• Contenu principal
  • Menu
OpenEdition Books
  • Accueil
  • Catalogue de 15471 livres
  • Éditeurs
  • Auteurs
  • Facebook
  • X
  • Partager
    • Facebook

    • X

    • Accueil
    • Catalogue de 15471 livres
    • Éditeurs
    • Auteurs
  • Ressources numériques en sciences humaines et sociales

    • OpenEdition
  • Nos plateformes

    • OpenEdition Books
    • OpenEdition Journals
    • Hypothèses
    • Calenda
  • Bibliothèques

    • OpenEdition Freemium
  • Suivez-nous

  • Lettre d’information
OpenEdition Search

Redirection vers OpenEdition Search.

À quel endroit ?
  • Éditions de l’École des hautes études en...
  • ›
  • Purushartha
  • ›
  • L’Inde et l’imaginaire
  • ›
  • The Anglo-Indian bungalow
  • Éditions de l’École des hautes études en...
  • Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales
    Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Liens vers le livre
    Informations sur la couverture
    Table des matières
    Formats de lecture

    Plan

    Plan détaillé Texte intégral THE 18th CENTURY URBAN AND ARCHITECTURAL COLONIAL DEVELOPMENTS FROM WHICH THE ANGLO-INDIAN BUNGALOW EMERGED AS A HOUSING NORM COLLAGE AND SYNTHESIS THE BUNGALOW AS A COLONIAL BUILDING NORM Notes de bas de page Auteur

    L’Inde et l’imaginaire

    Ce livre est recensé par

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    The Anglo-Indian bungalow

    Le bungalow Anglo-Indien

    Martin Meade

    p. 133-158

    Résumés

    With an architectural heritage reaching back to the 17th century, buildings of the British Raj are to be found throughout India and are an integral, indeed predominant, feature of the subcontinent’s urban typology. If the representational associations embodied in the architecture of colonial institutions still retain a valued significance in present day India, it is the bungalow, that ubiquitous and richly eclectic form of housing that constitutes perhaps the most distinctive contribution of the Anglo Indian architectural heritage. However with its vernacular origins in the bānglā (the traditional Bengali hut), its formal metamorphosis during the Raj and indeed the persistence and development of the type in contemporary Indian building, the bungalow is also a classic instance of “Pan Indian” expression – that power of association, of appropriation to its own ends that Indian civilisation has consistently applied to outside influences.

    L’architecture du Raj britannique en Inde, dont le patrimoine remonte à la fin du XVIIe siècle, se rencontre dans toutes les régions du sous-continent – partie intégrante, voire prépondérante, de la typologie urbaine. Au-delà même des valeurs représentatives qui de nos jours encore sont associées aux genres de constructions légués par les institutions coloniales, c’est sans doute le bungalow, omniprésent et foisonnant d’éclectisme, qui constitue la contribution notoire de l’héritage architectural anglo-indien. Pourtant ses origines vernaculaires dans la hutte bengalie (le bānglā), sa métamorphose architectonique sous le Raj et d’ailleurs la persistance du genre dans l’actualité de l’habitat indien font du bungalow le cas type d’une expression pan-indienne, une preuve de plus de cette capacité d’assimilation, de détournement à ses propres fins, que la civilisation indienne a toujours su imposer aux influences extérieures.

    Texte intégral THE 18th CENTURY URBAN AND ARCHITECTURAL COLONIAL DEVELOPMENTS FROM WHICH THE ANGLO-INDIAN BUNGALOW EMERGED AS A HOUSING NORM THE CLASSICAL STYLE AS ADAPTED IN INDIA FROM “GARDEN HOUSE” TO BUNGALOW A BRITISH INTERLUDE COLLAGE AND SYNTHESIS THE BUNGALOW AS A COLONIAL BUILDING NORM THE HILL STATION BUNGALOW INDO-SARACENIC VERSUS CLASSICAL “BUNGLE-OHS”-THE CLASSICAL CULMINATION Notes de bas de page Auteur

    Texte intégral

    1W. W. Skeat’s Etymological Dictionary of the English language gives the following definition of bungalow:

    a Bengal thatched house (Hindi) spelt bunglo, Murphy The Upholsterer, ii. 3 (1758). In Richardson’s Persian Dictionary we find: ‘Persian bangalah, of or belonging to Bengal; a bungalow. From the name Bengal. Forbes gives the Hindi Banglā, m. a kind of thatched house (p. 88); Wilson gives the Bengali form as bānglā (p. 59).

    2Perhaps even more than the representational architecture of colonial institutions, the bungalow, that ubiquitous form of housing encountered throughout the Indian subcontinent, has become the building type most readily identified with the Anglo-Indian architectural heritage. Yet the indigenous origins of this type of dwelling, its formal metamorphosis under the British Raj and indeed its persistance in the present Indian architectural context, reveal as with many other “outside influences”, the powers of assimilation and reinterpretation that Indian culture has always brought to bear and that are inherent to it.

    3Indian architectural forms and practices are conditioned by and have been evolved to accommodate the extremes of climate pertaining in the subcontinent which can be broadly divided (naturally with many local variations) into hot-humid and hot-arid zones, governed by the south-west and north-east monsoons. But the Portuguese, Dutch, Danish, British and French merchants when they established their coastal or riverside factories in the 16th, 17th and early 18th centuries, had to learn to adapt their architecture to the climate by the combined processes of trial and error and the assimilation of local building traditions.

    4Be it said here that the Portuguese were best adapted by the experience of their own country’s climate to developing an architecture appropriate to the conditions they found in India – it should come as no surprise that the verandah, so characteristic a feature of the bungalow, is a word of Hispanic origin waránda or baránda denoting a balcony or open gallery to a house.

    5Nevertheless the first hastily thrown up mud-walled and thatched factories built in the indigenous vernacular (and indeed climatically suitable) manner were replaced as soon as practicable, for reasons of security, by brick (and in the rare instances of its availability, stone) buildings and defences laid out on the established European model of the “place forte”.

    THE 18th CENTURY URBAN AND ARCHITECTURAL COLONIAL DEVELOPMENTS FROM WHICH THE ANGLO-INDIAN BUNGALOW EMERGED AS A HOUSING NORM

    6It is really only from the middle of the 18th century, with the consolidation of the European enclaves, and despite continuing French and British colonial rivalry, that the European presence expands well beyond the protective confines of the fortifications and that new, Indian influenced forms of European housing and urban typology are initiated.

    7The polarisation effect of the growing commercial success of the British East Indian Company towns leading to population pressures, the flourishing country trade and the increasing confidence and wealth of merchants and Company servants engaged in it, in other words nascent nabobdom combined with the ever more profitable politico-economic-territorial concessions wrung from local rulers in a period of internecine rivalry, Mahratta ascendancy and collapsing Moghul authority, all doubtless contributed to this development.

    8Climatic considerations are a basic factor. Ideally in the hot-humid zone buildings should be located on high ground and loosely planned to allow air circulation. Yet, until the development of the Hill Stations in the 19th century, the European establishments were all situated, for the purposes of their seaborn trade, in the torid coastal or estuary plains. It was no doubt to counteract in some degree this disadvantage that a markedly scattered and spacious “suburban” residential development appears in the second half of the 18th century, taking advantage of the shade provided by luscious vegetation and the potential flow of any sea or river breezes.

    9Pondicherry, during the expansionist phase of French colonial power from the 1730’s to the 1750’s under governors Lenoir and Dupleix, had already acquired a far more spacious urban layout (though still protected by an enceinte) and “garden houses” were being built in the surrounding countryside. From the 1760’s Calcutta and Madras rapidly followed suit with far ranging garden city-like suburbs.

