INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4474
www.rsisinternational.org



The Missing Link between Colonial Jack Arch Roofing and

Indigenous Construction Practices in India

Adithyalakshmi Suresh., Narasimman. R

School of Planning and Architecture Vijayawada, India

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.120800405

Received: 07 Oct 2025; Accepted: 15 Oct 2025; Published: 22 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This research critically examines the hybridization of the Jack Arch roofing system within the context of

colonial India, where British engineering intersected with indigenous construction traditions. While Jack

Arches are often treated as purely colonial imports, this study argues for a more nuanced understanding of

their localized adaptation. The research identifies a gap in architectural historiography, where the Jack Arch is

seldom recognized as a culturally negotiated outcome shaped through collaboration and necessity. By

analysing archival engineering manuals and Public Works Department records, this paper reveals how local

craftsmen modified imported engineering practices using vernacular materials such as hand-moulded bricks,

lime mortar, and region-specific construction logic. These adaptations not only improved the climatic

suitability and cost-effectiveness of the system but also established a new architectural language that merged

colonial structural rationalism with indigenous craftsmanship. The study uses a comparative framework to

contrast Jack Arches with traditional roofing systems such as Madras Terrace, bamboo thatch, and stone slabs

evaluating them through parameters like thermal performance, construction skill, durability, and cost. In doing

so, it offers evidence of a conscious and regionally grounded architectural transition during the colonial era.

The findings underscore the relevance of these hybrid systems in both heritage conservation and the

development of sustainable, resource-efficient architecture in present-day India.

Key words: Jack Arch, colonial construction, indigenous techniques, hybrid architecture, British India,

vernacular adaptations, architectural conservation.

INTRODUCTION

The architectural landscape of colonial India was shaped by a dynamic interplay between imported

technologies and indigenous knowledge systems. Among the many structural innovations introduced by the

British, the Jack Arch roofing system emerged as a prominent feature in railway quarters, administrative

buildings, and institutional structures due to its fire resistance, structural efficiency, and cost-effectiveness.

Traditionally viewed as a colonial imposition, the Jack Arch system has seldom been studied as a product of

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4475
www.rsisinternational.org



collaboration or adaptation. This research challenges the dominant narrative by examining how Jack Arches

were not merely transplanted but transformed engineered with local materials like hand-moulded bricks and

lime mortar and implemented by skilled Indian craftsmen whose vernacular expertise shaped its final form.

While literature on colonial infrastructure has documented the spread of European engineering methods,

limited attention has been given to the regional improvisations and hybrid techniques that emerged through

this cultural and technical exchange. the study identifies a critical gap in architectural historiography, the

absence of focused analysis on Jack Arch systems as culturally negotiated constructs rather than standardized

colonial forms. Through a comparative investigation of historical documentation and conservation efforts, this

paper aims to uncover the pluralistic evolution of the Jack Arch in India. In doing so, it contributes to broader

conversations around heritage, sustainability, and the revaluation of intermediate technologies in postcolonial

built environments. to investigate the hybrid evolution, spatial use, and conservation challenges of colonial

jack arch roofing systems in India by uncovering their indigenous adaptations, regional variations, and current

architectural relevance. Critically investigate how the British-introduced Jack Arch roofing system was

adapted, modified, and hybridized through the integration of indigenous Indian construction materials,

climate-responsive techniques, and craftsmanship thereby reframing it not as a mere colonial imposition, but

as a collaborative and regionally evolved architectural form. this paper focuses on the evolution and

transformation of the Jack Arch roofing system in India during the British colonial period. It examines the

architectural, material, and cultural adaptations that occurred when this British engineering technique was

implemented in the Indian context. The study is limited to the analysis of archival documentation, engineering

manuals, and comparative assessments of traditional Indian roofing systems, excluding detailed regional case

studies or primary fieldwork. It places emphasis on understanding the Jack Arch not merely as an imported

structural form, but as a hybridized system that absorbed indigenous influences and construction practices.

