Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c13.24

c13.24

In 1506 Bihzad's patron, the Sultan Husain, under whom he had worked for some thirty years, died, and the artist then entered the service of a new ruler of Persia, Shah Ismail. Thus imperceptibly the Timurid painting of Persia merged into that of the Safavid. For, as we have seen, the Sultan was a descendant of Timur, while the Shah, a man of an entirely different origin and mode of thought, was the founder of the Safavid dynasty. With the rise of this régime a change came over the political, social, and religious atmosphere of the country, which soon reacted on the character of its art. The Safavid rulers were a race of national monarchs, true Persians by birth and temperament. They practised Sufiism, a manifestation of Muhammadanism from which the dynasty took its name. To appreciate the painting of this time it is necessary to understand a few of the main principles of Sufiism. The original intention of this religious movement was to induce a life of asceticism; its doctrine was a form of mystic philosophy in which its followers professed a state of ‘dying to self and living in God’. It made its tenets known mainly through poetry, the writers of which in order to find suitable expression frequently referred to the pleasures of love and wine; for, according to its expounders, human love leads to divine love, and wine to a condition of ecstasy. In the course of time these original ideals became obscured through the poetical analogies being misunderstood, as much of the Safavid painting plainly shows. It is hardly necessary to point out that the contrast between the mental outlook of the Timurids and that of the Safavids was immense. There is reason to believe that the growth and popularity of Sufiism at this time was a revolt against the materialism of the Timurids. The effect of this new school of thought upon the painting of the the Roman world, and the most important events of the reign of Antoninus Pius, are related by his biographer, and the reader will not be sorry to find them here in a more concise form. The reign of Antoninus Pius is marked by the rare advantage of furnishing very few materials for history; which is only another mode of saying that its happiness was complete. During the twenty-three years of his administration, the Roman empire was governed by the same invariable maxims of justice and peace. The natives of a vast extent of country were protected by the same laws, and enjoyed the same privileges. The frontiers were defended by the same legions, and the same spirit of moderation and equity prevailed in the councils of the emperor. The death of Antoninus was lamented as a public calamity; and the memory of his virtues was preserved by the gratitude of his subjects, and the imitation of his successor.