    10In the case of Calcutta the “white town” had already (as it turned out too adventurously) spread out beyond the protection of Old Fort William, thus falling easy prey to Siraj-ud-daulah’s brief siege in 1756. Following its recapture by Clive in 1757, a vast new Fort William was built with its “back” to the Hooghly. For strategic reasons an immense expanse of ground was cleared on the landward side. By the 1770’s, with the recession of outside military threat, this park like space known as the Maidan, allowing the unimpeded sweep of wind off the river, had attracted development on its northern and eastern boundaries. The Esplanade became the dignified official setting for the principal public buildings, to be crowned in 1803 by the completion of Wellesley’s intentionally monumental Government House (designed by Captain Charles Wyatt) closing the spectacular northern vista of the Maidan. At the same time Chowringhi on the east side developed as a fashionable new residential quarter, producing with the Esplanade the magnificient, but never uniform, sequence of white chunam stuccoed “palaces” immortalised in the Daniell’s aquatinted views of the late 1780’s and 90’s. Madras over the same period developed a grandiose Esplanade along its foreshore, and palatial “garden houses” appeared in the Adyar area to the south of the city proper.

    11With their expanding economies the Presidency towns, Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, in the latter part of the 18th century attracted large Indian populations while their dominant European communities remained relatively small. Many of the latter rapidly acquired the financial means to indulge their living requirements on a scale inconceivable in Britain yet common enough in India with its abundance of material and demographic resources and where both climate and cultural heritage encouraged expansive building programmes as a manifestation of power and status. There were none of the social-economic-speculative pressures or restrictions that governed the contemporary evolution of Georgian town planning in Britain. While a London merchant might have built a modest villa at Highgate, Camberwell or Clapham as a convenient rural retreat from the oppressive confines of his City terraced home in the heat of summer, his Calcutta counterpart not only possessed a “garden house” at Alipur, Tollygang or Garden Reach for the same and more necessary purpose, but could also afford to have his town residence designed as a palatial villa in its own grounds – as much for an overt display of his European cultured identity (and his new wealth) as to attempt to palliate the rigours of the climate.

    12If some attempt was made at reproducing the planning of urban vistas on the European manner for the new residential areas, they had otherwise acquired distinctly Indian features in their relatively informal, loose, airy and unwittingly picturesque “pavilion” layout, blurring in the process the transition from town to suburb. Taking its cue from Indian models the town house stands free in a large compound-garden with ample space for outbuildings. The “garden houses” have the same but even more spacious setting. The resulting very spread out residential pattern anticipates by almost half a century, and on a far grander scale, the villa estates of early 19th century and Victorian London and such spa or coastal resorts as Tunbridge Wells, Sidmouth or Torquay. In Bengal by the 1790’s this relatively haphazard urban development was however to give birth to the cantonment that most spacious of planned urban forms and the one that was to establish the bungalow as the housing norm.

    THE CLASSICAL STYLE AS ADAPTED IN INDIA

    13If the layout of the new residential areas was clearly influenced by Indian experience, the classical architectural vocabulary applied to buildings was adapted from that prevailing in Britain during the period: the well established Palladian revival (initiated by Lord Burlington in the 1720’s) being only slowly refined by the introduction of neoclassicism which in India remained predominantly faithfull to Graeco-Roman antiquity rather than adopting the wide range of historical references that the movement gave rise to in Europe. In 18th century Britain, there was no real equivalent to the formal architectural education provided in France for both architects and engineers at the Académie d’Architecture and the Ponts et Chaussées. However architectural knowledge was widely disseminated (as in France) by a spate of publications in the form of treatises and pattern books as well as translations from such authorities as Vitruvius, Alberti and Palladio.

    14These were the publications (in particular James Gibbs’ “Works in Architecture” (1728 and 1739 editions) and the engineer’s vademecum “La Science des Ingénieurs” (1719) by B. F. de Bélidor) that informed the “architects” in the Presidencies. The East India Company engaged British bricklayers and carpenters who also set up in private practice as builder-architects (thus performing the same fonction as they did in London and the provinces in the 18th century) and local Indian builders collaborating with them gained a working knowledge of the classical style. There were also gentleman amateur architects. But by far the most important body of professionals were the military engineers serving in the Company’s army who, with their basic training in draughtsmanship, were most frequently called on to design and act as building surveyors for the Public Works Department. When in 1826 the Royal Engineers College at Chatham finally introduced an official handbook on civil architecture (a surveying school had been opened in Madras in 1794 and elementary principles of architecture were taught to engineers at the Company’s army college Addiscombe founded in 1809), Graeco-Roman neoclassicism was the dominant style in official circles and in a plain simplified form, for long remained that of the military. It is the rather heavy imprint of the engineer as architect that is unmistakable in so many cantonment and civil stations bungalows of the early to mid 19th century as well as in public buildings and private houses before then.

    15The builders recruited by the Company first introduced pucka brickwork, that is longer kiln firing of brick than was usual in India where in any case sun-dried bricks were normally used for vernacular cutcha construction. And brick-making standards were further improved in the latter part of the 18th century by the engineers. The brick walls were stuccoed in lime paster and the classical architectural details were modelled in the same material which could be given a marble-like finish known as chunam (a traditional plaster mix of burnt shell lime, eggwhite, milk and other ingredients).

    16With their origins in Italy and Mediterranean classical antiquity, the porticoes, colonnades, flat roofs and lofty “piano nobile” of the imported architectural exemplar seem, on face value, far more appropriate to Indian conditions than Palladianism or neoclassicism do in northern European climes. Initially porticoes and colonnades were reserved for public buildings, following European hierarchical conventions. Town houses were built following the pattern books though already with far loftier than usual first floor living rooms, over the ground floor godown, to improve ventilation. With the same objective internal doors were aligned on windows openings and the latter in accordance with French and Portuguese practice were provided with louvred shutters giving protection from direct sunlight.

    17Yet the cornices, pediments and pilasters of the classical facade repertory offered negligeable shade by comparison with the colonnade or the columned portico. Free from the hierarchical constraints of the urban context, more open to the models provided by the loggias and verandahs of Indian architecture, these features seem first to have been adopted for the “garden house” and were in keeping with the Palladian precedent of the country villa. But by the later 1780’s columned +portico-verandahs on one or two storeys were being added to existing town houses and increasingly used in new designs. They were soon to become an integral feature of the Anglo-Indian bungalow. In terms of European neoclassicism this widespread use of trabeated columnar architecture constitutes a strikingly early and comprehensive application of the Abbé Laugier’s (1713-1769) rationalist theories with their emphasis on free standing load-bearing columns derived from his interpretation of the origins of architecture in the “primitive hut”. However in India ostentatious use of the orders, fulfilling status aspirations confered by new wealth and confirming national prestige, conveniently met the demands of the climate and came to harmoniously pervade all types of building.

    18Although the villa typology of the garden and town house, and of the Anglo-Indian bungalow that evolved from them, principally derives from British Palladian precedents, potential French influence from Pondicherry on the Madras area and, in Bengal, from the French factory at Chandemagore should not be ignored. James Fergusson judiciously noted in his “History of the Modern Style of Architecture” of 1862, that had they had the opportunity “the French would probably have done better as colonists” citing the buildings and planning of Pondicherry. Certainly engravings of Dupleix’s old government house, completed in 1752, show for the date a far more professional architectural response; the requirements of shade and ventilation being met by a sophisticated adaptation of the French classical tradition with deep portico-loggias, spacious corridors and cross-alignement of openings (ill. 1). The same can be said for the Ghiretty House (ill. 2), the former governor’s residence outside Chandemagore dating probably from the 1760’s, recorded in a water colour by Samuel Davis in 1782. Here the house is an elegant terraced-roof “maison de plaisance”1 (with lower outspreading wings) raised on a basement and treated as a columned loggia with the centre canted out in front of the lofty octagonal salon which rises clear in a belvedere storey above the parapet. The type must have been found in the environs of Pondicherry as well, for it seems a likely influence on the surviving Adyar Club, Madras (ill. 3), built as a garden house in 1771. Another French prototype, vaguely reminiscient of the Grand Trianon would seem to have served as the basis (no doubt via engravings) for a “garden house” such as Felicity Hall (ill. 4). Even so the British political-cultural predominance and national pride must have made the abundantly published Palladian villa designs the primary source of reference.

