the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Ashgate Studies in Architecture Series

series editor: eamonn canniffe, manchester school of architecture,
manchester metropolitan university, uk

The discipline of Architecture is undergoing subtle transformation as design

awareness permeates our visually dominated culture. Technological change,
the search for sustainability and debates around the value of place and meaning
of the architectural gesture are aspects which will affect the cities we inhabit. This
series seeks to address such topics, both theoretically and in practice, through
the publication of high quality original research, written and visual.

Other titles in this series

Materan Contradictions
Architecture, Preservation and Politics
Anne Parmly Toxey
ISBN 978-1-4094-1207-6

A City’s Architecture
Aberdeen as ‘Designed City’
William Alvis Brogden
ISBN 978-1-4094-1147-5

Forthcoming titles in this series

Retailising Space
Architecture, Retail and the Territorialisation of Public Space
Mattias Kärrholm
ISBN 978-1-4094-3098-8

Modernist Semis and Terraces in England

Finn Jensen
ISBN 978-0-7546-7969-1
The Bungalow in
Twentieth-Century India
The Cultural Expression of Changing Ways of Life
and Aspirations in the Domestic Architecture of
Colonial and Post-colonial Society

Madhavi Desai
Architect, ARCHICRAFTS, Ahmedabad, India

Miki Desai
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology University,
Ahmedabad, India

Jon Lang
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
First published 2012 by Ashgate Publishing

Published 2016 by Routledge

2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright© Madhavi Desai, Miki Desai and Jon Lang 2012

Madhavi Desai, Miki Desai and Jon Lang has asserted their rights under the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the authors of this work.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in
any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used
only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

The bungalow in twentieth-century India : the cultural
expression of changing ways of life and aspirations in the
domestic architecture of colonial and post-colonial
society.-- (Ashgate studies in architecture)
1. Bungalows--India--History--20th century.
2. Architecture, Domestic--India--History--20th century.
3. Architecture and society--India--History--20th
century.
I. Series II. Desai, Madhavi, 1951- III. Desai, Miki, 1947-
IV. Lang, Jon T.
728.3'73'0954'0904-dc23
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Desai, Madhavi.
The bungalow in Twentieth-Century India : the cultural expression of
changing ways of life and aspirations in the domestic architecture of
colonial and post-colonial society I by Madhavi Desai, Miki Desai and Jon
Lang.
p.cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4094-2738-4 (hardback) 1. Architecture,
Domestic--India--History. 2. Bungalows--India--History. 3. Vernacular
architecture--India--History. 4. India--Social life and customs--20th
century. I. Desai, Miki. II. Lang, Jon. III. Title.
NA5725.5.I4D47 2011
728' .37309540904--dc23
2011021381

ISBN 13: 978-1-4094-2738-4 (hbk)

 Photographed by Jon Lang in 1995

An early twentieth century Anglo-Indian bungalow, Bengaluru, Karnataka

Contents

List of figures  ix
Preface  xv

1 Introduction: The Bungalow: Its Origins and its Evolution

in Twentieth-Century India  1

PART I The Family House

2 A Point of Departure: Residential Building Types in India

in 1900 – Indigenous and Colonial  11

3 The Utility of the Bungalow as a Precedent for Twentieth

Century Residential Architecture  63

PART II The Evolution of the Bungalow and its

Offspring in the Twentieth Century

4 Suburbanization, Cultural Change and Building Type

Modifications  73

5 Architects, Architectural Fashions and Stylistic Shifts  123

6 Regional Climates and Cultures and House Form:

Diversifying and Homogenizing Factors  163

PART III Postscripts

7 Apartments and Bungalows, Villas and ‘Farm’ Houses  191

8 Conclusion: The Disappearing Bungalow?  209

Bibliography  217
Index 227
List of figures

Frontispiece: An early twentieth century 2.4 A conceptual plan of a Brahmin

Anglo-Indian bungalow, Bengaluru, house in Tamil Nadu
Karnataka
2.5 A typical homestead of the Lower
Preface: A late twentieth century bungalow, Gangetic Delta, West Bengal
Gawara House, Nasik, Maharashtra;
2.6 An ainemane in Kodagu, Coorg,
Somaya and Kalappa, architects
Karnataka
2.7 Suryakaladi Mana, Kerala
1 Introduction
2.8 Building materials and house
The Bungalow: Its Origins and its
form in the Manali and Nagar areas of
Evolution in Twentieth-Century India
Himachal Pradesh
1.1 Antecedents 2.9 Bastis, 1980
1.2 The evolving use of the term 2.10 Jaisalmer, Rajasthan
‘bungalow’ for single family detached
houses 2.11 Jaipur, Rajasthan
2.12 George Town, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
Part I 2.13 The Ahmedabad walled city
The Family House
2.14 The pols of Ahmedabad
A traditional Anglo-Indian bungalow, 2.15 The mohallas in Shahjahanabad
Mesra, Ranchi photographed in 1937 (Old Delhi)
2.16 Bohrwads
2 A Point of Departure: Residential 2.17 Narayanswami’s store in
Building Types in India in 1900 Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu
– Indigenous and Colonial
2.18 The havelis of Shahjahanabad
2.1 The caste structure and plan of
2.19 An Ahmedabadi pol house
Ramanathapuram, Tamil Nadu in 1972
2.20 A Bohra house, Gujarat
2.2 Dev Dholera village, Gujarat
2.21 A Chettinadu house; an ancestral
2.3 Social status and house form in
home, c. 1840
Ramanathapuram, Tamil Nadu
x the bungalow in twentieth-century india
2.22 A Chettinadu house, Athangudi,
Tamil Nadu, c. 1910
2.23 The wada, Maharashtra
2.24 A traditional Chennai house
2.25 Traditional furniture in Gujarat
2.26 Colonel Mark Wood’s map of 1784
and 1785 (north to the left); published by
John Bailie in 1792
2.27 Architecture as understood by the
Public Works Department according to
John Lockwood Kipling
2.28 George Atkinson’s house at the
Waterloo Airport in Sierra Leone, 1941
2.29 ‘Curvilinear huts’, a bungalow and
a European country residence in Bengal.
Details of an aquatint by H. Merkle;
published by Edward Orme in 1805
2.30 An early bungalow, Shillong
(known as Scotland of the East), Assam
(now in Meghalaya)
2.31 An early twentieth-century
bungalow, Tikapore, Bangladesh, 1906
2.32 Hipped and flat roofed bungalow
types
2.33 The evolution of an urban
bungalow: 54 Free School Street (now
Mirza Galib Road), Kolkata
2.34 British villas in Kolkata
2.35 Images of the ways of late-
nineteenth-century British colonial life
in India
2.36 Punka and Punkawalla with an
ayah in the background; drawing by F.N.
Johnson
2.37 The Anglo-Indian bungalow in its
setting
2.38 Verandahs of colonial-era
bungalows today
2.39 Buildings and porticoes as an
indicator of socio-economic status
2.40 Allahabad plan in 1862
2.41 Bengaluru in 1924
2.42 Cantonment areas of Bengaluru in
the 1970s
2.43 Plan of the Peshawar Cantonment
(now in Pakistan), 1870
2.44 The railway colony at Kharagpur,
West Bengal
2.45 Modern trends in the late
nineteenth century
2.46 The influence and adoption of
colonial ways of life
2.47 The palace of Raja Nabakrishna
Deb, North Kolkata, West Bengal
2.48 The Marble Palace, North Kolkata,
West Bengal
2.49 The mansion of Khelat Chandra
Ghosh, North Kolkata, West Bengal, c.
1857, in 2007
2.50 Jagatjit Palace, Kapurthala, Punjab,
1900–10
2.51 Hazarduari Palace, West Bengal,
1837
3 The Utility of the Bungalow as
a Precedent for Twentieth Century
Residential Architecture
3.1 A human needs based model of the
functions of buildings
Part II
The Evolution of the Bungalow and its
Offspring in the Twentieth Century
A bungalow, Ahmedabad, c. 1940
4 Suburbanization, Cultural Change
and Building Type Modifications
4.1 Non family-home bungalows
4.2 New early twentieth century
residential building types
4.3 Early suburban bungalows in
Mumbai, Maharashtra
4.4 Garden houses in Chennai, Tamil
Nadu

