinth of the Kutb Minar is a polygon of 24 sides, each side measuring 6 feet 1 inches, or altogether 147 feet. The basement storey has the same number of faces formed into convex flutes, which are alternately angular and semi-circular. This last fact alone is sufficient to show the inaccuracy of Blunt's description of the plan as a polygon of 27 sides,* as any uneven number of faces would have brought two flutes of the same kind together. In the second storey the flutes are all semi-circular, and in the third storey they are all angular. The fourth storey is circular and plain, and the fifth storey is partially fluted with convex semi-circular flutes. Round the top of each storey runs a bold projecting balcony, which is richly and elaborately decorated. The three lower storeys are also ornamented with belts of Arabic writing, bordered with richly decorated hands. These three storeys are built entirely of red sand-stone, but there is a

* Asiatic Researches of Bengal, IV., 324.

difference in the colours of the stone, that of the second storey being generally a pale pinkish buff, while that of the third storey is a dark red. The whole of the upper part of the fourth storey is built of white marble, and there are also two ornamental bands of white marble in the fifth storey. According to Ibn Batuta,* the pillar was said to have been built "of stones from seven different quaries;" but I could not trace more than three different kinds of stone, viz., the grey quartzose rock of Delhi, the white marble of Jaypur, and the red sand-stone of the hills to the south of Delhi. If, however, the different colours of the sand-stone be taken into account, there are certainly three distinct colours, or buff, pink, and red, which may be considered as forming three distinct varieties of sand-stone. The grey quartzose stone is used only in the interior of the building, and the white marble is confined to the two upper storeys. Inside the pillar there is a spiral staircase of 376 steps from the ground level to the balcony of the fifth storey. Above this, there are three steps more to the present top of the stone-work, which once formed the floor of the paltry pavilion which Major Robert Smith was allowed to stick on the top of this noble column.

In 1794, when Ensign Blunt sketched the Kutb Minar, the old cupola of Firuz Shah was still standing, although much ruined. Blunt's rude sketch, as given in the Asiatic Researches, conveys no intelligible idea of the old cupola, and is sarcastically compared by Robert Smith to "a large stone harp." A better idea of the old cupola will be formed from an aqua-tint view of the pillar given in Blagdon's "Brief History of India," which was published about 1805.† By comparing this view with the statement of the Natives that the old cupola was a "plain square top on four stone pillars," I think that it would be quite possible to restore the upper part of the pillar in a style that would harmonize with the rest of the building. It is difficult, indeed, to conceive anything more incongruous than the flimsy Mogul pavilion, which Robert Smith fixed on the "top of this grand and massive specimen of Pathân architecture." In my Note-book of 1839, I find a remark that "the balustrades of the

Travels by Dr. Lee, p. 111.

Most of the views of this book are by Daniell. The value of the letter press may be judged by the name given to the pillar, "Kuttull Minor of Delhi."

Robert Smith's Report in Journal, Archæological Society of Delhi.

balconies and the plain slight building on the top of the pillar do not harmonize with the massive and richly ornamented Pathan architecture." Major Smith's pavilion was taken down in 1817 or 1848 by order of Lord Hardinge. I presume that this was done at the suggestion of his eldest son, the present Lord Hardinge, whose known artistic taste and skill would at once have detected the architectural unfitness of such a flimsy pavilion for the summit of this noble column.

On the 1st of August 1803, the old cupola of the Kutb Minar was thrown down, and the whole pillar seriously injured by an earthquake. A drawing of the pillar, while it was in this state, was made by Captain Elliot upwards of two years after the earthquake, but the engraving of this drawing is too small to show the nature of the balustrades of the balconies. About this time the dangerous state of the pillar was brought to the notice of the Governor General, who authorized the necessary repairs to be begun at once. This difficult work was entrusted to Major Robert Smith, of the Engineers, and was completed by the beginning of the year 1828, at a cost of Rs. 17,000, with a further charge of more than Rs. 5,000 for clearing the ruins around the pillar. The intricate nature of some of these repairs can be best seen and understood by an examination of Mallitte's large photograph of the lower balcony. All the forms of the mouldings have been carefully preserved, but the rich ornamentation has been omitted as too costly, and the new stonework is, therefore, quite plain throughout. This part of the work appears to have been done with much patience and skill, and Major Smith deserves credit for the conscientious care which he bestowed upon it. But this commendation must be confined to the repairs, for the restorations of the entrance door-way, of the balustrades, and of the cupola, are altogether out of keeping with the rest of the pillar.