    19Whatever its derivation, classical architecture was found by experience to have its limitations in the extremes of the Indian climate. Under the pragmatic influence of Hindu and Indo-Moghul building traditions, compromises were progressively wrought with the established classical norms of proportion, articulation and function. Porticoes were deepened into more effectively shady loggia’s or verandah’s, their column diameters reduced and the intercolum-niation widened to improve ventilation and, in the hot season, split-bamboo screens or blinds, tatties, were hung between the columns confirming the flexible, specifically Indian character of the portico-verandah as a living space; ghimils, tented wooden hoods, and Venetian blinds were added to exposed windows (as well as shutters), while, furthering the cause of ventilation, very high ceilinged rooms permitted upper openings which still read acceptably on the “classical” elevations as “mezzanine” or “attic” windows – and of course the advantages of the punka were rapidly appreciated. To these features must be added the adoption of the tykhana, underground rooms to escape the extreme midday temperatures of the hot-dry zones such as Lucknow or Delhi, and were possible excavated under a river bed. Despite these Indian modifications, the extensive use of tatties indicates that the proportions of the classical columned portico were still too tall, by comparison with the Hindu or Indo-Moghul loggia and its chugga, to provide sufficient protection from morning and afternoon sun. Portico and column had however become endowed with a specifically European cultural and imperial symbolism and were maintained as such – an “architecture parlante” that long outlived European neoclassicism.

    1 a et b. Le gouvernement de Pondicherry by the engineer Dumont, built 1752 for Governor Dupleix

    Image 10000000000002DC00000458B99A0408A7A5D660.jpg

    FROM “GARDEN HOUSE” TO BUNGALOW

    20As building developed apace during the last two decades of the 18th century, not only around the Presidency towns but in up country stations as well, the stylistic differences between garden and town houses progressively lessened as the design features of one were adopted for the other. The differences remained those of function and scale with a degree of regional variation.

    21The garden or up country house with its extensive grounds and compound outbuildings harmoniously combined Indian and European characteristics. In the Madras area (where numerous examples survive in Guindy and Adyar) markedly spreadout house plans are a distinguishing feature. The larger residences, such as the former Government House Triplicane or Guindy House consist of virtually detached grouped pavilions, their facades screened by ample two-storeyed portico-verandahs and interlinked by colonnades – recalling in many ways Dupleix’s innovative Pondicherry house. In Bengal the more compact villa plan pertains with separate ancillary structures.

    22If as we have seen, the broad architectural details of the house, despite their Indian “acclimatisation”, were required to proclaim their European derivation, the local vernacular building type adapted to the climate, cheap and easy to build, was adopted as a practical expedient for service annexes and offices. In Bengal this vernacular architecture was represented by the bangla, the thatched curvilinear or “double roofed” hut. Built on a rectangular plan of mud or sun dried bricks, the walls were protected and shaded by the overhang of the eaves which in the case of the “double roofed” hut were extended out at a shallower pitch all the way round (hence the name) and were supported on posts forming a verandah. Both these types of building are shown adjoining a garden house in an 1805 aquatint (ill. 5) no doubt functioning as servants housing and offices.

    23It was the synthesis of the simple “double roofed” with the garden house that provided the prototype of the Anglo-Indian bungalow. From about 1780 the old convention of situating the principal living quarters on the upper storeys, over the godown, was giving way to the common practice in the garden house of using the ground floor rooms as the main accommodation, influenced in turn by Indian custom. The 1785 sale particulars of Warren Hastings’ garden house at Alipur give a good idea of this transitional phase and the integration of the bungalow into the residential complex. Apart from extensive stabling, a bath house and other outbuildings, the property comprised: “An upper-roomed house consisting of a hall and rooms on each floor... A lower-roomed house containing a large hall and four good bedchambers...; a convenient bungalow containing two rooms and a verandah all round...”.2

    24The Bengali name had already been anglicised and the bungalow entered into common parlance, being used in a general sense to designate not only outbuilding or annexe but the “lower-roomed house” house as well. Samuel Davis’3 wash drawing of his own house at Bhagalpur in Bihar (where he was stationed as a Company Civil servant from the mid 1780’s, the Daniell’s staying with him in 1788 and 1790-91) shows an elegant single storeyed neoclassical villa with quadrant arcades linking the wings, but no portico (ill. 6) – yet he inscribes the drawing “my bungalow” – an early instance of the term being applied to a principal residence rather than a subsidiary or temporary structure.

    2. Ghiretty House, Chandernagore, mid 1760’s.3. The Adyar Club, Madras, former garden house of 1771.4. Felicity Hall, a “garden house” near Calcutta, c. 1780

    Image 10000000000002DA00000452E8E96CF8B603D63D.jpg

    25But the simplicity, cheapness and flexibility of the bungalow in its primitive form made it equally appropriate for uses other than the strictly domestic or civilian. From at least the late 1760’s the army engineers appear to have erected “double roofed” bungalows for the more permanent type of armed camp which was developed as the cantonment. These armed camps strategically located well outside the towns, leaving open ground between them, allowed the rapid manoeuvre and deployment of troops as the military necessity arose and supplemented the traditional forts. In contemporary European military terms the cantonment applied the principle of the campaign or siege camp. But in India the great “tented cities” of the Moghul Court, on campaign or in durbar and summer excursions to Kashmir, provided a recent indigenous precedent, and, with its very spacious grid plan centred on the vast parade ground, the camp was well suited to the climate.

    26When the cantonment assumed a permanent function, its urban form retained the very spacious regular lines of its tented origins, and the “double roofed” bungalow was after all only at one remove from the military tent with its guyed double roof. The cantonment thus presented an ordered version of the open garden city pattern that had been adopted for the European residential quarters, while the bungalow, set in a large compound, was to acquire in the early 19th century the architectural features of its civilian counterpart. As a strategic and planning corollary the “civil lines”, the non-military residential area that invariably accompanied the development of the cantonment further extended the garden city layout.

    27A detail of a painting of Lord Wellesley reviewing his bodyguard at Ballygang (where they were stationed from c. 1800) shows the parade ground flanked by regular “lines” of barracks and officers bungalows of the “double roof’’ type (ill. 7). As early as 1767 barracks were established on the outskirts of Calcutta at Behrampur. Dum Dum to the north became the headquarters of the Bengal artillery in 1783 and Barrackpore up the Hooghly, founded as a cantonnment in 1775 initially with a few officers bungalows and a tented camp, rapidly developed both as the principal Calcutta garrison town (until the Mutiny) and as a favoured location for garden houses. By 1785 the Company had acquired land and bungalows there and erected a garden house which served the Commander-in-Chief until Lord Wellesley reappropriated it in 1801 as the Governor-General’s hot season residence.