4.5 Early twentieth century suburban
streets in Bengaluru, Karnataka
4.6 A house on Street IV, Chamarajpet,
Bengaluru, c. 1910
4.7 A bungalow in Bengaluru possibly
inhabited by Winston Churchill as a
‘chummery’
4.8 Standard plans and elevations of
bungalows in Bengaluru
4.9 Faces of the bungalows of Bengaluru
4.10 Sri Nivas, Alipur Road, Civil Lines,
Delhi, c. 1904
4.11 Plan of the capital complex and
adjacent bungalow areas, New Delhi
4.12 Flagstaff House (now Teen Murti
Bhavan), 1930; Robert Tor Russell,
architect
4.13 Social status and bungalow form
in Imperial New Delhi
4.14 Gazetted officers’ bungalows
4.15 A large family bungalow for a
high ranked British official, c. 1920
4.16 Neo-classical façades, New Delhi
4.17 The Shama Singh House, Kasturba
Gandhi Marg, New Delhi, late 1930s
4.18 The residence of the Turkish
ambassador: the dining room in 2008
4.19 Servants’ quarters and a garage at
the rear of a bungalow, Imperial New
Delhi
4.20 Jamshedpur, Jharkhand
4.21 Suburban layouts of the 1920s and
1930s
4.22 Part plan, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad
developed during the 1920s
4.23 Lalit Kunj, Khar, Mumbai, 1930
4.24 Lalit Kunj: stained glass window
details
4.25 Sutaria House, Ahmedabad, 1929
4.26 Various kitchen arrangements
by socio-economic class, Hyderabad,
Andhra Pradesh
list of figures xi
4.27 Interior furnishings
4.28 New housing forms, Mumbai, 1940s
4.29 A doctor’s home, Mumbai
1940–74; J.R. Talpade, architect
4.30 The Shodhan House, Ahmedabad,
1939; Atmaram Gajjar, architect
4.31 Chandigarh
4.32 Company Towns
4.33 Early post-Independence housing
area designs in New Delhi
4.34 Plotted houses
4.35 Tapuriah bungalow, Barrackpur,
West Bengal
4.36 A modern house in Chennai
compared to the traditional
4.37 The Pereira house, Ahmedabad,
1983; Leo Pereira, architect
4.38 A house in Koramangala,
Bengaluru, 1985–88; Charles Correa,
architect
4.39 Modern interiors and taste cultures
4.40 Late twentieth century kitchens
5 Architects, Architectural
Fashions and Stylistic Shifts
5.1 A.V. Thiagaraja Iyer’s pattern book,
1916
5.2 Grihavidhan and its offspring
5.3 Two Art Deco-inspired bungalows
designed by Gregson, Batley and King,
architects
5.4 Sahani House, Amrita Shergil Marg,
New Delhi, 1920
5.5 Indo-classical domestic architecture
5.6 Sri Sadan: an Indo-classical mansion,
Ahmedabad, 1934; Suthar, architect
5.7 Carpenter Gothic bungalows in
Bengaluru
5.8 Monkey tops, Bengaluru
5.9 Wood craftsmanship in houses in
Mumbai
xii the bungalow in twentieth-century india
5.10 1940s Art Deco bungalows
5.11 Art Deco houses on Mandaveli
Road, Chennai
5.12 Art Deco details in bungalows, c.
1940s
5.13 A house in a mild Art Deco style,
Bhavnagar, Gujarat
5.14 Art Deco interiors, Kolkata, 1943;
Ballardie, Thompson and Matthews,
architects
5.15 Indo-Deco detailing
5.16 The Indian bungalows designed
by Walter Burley Griffin
5.17 Shymali, Shantiniketan, West
Bengal, 1935; Surendranath Kar, architect
5.18 Gandhi’s house in the Sabarmarti
Ashram, Ahmedabad, 1918
5.19 Bapu Kuti, Sevagram,
Maharashtra, 1936
5.20 Punascha and Udichi,
Shantiniketan, West Bengal
5.21 Udayana, Shantiniketan, 1919–28
5.22 Udichi, Shantiniketan, 1936
5.23 A proposed house appropriate for
a nobleman; Sris Chandra Chatterjee,
architect
5.24 Ashok Singh Palace, Kolkata, 1952;
Sris Chandra Chatterjee, architect
5.25 The Ideal Home Exhibition, 1937
5.26 The influence of Frank Lloyd Wright
5.27 Gajjar House, Juhu, Mumbai, 1941;
G.B. Mhatre, architect
5.28 Extension to Chidambaram,
Ahmedabad, 1954; Gira Sarabhai,
architect
5.29 Villa Shodhan, Ahmedabad, 1954;
Le Corbusier, architect
5.30 A model of the Chinubhai
Chimanbhai House proposal, 1951; Le
Corbusier, architect
5.31 The Sarabhai House, Ahmedabad,
1955; Le Corbusier, architect
5.32 The influence of Le Corbusier on
architect-designed bungalows
5.33 Kanvinde House, Delhi, 1967;
Achyut Kanvinde, architect
5.34 J.C. Parikh House, Ahmedabad,
1983; Anant Raje architect
5.35 Pre-Independence and post-
Independence utilitarian ‘bungalows’
5.36 Three examples of the Modern
Indian Vernacular bungalows
5.37 A house on Poonamallee Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai
5.38 Bhakhle House, Pune, 1965; Hema
Sankalia and Pravina Mehta, architects
5.39 Two Neo-Modernist houses;
Anand M. Shirgaokar, architect
5.40 The work of Nari Gandhi, architect
5.41 Shashital house, Talegaon, Pune,
1990s; D. K. Bubbar, architect
5.42 Neo-Vernacular houses
6 Regional Climates and Cultures
and House Form: Diversifying
and Homogenizing Factors
6.1 Climate and house form
6.2 Designing for the climate in
nineteenth century Uttar Pradesh
6.3 A late nineteenth-century bungalow
in Ahmedabad, Gujarat
6.4 Bungalows in the hot-humid
climate of the Andaman Islands, c. 1910
6.5 Two contemporary early twentieth-
century bungalows in Allahabad, Uttar
Pradesh
6.6 Southern Chennai in 1994
6.7 Vernacular houses of Jaisalmer in
the Thar Desert of Rajasthan
6.8 Two bungalows of the late 1920s in
Ahmedabad, Gujarat, a hot-arid zone
6.9 The Holme, Shimla, Himachal
Pradesh, 1900
6.10 Hill towns

6.11 Early twentieth century houses in
the hill stations
6.12 A Modern Indian Vernacular
house in Mount Abu, Rajasthan, 1992;
Barjor Mehta, architect
6.13 Shimla, Himachal Pradesh at the
end of the twentieth century
6.14 Iberian features in early twentieth
century Panaji houses
6.15 Two early twentieth century
bungalows in Goa
6.16 Catholic houses in Goa
6.17 Religion and house form in Goa
6.18 The Portuguese influence in Mumbai
6.19 Pondicherry, Tamil Nadu
6.20 Hirvai, Nadhawade, Maharashtra,
1980–1983; Shirish Beri and Associates,
architects
6.21 The ‘Hamlet’, Nalanchira,
Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala, 1970+;
Laurie Baker, architect
6.22 Kamath house, near Delhi; Revathi
Kamath and Vasant Kamath, architects
6.23 Kundoo House, Auroville, Tamil
Nadu, 1999; Anupama Kundoo, architect
Part III
Postscripts
‘Bungalows-in-the-sky’, Naimesh Park,
Ahmedabad, 1984; Yashwant Mistry,
architect
7 Apartments and Bungalows,
Villas and ‘Farm’ Houses
7.1 Apartment building design, 1930s
to 1990s
7.2 The Babylon Apartments, fifth-floor
plan
7.3 Late twentieth and early twenty-
first century images of bungalows/villas
for sale in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh
7.4 Sham Lal House, New Delhi, 1973;
Raj Rewal, architect
list of figures xiii
7.5 Asiad Village, New Delhi, 1982; Raj
Rewal, architect
7.6 Recreating the mohalla? The work of
Kamal Mangaldas, architect
7.7 Belapur Housing, Navi Mumbai,
Maharashtra, 1982–6; Charles Correa,
architect
7.8 Gated community features
7.9 Emerald Hills, Aluva, Kochi, Kerala
7.10 The Aralias, Gurgaon, Haryana
7.11 Gira Sarabhai’s farm house in
Hansol, near Ahmedabad, Gujarat
7.12 The Pathak Farms, near Delhi,
1980–3; Romi Khosla and others, architects
7.13 The Ankur Orchards development,
near Ahmedabad, Gujarat
7.14 A late twentieth century bungalow
in Shantiniketan advertised for rent in
2008
7.15 The Reddy farm house, near
Whitefield, Bengaluru, Karnataka, 1999;
Yagnik, architects
7.16 The Nitin Killawala farm house,
near Matheran, Maharashtra, Nitin
Killawala, architect
8 Conclusion: The
Disappearing Bungalow?
8.1 Single-family detached homes of
the poor
8.2 Colonial-era bungalows in the
early twenty-first century, Bengaluru,
Karnataka
8.3 The renovated Shah residence,
Ahmedabad Cantonment, Gujarat,
renovation by Rahul Mehrotra
8.4 Charlie’s Villa, Shimla, Himachal
Pradesh, renovation by Khushroo
Kalyanwala
8.5 42 Castle Street, Richmond Town,
Bengaluru, Karnataka, renovation by
Mistry Architects
8.6 The bungalow today?
Preface

India is a vast country. It stretches from its northern mountain chain – the
Himalayas – to Cape Comorin in the south. The regions within it are diverse in
character. There are two coasts to the peninsula, the presence of an extensive
alluvial plain in the north and a plateau in the south which is savannah in
parts and humid forests in others. The plateau is interspersed with rivers
that have created a number of deltas that flow into the Bay of Bengal. The
eastern edge contrasts with the coastal plain on the west – the Arabian Sea
side – which is only 60 kilometers (40 miles) wide before the steep rise of the
Western Ghats. The people of India are equally diverse as are the house forms
that have evolved within the different cultural regions of the country.
A broad range of studies have been conducted on housing types in
India. That is not surprising because there is an extraordinary variety and
complexity to the housing stock in the country. This book sets out to build
on and extend our understanding of this diversity but, in particular, it sets
out to analyse how one type – the bungalow – has shaped and been shaped
to meet the needs and aspirations of middle-class people. Indeed the very
label ‘bungalow’ is now applied in India to a variety of single family homes
that hardly resemble what is generally understood to be a bungalow in the
outside world. The objective here is to describe the assortment of house forms
and their regional variants that were derived from the bungalow as a much-
favoured house type for those who could afford it.
The time period that is the primary focus of this study – the twentieth
century – covers the peak of colonial rule and its total decline as well as the
rise of the new nation state of India. Several dominant social and architectural
ideologies that affected the built environment came and went during the
period. The social processes that have been variously labelled ‘globalization’,
‘westernization’ and ‘modernization’ reshaped middle-income Indian life.
This book attempts to shed light on the various technological, political and
social developments that re-formed the bungalow contemporaneously to
xvi the bungalow in twentieth-century india