The paper does not aim to provide structural calculations, restoration blueprints, or region-specific building

surveys, but rather seeks to contribute a theoretical and historical framework for recognizing intermediate

colonial technologies as part of India’s architectural heritage.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Jack Arch roofing system was first developed in 18th-century Europe as a fireproofing solution for

industrial floors and roofs. Characterized by shallow masonry arches spanning between parallel iron or steel

beams, the technique gained popularity during the Industrial Revolution for its fire resistance, load-bearing

capacity, and structural economy (Fletcher, 1905). The system was introduced to colonial India by British

engineers in the mid-19th century, particularly through infrastructure projects under the Public Works

Department (PWD). Sir George Buchanan’s Treatise on Civil Engineering in India (1859) detailed the

technical specifications of Jack Arches, promoting them as suitable alternatives to timber structures in

institutional and infrastructural buildings across India. These included railway quarters, government offices,

and military barracks (Buchanan, 1859; Metcalf, 1989). Despite their advantages, the use of Jack Arches in

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4476
www.rsisinternational.org



India required significant adaptation. Imported materials such as steel joists and Portland cement were

expensive and often inaccessible in remote regions. Moreover, the diverse climatic zones of the Indian

subcontinent from humid coastal areas to arid interiors posed challenges to unmodified European construction

techniques (Sahapedia, 2020; Sohoni, 2021). To address these challenges, Indian masons and craftsmen began

modifying the Jack Arch using locally available materials such as hand-moulded bricks and lime-surkhi

mortar. Traditional knowledge systems informed decisions on thermal performance, waterproofing, and

structural resilience. These adaptations allowed the system to meet regional climatic demands and reduced

dependency on expensive imports (INTACH, 2010; ASI, 2015–2020). Thus, in India, the Jack Arch evolved

from a standardized colonial technology into a hybrid architectural solution shaped by material pragmatism,

environmental responsiveness, and indigenous agency.

Evolution of the Jack Arch Roofing System

18th Century Europe (1780s) Jack Arches first developed in Europe, particularly in Britain, as a fire-resistant

structural system for industrial floors and roofs. Constructed using shallow brick arches set between iron or

cast-iron beams.

Source: Yeomans, D. T. (1992). The Trussed Roof: Its History and Development. Scholar Press. 19th Century

Industrial Revolution (Europe) (1830s–1850s) Widespread use of iron I-beams and brick vaults in mills,

warehouses, and factories across Britain. (Addis, B. 2007). Phaidon Press. 1859 - Sir George Buchanan’s

Treatise on Civil Engineering in India describes the use of Jack Arch systems for colonial buildings, praising

their structural efficiency and fire resistance. (Buchanan, G. 859). Mid–Late 19th Century Arrival in India

(1850s–1870s) British engineers introduce Jack Arches into Indian colonial architecture, especially in railway

infrastructure (stations, workshops, staff quarters), barracks, and public works. (Arif, M. K. 2019). (1870s–

1890s) Indian adaptations emerge: Locally made bricks replace imported ones.Lime mortar is used instead of

Portland cement due to availability and climate performance. (Davies, P. 1985). Early 20th Century

Vernacular Adaptations 1900s–1920s -Jack Arch construction popularized in worker and institutional

housing, such as those by Tata Steel (TISCO) in Jamshedpur. Adaptations for Indian climate (e.g., drainage

for monsoons, improved thermal performance) (Lang, J., Desai, M., & Desai, M. 1997). 1930s–1940s

Transitional hybrids: Jack Arches combined with Madras terrace roofing for climate control and durability.

(Tillotson, G. 1989). Post-1947 post-Independence India 1950s–1980s -Decline in usage due to the rise of

RCC (Reinforced Cement Concrete). Architect Laurie Baker explores low-cost construction techniques

including Jack Arch-inspired methods. (Baker, L. 1991). 1990s–2010s -Conservation efforts by INTACH and

ASI focus on preserving early 20th-century Jack Arch buildings in cities like Kolkata, Chennai, and

Bangalore. (INTACH, 2005). Contemporary (2020s–Present) Renewed architectural interest in Jack Arches

for: Sustainable construction, vernacular hybrid technologies & academic curricula in heritage conservation

and climate-resilient architecture Encouragement of documentation, thermal efficiency analysis, and revival

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4477
www.rsisinternational.org



for low-income housing. (Nair, J. 2021).