    28Lord Curzon provides an invaluable detailed history of Barrackpore House and Cantonment,4 quoting contemporary sources refering to the term bungalow and its ubiquitous function. Lord Wellesley initially had repairs and improvements made to the existing house and the grounds were landscaped in the fashionable picturesque manner. Its appearance at this time was recorded by Lord Valentia who visited Wellesley at Barrackpore on his Grand Tour in 18035: “The Park is laid out in the English style; and the house, at present unfinished, is well adapted to the climate, having a beautiful verandah on every side, and the rooms being on a very ample scale. (...) Several of the bungalows belonging to the lines (i.e. the cantonment) have been taken into the Park, and are fitted up for the reception of the Secretaries, Aides-de-Camp, and Visitors. His Excellency had ordered one to be prepared for me of which I immediately took possession. After breakfast at the house we returned to our own habitations till dinner...” The artist Henry Salt who accompanied Lord Valentia drew the house and bungalow (ill. 8). The House is shown as a porticoed single storey villa, although the verandah refered to is not evident. But the bungalows are of the double roofed vernacular type.

    5. Garden house with “bungalow” outbuildings, near Calcutta, (c. 1800). 6. Samuel Davis’s house at Bhagalpur, c. 1785.7. Detail of c. 1800 painting showing Lord Wellesley reviewing the Body Guard at Ballygang showing “double-roof” bungalows

    Image 10000000000002DC00000440FB7FFC09B2C38E93.jpg

    29Wellesley’s Government House Calcutta had just been completed at the time of Lord Valentia’s visit and the Governor General promptly began to plan a similar vast new residence at Barrackpore, also to be designed by his Super-intendant of Works, Captain Wyatt. The existing house was demolished and a bungalow was either adapted or newly built as temporary accommodation; but after Wellesley’s departure in 1806, work ceased and the costly project was abandonned. Instead the “temporary” bungalow became a permanent establishment and was enlarged to its present form as Barrackpore House in circa 1815, during the Earl of Moira’s (afterwards Marquis of Hastings) government.

    30Lord Minto, who came out as Governor General in 1807, describes Barrackpore prior to these alterations: “The present house is what is called a bungalow or cottage, and was intended only as a makeshift while the great house was erecting. It is a cottage indeed but a very considerable building compared with the European scale... The verandah next the room is a charming apartment. It affords a long shaded airy walk with a most beautiful prospect, and we find it an excellent eating room... Besides this principal bungalow there are a number of smaller ones like neat Swiss cottages scattered about the lawn. These afford accomodation for Aides-de-Camp, guests, etc, etc.”6 According to Curzon these bungalows retained thatched roofs until as late as 1864 when they were rebuilt, as they are now, in stuccoed brick with italianate classical dressings and flat, balustraded roofs, continuing however to serve their original purpose as ancillary accomodation.

    A BRITISH INTERLUDE

    31Lord Minto’s comparison of the bungalows to “neat Swiss cottages” raises the interesting question of the cultural cross reference of the bungalow with Picturesque taste in Britain at this period. Rustic pavilions and hermitages had been introduced into the irregular landscaped garden at an early date, following the classical temples, in the wake of castellated and Gothick follies and Chinoiserie Kiosks. The rationalism of Laugier’s “primitive hut” could be seen in the rustic temple and by the 1770’s combined with the functional in thatched estate cottages or model villages; while as adopted in France, the “Jardin Anglo-Chinois” included such purely sentimental features as the “Hameaux” at Chantilly and Petit Trianon. By the last decade of the 18th century “cottages or fermes ornées” with thatched roofs and verandahs were becoming fashionable as rural retreats or seaside residences. Numerous publications in particular those of John Plaw7 (ill. 9) and Papworth8 created a picturesque cottage or villa vogue enjoying great popularity through the first quarter of the 19th century. The vernacular bungalow, or its Anglo-Indian synthesis, could therefore be appreciated in cultivated circles as much for its Picturesque qualities as for its practical expedience.

    8. Barrackpore House 1803 by Henry Salt showing bungalows in left foreground. 9. John Plaw “Ferme Ornée” 1795; design for Keeper’s Lodge. 10. Clare House, East Malling, Kent, 1793 by M. Searles; a facade picturesquely animated by its verandah. 11. Bungalows of the early to mid 19th century in an 1870 photograph of Barrackpore Cantonment

    Image 10000000000002DC000003C00412D5443DC66264.jpg

    32Direct Anglo-Indian influence on architectural developments in Britain can indeed be identified in the sudden popularity of the verandah from the 1790’s onwards. No doubt first introduced by returning nabobs and further publicised by Thomas and William Daniell’s 1786-88 “Views of Calcutta”, the verandah in its columned portico or rustic form, appealed for the Picturesque qualities of movement and spatial variety it confered in both plan and elevation (ill. 10). Its potential for opening up the house to the garden seems to have been quickly realised by the leading Picturesque landscape architect Humphrey Repton and the verandah becomes a noticeable feature of the villa and country house designs he produced in partnership with John Nash from c. 1795 to 1802, as it is in their subsequently separate practice. It is very tempting to see Nash’s later prolific use of screening colonnades for the palatial stuccoed facades of Regent’s Park and Regent’s Street in London, as in some measure influenced by Anglo-Indian precedents.

    33Interest in specifically Indian architectural features was aroused by novel illustrated publications such as William Hodges’ “Select Views in India” (1785-88) and especially Thomas and William Daniell’s magnificient aqua-tints in their “Views of Calcutta” and “Oriental Scenery” (1795-1806),9 which captured Picturesque imagination with its taste for the exotic and provided architects with models to reproduce from. Although the Indian style only flourished briefly in Britain, it is represented by two outstanding buildings: Sezincote House, a palatial, domed Indo-Moghul “bungalow” built c. 1804-05 for the retired East Indian Company official Sir Charles Cockerell by his architect brother S. P. Cockerell, in collaboration with Repton and advised by Thomas Daniell; and the Prince Regent’s Brighton Pavilion where Porden first provided the Indo-Saracenic Dome Stables in 1803, followed in 1806 by an unexecuted Indian design of Repton’s for rebuilding the Pavilion itself, which was finally orientalised by Nash in a much freer picturesque fashion after 1815.

    34But in India the classical style provided Europeans with a cultural sheet anchor and deliberately expressed a formal antithesis to the omnipresent exoticism of the indigeneous styles. Although many individual Indian building features had been incorporated in Anglo-Indian architecture by the end of the 18th century, its strongly emphasised columnar articulation had acquired that racial, social and imperial suprematist stamp which gives neoclassicism in India such a distinctive and enduring character. One rare early instance of Indian stylistic influence (anticipating the eclecticism of late 19th century Imperial Anglo-India) is Metcalfe’s House, the commissioner’s bungalow built at Delhi in 1836. But its Moghul inspired verandah arcade must be seen, at this date, as an isolated exception to the classical norm, reflecting the building’s particular location outside the historic moghul capital as much as Metcalfe’s own individual personnality.

    COLLAGE AND SYNTHESIS THE BUNGALOW AS A COLONIAL BUILDING NORM

    35It is the bungalow that stands out as an entirely Indian concept adopted by the British, whatever its “rustic cottage” appeal might hold for some of them, for its practical convenience. As first erected by the engineers in cantonments or country stations (ill.7), the bungalows, appositely described by Henry Roberdeau in 1801 as “really stationary tents”,10 were of traditional cutcha build. The only European concessions being a false ceiling of stretched cloth to hide the rafters, pierced or louvred screens and doors and the occasional use of glazed windows. Roberdeau in his remote up-country station at Mymensingh, Bengal, had “two Bungalows near to each other, in one I sleep and dress and in the other sit and eat”,11 – a use of the bungalow as a free standing “room” comparable to that we have seen the guest bungalows were put to at Barrackpore.

