Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c16.38.2

c16.38.2

Such may be one explanation, while another is that he was a man of moods, and did, in some of his more puritanical moments, lay the heavy hand of imperial restraint on the artistic aspirations of his subjects. Where, however, the skill of the painter served a useful purpose, Aurangzeb was ready to turn it to advantage, as one story at least plainly shows. His eldest son, Muhammad Sultan, after giving the emperor much anxiety, finally revolted against the parental rule, only to surrender a few months afterwards. Aurangzeb, who, like the Bourbon, never forgot and never forgave, in spite of his fondness for the erring prince, had him confined in the state prison at Gwalior to the end of his days. Continuing to retain some of his fatherly affection, but feeling that he could not trust himself in the actual presence of his favourite son, he arranged for portraits of the prisoner to be painted from time to time, and these were submitted to the emperor so that he should be kept regularly informed as to the state of his health.¹ This may seem a somewhat unusual rôle for the portrait painter, but in the East the artist often found himself utilized for such purposes, and, as will be shown in a later chapter, his skill in seizing a likeness was employed in a variety of ways.