the development of modern Indian history during the period of British rule
and its post-colonial aftermath. In tracing this modern history there are often
references to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries because twentieth-
century changes were rooted in the past.
Any new book on the architecture of the bungalow and its urban design
implications builds on the work of prior scholars. This book, in particular,
owes a debt to the scholarship and writings on the bungalow by Anthony
King (1974, 1976, 1995 and 2004). His work was inspirational for us and it led
to our curiosity about how the bungalow developed after middle-class Indian
society adopted it as an ideal house type and adapted it to meet its own ends.
We have drawn on the work of many, many scholars who have written
about the bungalow. For instance, much of our description of the bungalows
in Bengaluru comes from the work of Janet Pott (1977) and the erstwhile
Bangalore Arts Commission. We have also relied on older publications
such as those by A.V.T. Iyer (1926) and by V.C. Mehta (1937). This work
partially parallels Gautam Bhatia’s study of houses, Punjabi Baroque and Other
Memories of Architecture, but our focus of attention is quite different. We have
endeavoured to follow the changing cultural use of space in houses through
much of the turbulent social and political history of twentieth-century
India. In addition, primary data, through the physical and photographic
documentation of houses and settlement patterns and through interviews
with many scholars, were collected in the main urban areas of India. These
centres included Ahmedabad, Bengaluru (formerly Bangalore), Chennai
(formerly Madras), Delhi, Kanpur (formerly Cawnpore), Kolkata (formerly
Calcutta), Lucknow, Mumbai (formerly Bombay) and Pune (formerly Poona).
The goal of the book is to show how changing ways of life and aesthetic
attitudes based on changing aspirations, have shaped the architecture of the
detached house in India. In doing so we are heavily indebted to the work of
Amos Rapoport on house form and culture (1969, 1977, 1984). Other influences
on our arguments are made clear in the body of our text. Our debt to these
studies should be obvious to the most casual reader of this work.
In addition to the debt that we owe others, the story we present here is
founded on our own previous studies. In particular it applies the arguments
on the symbolic nature of the built environment presented in our jointly
authored book, Architecture and Independence: The Search for Identity – India,
1880–1980 published in 1997, to the aesthetics of house form. That study
was funded by the Australian Research Council. This work also continues
the thrust of the studies of house forms in Gujarat conducted by Madhavi
Desai and Miki Desai and, more specifically, Miki’s exhibition catalogue
titled Architektur in Gujarat, Indien (1990). His extensive measured drawings
and photographs of the vernacular architecture of India have provided the
basis for much of this work. The Desais’ joint study of the adaptation and
growth of the bungalow (2005) and Madhavi’s book Traditional Architecture:
House Form of the Islamic Community of the Bohras in Gujarat (2008) have been
major sources of data for our current endeavor. Finally, this endeavour also
 preface xvii

builds on a study on culture and housing form in India funded by the Indo-
US Sub-Commission on Culture and Education and by the American Institute
of Indian Studies at the University of Chicago conducted by Jon Lang during
the 1980s.
As can be seen from the list of references our research drew on many
unpublished studies conducted by students at a number of schools of
architecture in India, but particularly at the Faculty of Architecture, of the
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT) University in
Ahmedabad, where students have been documenting indigenous/regional
traditional architecture in various Indian cultural contexts over the past forty
years. We thank CEPT University and all the other schools for permission to
use the results of their students’ labours. Words of thanks must be offered to
the sponsors of this work. The study The Cultural Expression of the Bungalow in
India: The Colonial Legacy and its Post-Colonial Manifestation, on which this book
is based, was funded by the Getty Foundation of Los Angeles. We are grateful
to CEPT University for providing institutional support for the research project
and for the development of our work. This book was partially prepared at the
University of New South Wales. The indirect financial support of the Faculty
of the Built Environment in its production is very much appreciated.
This research has been enriched by the generous help, hospitality and
support of numerous people in all the Indian cities we visited for field work.
For detailed discussions, we are grateful to Theodore and Thilaka Bhaskaran,
Gautam Bhatia, Partha Sadan Bose, M. N. Buch, Prem Chandavarkar, Malay
Chatterjee, S.L. Chitale, Abhimanyu Dalal, Probal Dev, Edgar D’Mello,
Mariam Dossal, Sharada Dwivedi, Narayani Gupta, Mohammed Haris, K.
Kalpana, J.M. Kapur, Rajkumar Malavia, Dulal Mukherjee, Kamal Mangaldas,
Leena Mangaldas, Anjan Mitra, Prabir Mitra, Tara Murali, S. Muthiah,
Ronobir Palchowdhury, Hasmukh Patel, the late Anant Raje, Deepak Rao,
K.T. Ravindran, Anil Shah, A. Srivathsan, Arun Tikekar and Satya Prakash
Varanasi.
We are indebted to many people for their kind hospitality, arranging for
access to buildings and for other assistance. Among them are Rafique Bagdadi,
Gita Balkrishnan, Durganand Balsavar, Mitrajit Chatterjee, Neeta Das, Samit
Das, Sunil and Marina Gandhi, Gauri Gharpure, Ranjan Gupta, Aparna Jalan,
Pankaj Joshi, Shubha Kanoria, Ruchi Kapoor, Anal Kapadia, Kiran Keswani,
Pratap Khanna, Kalpana and Ashok Korwar, Nipun Kumar, Shefali Poddar,
Ayan Sen, Sujatha Shankar, Sanchita and Gurpreet Singh, Imran Syed and
Lathika Dikshit, K. Tapuriah and Anjali Yagnik.
We have been lucky and grateful to have had excellent research assistants
supporting our work over the years. Kamalika Bose of CEPT University needs
a special mention. She worked on the research report to the Getty Foundation
with complete sincerity, efficiency, dedication and considerable patience. Urvi
Desai and Padmapriya Srinivasan helped with the layout of the report. The
contributions of Dinesh Patel and the office of ARCHICRAFTS (the research
and documentation organization of Miki and Madhavi Desai) were enormous
xviii the bungalow in twentieth-century india

in conducting fieldwork, producing measured drawings and in redrawing

many illustrations from published and unpublished sources. Lorraine Sexton,
an anthropologist, assisted Jon Lang in his fieldwork in India in the 1980s.
We are thankful to Pratyush Shankar of CEPT University for accompanying
and helping Miki Desai on a trip to Uttar Pradesh and for using his contacts
to enrich this study. Mahesh Panchal, Shreya Pandya and Sonal Trajker and
the library staff of CEPT University were very helpful throughout the period
of the research. Catrinel Dunca copy-edited the final report to the Getty
Foundation on which this book is based. Caroline Nute read through drafts
of this book and her observation helped to improve it. We must acknowledge
with gratitude the continued interest in our work shown by Anthony King
including his critical comments on the report that was submitted to the Getty
Foundation. We acknowledge with many thanks the review of the report to
Getty that we solicited from Amos Rapoport. It was of great assistance in
shaping this book. Finally, we are very grateful to Lakshmi Sasikumar for
diligently correcting the proofs of this book.

The Illustrations

Acquiring appropriate illustrations for a book is a challenging task. A number

of people have been extraordinarily helpful in assisting us in our efforts.
They include Neera Adarkar, Krishna Adibhatla, Shashikala Ananth, Gauri
Bharath, Kamalika Bose, Darshan K. Bubbar, Samit Das, Arindam Dutta,
Probal Dev, Rahul Gore, Khushroo Kalyanwala, Kathy Kolnick, Tanuja and
Sanjay Kanvinde, Nitin Killawala, Ashok Lal, Riaz Latif, Kamal Mangaldas,
Renu and Shahrukh Mistry, Ronobir Palchowdhury, Hasmukh Patel, Stephane
Paumier, the Section Engineer (Works) SE Railway (Kharagpur), Archana and
Sanjeev Shah, Dilip and Shishir Shah, Sujatha Shankar, Kartikeya Shodhan,
Brinda Somaya, Joanne Taylor, Aditya Wagle and Anjali Yagnik.
The photographs, diagrams, and drawings, unless otherwise indicated, are
by us or we are their copyright holders, or they are in the public domain. Every
effort has been made to contact and credit the copyright holders of the other
material used. It has been extremely difficult to trace a number of them. We
have no record of the provenance of the illustrations identified as being part
of the ‘Collection of Jon Lang’ or ‘Collection of ARCHICRAFTS’. If copyright
proprietorship can be established for any work not specifically or erroneously
attributed, please contact Jon Lang at the Faculty of the Built Environment,
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia 2052 or jonl@unsw.edu.au.
The authors will be pleased to rectify any errors.
 preface xix

The Outline of the Book

The book begins with a general introduction to the evolving nature of the
bungalow in India. It then moves on to Part I in which a description of the
variety of housing types that existed in India at the beginning of the twentieth
century is presented. It covers the indigenous and colonial, particularly
British, housing types that served as precedents for what were to come in
the twentieth century. The immense variety of vernacular Indian house forms
makes possible only an introduction to the topic compatible with the scope of
this work. The historical development of the bungalow around the world has
been widely documented so is only mentioned in a cursory manner here. Its
nature in India at the beginning of the twentieth century is what is of concern
here.
The central arguments of the book are presented in Part II of the book. The
bungalow, while still existing in its ‘pure form’ as a single storey detached
building with a verandah, has evolved into a number of new types that are
still called bungalows in India. It will come as a surprise to international
readers that even three-storey single family homes are called ‘bungalows’ in
the country. These types are an adaption of many aspects of the standard
bungalow form as it existed at the beginning of the twentieth century. The
changes have been brought about (or have come about) in response to
changing cultural patterns, social meanings and the evolving aspirations of
middle-class Indians. International architectural fashions have also had an
impact on the work of both architects and mistris, traditional contractors and
builders. The fashions have, however, been sifted through a web of indigenous
ways of life and aesthetic attitudes to form a particular form of modernism
(see Hosagrahar 2005).
The climate varies considerably across India so variants of house form
were developed, consciously and unconsciously, to respond to comfort needs
within the country’s different climatic regions. As Amos Rapoport (1969),
however, pointed out, local cultural patterns and aesthetic values often
override what might be regarded a sensible response to local temperature,
wind, rainfall and humidity patterns. There is thus today both a unity and a
diversity of house forms in India. This unity and diversity can be explained;
that is this book’s argument. The unity comes from the idea of the bungalow
as a point of departure; the diversity results from the need to adapt the form
to meet a variety of individual requirements within the resources, financial
and psychological, available to do so. The influences shaping house forms are
political and cultural as well as local and regional.
Part III of the book is short. Its goal is to provide a sense of the array of
house types today that have an ancestry, sometimes obvious but often remote,
in the colonial bungalow. That is where our story ends.
xx the bungalow in twentieth-century india

A Final Note

We three authors have had memorable experiences of growing up or spending

part of our childhoods in bungalows – Madhavi and Miki Desai in Gujarat
and Jon Lang in Bengal and Punjab. Those memories may well be the root of
our fascination!