    36In less isolated area, however, when a single, two or three-roomed bungalow served as the dwelling and the station had acquired a permanent character, more substantial building methods were employed. At their simplest, walls and verandah posts were still built of sun-dried brick and plastered. The traditional thatch eventually came to be replaced by tiles. But, for bungalows in important establishments (e.g. the Governor General’s bungalow at Barrackpore of 1803), and then generally, the Company’s engineers applied the structural and architectural features of the late 18th century garden and town houses of Calcutta or Madras. The walls were built of pucka brickwork, faced and detailed in stucco and glazed windows inserted and fitted with shutters. Parapet or terrace balustrades were commonly made of painted terracota but when ornamental ironwork was (sparingly) used from the early 19th century it was as an imported product of the British industrial revolution (just as the later use of corrugated iron would be for the roofs of Hill Station bungalows). Retaining the basic characteristics and climatic advantages of the Indian bungalow as a single story, flexible open-plan building, the verandah surrounding the rooms was developed into a deep colonnade providing an intermediary living space according to the season. Architectural pretention could be further enhanced, with benefit of shade, by the projection of a portico-porch or porte cochere. Where appropriate to the climate a flat terrace roof was used, concealed by a coped parapet. “Attic” windows could be introduced in a clerestorey between the flat (or pitched) verandah roof and the cornice, to vent the lofty main room and provide secondary lighting for its otherwise dark interior behind the verandah. Large bungalows, apart from the central living room, would have a dining room opening off it and a number of bedrooms with dressing rooms, a study or a play room, all giving on to or incorporated in the sequence of verandahs carried round the perimeter, if necessary extended out into wings and with a covered-way linking the kitchen. A belvedere or attic storey giving on to the roof terrace could even be added so that, except for the robust engineers Doricism of the detailing, with its complement of detached servants quarters and stabling in the compound, the appearance of the large bungalow was hardly any different from the 18th century “garden house” (ill. 11).

    37As the East India Company’s rule took on imperial dimensions, the Company’s Public Works engineers inevitably came under increasing pressure to design a variety of administrative buildings and facilities as well as housing in military and civil stations. To achieve this end while complying with strict measures of economy, they used their anglicised version of the bungalow as a basic building type, proving its adaptable range of function, scale and architectural pretention to be suitable for nearly all the practical and representational requirements of the Company’s service and the manifold gradations of its hierarchy – from the modest dak or circuit bungalow (for officers on tour) to bachelor or married quarters for officers and civilians, to collectors or judges lodgings, the Officers Mess, the Club or Gymkhana (built by subscription), a police station or a court house and, in the case of Government House Allahabad, acquiring with additional wings the status of Governor’s Residence.

    38This early 19th century “normalisation” of the colonial building type (taken up for private and plantation bungalows) was saved from dead uniformity by regional variations and idiosyncrasies of local craftsmanship, but principally by the inherent picturesque qualities the verandah confered on the bungalows, enhanced by the spacious and often tropically luxuriant garden setting of the compound. Although practical considerations of climate, function and economy governed the engineers elaboration of the bungalow, in their interpretation of Indian prototypes, they nevertheless achieved an architectural synthesis that constitutes a distinct and original contribution to the Romantic concept of the neoclassical villa.

    THE HILL STATION BUNGALOW

    39When however, places with less oppressive climatic conditions became accessible, they naturally attracted European settlement. The Moghul court had made yearly excursions to Kashmir for the same reason. The British when the opportunity arose created the Hill Station as a hot weather resort.

    40The Gurkha Wars of 1814-16 drew British attention to the remote Himalayas. Simla was established in 1819 as the main army base in this vital border region. The first cottage-bungalows were built by officers posted there and the advantages of the cool climate, at around 7000 feet, soon commended Simla to colleagues on leave as an escape from the heat of the plains. A colony grew up and in 1832 the Governor General Lord William Bentinck spent the hot season there. The fashionable example was set and Simla developed as Calcutta’s furthermost suburb. The informal arrangement whereby Governor Generals spent the summer months in Simla was officially consecrated in 1864 when Lord Lawrence established the Hill Station as the Government’s hot weather capital.

    41Ootacamund in the Nilgiris immediately followed Simla as the Hill Station for Madras and Mysore, the first bungalows appearing as early as 1821. Maha-baleshwar was founded in 1828 by the then Governor of Bombay Sir John Malcolm, as the Presidency’s Hill Station. Darjeeling developed from the 1840’s... With improved roads and the advent of the railways in the second half of the 19th century the Hill Stations flourished, especially in the Himalayas and the Nilgiris, and each province eventually had its own official hot weather station.

    42The Hill Stations were deliberately developed as resorts. Without the climatic restrictions of the plains and relatively free from the hierarchical formalities and architectural pretentions of colonial power that pertained there, officers and civilians on leave consciously sought after a picturesque bungalow style and a complementary illusion of Europe and “home” in the landscape of the Hills. The Himalayas conjured up fond comparisons with the mountains of Scotland, the Lake District fells or more appropriately the Alps, in the Romantic imagination. The hills encircling Ootacamund were named the Downs after their Sussex counterparts. The picturesque eclecticism of bungalow architecture similarly reflected contemporary cottage and villa styles in British spa or seaside resorts, to which so many Anglo-Indians retired.

    43Captain Kennedy’s Cottage at Simla (ill. 12), built of local stone and timber, doubtless to his own design, in 1822, combines steep gables with the Anglo-Indian bungalow verandah to produce a whimsical “Swiss Cottage” effect that appealed to contemporary picturesque taste and, as previously refered to, in the case of the Barrackpore guest bungalows had already elicited a parallel from Lord Minto when describing them. The Ootacamund club (built as Sir William Rumbold’s residence in 1831) is with its Ionic columned portico still in keeping with the neoclassical engineer’s bungalow of the plains (ill. 13). But while the verandah is invariably incorporated in the design of the Hill Station Bungalow, stimulated by the numerous publications on villa and cottage designs, especially John Claudius Loudon’s Encyclopedia in the 1830s and 40s, cottage orné and chalet styles were deemed more appropriate to the setting and recreational purpose of the Hill Station.

    44Although the engineers seem to have turned their hand to supplying designs, as well as the amateurs in the early years, the Hill Station bungalows were principally the work of speculative builders who thus fulfilled a similar role to their counterparts in British resorts. Bungalows were normally rented for the season, apart from official government residences, and many were owned by Indian landlords. By the turn of the century the Indian princes, who had been encouraged to participate in the imperial system and adopt western values and social mores, acquired or had built bungalows in the Hill Stations (ill. 14) just as they built eclectic European or “Indo-Saracenic” palaces in their capitals; and the Hill Station custom was to be taken up by the western educated and orientated Indian middle classes.

    45Timber and stone for building were plentiful in the Hills. Wood shingles or tiles for the roofs were, later in the 19th century, frequently replaced by that ubiquitous British colonial import: corrugated iron. With a climate favouring pitched and gabled roofs and these materials to hand, the Romantic Victorian predilection for “Jacobeathan” or “Swiss chalet” timber framing could easily be indulged in. Finialed gables with fretted bargeboards and eaves, fretwork verandahs, bay windows, fancy timber framing patterns with plastered infill mixed with vaguely Italianate villa features and Gothic details, all abound in the Hill Station bungalow.

    46As executed with the individualism of local crafsmanship and woodcarving, an exuberantly eclectic architectural hybrid was the result. Despite the close (and intended) parallels with British resort architecture, as is often the case in the Anglo-Indian equivalent, colonial economic, cultural and social factors ensure that the western model is modified, exaggerated and outstripped so that the Hill Station bungalow takes on a particular character that one author has valiantly tried to define (with some appositeness) as “Himalayan Swiss Gothic” (ill. 15).