Construction Of Typical British Jackarch Roofing

The British procedure for the construction of jack arches, developed in the 19th century during the Industrial

Revolution, was primarily intended to provide fireproof, durable, and load-bearing floor and roof systems for

industrial and colonial buildings. The process began with the placement of cast iron or wrought iron joists,

typically spaced 3 to 4 feet apart, which acted as the structural frame and springing point for the arches.

Wooden centering or shuttering was then temporarily erected between these joists to form the underside

curvature of the jack arch. This centering could be supported either from the joists or independently from the

floor below, but it was essential to ensure that the joists were not overloaded during construction.The jack

arches themselves were constructed by laying burnt clay bricks on edge using lime mortar (1:3) or cement

mortar (1:4). The arches were usually shallow and segmental in shape, and the bricks were sometimes cut or

tapered to maintain uniform joints and curvature. Once the arches were keyed at the crown to lock them in

place, the spandrel spaces or haunches between the arch and the top flange of the joists were filled using lime

concrete, rubble, or broken brick aggregate in lime mortar. Over this, a leveling course of lime concrete,

approximately 75 mm thick, was laid to prepare for the final floor or roof finish, which could be brick tiles,

stone slabs, or timber battens depending on the building’s function.Curing was a critical step, where the

structure was kept moist for 7–10 days before gradually removing the centering to allow the load to transfer to

the arches. This technique was especially favored for its fire-resistant qualities, making it ideal for textile

mills, warehouses, railway stations, and colonial structures in India and other British territories. The system

combined the modular strength of iron with the availability and economy of brick and lime, making it suitable

for adaptation in different climates and regions. Historical sources such as The Builder journal (19th century

UK), and colonial Public Works Department manuals provide detailed documentation of these techniques,

which later influenced Indian construction practices and standards like IS: 2541–1974.


Fig1: A typical form of jack arch slab and its details

Construction Of Indegenous Jack Arch Roofing In India

Construction of Jack-Arches The construction of jack-arches begins with the erection of centering, which is

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4478
www.rsisinternational.org



essential to support the arch work placed between joists. This centering must be smooth and conform

accurately to the required curvature. It may be supported either from the joists themselves or independently

from the floor below, but it must not bear upon any tie rods. Temporary supports can be provided to the joists

to prevent sagging during the arch construction process. Brickwork for the Jack Arch Bricks, as prepared

according to the specified standards, are laid on edge in a cement mortar mix not leaner than 1:4 (cement:

sand by volume), or an equivalent lime mortar. These bricks spring from the bottom flange of the joists and

form the arch over the centering. Joints at the bottom shall not exceed 10 mm in thickness. Once the

brickwork is laid, it should be kept moist for curing and allowed to set for a minimum of 10 days before any

concrete is laid over it. The centering used for jack-arches is eased after 7 days if constructed with cement

mortar, and after 10 days if constructed with lime mortar, just before the laying of lime broken brick aggregate

concrete. Laying of Lime-Concrete After the arch has adequately hardened, a layer of lime-broken brick

aggregate concrete is laid. This concrete mix typically follows the ratio of 1:2+ (slaked lime: broken brick

aggregate by volume). Alternatively, a mix of lime, pozzolanic material, and fine aggregate in the ratio of