Madhavi Desai and Miki Desai, Ahmedabad,

Jon Lang, Sydney
February 2011
 Photograph courtesy of Brinda Somaya

A late twentieth century bungalow, Gawara House, Nasik, Maharashtra; Somaya and
Kalappa, architects
1

Introduction
The Bungalow: Its Origins and its Evolution in Twentieth-
Century India

Bun.ga.low\n [Hindi banglo, lit., (house) in the Bengal style]: a

usu. one storied house of the type first developed in India and
characterized by low sweeping lines and a wide varanda.
Webster’s Seventh Collegiate Dictionary, 111

The origins of the single family detached house as a residence can be traced
back two thousand years (King 2004). While its form that we know today
can be said to have had multiple origins two are basic to the Indian context:
the Bengali and the English country houses. The term bungalow as applied
to single family detached houses is, however, clearly Indian, and specifically
Bengali in origin.
The fundamental building type of Bengal was the pavilion. ‘Its singular
persistence as the idea of dwelling (vastu) further clarifies the culture of the
Bengal delta (Haque et al. 1999: 9). It is a freestanding, single room, single
storey structure and consists of a bent roof, a canopy or chhad. This bangla
roof type is a defining element of the Bengali vernacular architecture. The
walls, placed well within the perimeter of the roof, are permeable and the
verandahs, terraces and the semi-enclosed nature of the site reinforce the
pavilion like quality. The materials used were those provided by the delta;
clay is the predominant material but bamboo and timber were also available.
In rural Bengal the house design has not changed much over the past three
centuries although new materials are often employed now and we see less of
the chhad roof form. The hut’s resilience as a type stems from it withstanding
the torrential rain and sheltering its inhabitants from the intense heat of the
sun. While it was and is an impermanent structure it gave the world the term
‘bungalow.’
As defined in Webster’s the word ‘bungalow’ is Anglo-Indian in origin
and derived from the word bangla meaning ‘belonging to Bengal’ or simply
‘of Bengal’ in Bengali and many other Indian languages. As early as 1676
British East India Company officials referred to ‘Bungales or Hovells ... for all
English in the Company’s service’. By 1711 there were references in East India
Company manuscripts to a ‘Dutch bungelow’ on the banks of the Hooghly.
In the eighteenth and early nineteenth century there are references to houses
in India as ‘bungula’ and ‘bungalo’. By the mid-nineteenth century the word
bungalow was in common use. An 1847 description cited by George Edwards
(1907) describes what the bungalow of the era was.

[A detached house] built for the most part of unbaked bricks and covered with
thatch, having in the centre a hall, the whole being encompassed by an open
verandah.
 2 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Collection of Jon Lang Source: Edwards (1907) Collection of Jon Lang

a.The English cottage b. The indigenous Bengali hut c. A larger Anglo-Indian adaptation

1.1 Antecedents The second antecedent of the bungalow form lay in contemporary England
where the single family detached house took two forms: workers’ rural
cottages and the rural villa. John Lockwood Kipling (1837–1911), one time
professor of architectural sculpture at the Sir Jjamshedji Jeejeebhoy School of
Art in Bombay (now Mumbai) believed it was the latter to which the Anglo
Indian bungalow owed much (King 1995).
The workers cottages were small, single-storey in height with one or two
rooms (Loudon 1939, originally 1834). The villa was grander. The term, ‘villa’,
is Italian in origin. It came to be applied to elegant two-storey houses of the
upper-class in rural Britain. In the twentieth century the term ‘villa’ came to
be applied to a variety of houses: detached and semi-detached homes whether
located in rural or suburban areas.

The Meaning of ‘Bungalow’

A 1793 description of bungalow cited in Hobson Jobson confirms what has been
noted above. It runs like this:

Bungalows are the buildings in India, generally raised from the ground, and
consist only of one storey: the plan of them usually is a large room in the centre
for an eating and sitting room and the rooms at the corner for sleeping; the whole
is covered with one general thatch, which comes down low to one side; the spaces
between the angle rooms are viranders or open portices ... sometimes the centre
viranders at each end are converted to rooms (Yule and Burnell 2006, originally 1886).

In much of the English-speaking world today a bungalow still refers to a

detached, generally single-storey dwelling, occasionally with a verandah.
There are departures from this general meaning. In North America, it refers
frequently, to a one and a half storey dwelling, often with an Arts and Craft
style and characteristics. More specifically, in the United States, a bungalow
can be anything from a small two-storey country house, to a building without
dug foundations and large multi-storey such houses. In the west of the country
the Californian bungalow owes much to the New Mexican hacienda, also a
rural house form, of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Reeve 1988).
 introduction 3

Even in India two-storey indigenous and Anglo-Indian bungalows were quite

common (see Figure 1.1c).
These definitions are a point of departure but the meaning of the term
bungalow is interpreted somewhat differently in different places and, in the
twentieth century, in India it came to have a meaning really quite different
from its Bengali origins as it evolved over time and regions.

The Meaning of ‘Bungalow’ in India

The bungalow was originally a dwelling conforming more to a colonial ‘Indo-
European’ than the traditional Indian model (King 1984: 55). In India, and in
Southeast Asia, ‘bungalow’ implies a freestanding, ex-urban dwelling. In the
nineteenth century it was usually considered to be of one storey. Increasingly
in India in the twentieth century, houses of two or more storeys were still
considered to be bungalows. The bungalow form was adopted and adapted
by the indigenous populations in India to suit their needs and taken by British
business people and officials to other parts of the world (see Figure 2.28 for an
example). The word bungalow is, however, now used to describe a variety of
residential building types both in India and elsewhere in the world.
The bungalow in the second half of the twentieth century in India meant
an ‘independent or an isolated dwelling unit’. Examples of bungalows in their
historic context are shown in Figure 1.2. All the houses shown in the figure
are known in India as bungalows except by the most pedantic. The defining
meaning of bungalow was and is a dwelling built within a plot of land that
is clearly defined by boundaries. As such it stands in strong contrast to the
densely-packed urban houses of traditional Indian cities.

Photograph by Miki Desai Photograph by Miki Desai

a. A simple, early bungalow, Mirzapur, Uttar b. A late nineteenth century two-

Pradesh storey bungalow in Bengaluru

Photographed by Tyrrell B. Lang in 1944; © Jon Lang Photograph by Shailini Amin

1.2 The evolving

use of the term
‘bungalow’ for
c. A utilitarian modern bungalow c. 1920 d. A late twentieth-century single family
bungalow in a gated community detached houses
4 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

The bungalow in India was and is a large house surrounded by open space
with trees and garden, enclosed by a wall or a fence. Over time the sites have
shrunk in size and one dwelling is separated from its neighbours only by the
minimum distance specified in building codes designed to stop fire spreading.
The nature of the bungalow was originally a response to the climate having a
high ceiling, being airy and enveloped by a verandah with a European portico
in the front, but in colonial society it soon acquired socio-political meanings of
status. In a post-colonial world it still does.
The buildings and urban designs associated with the colonial enterprise,
of which the bungalow and the residential areas of single family detached
houses sitting in their compounds is highly representative, was a product
of a political and economic system as well as a social and cultural setting
for Anglo-Indian ways of life. The bungalow was a dwelling type that was
absorbed into Indian middle-class life. It evolved in the twentieth century as
ways of life changed due to technological changes, the evolution of family
structures and the roles and expectations of family members. New house
forms emerged from a loose amalgam of antecedents that included not only
the bungalow but other indigenous houses both in overall form and internal
organization. These new forms had antecedents in the various Indian house
styles and internal arrangements of the nineteenth century which, in turn,
were based on earlier ways of life and what were regarded as appropriate.
Over time, the very nature of the bungalow was shaped by the changing
cultural demands of India.

