Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c18: V. Akbar's School of Book Illustrators

Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c18

Language: English

c18.1 — 4 parts
c18.2 — 4 parts
c18.28 — 4 parts

V. Akbar's School of Book Illustrators

c18.1.1

IF we are to judge from Abu'l Fazl's contemporary account of the state of painting under the Emperor Akbar, it is evident that the Mughals had a high opinion of the skill of the court artists. For his remarks in the *A'in-i-Akbari* on the subject are quite clear. 'Here', writes the famous historian, 'the art flourishes, and many painters have obtained great reputation.' 'Here', he continues, 'most excellent painters are now to be found, and master-pieces, worthy of Bihzad, may be placed at the side of the wonderful works of the European painters who have attained world-wide fame. The minuteness in detail, the general finish, the boldness of execution, &c., now observed in pictures, are incomparable; even inanimate objects look as if they had life.' This is high praise indeed. It should be explained, however, that Abu'l Fazl was a consummate flatterer, and his writings were largely devoted to a fulsome eulogy of his august master and all that he did. But although given to exaggeration, and although he had no expert knowledge of painting, the fact should not be overlooked that he was a refined and educated man, and probably the leading intellectual at Akbar's court. His opinion, therefore, in spite of its technical failings, carries some weight, and should receive consideration in any review of the painting of his time. Pictorial art under the Mughals, according to the same authority, specialized in two directions, that of portraiture and of book-illustrating.

c18.1.2

Of the former very few authentic examples remain, as the albums of celebrities prepared at Akbar's order have been broken up and dispersed. But of the pictured manuscripts quite a number have been preserved, from which it is possible to gain a comprehensive idea of this aspect of Mughal painting. As this art had been derived from Persia, it is only natural that at first it imitated in every respect the productions of the Safavid artists, even to confining its activities almost entirely to illustrating the classical literature of ancient Iran. So we find Abu'l Fazl recording that 'Persian books, both prose and poetry, were ornamented with pictures, and a very large number of paintings was thus collected. The story of Hamzah was represented in twelve volumes, and clever painters made the astonishing illustrations for no less than one thousand and four hundred passages of the story. The Chingiz-namah, the Zafarnamah, this book, the Razmnamah, the Ramayan, the Nal Daman, the Kalilah wa Damnah, the Ayar Danish, &c., were all illustrated.’ Several of the actual manuscripts here referred to, and containing the original pictures by the Akbari artists, together with a number of others not in Abu’l Fazl’s list, have survived, and we are thus presented with adequate material for study.

c18.1.3

These works are scattered among various museums, art galleries, libraries, and collections, but the principal ones are located as follows : In the British Museum there is a copy of the Bāburnāma, or Babur’s Memoirs (Or. 3714), and a Dārābnāma (Or. 4615); the latter is an edition of the Shāhnāma, or Book of Kings, prepared in the form of a series of stories by a writer of the name of Abu Tahir. The same institution also possesses a small volume by the poet Jami (Or. 1362 N.B. 36), and another minute manuscript catalogued as Grenville Or. 7573. Exhibited in the Indian Section of the Victoria and Albert Museum, South Kensington, is a series of one hundred and seventeen pictures from the Akbarnāma, or ‘History of Akbar’ (Clarke MSS.), as well as twenty-five illuminated pages from the celebrated copy of the Amir Hamzah, or ‘Story of Hamzah’ (No. 1513-1883, I.S.). Both manuscripts are included in Abu’l Fazl’s list in the A’in-i-Akbari. The Museum also displays a few illustrations from a fragmentary copy of the Bāburnāma (Waqi‘at-i-Babari, I.M. 262). Of the remaining large number of paintings which originally comprised the Amir Hamzah, sixty-one are in the Museum for Art and Industry at Vienna, and one or two stray leaves are preserved in other European collections. The Bodleian Library, Oxford, possesses a copy of Jami’s Bahāristan or ‘Season of Spring’ (Elliott 254), and the collection of Mr.

c18.1.4

Dyson Perrins of Malvern, Worcestershire, contains a manuscript of Nizāmī’s Khamsah, both of which are illustrated. In India there are two large volumes profusely pictured, a Razmnāma, the property of H.H. the Maharaja of Jaipur, mentioned in the A’in-i-Akbari list, and a Timūrnāma (Tarikh-i-Khandan-i-Timuriyya), or ‘History of the House of Timur’, in the Oriental Public Library at Bankipur.

