Iconic Red fort was originally white

The structure is undergoing a makeover after a survey suggested that the British had painted the citadel red to save on maintenance costs

The structure is undergoing a makeover after a survey suggested that the British had painted the citadel red to save on maintenance costs

Delhi's Red Fort, where Mughal emperors ruled and Nehru made his first speech to independent India, is undergoing a makeover after conservationists discovered much of the world heritage site was actually originally white.u00a0 According to conservation architects, the symbol of Mughal power and Indian Independence should be known as the 'Red and White fort' for the combination of colours favoured by its creator, Shah Jahan, the emperor who also built the Taj Mahal. It was completed in 1648 and originally named 'the Blessed Fort.'


Back to the future: Parts of the fort, which had been painted red in
the mid-19th century, have changed colour. File pic

Craftsmen are now restoring three key buildings to their original colour with a traditional white 'Mughal plaster' made from ground marble, pulses, lime and fruit juice after a study found they had been painted red in the mid-nineteenth century, according to a British newspaper's report.

The Archaelogical Survey of India (ASI) also discoveredu00a0 that Delhi's celebrated Jantar Mantar building, an early 18th Century series of giant 'red stone' sundials and astronomical instruments built by the Maharaja of Jaipur, was also once white. They are now making plans to restore this major tourist attraction to its original colour.

The discovery and the decision to restore these buildings to their original white has set off a row among conservation architects over whether the colour should be changed after so many years, and who was to blame for painting the buildings red.

Some experts have blamed British military officers, who occupied the fort and used it as a barrack after the overthrow of Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal emperor, and the crushing of the Indian mutiny in 1857. They believe the British stopped using traditional masons, who used methods of grinding white marble to make a sparkling lime plaster to save money.

The Red Fort's gateway, which has a large Mughal arch at its centre, is believed to have been the scene of two regicides, and was home to the drummers who announced the arrival of dignitaries. It is now a war museum. Two other key buildings, the royal hamam, or bathhouse, and the Rang Mahal, which contains a hall of mirrors, are also to be restored with white plaster.

KK Mohammad, head of the Architectural Survey of India, said the 'Red Fort' is a "misconception" because although its exterior ramparts are red sandstone "more of the Red Fort is white than people realise." He added that it was not clear whether the British or the Mughals themselves had painted the buildings, but work was currently underway to restore the Naubat Khana, the main gateway to the royal audience hall, to its original white lime plaster. Ratish Nanda, a leading conservation architect, said: "The British did introduce conservation to India, but they also dismantled the system through which these buildings were preserved."

Conclusive evidence
Traces of Mughal lime plaster, an elaborate mixture of lime, gum, bael fruit and marble dust, have convinced Indian conservationists that parts of the fort were once white. Inside the main gates, which was built in the 17th century, the Naubat Khana, or music pavillion, was one of the buildings that has changed colour. The Naubat Khana sits on the eastern side of the ten pillars lane and is the main gateway to the royal audience hall.u00a0An elegant building with twin gazebos on the roof, the building lay dilapidated until the end of the 19th century.

Today it is a dull red colour from its exposed sandstone, but conservationists believe its original plaster may have faded, or been painted over by the British. Others believe the British stopped using traditional masons, whose methods of grinding white marble to make a sparkling lime plaster to save money. "Originally it was white. It wasu00a0 plastered into pink during the British period," said K K Mohammed, superintendent, Archaeological Survey of India.

"Then the plaster wore off and there was water seepage. It was making the monument weak. Now we are removing the old pulverised plasters and putting a new layer of the lamp plaster which wasu00a0 originally used by the Mughals," he said.