Evolving Cultures and Evolving House Forms

House form and culture are intertwined as are house form and climate
(Rapoport 1969). One of the purposes, indeed the fundamental purpose, of
any building is to provide shelter for a set of activities. Once, however, this
basic need is served well enough, people seek to have their higher aspirations
met (Maslow 1987; see Chapter 3). For this reason the form of houses and their
location in relationship to each other, the services needed by people to meet
their everyday requirements and the aesthetic character of the building often
seem to make little sense from a climatic viewpoint. Houses often seem to
have little relationship to their geographical context although responding to
climatic necessities is always a concern (see Chapter 6). The form of the built
environment at any time in history can be seen as an adaptation – successful
or unsuccessful – of the natural environment by people working within a
cultural frame.
The ways in which houses are configured produce properties that afford
specific behaviours and preclude others. The sum total of the affordances1 of
a configuration, or pattern, is the totality of possible ways it can be used by
people (or other species if they are of interest). Many people are prepared
to tolerate high degrees of physiological discomfort in houses for other,
often symbolic, aesthetic, status-related ends that are perceived to be central
 introduction 5

to their identity. The interior layouts of houses, how they are located in
relationship to each other and to streets, and their exterior appearance – the
face they present to the world – are material representations of a culture. As
behaviour patterns and aesthetic values change so do standard house and
housing forms. The nature of houses at any point in history represents the
contemporary aspirations of their owners to the extent that their resources
– emotional and financial – allow. One of the characteristic developments of
the twentieth century was the rising affluence of the middle class and the
appearance of the consumer society in India. The houses people chose for
themselves reflected this new financial status. A houses is, after all, a symbol
of who one is (Cooper 1974) and of one’s membership within a group, both
socio-economic and cultural.
Many different activities take place within the give and take of family
life. A family serves many purposes that vary by family type and for
different members of the family. These include economic, nurturing, sexual,
educational and ceremonial purposes. They change as the family changes
over time and as the broader culture impinges on family life. In maintaining
and running a household, a number of specific activities are reflected in the
layout of dwelling units. The religious strictures of Hindu and Muslim society
explain much.
The Indian subcontinent has seen a number of waves of migration and three
thousand years of ethnic and religious struggles for power. Throughout its
history India has been a Hindu-dominated country. The Mughals conquered
India and stayed, changing its ethnic and religious composition; Britain
colonized India and while leaving few people behind on quitting the country,
broke the continuance of tradition in many areas of life including house form.
Household activities are not all of equal importance in analysing the
evolution of bungalow types in India during the twentieth century. In some
places in India religious practices have had no impact on the design of houses;
often socio-economic constraints and the availability of cheap materials at
hand have dictated everything. For the poor it is a way of life. This book is,
however, about the middle-class.

The Twentieth Century: The Shift from a Colonial to a Post-Colonial

Society

Cultures change. Sometimes these changes are rapid and at other times
incremental. Some new ideas develop independently within a culture; others
are adapted because they provide the affordances that achieve specific
objectives more easily or more comfortably than existing patterns. Some
patterns are adopted because they are seen as prestigious or fashionable.
The twentieth century was tumultuous for India as it was for much of the
world. There were major movements of people so that in the cities people
of different cultures and socio-economic statuses often lived cheek by jowl.
6 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Some of these migrations were due to economic necessity; others to political

upheavals. These movements, industrialization and political changes and
the general increase in wealth and thus greater opportunities for people to
express themselves have sped the process of cultural change from a pattern
that had previously been slowly evolving. The processes of globalization that
began with the colonial enterprise have sped up the influence of international
architectural ideas.
At the beginning of the century the use of electricity was in its infancy. The
introduction of automobile, radio, telephone and cinema was yet to come.
Refrigerators were unheard of. Change was rapid. All these elements were
part of everyday life for the middle-classes in India by the end of the 1930s.
Ways of family life thus started to change radically. International influences
came thick and fast. People’s aspirations changed. Family structures began to
change; the role of men and women began to evolve. Life began to be turned
upside-down. Radical changes occurred in the size of families, their structure,
the relationship of their members to each other and the roles of servants and
other household members. These aspects of a culture are accommodated to a
greater or lesser extent by the structure of dwelling units and residential areas.
New house forms emerged that showed an amalgam of the bungalow type
with indigenous types. Some of the changes occurred un-self-consciously but
others were highly self-conscious.
Independence in 1947 brought many changes. There have been over 400
new towns built in India since then. These towns include state capitals such as
Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh and Gandhinagar created for political reasons but
also much has been economically driven. New industrial cities such as Bhilai
in Chhattisgarh were built in the 1950s with Soviet assistance. Bhilai now
has a population of over 5 lakhs (five hundred thousand). Many new satellite
towns such as Faridabad near Delhi and Maraimalai Nagar near Chennai
appeared on the scene. Navi Mumbai is a substantial new city in the process
of development across Thane Creek from Mumbai. Salt Lake City grows
outside Kolkata. The number of new company towns built in India since
independence as result of successive government decentralization policies is
substantial. They were built for industries such as steel works, fertilizer plants
and power stations. Major cities expanded into suburban areas. Villages
too saw many changes during the twentieth century. Increased wealth and
electrification brought the outside world into them. Squatter settlements
proliferated in cities. These processes continue into the twenty first century.

The Nature of House Forms

The changing physical nature of buildings and rooms – their walls, floors,
ceilings – during the twentieth century is the central concern in this book.
Their configurations and the relationships of parts to the whole and what
they did and did not afford the families who dwell in them changed during
 introduction 7

the century. The relationship between outside and inside and the connections
between spaces, internal and external, was another sign of changing ways of
life.
Traditional courtyards, verandahs and/or porches changed as new social
structures and new household equipment became available. The changes
made reflect the new interaction patterns within families, and the way day-
to-day activities such as socializing, cooking and ablutions were carried out.
The character of these activities depend on gender roles and the relationship
of family members to each other: the relationships of males and females, the
young and old and members of the household to visitors.
The presentation of the appearance of buildings to the world conveys many
to-whom-it-may-concern messages. They indicate the status of a house’s
occupants, and the nature of a family’s aspirations within its community’s
tolerance for departures from the norm. As the century progressed and
with the coming of political independence attitudes towards the display of
status changed. Gandhian concepts of restraint gave way to more hedonistic
values. The size of a house is an important statement of status as are the way
decorative elements are handled; they show a family’s location within the
social system and its aspirations. These relationships changed over the course
of the twentieth century as did house forms.
The twentieth century saw the emergence of the city planning, architectural
and engineering professions. Many housing areas came to be self-consciously
designed by city planners and civil engineers. Single family houses designed
by architects became popular among the elite although such houses remain
a tiny minority amongst the mistri-designed houses and houses built by their
inhabitants for themselves. This book is about the evolution of the bungalow
in the hands of both architects and lay people.

The Argument

Although much housing development, particularly in rural areas was

untouched by the colonial experience, throughout the twentieth century the
intertwining of indigenous histories and the British influence, for better or
worse, affected much of the social and institutional structure of India. The
impact included attitudes towards housing design and settlement patterns of
which the bungalow as a desirable house type was the most obvious. In cities,
indigenous ideas about neighbourhoods and houses often became mixed with
those of the colonial power. The attitudes of colonial officials were, in turn,
much moulded by indigenous values and norms of behaviour (Hosahgrhar
2005). While architects designed only a miniscule part of the total housing
production of India, their ideas had a significant impact on the work of local
contractor-builders, the mistris. The best example perhaps is the Corbusian
architecture of Chandigarh that appeared in that city after the construction of
the capital complex.
8 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

During the twentieth century reactions to the British and, later, international
ideas about the nature of houses, particularly, those of the Modern Movement
in architecture that had its seeds in Continental Europe, resulted in a self-
conscious examination of indigenous house types. Nationalism and nationalist
ideas came to the fore. The most notable of reactions in the early part of the
century were the ideas promulgated by Rabindranath Tagore at Shantiniketan
in the 1920s and 1930s and those of the Modern Indian Architectural Movement
a decade later. After Independence, ideas about house form were affected
by the ideologies of the European Modernists, such as Walter Gropius and
Le Corbusier, and by the Garden City Movement. Postmodernist ideas held
sway in the late twentieth century.
There was always the climate with which to contend and local mores
continued to dictate much. What has resulted has been a particular variety
of house types, unique to the varying cultures of India. They are both praised
and disparaged on both nationalistic and architectural grounds but need to be
understood. This book seeks to explain the relationship between the changing
values that led the bungalow form to be adapted into the form of single-family
detached houses still called bungalows that we see in India today.

Notes

1 An affordance in this context is the property – shape and material – of an object

or a pattern of built form that allows it to be used by people (or any species of
concern) to meet a particular purpose (Gibson 1979, Lang 1987, Lang and Moleski
2010). There is no such word in the English language but it has slipped into
architects’ vocabularies because it does not imply a deterministic relationship
between the built environment and human behaviour.
Bibliography

Abbas, R.S.H. 2004. The house that Jinnah built. MG: The Milli Gazette (1–15
September); http://www.milligazette.com/archives/2004/01-15sep04-
PrintEdition/011509200404.htm [accessed 20 February 2009].
Altman, I. 1975. Environment and Social Behavior: Privacy, Personal Space, Territory,
Crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Amby Valley City 2008. http://www.facebook.com/group.pjp?=55315816289 [accessed
20 March 2008].
Antão, A.R.A. 1977. Forms and settlement patterns in the regions of Goa.
Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning
and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Architecture in India, 1985. Paris: Electa Moniteur.
Bahga, S., Bahga, S. and Bahga, Y. 1993. Modern Architecture in India. New Delhi:
Galgotia Press.
Batley, C. 1934. The Design Development of Indian Architecture. London: John Tiranti
(reprinted 2002 by Asian Architectural Services, New Delhi).
Beazley, E. 1960. Design and Detail of the Space between Buildings. London: Architectural
Press.
Belnos, S.C. 1832. Twenty Four Plates Illustrative of Hindoo and European Customs.
Republished Calcutta: Riddle-India, 1979.
Bernier, F. 1672. Travels in the Moghul Empire AD 1656–1668. New Delhi: Oriental
Reprints, 1972.
Berreman, G.D. 1972. Hindus of the Himalayas. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Bharat, G. 2005. Evolution of Jamshedpur: the planning process and emerging issues.
Unpublished report submitted to the Jamshedpur Utilities Services Company.
Jamshedpur.
Bhattacharya, M. 2002. Locating identities; residential architecture and the Bengali
elite in Calcutta, mid-eighteenth century to late-nineteenth century. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Bhatia, G. 1984. Jaisalmer: towards an aesthetic ignorance. The India Magazine 4(4): 20–9.
Bhatia, G. 1987. Baker in Kerala. Architectural Review, CLXXXII (1086): 72–5.
Bhatia, G. 1991. Laurie Baker: Life, Work and Writings. New Delhi: Penguin India.
Bhatia, G. 1994. Punjabi Baroque and Other Memories of Architecture. New Delhi:
Penguin Books.
Bhatt, V. 1998. Resorts of the Raj: Hill Stations in India. Ahmedabad: Mapin.
218 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Bhatt, V. 2003. Ahmedabad, in R.S. Sennett (ed.), Encyclopedia of 20th-Century