1:1:1 may be used, following the standards outlined in IS:2541-1974 or as detailed in Appendix B. This

mixture is spread to an initial thickness of 75 mm over the crown of the arch. The concrete is then compacted

using wooden rammers weighing no more than 2 kg, reducing the consolidated thickness to approximately 60

mm. Further compaction is achieved through hand beating using wooden hand beaters until the surface

becomes firm and the beater bounces off without leaving an impression. Workers must beat the surface

lightly, in rhythm, while moving forward in closely arranged rows. During this process, the surface is kept

moist by sprinkling lime water mixed with sugar solution or herbal solutions like KADUKAI (Hararh) or

jaggery-GUGAL mixtures. Traditional Additives for Compaction Traditional compaction practices include

using herbal and natural additives. For instance, in northern India, a sugar solution is made by mixing around

3 kg of jaggery and 1 kg of Bael fruit in 100 litres of water. A solution of KADUKAI or HARARH is

prepared by breaking the dried nuts into pieces and soaking them in water with 200 g of jaggery, using 60 g of

KADUKAI or HARARH per 40 litres of water for 10 m² of work. The mixture is brewed for 12 to 24 hours

before use. Alternatively, jaggery and GUGAL are soaked in water (50 g each in 40 litres of water per 10 m²

work) to form another effective compaction aid. Finishing and curing if the surface becomes uneven and

water pools during compaction, it must be pricked and fresh concrete added and consolidated again to ensure

evenness. Finally, the surface is cured by regular sprinkling of water and is allowed to harden for no less than

six days before any flooring or roofing finish is applied. The culturally and materially negotiated

transformation of Jack Arch roofing into a hybrid architectural form shaped by indigenous craftsmen, local

materials, and contextual performance needs. It includes use of vernacular materials like lime-surkhi mortar,

hand-moulded bricks, shell lime, and admixtures, integration with local craftsmanship and techniques (e.g.,

modifications in arch rise, bonding patterns), climatic adaptation, such as enhancing thermal comfort in

hot/dry or humid regions, construction improvisations, such as combining Jack Arch logic with Madras

Terrace finishes.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4479
www.rsisinternational.org



Case studies on Indian Context Jayalakshmi Vilas Mansion, Mysore


The Jayalakshmi Vilas Mansion, built in 1901–1905 by Maharaja Chamaraja Wodeyar IV near Kukkarahalli

Lake in Mysuru, is a grand example of classical European architecture in South India. While its design is

visibly colonial evident in its Ionic/Corinthian detailing and arched porticos it also features a jack-arch roofing

system, particularly noticeable in its iconic grand ballroom. Structural & Material Characteristics, Jack-Arch

Roof Structure The ballroom boasts a 40-foot-high ceiling formed by shallow brick jack arches spanning

between iron or timber joists, supporting a glass-panelled dome. Local Materials & Craftsmanship Despite its

European formal design, the roofing reflects indigenous material use Hand-moulded regional bricks, likely

produced locally, shaped and assembled by Mysuru masons accustomed to arch vault work. Lime-based

mortar, used instead of cement, enhanced compatibility with native bricks and the humid climate. Glass

skylights, possibly imported but stored in locally fabricated iron frames, then embedded over low brick arches

and waterproofed using indigenous sealing techniques Roof Integration The jack-arch base allows natural

light through skylights while holding waterproofing layers and concealing structural elements. The adaptation

demonstrates how colonial structural logic (arch spans, iron supports) and vernacular roofing tradition (brick

vaulting, plaster finishes) merged seamlessly. In Jayalakshmi Vilas, the missing link is the material-cultural

synthesis The palace's roof melds colonial structural intent (fireproofing, load distribution) with local

craftsmanship and materials (brick vaulting traditions of Mysuru). The ballroom’s custom skylight assembly

resting on jack-arched brick vaults exemplifies how British engineering cherry-picked indigenous execution

methods, resulting in a hybrid form a colonial shell animated by local substance. Interpretation The

Jayalakshmi Vilas Mansion’s roofing system doesn’t simply replicate a colonial template it reinterprets and

actualizes it through regional expertise. This amalgamation validates your thesis: colonial technology was

hybridized through indigenous traditions, and the missing link is that collaborative intersection made visible

in this building’s roof.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4480
www.rsisinternational.org