    47By the 1870’s the popularity of the Hill Station style (and Victorian taste) can be seen influencing architectural features of the cantonment bungalow. At Bangalore, the administrative capital of Mysore state whose main Hill Station is Ootacamund, the later Victorian bungalows in the cantonment have fretted and finialed gables (known as “monkey tops”) and picturesque wooden verandahs (sometimes with trellising reminiscient of Gudjerati wood carving), or a hybrid of these features and vaguely moorish castellated parapets combined with .the stuccoed conventions of neoclassical bungalow detailing (ill. 16). Elements of “Himalayan Swiss Gothic” also appear in plantation bungalows. But notwithstanding this Hill Station influence, the majority of bungalows in civil and military stations continued to be built by the Public Works Department engineers, in a style which on the whole adhered to the basic classical vocabulary of the Anglo-Indian tradition.

    INDO-SARACENIC VERSUS CLASSICAL

    48Hill Station eclecticism was however reflected in the Gothic style devised by the Public Works Department (P. W. D.) engineer-architects for public buildings in the later Victorian period. The adaptation of the style to Indian conditions lead to a serious attempt to define a specifically Indian style for official architecture. This became an important issue in the debate that ensued on what official style should be adopted for New Delhi once the decision was made to transfer the capital there from Calcutta in 1911. As the outcome was Lutyens’ classical synthesis, affecting the design of the city’s bungalows as well as its public buildings, the background requires a brief summary.12

    12. Captain Kennedy’s Cottage, Simla c. 1822. 13. The Ootacamund Club formely the bungalow of Sir William Rumbold, 1831

    Image 10000000000002DA0000046A189012A1FBFA4A6E.jpg

    49The Gothic Revival had been introduced for churches as early as the 1820’s and Queen’s College, Varanasi, built by Major Kittoe of the Bengal engineers in 1847, is an exceptionally early instance of the style’s institutional application. But by the time direct British rule had been introduced and Queen Victoria proclaimed Empress of India in 1877, P. W. D. engineers were putting High Victorian-Ruskinian Gothic to the test for civic and institutional buildings in Madras, Calcutta and especially Bombay. In the 1880’s a hybrid Ruskinian Gothic increasingly incorporating Indian stylistic features, the so called “Indo-Saracenic” style, had evolved (F. W. Stevens civic work in Bombay being outstanding in the genre). Widespread experiments were undertaken to make “Indo-Saracenic” an architecture both appropriate in style and structure to India, and by the turn of the century a Rajput-Moghul revival was being favoured as suitably in the imperial image while offering some recognition of the cultural and political aspirations of Indians as fellow subjects of the Queen-Empress. In enlightened Anglo-Indian circles, inspired by the Arts and Crafts movement and the ideals of William Morris, a more critical approach sought to revive the traditional crafts of the Mistri (the Indian master builder) as the basis for the development of a truly contemporary indigenous style.

    50Lord Curzon, Viceroy 1898-1905, introduced the first legislation for the restoration and protection of ancient Indian monuments and founded the Archaeological Survey of India. But he was also acutely aware of the historical significance of the Anglo-Indian classical tradition. He went to great pains to restore Government House, Calcutta, and other symbolic building of the Company period; while for contemporary architecture he encouraged an Anglo-Indian Edwardian Baroque style. It was Curzon who initiated the practice of appointing professional architects from Britain to the post of Architect to the Government of India, overiding the P. W. D. He thus prepared the ground for Lutyens’ monumental conception of New Delhi although he always remained vehemently against the transfer of the capital of British India from its historic roots in Calcutta.

    “BUNGLE-OHS”-THE CLASSICAL CULMINATION

    51Begun in 1913, only inaugurated in 1931 and with building continuing until Independence and beyond, New Delhi marks the brilliant culmination of the Anglo-Indian classical synthesis.13 Edwin Landseer Lutyens with Herbert Baker were appointed architects respectively of Viceroy’s House (Rashtrapati Bhawan) and the Secretariats, with Lutyens having overall responsibility for the formal conception of the city and the (over) vast “garden city” plan – in itself a grand culmination of the Anglo-Indian urban tradition.

    52Lutyens had initially been derogatory about traditional styles of Indian architecture, just as he was about Anglo-Indian “bungle-ohs” as he termed them, and he adamantly resisted a powerful P. W. D. and Government of India lobby to make “Indo Saracenic” the official style of the new capital. Lutyens had developed an exceptionally profound understanding of the abstract geometrical essence of classical architecture and he was far too sensitive an architect not to eventually appreciate the appropriateness of aspects of the Indo-Moghul synthesis epitomized by Akbar’s Fatehpur-Sikri. Abetted by Baker’s experience of adapting a classical style to the hot climate of South Africa (Union Buildings, Pretoria, 1910), Lutyens achieved a unique fusion between eastern and western traditions in the design of Viceroy’s House. Indeed the articulation of the forecourt elevation of Viceroy’s House with its emphasis on one principal storey, outspreading wings, portico-loggias and defining horizontal of the chujja-cornice, presents itself in one aspect as the most palatial sublimation of the Anglo-Indian concept of the bungalow (ill. 17).

    15. ’’Himalayan-Swiss-Gothic” at Simla. 16. Bangalore eclecticism of the 1870’s. 19 a. New Delhi bungalow of 1920’ (former French Embassy). 14. Femhill, residence of the Maharajah of Mysore at Ootacamund c. 1890.17. SirE. L. Lutyens entrance front of Rashtrapatti Bhawan New Delhi, former Viceroy’s House 1912-20

    Image 10000000000002DA00000432DE783B4ADE8B6AB7.jpg

    53In 1917 Lutyens made a number of prototype designs for the city’s bungalows which, like Viceroy’s House, he wanted built of stone, but they were rejected by the government on the grounds of cost. He did however design the senior Viceregal staff bungalows, Staff Quarters and Bodyguard Lines of the Viceregal Estate, in the compound of Viceroy’s House. These were erected after 1918 and one of them – the future Private Secretary’s Bungalow – was used by Lutyens on his annual winter visits from 1923 to 1928. They are of conventional P. W. D. build: stuccoed brick with flat roofs composed of an insulating layer of mud compacted on a concrete screed laid on bricks supported by joists. With their subtly detailed white facades, columns, chujja-like cornices and portico-verandahs they offer a conscious, but refined, imperial recall of the early 19th century classical synthesis devised by the East India Company’s Engineers (ill. 18). The unified hierarchical order achieved by Lutyens in these relatively cheap, simple but imaginatively composed buildings in the Viceregal compound, set the standard and provided the model for the housing the city required.

    54Responsibility for the vast majority of the several thousand bungalows built in New Delhi (as with public buildings) rested with the P. W. D. under the direction of W. H. Nicholls and particularly his successor as Chief Architect, Robert Tor Russell, in post from 1919 to 1939. A number were also designed by C. G. Blomfield who left the P. W. D. for private practice in 1918; while John Begg was the architect of the New Delhi Cantonment where the bungalows are designed in a pared down sharply defined neoclassical style not unreminiscent of contemporary Scandinavian Doricism.

    55These architects and a generation of younger colleagues inspired by Lutyens’ example established the city’s bungalow housing typology in conformity with the hierarchical residential traditions of British administration in India. Set in large compounds the white stucco, classical, New Delhi bungalows of the 1920’s and 30’s, with their columns and “attic windows” venting the lofty interiors, are little different from their early 19th century predecessors even to the occasional slightly heavy quality of the detailing where they lack Lutyens’ sophistication (ill. 19).

    56Although Lutyens had provided substantial loggias, for the Viceregal estate bungalows, New Delhi was conceived as a cold weather capital. The government traditionally spent the summer months in Simla and the city’s bungalows were in general designed accordingly, with relatively shallow, columned loggias rather than fully screening verandahs (no doubt for reasons of economy as well). But when, in the later inter-war period, increasing numbers of officials only took short leave, many bungalows proved uncomfortably hot to live in; the flat roofs cannot be used as sleeping terraces for there is no direct means of access to them, and, as the lower end of the housing hierarchy is reached, compounds are reduced to small courtyards and the simplest housing gives straight on the pavement without any kind of verandah.