Architecture, Vol. 1 – A–G. London: Routledge: 30–31.
Bhatt, V. and Scriver, P. 1990. Contemporary Indian Architecture: After the Masters.
Ahmedabad: Mapin.
Bhoosan, B.S. and Misra, R.P. 1979. Habitat Asia: Issues and Responses, Vol. 1. New
Delhi: Concept Publishing.
Bose, K. 2008. Seeking the Lost Layers: An Inquiry into the Traditional Dwellings of the
Urban Elite in North Calcutta. Ahmedabad: SID Research Cell.
Bose, N.K. 1972. Anthropology and Some Asian Problems. Calcutta: ASRAA.
Bubbar, D.K. 2005. The Spirit of Indian Architecture: Vedantic Wisdom of Architecture for
Building Harmonious Places. Bombay: Rupa.
Burton, A. 1997. House/daughter/nation: interiority, architecture and historical
imagination in Janaki Majumdar’s “family history”. Journal of Asian Studies 56(4):
921–46.
Calloway, S., Collins, E. and Powers, A. (eds) 1997. Elements of Style: An Encyclopaedia
of Domestic Architectural Detail. London: Mitchell Beazley.
Campbell, J.M. 1895. Notes on the spirit base of belief and custom. Indian Antiquarian
XXIV: 128+
Campbell, A.C. 1907. Glimpses of Bengal: A Comprehensive Archaeological and Pictorial
History of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Calcutta: Campbell and Medland.
Chang, J-H. 2007. Building a (post)colonial technoscientific network: tropical
architecture, building science, and the Tropical Building Division, in P. Scriver
(ed.), The Scaffolding of Empire. Adelaide: The Centre for Asian and Middle Eastern
Architecture, University of Adelaide, 127–53.
Chatterjee, A.K. 1977. Contemporary Urban Architecture. Delhi: MacMillan.
Chatterjee, R. 1988. Bungalows of my childhood, in T.P. Issar (ed.), The City Beautiful:
A Celebration of the Architectural Heritage of Bangalore. Bangalore: Bangalore Arts
Commission, 220–5.
Chatterjee, S.C. 1942. Magadha Architecture and Culture. Calcutta: Calcutta University
Press.
Chatterjee, S.C. 1948. The Architect and Architecture, Then and Now: An Essay on Human
Planning. Calcutta: Calcutta University Press.
Chatterjee, S.C. 1949. India and the New Order. Calcuta: Calcutta University Press.
Chattopadhayay, D.P. 1979. Santiniketan Uttarayan. Translated from the Bengali by L.
Majumdar and S. Roy. Santiniketan: Bandana Chattopadhyay.
Chattopadhayay, H. 1990. From Marsh to Township East of Kolkata. Kolkata: K.P. Bagchi
& Co.
Chattopadhyay, S. 2006. Representing Calcutta: Modernity, Nationalism and the Colonial
Uncanny. London: Routledge.
Chauhan, M. and Bose, K. 2007. A History of Interior Design in India, Vol. 1: Ahmedabad.
Ahmedabad: SID Research Cell.
Chaudhuri, S. (ed.) 2005. Calcutta: the Living City, Vol. 2: The Present and the Future.
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Chopra, P. 2007. Reconfiguring the colonial city: recovering the role of local
inhabitants in the construction of colonial Bombay, 1854–1918. Buildings and
Landscapes 14 (Fall): 109–25. http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/buildings_and_
landscapes/v014/14.1chopra.html [accessed 25 March 2008].
Churchill, W. 1930. The Early Life: A Roving Commission. London: T. Butterworth.
Contractor, H. 1968. Study of old houses, Ahmedabad. Unpublished undergraduate
diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Cooper, C. 1974. The house as image of self, in J. Lang, C. Burnette, W. Moleski and D.
Vachon (eds), Designing for Human Behavior: Architecture and the Behavioral Sciences.
Stroudsburg, PA: Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, 130–46.
Correa, C. 1996. Charles Correa. London: Thames and Hudson.
 bibliography 219

Correa, C. 1999. Housing and Urbanisation. Bombay: Urban Design Institute.

Curtis, W.J.R. 1988. Balkrishna Doshi: An Architecture for India. Ahmedabad: Mapin.
Dalvi, M. 2000. G.B. Mhatre’s architecture and its time, in K. Iyer (ed.), Buildings
that Shaped Bombay: Works of G.B. Mhatre (1920–1973). Mumbai: Kamla Raheja
Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture and Environmental Studies and Urban
Design Research Institute, 14–21.
Danby, M. 1980. The Islamic architectural tradition and the house, in A. German (ed.),
Islamic Architecture and Urbanism. Dammam: King Feisal University.
Das, N. 1983. Santiniketan Guide Book. Santiniketan: Chandrima Das.
Davies, P. 1985. Splendours of the Raj: British Architecture in India, 1660–1947. London:
Murray.
Delhi Town Planning Committee 1913. Final report on the Town Planning of the New
Imperial Capital. London: H.M. Stationery Office.
Desai, Madhavi, (ed.) 2007a. Gender and the Built Environment in India. New Delhi:
Zubaan.
Desai, Madhavi 2007b. Women and architecture: the colonial bungalow in Gujarat,
1920–1970, in Madhavi Desai (ed.), Gender and the Built Environment in India. New
Delhi: Zubaan, 146–68.
Desai, Madhavi 2007c. Traditional Architecture: House Form of the Islamic Community of
the Bohras in Gujarat. Pune: Council of Architecture.
Desai, Madhavi and Desai, Miki 1993. Grihvidhan: A discourse of house form.
Architecture + Design X(2): 43–7.
Desai, Madhavi and Desai, Miki 1998. The adaptation and growth of the bungalow in
India, in A. Petruccioli (ed.), European Houses in the Islamic Countries: Journal of the
Islamic Environmental Design Research Centre, Como, Italy: 104–21.
Desai, Miki 1990. Architektur in Gujarat Indien. Bauernhof, Stadthaus. Zürich: Museum
Rietberg.
Desai, Miki (in progress). Architecture of Kerala; a Tradition in Wood.
Desai, Miki and Desai, Madhavi 2005. The cross-cultural expression of the bungalow
typology in India: The colonial legacy and post-colonial modernism. Proceedings:
Re-thinking and Reconstructing Modern Asian Architecture. Istanbul: MAAN, 268–74.
De Santa Rita Vas, M.I. 2007. Constructing the self in other spaces; leisure, art and
spaces for women, in Madhavi Desai (ed.), 2007a. Gender and the Built Environment
in India. New Delhi: Zubaan, 30–52.
Deshpande, S.P. 1994. Shirgaonkar and Associates: A functional aesthetic. Architecture
+ Design (December): 54–67.
Dey, P. 2005. Sense of making a home: A study of villages in Bolpur, West Bengal.
Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning
and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Dixon, W. 2003. Morocco and Vietnam: Colonial Agents of Modern Urbanism,
Unpublished master’s thesis, University of New South Wales, Sydney.
Doctor, S.K. 1982. Influence of European architecture on Indian architecture.
Unpublished diploma dissertation, Centre for Environmental Planning and
Technology, Ahmedabad.
Doshi, H. 1974. Traditional Neighbourhood in a Modern City. New Delhi: Abhinav.
Dutta, K. 1984. Calcutta: A Cultural and Literary History. Northampton, MA: Interlink
Books.
Dwivedi, S. and Mehrotra, R. 2001. Bombay: The Cities Within. Bombay: The India
Bookhouse.
Dwivedi, S. and Mehrotra, R. 2008. Bombay Deco. Mumbai: Eminence Designs.
Editors 1989. Profile: Romi Khosla. Mimar 30 (December): 29–51.
Edwards, G.W. 1907. The word “bungalow”: whence it came and what it has come to
mean. Indoor and Out, 4(1): 13–15.
220 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Evenson, N. 1989. The Indian Metropolis: View Towards the West. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Foley, T. 1993. The Romance of the Colonial Style. London: Thames and Hudson.
Fonseca, R. 1969. The walled city of Old Delhi. Landscape 18(3): 12–26.
Futagawa, Y. 1974. GA-32: Global-Architecture; Le-Corbusier: Sarabhai House, Ahmedabad,
India 1955; Shodhan House, Ahmedabad, India, 1956. Tokyo: ADA Edita Tokyo Co.
Futehally, L. 1988. House and home in Bangalore, in T.P. Issar, The City Beautiful:
A Celebration of the Architectural Heritage of Bangalore. Bangalore: Bangalore Arts
Commission, 262–3.
Gaekwad, F., Maharaja of Baroda, 1987. The Palaces of India. London: Collins.
Gibson, J.J. 1979. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gillion, K. 1968. Ahmedabad: A Study in Urban History. Berkeley and Los Angeles:
University of California Press.
Glimpses of a shattered bungalow c. 2008. For the Second Anniversary of India Hello,
Bangalore Walla Namaskara. http://www.geocities.com/athens/acrospolis/9449/ajjj.
htm [accessed 27 February 2009].
Glover, W. 2004. A feeling of absence from old England: The colonial bungalow. Home
Cultures 1(1): 61–82.
Gooptu, N. 2001. The Politics of the Urban Poor in Early Twentieth-Century India.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gore, R. 1996. The work of Nari Gandhi. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis,
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Grant, C. 1862. Anglo-Indian Domestic Sketch: A Letter from an Artist in India to his
Mother in England. Calcutta: Subarnarekha.
Grover, S. 1995. Building Beyond Borders: Story of Contemporary Indian Architecture. New
Delhi: National Book Trust.
Grover, S. 1967. Jaisalmer in Jantar: Souvenir Publication of the School of Planning and
Architecture. New Delhi.
Hakim, B.S. 1986. Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles. London: KPI.
Haque, S.U., Ahsan, R. and Ashraf, K.K. (eds) 1999. Pundranagar to Sherebanglanagar;
Architecture in Bangladesh. Dhaka: Chetana Sthapatya Unnoyon Society.
Haris, M. 1984. Head, School of Architecture, Anna University, Chennai. Personal
interview by Jon Lang.
Harmani, P. 1970. Medieval town planning in India. Unpublished undergraduate
diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Hatcher, B. A. 1999. Eclecticism and Modern Hindu Discourse. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Hathi, R. 1981. Indian architecture: From traditional to contemporary – a study of
turbulent phases. Unpublished diploma dissertation. Centre for Environmental
Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Hosagrahar, J. 2005. Indigenous Modernities: Negotiating Architecture and Urbanism.
London: Routledge.
Huitt, W.G. 2004. Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. Educational Psychology
Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. http://chiron.valdosta.edu/
whuitt/col/regsys’maslow.html [accessed 10 April 2006].
Hussey, C. 1950. The Life of Sir Edwin Lutyens. London: Country Life.
Iengar, K.N. 1987. Buildings of Bangalore. Unpublished paper.
Iengar, K.N. 1994. Education for Architecture: Programme for Concord. Mysore: Academy
of Art and Architecture.
Iengar, K.N. 1996. Composing Architecture. Mysore: Academy of Art and Architecture.
INTACH 2004. Architectural Heritage of Pondicherry – Tamil and French Precincts.
Pondicherry: Aurobindo Press.
Irving, R.G. 1981. Indian Summer: Lutyens, Baker and Imperial Delhi. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
 bibliography 221