c18.2.1

On many of the illustrations in the manuscripts here referred to, there are inscriptions which are written with the object of identifying the pictures with the artists who are presumed to have painted them. From these it is possible to prepare a list of over a hundred artists who worked in the school organized by Akbar. But before any description of the pictures or the painters can be attempted a digression seems necessary in order that the meaning, and specially the authenticity, of these inscriptions may be discussed. In the first place, although they give their names, none of them is in the writing of the artist himself. They were subsequently added by the clerks or *munshis*, employed either at the court of Akbar or in the office of the imperial library. In most cases the artists were Hindus, and so were not likely to be acquainted with the Persian script in which they are invariably written. A few exceptions occur, but they are rare. As an example the very minute inscriptions executed with a brush, which are on the picture reproduced on Plate XI, so fine as to be invisible in the photograph, may be by the hand of the artist, who would be a Muhammadan. Being illiterate, he spelt the Hindu name of Raja Todar Mall phonetically, and as if he were a Muhammadan. Occasionally, where the name is microscopically inscribed on some detail of the picture, it may have been written by the artist himself, as for instance the miniature (fol.

c18.2.2

21 b) by Muhammad Khan in the album of Dara Shikoh in the India Office Library. Plate XXIX is a picture by a Hindu artist, and an inscription in Hindi characters, also not discernible in the reproduction, which contains the name of Hunhar, may be in the handwriting of the painter. But it is clear that all the illustrations in the Akbari books were originally issued by the artists, the majority of whom were Hindus, unsigned, and the names which they now bear were written later by Muhammadan and very often by Persian clerks. Unfortunately the reliability of all these inscriptions is open to question, especially when they are subjected to a close scrutiny. In the case of a number of pictures, notably in the British Museum *Dārābnāma*, frequent corrections in the artists’ names are visible, and it is evident that the work of labelling was not carefully done. On many of the paintings the artists’ names have been wrongly written, and afterwards others substituted when the mistake was discovered. The clerk concerned thought that his faults might be mitigated by deleting his first incorrect inscription with a smear of gold paint, and then writing across it another name. There was evidently considerable uncertainty in the office responsible for this work as to which artist painted which picture.

c18.2.3

To test the accuracy of the scribes, the obvious procedure would be to compare a number of pictures bearing the same name but in different manuscripts in order to see whether they were similar in style or workmanship. There is, however, a somewhat unusual complication in any attempt at classification on these terms, as it was the custom for several painters to collaborate on one picture, so that it is rare to find any miniature which is entirely the work of one artist. As an example, although pictures with an inscription including the name of the famous Akbari artist Daswanth are not uncommon, there is no specimen of his painting which is the sole product of his own hand. In all his designs some portion of the work, either the drawing or the painting, was entrusted to other exponents, whose names, included with Daswanth’s, are written on the margin. That such a method of partnership was common is proved by the Emperor Jahangir’s comment quoted in Chapter III, in which, if his statement is to be literally accepted, even the features in a portrait may be the work of more than one artist. The system, which strikes the occidental as a somewhat unusual one, seems to have been derived from Persia, where it is observable in a few pictures of the Safavid school, although it was left to the early Mughal artists to elaborate the practice.

c18.2.4

In the majority of Akbari pictures two artists only have combined, the one making the *tarrah*¹ or sketch, and the other doing the *‘aml*, work, or painting. On occasion, however, there may also have been a third who did the *chihra-numā* or portraiture, and, very rarely, a fourth who supplied the *surat* or figure-drawing. In a few pictures the inscription also states that one of the artists undertook the *rang-āmezi*, or colouring. In these circumstances it is easy to understand that the clerk who wrote the inscriptions was sometimes uncertain to whom the various parts of the work were to be apportioned. The difficulties in any comparison between the different pictures, certain parts of which are presumed to be the work of one artist, when his collaborators have not been the same, will likewise become intelligible.

c18.3

¹ The Persian word *tarh* or *tarrah* has a variety of meanings, but in this connexion it may be interpreted in two ways. In one it may mean ‘foundation’, in which case it seems to refer to the original sketch or design being the work of the artist mentioned. In the other it may be translated as ‘mode’ or ‘style’, when it may indicate that the picture is ‘in the style of’ or ‘after’ the artist named.