    18. Viceregal Estate: 1917-18 design by Lutyens for the Surgeon to the Viceroy’s bungalow
    19 b. Asoka Road bungalow c. 1925, New Delhi

    Image 10000000000002D8000003EE8EECDE26E1EA9863.jpg

    57Lutyens’ extended formal garden city plan has also been criticised for its very low density with vast distances placing heavy reliance on vehicular transport. Yet in this respect, as with the housing, New Delhi must be seen in context as being entirely consistent with the historical Anglo-Indian precedents of urban and cantonment development. Based on the assumption of a constant and relatively cheap supply of labour, the priviledged economic power structure of colonial rule established in the latter part of the 18th century had permitted an initial response to climatic conditions and Indian influence to become consecrated in very expansively serviced living standards and residential patterns with a grand scale and display of architecture to match.

    58Whatever its failings New Delhi eminently fulfills the particular requirements of its original brief and remains on any terms an outstanding achievement. That Lutyens, Baker and their followers so successfully proved the vitality and potential of the classical tradition in New Delhi also pays fitting homage to that initial synthesis of eastern and western architectural traditions that produced the Anglo-Indian bungalow.

    59New Delhi marks an appropriate classical finale. But the bungalow was by then an entirely conventional house type, pervading every region of India. Outside the official Anglo-Indian New Delhi orbit the styles chosen for the private bungalow persisted in the chameleon-like eclecticism of its Hill Station manifestation. Early adopted by the Indian middle classes, personal taste and the vagaries of fashion all found individual expression in the bungalow and have continued to do so since Independence. Art Deco styling appears in the 1930’s, modernist concrete forms predominate by the late 1950’s and 60’s (influenced by Le Corbusier and Pierre Jeanneret’s Chandigarh) and these are now being overlaid once more by an eclectic collage of stylistic references. Invariably however these designs display uniquely Indian traits of form and function – the bungalow has been completely assimilated and re-absorbed into the culture of its origins.

    Notes de bas de page

    1 Cf. De la distribution des Maisons de Plaisance et de la décoration des édifices en général by Jacques-Francois BLONDEL. Paris, 1737. Reprinted by Gregg Press, 1967.

    2 G. N. CURZON, Marquis Curzon of Keddleston, British Government in India. London, 1925, vol. I, p. 142.

    3 Samuel DAVIS (1756 (?) -1819) went to India in the Madras Infantry in 1780 but some years later entered the East India Company ’s Civil Service; an amateur watercolourist, he became a close friend of Thomas and William Daniell; cf. Mildred ARCHER & Ronald LIGHTBROWN, India Observed, Victoria & Albert Museum – Trefoil books, 1982; and Mildred ARCHER, Early views of India, Thames and Hudson, 1980.

    4 Lord Curzon, Viceroy 1898 to 1905; cf. CURZON op. cit., vol. II, pp. 1-46.

    5 CURZON op. cit., vol. II, p. 7.

    6 Ibid., p. 17.

    7 John PLAW (1745-1820), Rural Architecture; or Designs from the Simple Cottage to the Decorative Villa, 1785, 1794, 1796, 1800, 1802 and 1804; Ferme Ornée or Rural Improvements, 1795, 1813; Sketches for Country Houses, Villas and Rural Dwellings 1800, 1803.

    8 John Buonarotti PAPWORTH (1775-1847), Rural Residences, consisting of a Series of Designs for Cottages, small villas and other ornamental building, 1818,1832.

    9 Cf. Mildred ARCHER, op. cit.; M. Archer & R. Lightbrown, op. cit.

    10 Sten NILSSON, European Architecture in India 1750-1850; Faber & Faber, 1968; and Ph. WOODRUFF, The men who ruled India, Jonathan Cape, 1953.

    11 S. NILSSON, op. cit., p. 187.

    12 Cf. Lotus International n 34: India: end of the classical tradition by Gavin STAMP; and Robert Grant IRVING, Indian Summer, Yale University Press, 1981.

    13 C. HUSSEY, The Life of Sir Edwin Lutyens, 1950; R. G. IRVING, op. cit.; G. Stamp in Lotus, op. cit.
    Sten NILSSON’s European Architecture in India 1750-1850, Lord CURZON’s British Government in India (1925), Anthony D. KING, The Bungalow (1985), Philip DAVIS, British Architecture in India (1984) and the articles and papers of Mildred ARCHER, A. D. KING and Gavin STAMP have all provided invaluable source material for this paper.

    Auteur

    • Martin Meade

      Historien d’architecture Professeur à l’Ecole Spéciale d’Architecture

    Précédent Suivant
    Table des matières

    Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.

    Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

    Voir plus de livres
    Rites hindous

    Rites hindous

    Transferts et transformations

    Gérard Colas et Gilles Tarabout (dir.)

    2006

    L’espace du temple I

    L’espace du temple I

    Espaces, itinéraires, médiations

    Jean-Claude Galey (dir.)

    1985

    L’espace du temple II

    L’espace du temple II

    Les sanctuaires dans le royaume

    Jean-Claude Galey (dir.)

    1986

    La dette

    La dette

    Charles Malamoud (dir.)

    1980

    Divins remèdes

    Divins remèdes

    Médecine et religion en Asie du Sud

    Ines G. Županov et Caterina Guenzi (dir.)

    2009

    Circulation et territoire dans le monde indien contemporain

    Circulation et territoire dans le monde indien contemporain

    Véronique Dupont et Frédéric Landy (dir.)

    2010

    Construire les savoirs dans l’action

    Construire les savoirs dans l’action

    Apprentissages et enjeux sociaux en Asie du Sud

    Marie-Claude Mahias (dir.)

    2011

    Politique et religions en Asie du Sud

    Politique et religions en Asie du Sud

    Le sécularisme dans tous ses états ?

    Christophe Jaffrelot et Aminah Mohammad-Arif (dir.)

    2012

    L’Inde des Lumières

    L’Inde des Lumières

    Discours, histoire, savoirs (XVIIe-XIXe siècle)

    Marie Fourcade et Ines G. Županov (dir.)

    2013

    Indianité et créolité à l’île Maurice

    Indianité et créolité à l’île Maurice

    Catherine Servan-Schreiber (dir.)

    2014

    Cosmopolitismes en Asie du Sud

    Cosmopolitismes en Asie du Sud

    Sources, itinéraires, langues (XVIe-XVIIIe siècle)

    Corinne Lefèvre, Ines G. Županov et Jorge Flores (dir.)

    2015

    L’Inde et l’Italie

    L’Inde et l’Italie

    Rencontres intellectuelles, politiques et artistiques

    Tiziana Leucci, Claude Markovits et Marie Fourcade (dir.)

    2018

    Voir plus de livres
    1 / 12
    Rites hindous

    Rites hindous

    Transferts et transformations

    Gérard Colas et Gilles Tarabout (dir.)

    2006

    L’espace du temple I

    L’espace du temple I

    Espaces, itinéraires, médiations

    Jean-Claude Galey (dir.)

    1985

    L’espace du temple II

    L’espace du temple II

    Les sanctuaires dans le royaume

    Jean-Claude Galey (dir.)

    1986

    La dette

    La dette

    Charles Malamoud (dir.)

    1980

    Divins remèdes

    Divins remèdes

    Médecine et religion en Asie du Sud

    Ines G. Županov et Caterina Guenzi (dir.)