It appears from Major Smith's report that the old entrance doorway was still in existence at that time, although much broken. This being the case, he should have adhered strictly to the original design, instead of which, to use his own words, "the former rude and fractured entrance door of the base of the column (was) repaired, and improved with new mouldings, frieze, and repair of the inscription tablet." From this statement I infer that the whole of the entrance

doorway is Smith's own design, a conclusion which has already been drawn by Mr. Fergusson, who denounces this work as being "in the true style of Strawberry Hill Gothic." Perhaps it may not now be possible to recover the original design, but its main features may be ascertained from the other three existing doorways. All of these are plain, and it is evident from Major Smith's account that the lower doorway was also plain, or, as he calls it, "rude," and without fricze or mouldings, which were added by himself. I confess, therefore, that I should like to see Smith's doorway altogether removed, and the old entrance restored in the simple but massive style of the other doorways. The entrance of the Koël Minar, which is still in existence, is also plain, and might be studied with advantage.

The flimsy balustrades are even a greater eye-sore than the modern entrance, as they form a prominent part in every view of the building. But although not ornamental, they are useful, and might on that account alone be tolerated. It would not, however, be either difficult or expensive to remove them, and to furnish new balustrades more in harmony with the rich style of the balconies. Ensign Blunt describes the old balustrades as "small battlements;" and such, I believe, must have been the nature of the original balustrades, at once rich and massive, like the battlements of the older tombs. The present balustrades might be sold with advantage in Delhi, as they belong to the flimsy style of garden-house architecture of the present day.

The history of the Kutb Minar is written in its inscriptions. In the basement storey there are six bands or belts of inscriptions encircling the tower. The uppermost band contains only some verses from the Koran, and the next below it gives the well known ninety-nine Arabic names of the Almighty. The third belt contains the name and praises of Muaz-uddin, Abul Muzafar, Muhammad Bin Sam. The fourth belt contains only a verse from the Koran, and the fifth belt repeats the name and praises of the Sultan Muhammad Bin Sâm. The lowermost belt has been too much injured, both by time and by ignorant restorations, to admit of being read, but Syad Ahmad has traced the words " Amirul-Umra, or Chief of the "nobles." The inscription over the entrance doorway records that "this Minar of Sultan Shams-uddin Altamsh having been injured, was repaired during

the reign of Sikander Shah, son of Bahlol, by Fateh Khan, the son of Khawâs Khan, in A. H. 909 or A. D. 1503.

In the second storey the inscription over the doorway records that the Emperor Altamsh ordered the completion of the Minar. The lowermost belt contains the verses of the Koran respecting the summons to prayers on Friday, and the upper line contains the praises of the Emperor Altamsh. Over the door of the third storey the praises of Altamsh are repeated, and again in the belt of inscription round the column. In the fourth storey the door inscription records that the Minar was ordered to be erected during the reign of Altamsh. The inscription over the door of the fifth storey states that the Minar having been injured by lightning, was repaired by the Emperor Firuz Shah in A. H. 770 or A. D. 1368.

But besides these long inscriptions, which form part of the architectural ornament of the pillar, there are a few other short records which are worth preserving. On the basement storey is recorded the name of Fazzil, son of Abul Muâli, the Mutawali or high priest; and on one side of the third storey is found the name of Muhammad Amircho, Architect. On the same storey, also, there is a short Nagari inscription in one line with the name of Muhammad Sultán and the date of Samvat 1382 or A. D. 1325, which was the first year of Muhammad Tughlak's reign. On the wall of the fourth storey there is another Nâgari inscription, in two lines, which is dated in the Samvat year 1425 or A. D. 1368, in the reign of Piroj Sáh, or Firuz Shah Tughlak. A third Nagari inscription is found on the south jamb of the doorway of the fourth storey, cut partly on the white marble and partly on the red sand-stone. This also gives the name of Firuz Shah, but the date is one year later than the last, or Samvat 1426. This is the longest and most important of the Nâgari inscriptions, but unfortunately it is not in such a state of preservation, more especially the upper portion on the white marble, as to be easily legible. I can make out the words Sri Viswakarma prasáde ruchita, and towards the end I find the title of Silpi, or "Architect," applied to the son of Cháhada Deva Pála, named Nana salha, who repaired the Minar. But in the middle of the inscription I find no less than five numbers given in figures, all of which are preceded by the word gaj, as gaj 22, gaj 3, gaj 26, gaj 131, and gaj 134. I