c18.4

Such a system of production seems to suggest that the painting of Mughal pictures was more of a craft than a fine art, and that it was conducted in the following manner. The painters were assembled in a hall or workshop, and there, under a head man, each was employed in executing those parts of a picture with which he was most familiar. The actual composition, or ‘lay out’, of the miniature would be sketched in by the chief artist, which, when approved would be passed from hand to hand, one artist drawing the figures, another painting the background, a third putting in the features, and so on, until each had completed the portion of the work allotted to him and the whole was finished. It is quite possible that the method thus outlined was not altogether a device of the artists themselves, but a plan conceived by their patron in a supreme endeavour to obtain what he considered the finest results. This potentate would be quite capable of demanding that the best background painter at the court be employed on the landscape, the best portrait painter on the faces, the best animal painter on the animals, fondly believing that by such means he would get a superlative work of art. On the other hand a similar form of collaboration marks the system by which most of the craft work of India is produced, the divisions of labour being sharply defined. As an example, in the trade of the metal-worker, the *thathiyar* who hammers out the shape of the vessel is distinct from the *chataira* who repoussés the pattern with which it is decorated. In the same way the picture was arranged to be the work of a number of craftsmen, each separate individual being trained to do his own particular portion to perfection, thus taking his share in the production as the whole. It should be explained, however, that painting in this manner was in vogue only for a limited time. Although Jahangir speaks of it as if it were a common procedure, he is clearly referring to the painting of the past, for there are few signs of it in the pictures of his reign. Under Akbar for a short period it seems to have been freely practised, but only as a passing phase, probably encouraged by that monarch with the vague idea that by so doing he was improving the art and increasing the output of his school. Of the many illustrated manuscripts produced in his time, in only three, the Jaipur *Razmnāma*, the Bankipur *Timūrnāma*, and the South Kensington *Akbarnāma*, is it employed to any great extent. In the other works which have survived, occasionally two artists’ names are inscribed on the same picture, but this is the exception rather than the rule.

c18.5

Of all the illustrated manuscripts of the Mughals that have been handed down to us, the fragments of the *Amir Hamzah* preserved at the South Kensington and Vienna Museums are the earliest. Much of this stupendous work, as we have already seen, was executed in the reign previous to that of Akbar, so that a strict classification would refer to it as belonging to the school of Humayun. Begun by the Tabrizi artist Mir Sayyid Ali about the year 1550 in Kabul, at the latter emperor’s order, it was probably not finished until twenty-five years later, at Agra, under Akbar’s régime. In spite of the long period it took to complete the manuscript, and the great political changes that occurred while it was in progress, the same style of work was maintained throughout the whole series of 1,375 paintings which form its illustrative portion. As would be expected the style is fundamentally Persian, although there is much in it which shows an atmosphere and environment different from the productions of either the Timurid or Safavid schools. One of the pages is reproduced on Plate VII, and illustrates the general character of the painting; on the reverse of each folio is a written description of the incident depicted, the whole comprising the story or ‘Romance of Hamzah’ (*Dastan-i-Amir Hamzah*). Hamzah was the uncle of the Prophet Muhammad, and the ‘Romance’ is a fantastic narrative founded on the original adventures of this hero. As records of the life and customs of the early Mughals the pictures are unique. Unfortunately in many of the paintings the faces have been clumsily obliterated by a later zealot, but except for this they are in an excellent state of preservation. They display quite plainly the circumstances in which they were produced, the general scope of the work being devised by Mir Sayyid Ali in his inimitable Safavid style, but in the actual painting he was assisted by others, either Persians or Indians. Apart from any other qualities that it may possess, the *Amir Hamzah* is of importance in providing that definite connecting link between the Persian and Indian schools.¹

c18.6

¹ See *Indian Drawings: Twelve Mogul Paintings of the School of Humayun (sixteenth century) illustrating the Romance of Amir Hamzah*. Text by C. Stanley Clarke; Victoria and Albert Museum Portfolios, London, 1921.

c18.7

The pictures of the *Amir Hamzah*, however, stand in a class by themselves; they are too obviously of Persian extraction to be considered as belonging to the Mughal school proper. It is to the other manuscripts in the list of illustrated books prepared under Akbar’s order that we must turn for representative specimens of the work of this school. These resolve themselves into groups in the order in which it is presumed they were executed. In the earliest group may be placed the two British Museum manuscripts, the *Dārābnāma* and the *Bāburnāma*. The next to be produced were no doubt the Jaipur *Razmnāma* and the Bankipur *Tīmūrnāma*, which constituted the second group. Following these come the Bodleian *Bahāristan* and Mr. Dyson Perrins’s *Khamsah*, forming the third group, while last of all, and placed in a class by itself, for reasons which will be explained hereafter, is the South Kensington *Akbarnāma*. A general survey of all the paintings contained in these manuscripts reveals the fact that as a whole they illustrate a style of work different from that executed at any other period of the Mughal school. The dominant note is undoubtedly their Indian character.

c18.8

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.

