Storia do Mogor 12.p2

12.p2

In 1898 I came across some articles in the Gazette des Beaux Arts, January to June, 1897, p. 281, by Monsieur E. Blochet, on 'Miniatures des MSS. Mussulmanes'; and for one of his reproductions, a portrait of Dawar Bakhsh, alias Bulaqi, grandson of Jahangir, he gave as his authority 'Voyage de Manucci.' In March, 1899, being then in Paris, my friend Mr. H. Beveridge kindly made an examination for me, from which there could be no doubt that it was the identical volume that Zurla in 1818 declared had been mislaid, but, to speak more exactly, that had been carried off by the French in 1797 as part of their Italian booty.
I have since seen the book myself. It forms part of the collection in the Cabinet des Estampes at the Bibliothèque Nationale, and it is classed as O.D., No. 45 (reserve). It is now bound in red morocco, impressed with gold imperial eagles at the corners. Evidently it was rebound at Paris after 1797; but the embossed lozenge-shaped stamp of the San Marco Library, cut out of the old calf binding, is inserted in the centre of the new covers. The lining is of pale blue satin with gold edging. It is labelled outside 'Histoire de l'Inde depuis Tamerlank jusqu'a Orangzeb, par Manucci,' and bears the year 1712. Inside is the ex-libris of San Marco, bearing the same name (Geronimo Veniero) and the same year (1722) as that in Codex XLIV. (Zanetti) at Venice. Opposite each picture is a description of it in French. Of these an Italian version is found at Venice in Codex Class VI., No. cccxlv.; they are evidently the composition of Manucci. Most of the portraits are very characteristic; those of Aurangzeb and Shiva Jī may be specially noted. Those of Shah 'Alam and the other sons of Aurangzeb, as those of persons known to Manucci, ought to be authentic. The two pictures devoted, one to the kings of Gulkhandah and the other to the kings of Bijapur, strike me as very life-like, and probably also authentic.
As an introduction to his descriptions, Manucci says : ' Before I left the Mogul dominions ' [that is, before 1686], ' to satisfy my curiosity I caused portraits to be painted of all the kings and princes from Taimur-i-lang to Aurangzeb, including the sons and grandsons of the last named, together with the portraits of the rulers over Bijapur and Gulkhandah, of some of the chief Hindu princes, and of other famous generals. The artist was a friend of mine, Mir Muhammad, an official in the household of the prince, Shah 'Alam, and all were copied from originals in the royal palace. So far as I know, no one has yet imparted such portraits to the public ; or if any ingenious person has so done, this collection of mine has nothing in common with such, mine being the veritable, which the others cannot be. Meanwhile, to get them I have spared no expense, and have given many presents; and the whole was carried out under great difficulties, it being incumbent on me to observe profound secrecy as to my having the copies. I do not bring forward any portraits of queens and princesses, for it is impossible to see them, thanks to their being always concealed. If anyone has produced such portraits, they should not be accepted, being only likenesses of concubines and dancing-girls, etc., which have been drawn according to the artist's fancy. It should be remarked that all portraits showing a nimbus and an umbrella over the head are those of persons of the blood royal.' volume O.D., No. 45 (reserve); but this I need not insert, as black and white reproductions of the whole series are incorporated in the present issue of Manucci. The excellent negatives from which they are taken were done by Monsieur P. Sauvanaud, of the Rue Jacob, Paris, who was recommended to me by Monsieur Blochet. The original paintings are, as M. Blochet justly says, 'd'une splendide execution'; they lose vastly in effect when stripped of their colouring, at once gorgeous and exquisitely delicate, and I regret that the great expense has made it impossible to attempt their reproduction by some colour process. Apart from their artistic excellence, these pictures have the additional value of forming a collection which has never been disturbed since it was made, while the date of execution and the name of the artist are accurately known. Thus the portraits of men then alive may be accepted as likenesses, so far as the skill of the painter permitted.
Of previous reproductions of these portraits, I have already referred to the three fine copperplate engravings in Zanetti's catalogue of 1741, and Monsieur Blochet's process block of Dawar Bakhsh, alias Bulaql (grandson of Jahangir), in the Gazette des Beaux Arts (1897). In June, 1903, I accidentally took up some lithographs, displayed by Miss Manning at one of her National Indian Association meetings, and to my surprise one of these, a portrait of Aurangzeb, professed to be from 'una miniatura persiana estratta dal MS. di Manucci.' Miss Manning told me she had destroyed the book but kept the illustrations, and she subsequently sent me thirty-three lithographs in all, and of these, a portrait of Akbar was also referred to an original in Manucci's collection. After a good deal of trouble the book was found at Rome. It turns out to be 'Storia delle Indie Orientali,' by Giovanni Flechia, preceded by a 'Geographical Description of India,' by F. C. Marmocchi (2 vols., 4to., Torino, 1862). The geography (262 pages) is good, but the history is a mere compilation from Elphinstone and other easily accessible authorities.
There are forty-seven full-page lithographic illustrations, mostly taken from W. Daniell's 'Oriental Annuals,' and a few, the most spirited, from originals by Évremont de Bérard (flourished c. 1852-1861). There are five portraits of emperors: (1) Taimur, (2) Akbar, (3) Shahjahan, (4) Aurangzeb, (5) Bahadur Shah II., all given in gold and colours, very creditably done, that of Shahjahan being especially good. Of these, the second, third and fourth profess to be taken from Manucci's volume, but no further indication of its locale is given. The one of Shahjahan could hardly be from the Manucci collection, as there is no such portrait of that monarch contained in it.