    2009

    Circulation et territoire dans le monde indien contemporain

    Circulation et territoire dans le monde indien contemporain

    Véronique Dupont et Frédéric Landy (dir.)

    2010

    Construire les savoirs dans l’action

    Construire les savoirs dans l’action

    Apprentissages et enjeux sociaux en Asie du Sud

    Marie-Claude Mahias (dir.)

    2011

    Politique et religions en Asie du Sud

    Politique et religions en Asie du Sud

    Le sécularisme dans tous ses états ?

    Christophe Jaffrelot et Aminah Mohammad-Arif (dir.)

    2012

    L’Inde des Lumières

    L’Inde des Lumières

    Discours, histoire, savoirs (XVIIe-XIXe siècle)

    Marie Fourcade et Ines G. Županov (dir.)

    2013

    Indianité et créolité à l’île Maurice

    Indianité et créolité à l’île Maurice

    Catherine Servan-Schreiber (dir.)

    2014

    Cosmopolitismes en Asie du Sud

    Cosmopolitismes en Asie du Sud

    Sources, itinéraires, langues (XVIe-XVIIIe siècle)

    Corinne Lefèvre, Ines G. Županov et Jorge Flores (dir.)

    2015

    L’Inde et l’Italie

    L’Inde et l’Italie

    Rencontres intellectuelles, politiques et artistiques

    Tiziana Leucci, Claude Markovits et Marie Fourcade (dir.)

    2018

    Accès ouvert

    Accès ouvert freemium

    ePub

    PDF

    PDF du chapitre

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque

    Acheter

    Édition imprimée

    • amazon.fr
    • decitre.fr
    • mollat.com
    • leslibraires.fr
    • placedeslibraires.fr
    • lcdpu.fr
    ePub / PDF

    1 Cf. De la distribution des Maisons de Plaisance et de la décoration des édifices en général by Jacques-Francois BLONDEL. Paris, 1737. Reprinted by Gregg Press, 1967.

    2 G. N. CURZON, Marquis Curzon of Keddleston, British Government in India. London, 1925, vol. I, p. 142.

    3 Samuel DAVIS (1756 (?) -1819) went to India in the Madras Infantry in 1780 but some years later entered the East India Company ’s Civil Service; an amateur watercolourist, he became a close friend of Thomas and William Daniell; cf. Mildred ARCHER & Ronald LIGHTBROWN, India Observed, Victoria & Albert Museum – Trefoil books, 1982; and Mildred ARCHER, Early views of India, Thames and Hudson, 1980.

    4 Lord Curzon, Viceroy 1898 to 1905; cf. CURZON op. cit., vol. II, pp. 1-46.

    5 CURZON op. cit., vol. II, p. 7.

    6 Ibid., p. 17.

    7 John PLAW (1745-1820), Rural Architecture; or Designs from the Simple Cottage to the Decorative Villa, 1785, 1794, 1796, 1800, 1802 and 1804; Ferme Ornée or Rural Improvements, 1795, 1813; Sketches for Country Houses, Villas and Rural Dwellings 1800, 1803.

    8 John Buonarotti PAPWORTH (1775-1847), Rural Residences, consisting of a Series of Designs for Cottages, small villas and other ornamental building, 1818,1832.

    9 Cf. Mildred ARCHER, op. cit.; M. Archer & R. Lightbrown, op. cit.

    10 Sten NILSSON, European Architecture in India 1750-1850; Faber & Faber, 1968; and Ph. WOODRUFF, The men who ruled India, Jonathan Cape, 1953.

    11 S. NILSSON, op. cit., p. 187.

    12 Cf. Lotus International n 34: India: end of the classical tradition by Gavin STAMP; and Robert Grant IRVING, Indian Summer, Yale University Press, 1981.

    13 C. HUSSEY, The Life of Sir Edwin Lutyens, 1950; R. G. IRVING, op. cit.; G. Stamp in Lotus, op. cit.
    Sten NILSSON’s European Architecture in India 1750-1850, Lord CURZON’s British Government in India (1925), Anthony D. KING, The Bungalow (1985), Philip DAVIS, British Architecture in India (1984) and the articles and papers of Mildred ARCHER, A. D. KING and Gavin STAMP have all provided invaluable source material for this paper.

    L’Inde et l’imaginaire

    X Facebook Email

    L’Inde et l’imaginaire

    Ce livre est cité par

    • Racine, Jean-Luc. (2001) La question identitaire en Asie du Sud. DOI: 10.4000/books.editionsehess.24042
    • Weinberger-Thomas, Catherine. (2004) Littérature et poétiques pluriculturelles en Asie du Sud. DOI: 10.4000/books.editionsehess.25157
    • Goreau-Ponceaud, Anthony. (2008) De l’image au voyage : l’Inde sur la route de soi. Articulo – revue de sciences humaines. DOI: 10.4000/articulo.771

    L’Inde et l’imaginaire

    Ce livre est diffusé en accès ouvert freemium. L’accès à la lecture en ligne est disponible. L’accès aux versions PDF et ePub est réservé aux bibliothèques l’ayant acquis. Vous pouvez vous connecter à votre bibliothèque à l’adresse suivante : https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks

    Suggérer l’acquisition à votre bibliothèque Acheter ce livre aux formats PDF et ePub

    Si vous avez des questions, vous pouvez nous écrire à access[at]openedition.org

    L’Inde et l’imaginaire

    Vérifiez si votre bibliothèque a déjà acquis ce livre : authentifiez-vous à OpenEdition Freemium for Books.

    Vous pouvez suggérer à votre bibliothèque d’acquérir un ou plusieurs livres publiés sur OpenEdition Books. N’hésitez pas à lui indiquer nos coordonnées : access[at]openedition.org

    Vous pouvez également nous indiquer, à l’aide du formulaire suivant, les coordonnées de votre bibliothèque afin que nous la contactions pour lui suggérer l’achat de ce livre. Les champs suivis de (*) sont obligatoires.

    Veuillez, s’il vous plaît, remplir tous les champs.

    La syntaxe de l’email est incorrecte.

    Référence numérique du chapitre

    Format

    Meade, M. (1988). The Anglo-Indian bungalow. In C. Weinberger-Thomas (éd.), L’Inde et l’imaginaire (1‑). Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.25033
    Meade, Martin. « The Anglo-Indian Bungalow ». In L’Inde Et l’imaginaire, édité par Catherine Weinberger-Thomas. Paris: Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, 1988. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.25033.
    Meade, Martin. « The Anglo-Indian Bungalow ». L’Inde Et l’imaginaire, édité par Catherine Weinberger-Thomas, Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, 1988, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.25033.

    Référence numérique du livre

    Format

    Weinberger-Thomas, C. (éd.). (1988). L’Inde et l’imaginaire (1‑). Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.24983
    Weinberger-Thomas, Catherine, éd. L’Inde et l’imaginaire. Paris: Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, 1988. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.24983.
    Weinberger-Thomas, Catherine, éditeur. L’Inde et l’imaginaire. Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales, 1988, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.editionsehess.24983.
    Compatible avec Zotero Zotero

    1 / 3

    Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales

    Éditions de l’École des hautes études en sciences sociales

    • Plan du site
    • Se connecter

    Suivez-nous

    • Flux RSS

    URL : http://editions.ehess.fr

    Email : editions@ehess.fr

    Adresse :

    Éditions de l’EHESS

    105 boulevard Raspail

    75006

    Paris

    France

    OpenEdition
    • Candidater à OpenEdition Books
    • Connaître le programme OpenEdition Freemium
    • Commander des livres
    • S’abonner à la lettre d’OpenEdition
    • CGU d’OpenEdition Books
    • Accessibilité : partiellement conforme
    • Données personnelles
    • Gestion des cookies
    • Système de signalement