c18.9

The reign of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, which followed, was a period of great activity and of great events. The empire was attacked on all sides by the barbarians, and the emperor was obliged to spend the greater part of his life in the camp. He was a man of a mild and philosophical temper, and he would have preferred the quiet of the study to the tumult of the field. But he was a prince of a high sense of duty, and he did not shrink from the task which was imposed upon him. He defended the frontiers with vigour, and he defeated the enemies of Rome in many a hard-fought battle. His death was a loss to the empire, and it was felt by all classes of his subjects. He was the last of the good emperors, and with him the golden age of the Roman empire may be said to have terminated.

c18.10

The character of the Roman government, under the Antonines, was that of a mild and paternal despotism. The emperor was the source of all power, and his will was the law of the land. But he was restrained by the influence of the senate, and by the force of public opinion. The senate was still a body of great dignity and importance, and its members were the principal officers of the state. The emperor was careful to consult them on all matters of importance, and he was always ready to listen to their advice. The public opinion was also a powerful check upon the actions of the emperor. The people of Rome were still a proud and independent race, and they were not afraid to express their dissatisfaction with the measures of the government. The emperor was aware of this, and he was always careful to avoid any act that would be likely to give offence to the people.

c18.11

The administration of justice was one of the most important duties of the emperor. He was the supreme judge of the empire, and he was always ready to hear the complaints of his subjects. He was assisted by a council of jurists, who were the most learned men of the age. The laws were administered with impartiality, and the rights of the citizens were protected. The taxes were moderate, and they were collected with fairness. The public works were carried on with vigour, and the cities of the empire were adorned with magnificent buildings. The trade and commerce of the empire were encouraged, and the people were prosperous and happy. The Roman empire, under the Antonines, was a model of good government, and it was the envy of the world.

c18.12

[Figure: Illustration from the Bāburnāma, British Museum, Or. 4615, fol. 478 Babur visiting the palace of Jalal Khan near Agra Painted by Dhanraj or Dasraj c. A.D. 1575.]

c18.13

While they owed something to the productions of the Persians, notably for their small size and effect, in every other particular they reflect plainly the temperament of the indigenous artist. The reason for this is not far to seek. At no time in its history was the Hindu element so strong in the Mughal school of painting as during the latter half of Akbar’s reign, that is, towards the end of the sixteenth century. Abu’l Fazl’s expression of admiration at the skill of the Hindu painters has been already quoted, and he had good cause for recording it; for by far the majority of the artists who produced the paintings which are contained in these manuscripts were Hindus. And the result of the Indian talent, drawn from all parts of the Mughal empire, shows its influence in the most pronounced manner in the illustrative painting now being described.

c18.14

A short account of each group of pictured manuscripts will be now undertaken, in the sequence in which it is believed they were produced. The oldest group, as already stated, consists of the *Dārābnāma* and the *Bāburnāma* in the British Museum, both of which were probably finished about 1575. They are so classified because on the whole the illustrations in these two works are more immature and uneven in treatment than in any of the other volumes of the series. There is little of the Persian element discernible, and much of the painting is essentially Indian in its character and handling. As with the *Amir Hamzah*, so with these two books it is quite possible to realize the conditions under which they were produced. The illustrative part was handed out to a large staff of painters of mixed qualifications, and some with limited experience in this particular branch of pictorial art. They were left very much to their own devices, supervised in some respects, but in the main allowed a fairly free hand in their work. It is obvious that a few had received more training than others, and one or two were fairly expert in their craft, but the majority of them were in that stage where they had not yet mastered the complete technicalities of miniature painting. The defects of their work lie in the loose and careless drawing and the crudity of the colour-schemes. Many show every sign of being the production of a mural decorator accustomed to covering large surfaces with a full and free brush. In his first attempts to adapt his art to the confined space of a page in a book, he shows his inexperience, as his broad flat washes, slovenly applied, plainly testify. Moreover small brushes were not to his liking, and his pigments were not always well prepared. Nevertheless some of the illustrations rise to a fairly high level, especially those of the *Bāburnāma*. Among these the picture reproduced on Plate XXXII is a typical example, and shows Babur visiting the palace of Jalal Khan near Agra (fol. 478); it is inscribed with the name of Dhanraj. Two painters from Gujarāt—Bhim and Sur, the latter on fol. 295—have contributed good specimens of their work, while the pictures by Tiriyya, specially that on fol. 274, and those by Kesu, one of the artists mentioned in the *A’in*, may be likewise noticed. On the other hand the painting by Bhagwan is crude, and so is that of Chatesh, Gobind, and Banwari, while Mukhlis, afterwards to do good work in other books, was clearly at this stage only a tyro. From this reference to the illustrations in the *Bāburnāma*, we may turn to the companion volume of the group, the *Dārābnāma*, and review in a similar manner its pictorial contents. In it may be studied paintings by six of the artists in Abu’l Fazl’s list, of whom Sanwlah has produced some spirited drawings (folios 11, 39, 40, 67, 108), but the one which depicts a game of polo is by far the best (fol. 11 rev.).¹ There is an illustration by the same artist in the *Bāburnāma* (fol. 133), but no resemblance is discernible between it and any of the series inscribed with his name in the *Dārābnāma*. In general effect the former is strong, hard, and somewhat unsympathetic in its treatment, while most of the latter are light and atmospheric, especially in the representation of the background and accessories. It may be remarked, however, that, like most oriental artists, the Mughal painters were noted for the variability of their style, which they often changed, sometimes to suit their subject, and sometimes probably at the order of their patron. Among the other noticeable paintings in the *Dārābnāma* are those bearing the names of Nanha (fol. 24), Basawan (fol. 34), and Miskin (fol. 101), all of which show no little individuality.

