“A human dwells in an environment he experiences meaningful.” - Anthony K., Anthony C.

 

Since the beginning, civilization has sustained in different clusters of varied ethnicities and communities. Over a period of time and with the evolving nature of intellect, the communities established their own set of ideas, beliefs, and morals of conduct. These ethnic groups were later broken down into joint families living in one house. Hence, the human behavior of such a construct was different from today's nuclear families. It was not unusual to have a family of 20-30 living with brothers, sisters, aunts, and grandparents under the same roof a few years back. This type of social structure impacted the spatial organization of their habitats. There was a sense of sharing as a value within the people of the community, where one felt other person's priority as important as their own, a sense of security that one does not need to worry when their near ones are watching out for them. (Doshi & Bader, 2019) The architecture that evolved out of such behavior was still enough to notice the life around them and listen to the continuity of the people's routine.

 

Traditional Indian settlements with distinct neighborhoods evolved as a response to a sense of familiarity and security. Each neighborhood followed the same religion and had similar occupations. Their second names, now what we call surnames, reflected their work and the community they belonged to, for example, Mistry (a carpenter), Daruwala, or Patidar (a land owner). Physically, these clusters are usually a closed network system with a single entrance, where the houses open into the narrow streets (galis) of the habitats. The houses are two to three-storeyed, with two parallel walls in common with the next house in a row. Hence, the possibility of openings is either on the side of the meandering street or a small (service) gali on the back. This dense fabric opens up at specific intervals to form open spaces for communal activities. 

 

A relationship between the spatial organization and the social structure of the habitats can be determined through the behavioral patterns of the inhabitants. Every form of Vernacular architecture responds to needs, accommodating values, economy, and ways of life of the user. (Adebayo et al., 2013) As a part of the analysis of human behavior within such enclosed communities, a linear structure in the hierarchy is seen in the houses, from public to semi-public to private spaces. An organic distinction of marked territory forms with each adjacent space. 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

One such distinct settlement of the Vohra (Bohra) community is seen in parts of Gujarat, like Surat, Siddhpur, and Kapadvanj, called Vohrawad. Vohras are a minority, converted Muslims who used to be traders during colonization. The Britishers partnered with these traders and helped them build their communities and houses. Their clusters grew in two ways: organically with the city pattern and a gridiron layout; however, they followed the same idea of row houses built next to each other. Each of these settlements has a mosque, an assembly hall, a travelers lodge, and a community hall for any sacred ceremonies or festivals. 

​

The facades of the Vohra row houses have prominent variations of European styles in their architectural elements, such as brackets, columns, cornicing, finely carved wood, and motifs as a result of their relationship with the Britishers. Being the minority as a relatively newer community in the context, they manifested their prosperity through the ornamented facades. The portico is raised 75 cm above the street level and opens into an anteroom (delhi). The anteroom and the internal courtyard are separated by a light screen, where one sees stairs directed towards the first floor to the formal sitting area. The periphery around the courtyard, called the 'Bahar ni Parsal,' now looks down to the court and connects 'Andar ni Parsal' (the rooms). The last room of the house, at the most interiors, is called 'Ordo.' The spatial narrative transcends from a public to the most private space of the house with order, reiterating the concept of hierarchical social behavior in a community habitat. The court on the ground floor is used for domestic activities or daily chores, ventilation, and a significant light source. (Doshi & Bader, 2019)

The traditional Pol houses of Ahmedabad similarly follow a linear structure of houses with an open-to-sky courtyard since they share the same origin of roots. However, what highly differentiates the identity of the houses is their cultural, social, and religious resemblance in elements translated in a marginally literal manner. In a Vohra house, one might encounter a cupboard on an extreme rear wall with nine squares called 'Navkhand' representing Islamic traditions. In contrast, a 'Hichko' (traditional wooden swing) is surrounded by intricately carved cabinets of teakwood over a niche in a Pol House. 'Daglo,' known as the attic windows, is used by children and grandmothers as a recreational space to read and interact with the people next door in Pol house; however, due to certain social norms in the Vohra Community, a similar activity was not observed back then.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Culture in a community represents a means and a method of getting accommodated within, representing a way of life of a particular group. The built are made as products of this social structure of the living that pursues their cultural identity. In conclusion, such responsive architecture to a certain ethnicity can be examined in three ways: spatial experience, approach to construct (with materials), and cultural symbolism. These factors make the spatial experience tangible and place it in context, shaping its unique identity.

​

​

​

​