British Residency , Koti Hyderabad

Constructed: 1803–1805 under Lt. Samuel Russell of the Madras Engineers, commissioned by British

Resident James Achilles Kirkpatrick. Style, Neo-Palladian, designed to be Hyderabad’s version of the “White

House” Current State: Adaptively reused as the Koti Women’s College; conserved in a multi-decade project

led by the World Monuments Fund and ASI Composite Structural Roof Although originally specified with

iron joists and cement, the actual implementation used locally available lime and mud mortar, hand-pressed

bricks, and teakwood beams, as confirmed by heritage surveys. Situated in a hot, hazy urban climate with

monsoon rains, jack-arched roofs were lime-finished and topped with waterproof terrace layers, blending

colonial arched systems with Madras Terrace functionality.

Lahore (Now Pakistan) – Railway Quarters & Barracks (1900–1940)


Historical Context Between 1900 and 1940, Lahore was a vital node in British India's expanding railway

network. As the headquarters of the North-Western Railway (NWR), Lahore saw rapid development of

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4481
www.rsisinternational.org



Railway quarters for officers and staff, Military barracks and armories & Support infrastructure like

workshops and storehouses. British engineers prioritized cost-effective, durable, and fireproof construction,

making Jack Arch roofing a key architectural feature in this infrastructural wave. Jack Arch Roofing System:

Colonial Intent The railway quarters were standardized using, Segmental brick arches spanning between cast

iron or rolled steel I-beams, Fireproof ceilings that protected against heat and combustion hazards from coal-

burning stoves and Minimal timber use due to termite risk and scarcity in Punjab. Plans were often drawn in

regional public works offices following the British PWD manuals, with input from engineers based in

Lahore’s engineering school and NWR headquarters, Indigenous Adaptation: Materials & Methods Despite

colonial standardization, Lahore’s builders made numerous local modifications, resulting in a hybrid

construction system, Materials Used Hand-pressed Punjabi bricks (larger and more porous than British

bricks), moulded locally in kilns near Wagah and Kasur. Lime-surkhi mortar, widely used in Punjab,

composed of Slaked lime Burnt brick powder (surkhi) Sometimes mixed with organic additives like guggal

resin or molasses to improve water resistance. Plaster finishes composed of lime, mud, and natural oils to

improve internal insulation and reduce hairline cracks in vaulted ceilings. Construction Techniques Variable

arch spans: Adjusted on site depending on available brick size and spacing of beams. Reinforcement with tie

rods was sometimes introduced in longer spans a local innovation not standard in British jack arch design.

Roofs were covered with lime concrete and china mosaic to prevent water seepage during the monsoon.

Climatic & Cultural Performance Lahore’s hot semi-arid climate required durable roofing that could

Withstand high summer temperatures (often >45°C) Resist monsoon damage and humidity-related decay

Provide passive cooling in staff housing the indigenous lime mortar and plastering allowed for thermal inertia,

reducing indoor heat load while remaining permeable enough to prevent moisture buildup. The Jack Arch

system in Lahore became a cultural-technical hybrid structured by British logic, but materially and

climatically governed by Punjabi traditions. The “missing link” here is the vernacularisation of British

construction, where Indian masons worked within structural constraints but localized every material and

finish. Colonial blueprints became skeletons animated by indigenous labor, craft, and climatic intelligence.

Comparison With Other Indigenous Roofing

Traditional Indian roofing systems exhibited deep environmental intelligence and regional adaptation. Their
comparison with the adapted Jack Arch system underscores the architectural negotiation between imported
engineering and indigenous practice. Madras Terrace Widely used in Tamil Nadu; this system consisted of
timber joists overlaid with brick-on-edge courses and lime plaster. It offered moderate thermal comfort but
required significant maintenance, particularly in coastal climates where waterproofing frequently failed. The
heavy reliance on timber made it susceptible to decay and termite damage, limiting long-term performance
(Sahapedia, 2020).

