Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c11.11

Language: English

c11.11.1

While the miniatures of the Mughals have become known mainly on account of their artistic qualities, the student will readily recognize that they also form a valuable pictorial commentary on the history of the period in which they were produced. They do not, however, profess to concern themselves with the state of the ordinary inhabitants of the country—for this we must refer to the contemporary Rājput art—but as a record of the habits and customs of the ruling class they are unique. Much of the work of the school had even a narrower object, its intention being to depict almost the daily life of the monarchs themselves. As these emperors were Muhammadans, the question will be asked, how were they able to reconcile their artistic proclivities with the strict tenets of their religion? In other words, how could they not only permit, but command, pictures of themselves and other living beings to be painted when the Prophet had declared in effect that ‘ on the day of resurrection those who had been guilty of making pictures of animate objects would be ordered to breathe life into their handiwork, and those unable to do so would perish in torment ’? ¹ It is now generally accepted that Muhammad laid down this law with the sole object of preventing idolatry among his followers, the pernicious effects of which were only too apparent among those of other religions with whom he was brought into contact.

c11.11.2

And on the whole it was observed by Muhammadans in their art, strictly, where it concerned their religion, but less so in its secular form. In those countries dominated by the *Sunnis* it was more literally obeyed, because these took their name from the *Sunnat*, the ‘ path ’ or ‘ usage ’ of the Prophet, which they faithfully follow, and in which this particular law is recorded. The other Islamic division, the *Shiah*, allows itself more freedom in such matters, as may be seen in the art of Persia, a country chiefly populated by its adherents. By descent the Mughal emperors were *Sunnis*, and as such would ordinarily have conformed strictly to Muhammad’s edicts, in which case there would have been no Mughal school of painting. But one of the most striking characteristics of the dynasty as a whole was the complete independence of thought displayed by most of its members, and in no direction was this more noticeable than in their attitude towards religion. The individual ideas of each may be briefly defined. Humayun was a devout believer in the faith of his fathers, but during his period of exile from the throne, and dependent for his very existence on being in the good graces of his protector, Shah Tahmasp of Persia, he was forced to become a *Shiah*.

c11.11.3

The story of Akbar’s struggle with his religious convictions is a long and involved one, in the course of which he became completely unorthodox, in the end resorting to a peculiar creed devised by himself called the *Dīn Ilāhī* or ‘Divine Faith’. Its doctrines enabled him to follow his own inclinations in most things, among which liberal views on the subject of art were included. Jahangir, nominally a *Sunni*, was too easygoing to allow any of the tenets of this belief which conflicted with his own pleasures or opinions to carry weight. In Shah Jahan we see a gradual reversion to the original principles of the orthodox faith, modified, however, by a craving for worldly pleasures, as shown by his magnificence and display. The lives of all these rulers, as manifested by their attitude towards every form of art, seem to prove that laws cannot restrain expression, and that temperament is more powerful than belief. No ordinance, however strongly worded or inspired, could prevent them from giving free play to their aesthetic impulses, as the painting and architecture of their time most eloquently testify. But that a literal interpretation of the Prophet’s precept could, and did, affect this artistic movement is observable in the reign of the last of the real ‘Great Moguls’, Aurangzeb. To his puritanical and ultra-orthodox disposition some decline in the arts may be traced, although it was by no means the only reason for their decay.

c11.11.4

When Aurangzeb came to the throne, premonitions of the crumbling of the Mughal empire, and with it all its institutions, were not wanting, and it is this circumstance, more than the strict application of the *Sunnat* by the royal zealot, which brought about the deterioration of the school. And, while discussing the influence of religion on the art of the Mughals, the fact should not be lost sight of, that in its pictorial aspect it was severely secular in character, rarely, if ever, straying into other fields, so that its patrons were guided by the spirit rather than the letter of Muhammad’s ‘prohibition’.