79 <5 Situation of the Allahabad and Delhi pillars. [Sept. 



The temple is buried in the accumulated rubbish of ages, which is 

 found in a greater depth than that of the level of the temple 

 foundations. 



The present stone fortress, the work of Akber and of his son 

 Jahangi'r (whose pedigree is engraved on the pillar) occupies the 

 place of some previous Hindu works of brick, few vestiges of which 

 remain. 



I think it probable that the pillar occupied its original position till 

 taken down by Colonel Kyd during the alterations that were being 

 made. 



Though in all probability the Achay Bat may be a Buddhist relic it 

 may nevertheless be otherwise, as the Hindus consider the bur 

 (Ficus Indicus) as an emblem of Siva : the peepul (Ficus religiosaj of 

 Vishnu ; and the pullas or dawk ( Butea FrondosaJ as that of 

 Brahma, and venerate them accordingly. 



The Feroz Sha'h lat at Delhi was placed (as historians assert) in 

 its present position by the emperor Feroz, and I certainly see no 

 reason to doubt the truth of it ; the style of architecture of the building, 

 on the roof of which it stands, is of the first or Pathani : the same 

 style pervades throughout the whole adjacent buildings. There are 

 no traces of Hindu buildings anywhere near. There is a large bur 

 tree beneath the walls, on the river face, under which is a tomb of 

 some celebrated " peer" who was put to death by order of Feroz ; this 

 spot is held sacred and much resorted to by both Hindus and Musal- 

 mans : the tree is very ancient and may have been a holy tree of the 

 Buddhists. The Mahommedans of India venerate the Bat almost as 

 much as the Hindus do, which would account for its preservation though 

 other idols would have been destroyed. With regard to the quarries 

 from whence the different pillars were brought, I think it probable 

 they were floated on rafts down the Jumna, being cut from the sand- 

 stone rocks at or near Rdjptir (Bddshdhmahal) in the Sewalik, a few 

 miles above the site of the sunken city of Behat. I made this observa- 

 tion in the year 1831 when I took an experimental trip by water from 

 Rdjghdt in the Dun to Agra. I believe both lats are of the same 

 kind of stone, the others I have not seen. 



A few remarks on the Kotela (called by Captain Ho a re " a mena- 

 gerie") may be acceptable. 



Feroz Shah's palace, called the " Kotla" was formerly within the 

 north-western angle of the city walls of old Delhi, and was the citadel of 

 that place ; one face of it was in former years washed by the Jumna, 

 which seldom reaches it in these times except in very heavy floods. 

 The works of this citadel were very extensive ; the architecture is 

 clumsy in its style and rough in execution, and has no pretence to 