Bamboo and Thatch Roofs Common in Bengal and northeastern India, these roofs used flexible, low-cost
materials suited to high rainfall. They performed well thermally due to low thermal mass but were highly
perishable, requiring frequent replacement. While environmentally sustainable, they lacked structural
longevity and were mainly confined to vernacular domestic buildings (Hardy, 2007). Stone Slab Roofing Used
in arid regions like Rajasthan, large stone slabs were laid over beams to form robust, thermally stable robust,

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4482
www.rsisinternational.org



thermally stable roofs. These systems performed excellently in dry climates and were nearly maintenance-

free. However, the roofs were heavy, expensive to construct, and limited in design flexibility, requiring skilled

stonemasonry (Venu, 2010). Hybrid Jack Arch System the Jack Arch, as adapted in colonial India,

combined British structural logic with local materials such as hand-molded bricks and lime mortar. Supported

by steel or iron joists, it offered excellent fire resistance, reduced reliance on timber, and required less

maintenance than Madras Terrace roofs. Unlike stone slabs, it allowed wider spans, and unlike thatch, it was

permanent. Its adoption represents a pragmatic vernacularizing of colonial building systems (Buchanan, 1859;

INTACH, 2010). Kerala Timber Roof (Sloped Mangalore Tile Roof) In Kerala and parts of coastal

Karnataka, the sloped Mangalore tile roof emerged as a significant adaptation to monsoon-heavy

environments. These roofs were constructed using seasoned timber rafters and clay tiles arranged on steeply

pitched frames, enabling efficient rainwater runoff. The integration of ventilated attic spaces also facilitated

passive cooling in humid tropical climates. This roofing system embodied a synthesis of local timber

craftsmanship and colonial-era tile-making technologies. Patra (Leaf Roof) In the tribal belts of Odisha and

Central India, Patra roofs composed of large sal or palmyra leaves tied over bamboo frameworks were widely

used. Extremely lightweight and biodegradable, these roofs were ideal for temporary or seasonal dwellings,

reflecting ecological sensitivity and the nomadic traditions of the communities that built them. Chhajja Roof

Extension (Overhanging Eaves) Chhajja roof extensions, found across North India in Mughal and Indo-

Islamic architecture, consisted of overhanging eaves supported by elaborately carved stone or timber brackets.

These provided critical shading and rain protection and were often incorporated into larger terrace systems,

demonstrating a blend of ornamentation and function. Brick Vaulted Roofs (Pre-Colonial & Islamic

Influence) Another pre-colonial form, brick-vaulted roofing, was prevalent in Mughal-era structures across

regions such as Delhi and Awadh. Built using burnt brick and lime mortar arranged in arches or domes, these

roofs embodied advanced masonry techniques and represented a structural precursor to the Jack Arch. They

were commonly seen in mosques, caravanserais, and public baths. Mud and Reed Roofs In the arid regions of

Gujarat and Rajasthan, particularly in vernacular circular dwellings like the Bhunga, roofs were built from

mud and reed. These structures were thermally insulative, offering protection from extreme desert heat, and

often incorporated dome-like forms for stability and spatial efficiency. Slate Roofing In Himalayan regions

such as Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, slate roofing was common. Flat slate tiles laid over wooden

rafters created steeply pitched roofs capable of withstanding snow loads. These roofs not only performed

exceptionally well in cold climates but also made use of locally quarried stone and skilled craftsmanship.

These varied roofing systems highlight the ingenuity of traditional Indian builders in negotiating

environmental challenges through material and structural innovation. Against this rich backdrop, the localized

Jack Arch system can be understood as one among many regionally adapted responses to evolving

architectural demands during the colonial period.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis between other traditional roofing systems

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4483
www.rsisinternational.org



Roofing
System

Region Materials
Used

Structural
Logic

Climate
Suitability

Construction Skill
Required

Durability Maintenance
Needs

Source

Jack Arch
(Hybrid)

Pan-India
(Colonial
Sites)