Issar, T.P. (ed.) 1988. The City Beautiful: A Celebration of the Architectural Heritage and
City Aesthetics of Bangalore. Bangalore: Bangalore Arts Commission.
Iyer, A.V.T. 1926. Indian Architecture, Vol. III. Madras: A.V.T. Iyer and Son.
Iyer, K. (ed.) 2000. Buildings that Shaped Bombay: The Work of G.B. Mhatre, FRIBA,
1902–73. Mumbai: Kamla Raheja Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture and
Environmental Studies and Urban Design Research Institute, 70+.
Iyer, P. 1993. Shahjahanabad, the dwelling environment; physical manifestation and
its socio-cultural meaning. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis. Centre
for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Jain, A.K. 1994. The Cities of Delhi. New Delhi: Management Publishing.
Jain, K. and Jain, M. 1994. Indian City in the Arid West. Ahmedabad: AADI Centre.
Jain, M. 1982. Eclectic elements: Bohra homes of Siddhpur, in J. Pieper and G. Michell
(eds), The Impulse to Adorn: Studies in Traditional Indian Architecture. Bombay:
MARG Publications, 43–54.
Kanhere, G.K. 1982. Traditional motifs in house ornamentation, in J. Pieper and
G. Michell (eds), The Impulse to Adorn: Studies in Traditional Indian Architecture.
Bombay MARG Publications, 56–62.
Karlekar, M. 2005. Re-visioning the Past: Early Photography in Bengal 1875–1915. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Karve, I. 1965. Kinship Organization in India. Bombay: Asia Publishing House.
Kennedy, M. 2004. Inside the gates. Old Town Review (February). http://www/
fluxfactory.org/otr/kennedygates.thm [accessed 20 March 2009].
Khan, M. 1998. Cultural transfers; the re-possession of architectural form. European
houses in the Islamic countries. Environmental Design: Journal of the Islamic
Environmental Design Research Centre 1–2 (1994–1995): 84–103.
Khular, A. 1981. Riots; the dynamics of physical spaces. Unpublished master’s thesis,
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.
Kindred M. 2008. An energy efficient house in Kerala. http://www.ecospace.cc/
pg/blog/mkindred/read/1129/anenergyefficienthouseinkeralaindia?annoff=25
[accessed 6 March 2009].
King, A.D. 1974. The colonial bungalow-compound complex: A study in the cultural
use of space. Sociology 8(1): 81–100.
King, A.D. 1976. Colonial Urban Development: Culture, Social Power and Environment.
London: Routledge.
King, A.D. 1984. The Bungalow: The Production of a Global Culture. New York: Oxford
University Press.
King, A.D. 1995. The Bungalow: The Production of a Global Culture, Second Edition. New
York: Oxford University Press.
King, A.D. 2004. Spaces of Global Culture: Architecture Urbanism Identity. London:
Routledge.
Kipling, J.L. 1884. India architecture today. Journal of Indian Art 1(3): 1–5.
Koshy, G. 2007. Is it do or die for our cities? News Center, 5 June. http://www.
moneycontrol.com/india/news/lifestyle/is-it-do-or-die-for-our-cities/285043
[accessed 6 March 2009].
Krishna, N. 1984. Adapted to today. Inside–Outside 36(April–May) 27–51.
Kruty, P. 1998. Creating a modern architecture for India, in A. Watson (ed.), Beyond
Architecture: Marion Mahony and Walter Burley Griffin; America, Australia, India.
Sydney: Powerhouse Publishing, 38–69.
Kumar, A. 2007. Socio-cultural aspects and change in the Tamil Brahman House-
form; a study of the houses in the temple town of Srirangam between 1900–2000.
Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning
and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Kumar, S. 2008. Free from India? Gated communities are zones immunised to
mess around. Secession? Gurgaonscoop. http://www.gurgaonscoop.com/
222 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

story/2008/8/19/42332/3114 [accessed 20 March 2009].

Lal, N.D. (compilor and editor) 2006. Calcutta: Built Heritage Today; an INTACH Guide.
Kolkata: INTACH Calcutta Regional Chapter.
Lang, J. 1987. Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in
Environmental Design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Lang, J. 1988. Cultural implications of housing policy design in India, in S. Low
and E. Chambers (eds), Culture, Housing and Design: A Comparative Perspective.
Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 375–92.
Lang, J. 1996. Indian Subcontinent IV: Urban Planning, in J. Turner (ed.), Dictionary of
Art (15). London: MacMillan, 408–11.
Lang, J. 2002. A Concise History of Modern Architecture in India. New Delhi: Permanent
Black.
Lang, J., Desai, Madhavi and Desai, Miki 1997. Architecture and Independence: The
Search for Identity – India 1880 to 1980. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Lang, J. and Moleski, W. 2010. Functionalism Revisited: Architectural Theory and Practice
and the Behavioral Sciences. Farnham: Ashgate.
Langlès, L. 1821. Monuments Anciens de L’Hindoustan. Paris.
Le Corbusier in India. Exhibition Catalogue of Le Corbusier: Architect of the Century
(1987). Architecture + Design (September–October), whole issue.
Legg, S. 2007. Spaces of Colonialism: Delhi’s Urban Governmentalities. Malden, MA:
Wiley-Blackwell.
London, G. (ed.) 2004, Houses for the 21st Century. North Clarendon, VT: Tuttle.
Loudon, J.C. 1939, originally 1834. An Encyclopaedia of Cottage, Farm and Villa
Architecture and Furniture. London: Longman.
Maslow, A. 1987. Motivation and Personality, Third Edition. Revised by R. Frager, J.
Fadiman, C. Reynolds and R. Cox. New York: Harper and Row.
Mayer, A.C. 1960. Caste and Kinship in Central India: A Village and its Region. Berkeley
and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Mehrotra, R. and Dwivedi, S. 2000. Anchoring a City Line: The History of the Western
Suburban Railway and its Headquarters in Bombay (1899–1999). Mumbai: Eminence
Design.
Mehta, N. 1998. Indo-Saracenic style – An exception in Bombay; study of the
General Post Office. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for
Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Mehta, V.C. 1939a. Gramavidhan or village planning. Paper contributed to the Second
All India Self Government Conference, Calcutta, 28–30 December, copy.
Mehta, V.C. 1939b. Grihavidhan. Bhavnagar: City Improvement Office.
Menon, A.G.K. (n.d.). The Contemporary Architecture of Delhi: A Critical History. Delhi:
Architecture Imprints. http://www.architexturez.net/+/subjscet-listing/000179.
shml [accessed 18 June 2008].
Metcalf, T.R. 1989. An Imperial Vision: Indian Architecture and Britain’s Raj. London and
Boston: Faber and Faber.
Michell, G. and Shah, S. 1988. Ahmedabad. Bombay: Marg Publications.
Mittal, N. 2002. The colonial bungalows of Bangalore; a study of characterization
through ornamentation. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis. Centre for
Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Modern Architecture Research Group (MARG) 1947. Creative architecture or
regressive revivalism? Journal of the Indian Institute of Architects 15(4): 77.
Moorhouse, G. 1984. India Britannica. London: Paladin.
Muthesius, H. 1904. Das Englishe Haus, Berlin: Weismuth. Published in English as The
English House, edited by D.Sharp and translated by J. Seligmann. London: Crosby,
Lockwood Staples.
Nair, J. 2007. The Promise of the Metropolis: Bangalore’s Twentieth Century. New Delhi:
Oxford University Press.
 bibliography 223