Brick
voussoirs,
lime
mortar,
iron/steel
joists

Shallow
arches
between
steel beams

High
thermal
mass;
dry/hot
regions

Moderate (trained
masons)

High Low Buchanan
(1859);
INTACH
(2010);
ASI
(2015–
2020)

Madras
Terrace

Tamil Nadu,
Andhra
Pradesh

Timber
joists,
brick bats,
lime
plaster

Layered flat
roof

Moderate;
vulnerable
to
humidity

High (traditional
masons)

Medium High
(frequent
plastering)

Sahapedia
(2020)

Bamboo &
Thatch

Bengal,
Northeast
India

Bamboo,
palm
leaves,
rope

Lightweight,
flexible
framing

Excellent
for rainfall;
poor in
heat

Low (vernacular
skills)

Low High Hardy
(2007)

Stone
Slabs

Rajasthan,
Karnataka

Stone
slabs on
wooden or
stone
beams

Post-and-
slab
spanning

Ideal for
arid zones

High
(stonemasonry)

High Low Venu
(2010)

Mangalore
Tile Roof

Kerala,
Coastal
Karnataka

Timber
rafters,
clay tiles

Sloped
rafter-based
structure

Excellent
for
monsoons;
ventilated

High (carpentry) Medium Moderate Sahapedia
(2020)

Leaf
(Patra)
Roof

Odisha,
Chhattisgarh

Palm or
Sal leaves
over
bamboo
framing

Light,
temporary
over bamboo
frame

Moderate
rain
protection

Low
(tribal/vernacular)

Very Low Very High Hardy
(2007)

Brick
Vaulted
Roofs

North India
(Mughal
areas)

Burnt
bricks and
lime
mortar

Vaulted
arches or
domes

Stable
across
climates

High (vault
specialists)

High Medium Metcalf
(1989);
INTACH
(2010)

Slate
Roofs

Himachal,
Uttarakhand

Slate tiles,
timber
battens

Pitched roof
with
overlapping
tiles

Excellent
for snow
and rain

High (hill
construction)

High

This comparative overview illustrates the pluralism and ingenuity of India's roofing traditions. The hybrid Jack
Arch system occupies a unique middle ground: it bridges colonial structural rationalism with local material
logic. Its relative permanence, structural resilience, and adaptability made it distinct from more ephemeral or
climate-specific vernacular systems. While traditional roofs emphasized local resource use and craftsmanship,
the Jack Arch offered a structurally efficient and low-maintenance alternative that was modified through
indigenous knowledge. This nuanced comparison repositions the Jack Arch not as a foreign import but as an
assimilated architectural technology shaped by cross-cultural dialogue.

CONCLUSION

This study concludes that the Jack Arch roofing system, far from being a simple instrument of colonial
construction, evolved into a sophisticated hybrid form through its engagement with the Indian subcontinent.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4484
www.rsisinternational.org



The paper has demonstrated that its transformation was driven by the pragmatic ingenuity of local craftsmen,
who adapted British engineering with regional materials, vernacular building logic, and a deep understanding
of climate. The use of hand-moulded bricks, lime-based mortars with traditional additives, and integration with
other roofing finishes were not minor alterations but fundamental reinterpretations that created a new,
culturally embedded architectural language. By tracing this evolution, this research challenges the dominant
historiography of colonial architecture, replacing the narrative of a one-way transfer of technology with a more
nuanced story of collaboration, adaptation, and indigenous agency. The Jack Arch thus represents a crucial
"missing link" connecting imperial structural rationalism with the material and environmental realities of India.
The implications of this re-evaluation are twofold. First, it enriches our approach to heritage conservation,
urging us to recognize and preserve these hybrid systems as unique testaments to a shared architectural past.
Second, and perhaps more urgently, it provides a valuable precedent for contemporary sustainable design. The
adapted Jack Arch serves as a time-tested example of climate-responsive, low-carbon building that prioritizes
local resources and craftsmanship model directly relevant to the architectural challenges of today. Ultimately,
the Jack Arch is a powerful metaphor for architectural dialogue: a structure built from both blueprints and
experience, embodying a confluence of empire and ecosystem.