Nandy, A. 1983. The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Naqvi, H.K. 1968. Urban Centres and Industries in Upper India 1556–1803. London: Asia
Publishing House.
Natarajan, R. 1980. Rural habitat in Tamilnadu and proposals of houses in
Thirmukkaodal. Unpublished bachelor’s thesis, University of Madras.
Nilsson, S. 1968. European Architecture in India, 1750 to 1850. London: Faber and Faber.
Nilsson, S. 1973. The New Capitals of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. London: Curzon
Press.
Oldenberg, V.T. 1984. The Making of Colonial Lucknow, 1856–1877. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Pandit, H. and Mascarenhas, A. 1999. Houses of Goa. Bardez: Architecture
Autonomous.
Pandya, Y. and Rawal, T. 2002. The Ahmedabad Chronicle: Imprints of a Millennium.
Ahmedabad: The Vastu Shilpa Foundation.
Patel, B.H.1995. The space of property capital: property development and architecture
in Ahmedabad. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at
Berkeley.
Patel, G. 1976. Dwelling clusters in South India. Unpublished undergraduate diploma
thesis. Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Payne, G. 1977. Urban Housing in the Third World. London: Leonard Hill.
Pereira, J. 1995. Baroque Goa: The Architecture of Portuguese India. New Delhi: Books &
Books.
Pieper, J. 1987. Cantonment towns and bungalows. Inside–Outside (April–May): 110–16.
Pott, J. 1977. Old Bungalows in Bangalore. Bangalore: South India.
Pramar, V.S. 1982. Traditional woodwork in secular architecture, in J. Pieper and
G. Michell (eds), The Impulse to Adorn: Studies in Traditional Indian Architecture.
Bombay: MARG Publications, 23–42.
Prince, C. 2005. Continuity and change in a traditional house form; case study:
Chettinadu Mansions, Tamil Nadu. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis,
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology. Ahmedabad.
Prithi, A. 1991. Designing with freedom. Inside–Outside 82: 98–120.
Raje, A.D. 2000. G.B. Mhatre’s architecture and its time, in K. Iyer (ed.), Buildings that
Shaped Bombay: Works of G.B. Mhatre, FRIBA (1902–1973). Mumbai: Kamla Raheja
Vidyanidhi Institute of Architecture and Environmental Studies, 12–13.
Ramachandran R. 1989. Urbanization and Urban Systems in India. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Ramchandhani, R. 1999. The home. Inside–Outside 170 (July), 158–66.
Rao, C.H.G. 2006. House Plans for Midsize Plots. Chennai: The Author.
Rapoport, A. 1969. House Form and Culture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rapoport, A. 1977. Human Aspects of Urban Form. New York: Pergamon.
Rapoport, A. 1982. The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Non-Verbal Communications
Approach. London: Sage Publications.
Rapoport, A. 2005. Culture Architecture Design. Chicago, IL: Locke Science.
Rau, N.L. 1988. Origin and growth of Basavangudi, Bangalore, in T.P. Issar (ed.), The
City Beautiful: A Celebration of the Architectural Heritage of Bangalore. Bangalore:
Bangalore Arts Commission, 226.
Raut, M. 1999. Genesis and evolution of a traditional house form as a cultural idiom:
Pesha Wadas, a Maratha way of life. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis,
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Recommended bungalows: bungalows for sale, Hyderabad (2008). Http://www.
exclventures.com/Gb224.asp [accessed on 20 March 2009].
Reeve, A. 1988. From Hacienda to Bungalow: North New Mexico Houses: 1850–1912.
Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
224 the bungalow in twentieth-century india

Rewal, R. 1985. The relevance of tradition in Indian architecture, in Architecture in

India. Paris: Electa Moniteur, 12–23.
Robinson, A. 1994. A poet’s vision: the houses of Rabindranath Tagore, in C.W.
London (ed.), Architecture in Victorian and Edwardian India. Bombay: MARG
Publications, 117–30.
Rogers, E.M and Shoemaker, F.F. 1971. Communication of Innovation: A Cross-Cultural
Approach, Second Edition. New York: The Free Press.
Rosselli, J. 1980. The self-image of effeteness: physical education and nationalism in
Bengal. Past and Present 86 (February), 121–48.
Ruparel, M. 2004. Proportioning systems as an ordering principle: An inquiry into
the works of architect Anant D. Raje. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis,
Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Sachdev, V. and Tillotson, G. 2002. Building Jaipur: The Making of an Indian City.
London: Reaktion Books.
Sahai, V. 1967. Lessons from tradition. RIBA Journal (March): 110.
Santayana, G. 1896. The Sense of Beauty. Reprinted in 1955. New York: Dover.
Scriver, P. 1994. Rationalization, standardization and control in design: A cognitive
historical study of architectural design and planning in the Public Works
Departments of British India, 1855–1901. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Delft, The Netherlands.
Sengupta, S. 2008. Inside gate, India’s good life; outside the servants’ slums. The New
York Times (9 June). http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/09/world/asia/09gated.html
[accessed 20 March 2009].
Shah, K. 1972. Organizational patterns; social and physical. Unpublished
undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning and
Technology, Ahmedabad.
Shah, K.S. 1976. Evolution and principles of furniture design in India. Unpublished
undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning and
Technology, Ahmedabad.
Sharar, A.H. 1929. Lucknow: The Last Phase of an Oriental Culture. (Republished;
London: Paul Elek. Translated and edited by E.S. Harcourt and F. Hussain, 1974).
Shastri, S.K. 1970. Study methodology of design as described in the ancient-Indian
texts on architecture. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for
Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Singh, U. 1966. Allahabad: A Study in Urban Geography. Varanasi: Banaras Hindu
University.
Sinha, A. 1999. Women’s local space; home and neighbourhood, in S. Sutherland (ed.),
Bridging Worlds: Studies on Women in South Asia. Center for South Asian Studies,
University of California at Berkeley.
Sinha, A. 1999. Bungalows of Lucknow Cantonment, India. Open House International
24(2): 56–63.
Sinha, A.C. 1984. India’s outer darkness. Why the North-East is estranged. The Sunday
Statesman CXXIV (34467) (4 March): 6.
Solanki, B.N. 1968. Urban spaces in Indian cities. Unpublished undergraduate
diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.
Somaya, B. and Mascarenhas, P.V. 2005. Silent Sentinels: The Traditional Architecture of
Coorg. Mumbai: The HECAR Foundation.
Srinivas, M.N., Seshaiah, S. and Parthasarathy, V.S. (eds) 1977. Dimensions of Social
Change in India. New Delhi: Allied Publishers.
Srinivas, M.N. 1966. Social Change in India. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Srivastava, S. 1982. Colonial residential development; a study of New Delhi.
Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for Environmental Planning
 bibliography 225

and Technology, Ahmadebad.

Staley, E. 1981. Monkey Tops: Old Buildings in the Bangalore Cantonment. Bangalore:
Tara Books.
Steele, J. 1998. The Complete Works of Balkrishna Doshi: Rethinking Modernism for the
Developing World. London: Thames and Hudson.
Taylor, B.B. 1992. Raj Rewal. London: Mimar Publications.
Taylor, J. 2006. The Forgotten Palaces of Calcutta. Calcutta: Niyogi Books.
Taylor, J. 2008. The Great Houses of Kolkata. Unpublished master’s thesis, University
of New South Wales, Sydney.
Thomas, P. 1975. Hindu Religion, Customs and Manners. Bombay: Taraporevala Sons.
Tillotson, G.H.R. 1989. The Tradition of Indian Architecture: Continuity, Controversy and
Change since 1850. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Vadgama, K. 1984. India in Britain: The Indian Contribution to the British Way of Life.
London: Robert Royce.
Vasool, N. 1982. Domestic kitchens. Unpublished bachelor’s thesis, Jawarharlal Nehru
Technological University, Hyderabad.
Vernon, C. 2007. Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony Griffin: From Canberra to
Lucknow (via Perth). The Architect (Autumn): 10–13.
Villas in Gated Community in Kerala 2008. http://www/harithavens.com/ [accessed 20
March 2009].
Volwahsen, A. 2002. Imperial Delhi: the British Capital of the Indian Empire. Munich:
Prestel.
Welandawe, H. and Perera, A. 2007. Men, women and architecture: gender identities
and the appropriation of space, in Madhavi Desai (ed.), Gender and the Built
Environment in India. New Delhi: Zubaan, 169–88.
Weirick, J. 1988. The Magic of America: vision and text., in J. Duncan and M. Gates
(eds), Walter Burley Griffin: A Review. Clayton, Vic: Monash University Gallery:
5–14.
Wright, G. 1991. Introduction to Hill Stations of India. Hong Kong: Odyssey.
Yule, H. and Burnell, A.C. 2006, originally 1886. Hobson Jobson: A Glossary of Colloquial
Terms, Etymological, Historical, Geographic and Discursive. New Delhi: Asian
Educational Service.
Zaki, S. 1989. Residential open spaces; a study of Muslim residential areas in
hot climatic regions. Unpublished undergraduate diploma thesis, Centre for
Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.