REFERENCES

1. Addis, B. (2007). Building: 3000 Years of Design Engineering and Construction. Phaidon Press.
2. Arif, M. K. (2019). [Full Title of Work, e.g., Journal Article or Book Chapter]. [Publisher/Journal

Information].
3. Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). (2015–2020). [Specific Report or Publication Title, e.g., Annual

Reports]. Government of India.
4. Baker, L. (1991). Laurie Baker: Life, Work, Writings. Penguin Books.
5. Buchanan, G. (1859). A Treatise on Civil Engineering in India.
6. Bureau of Indian Standards. (1974). IS 2541: Code of Practice for Use of Lime Concrete in Buildings.
7. Davies, P. (1985). Splendours of the Raj: British Architecture in India, 1660-1947. John Murray.
8. Fletcher, B. (1905). A History of Architecture on the Comparative Method. Batsford.
9. Hardy, A. (2007). [Full Title of Work on Vernacular Architecture]. [Publisher/Journal Information].
10. Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH). (2005). [Title of Specific Charter or

Conservation Guideline]. INTACH.
11. Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage (INTACH). (2010). [Title of Specific Report or

Publication]. INTACH.
12. Lang, J., Desai, M., & Desai, M. (1997). Architecture and Independence: The Search for Identity—

India 1880 to 1980. Oxford University Press.
13. Metcalf, T. R. (1989). An Imperial Vision: Indian Architecture and Britain's Raj. University of

California Press.
14. Nair, J. (2021). [Full Title of Work, e.g., Journal Article or Book Chapter on Sustainable Architecture].

[Publisher/Journal Information].
15. Sahapedia. (2020). [Title of Specific Article, e.g., "Madras Terrace Roofs"]. Retrieved from

https://www.sahapedia.org.
16. Sohoni, P. (2021). [Full Title of Work on Indian Construction Techniques]. [Publisher/Journal

Information].
17. Tillotson, G. H. R. (1989). The Tradition of Indian Architecture: Continuity, Controversy, and Change

Since 1850. Yale University Press.
18. Venu, M. (2010). [Full Title of Work on Rajasthani Architecture or Stonemasonry]. [Publisher/Journal

Information].
19. Yeomans, D. T. (1992). The Trussed Roof: Its History and Development. Scholar Press. Arif, S., Khan,

A., Nadeem, O., & Anwer, A. (2013). Jack Arch: The Back-bone of British Colonial Residential
Buildings in India. Pakistan Journal of Science, 65(3), 352–354.

20. Sahapedia. (2020). Native Roofing Systems of South India. Retrieved from http://www.sahapedia.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION (IJRSI)
ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |Volume XII Issue IX September 2025

Page 4485
www.rsisinternational.org



21. Sohoni, P. (2021). Colonial and Modern Architecture in India. Oxford Bibliographies.

doi:10.1093/obo/9780190922467-0051H.
22. Vellinga, M. (2007). Vernacular Architecture and the Challenges of the Future. Architectural Theory

Review, 12(3), 145–164.
23. Metcalf, T. R. (1989). An Imperial Vision: Indian Architecture and Britain’s Raj. Faber and Faber.
24. Buchanan, G. (1859). A practical treatise on civil engineering in India. John Weale.
25. Fletcher, B. (1905). A history of architecture on the comparative method. B.T. Batsford.
26. Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage. (2010). Heritage building survey reports (Various

cities: Chennai, Pune, Kolkata).
27. Hardy, A. (2007). The temple architecture of India. Wiley.
28. Archaeological Survey of India. (2015–2020). Annual conservation reports. ASI.
29. Venu, R. (2010). Laterite in South Indian architecture. Journal of South Asian Studies, 33(2), 123–141.
30. Laurie Baker Centre for Habitat Studies. (n.d.). Low-cost building materials and techniques.
31. In dian standard Code of practice for Construction of jack-arch type of Built-up floor or roof.