c18.15

¹ See *The Court Painters of the Grand Moguls*, by Binyon and Arnold, Plate VII.

c18.16

Owing to their similarity in many respects, the Jaipur *Razmnāma* and the Bankipur *Tīmurnāma* form themselves into another group, placed second in the list as both were no doubt executed at a date subsequent to the two manuscripts just described, probably about 1580. The *Razmnāma* is an illustrated adaptation of the Hindu epic the *Mahabharata*, and, as its story contained much that was foreign to the Muhammadans, the pictorial part is, with few exceptions, the work of Hindu artists. Akbar showed an active interest in the ancient Sanskrit literature of India, which was manifested in his demand for the preparation of Persian translations of several Hindu classics, among these being, as Abu’l Fazl states, the *Razmnāma* and the *Ramayana*. Several copies of both works with illustrations appear to have been produced at this time, as Akbar in his zeal required some of his nobles to order them for their own use. He also kept 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.

c18.17

c18.18

c18.19

c18.20

a few spare copies himself with the object of presenting them to persons of high estate whom he wished to gratify. These copies were not always of the same high standard; inferior or abridged editions were sometimes executed for less exalted officials, but the Jaipur manuscript appears to be the original one specially prepared for preservation in the imperial library at Agra. According to the inscription on the pictures the duty of illustrating the *Razmnāma* was entrusted mainly to the three leading Hindu artists at Akbar’s court, namely, Daswanth, Basawan, and Lal. These three experts were concerned in the majority of the paintings, but in each case they collaborated with another artist so that the work as a whole occupied a large staff. In the two manuscripts comprising this group the method of employing more than one painter on the same composition is most pronounced, very few of the pictures in either being the work of one individual. From the nature of its contents it will be understood that in the subject-matter of the *Razmnāma* there is much that is unreal and fantastic, and some of the scenes must have tried severely the ingenuity of the artists in representing them on paper with any degree of success. Plate XXXIII, one of the illustrations taken from this work, will give some idea of the style. It depicts Nala, the king of Nishadha, and his wife Damayanti, the story of whose adventures is one of the most touching in the whole of this great drama. It was painted by a Muhammadan artist named Sharif, assisted by Kesu, a Hindu. The other volume of this group, the *Tīmūrnāma* at Bankipur, as it concerns itself with an entirely different subject, at first sight appears to bear little similarity to the *Razmnāma*, but a closer study shows that in workmanship there is considerable resemblance. There is the same confused composition in many of these pictures, the same loss of effect by the introduction of too many elements, the same over-elaboration of the scene, but, on the other hand, both contain a sumptuous array of colour, and a sense of action and vitality in the figures, that compensates for much that is not always acceptable to the critical eye. In both these books, as distinct from those of the previous group, there is more equality in the workmanship, and it seems as if the artists who prepared them were better organized, and on a better understanding with one another, so that the pictures throughout are as a whole more even in quality. The *Tīmūrnāma* comprises over a hundred pictures of incidents in what is described as ‘the life of His Majesty Amir Timur, the august hero, the world conqueror, and that of His Majesty’s descendants down to the 22nd year of Akbar, may his deeds be luminous’. A specimen of one of the pictures (fol. 3 b) is reproduced on Plate XXXIV, and depicts a night scene in a mosque with the *muezzin* calling the faithful to prayer. The design was sketched by Madhu Kalan, but the painting was by the brush of Tulsi Kalan.¹ Both books represent a vast amount of labour, and must have occupied a large number of artists some considerable time.

c18.21

¹ As an instance of the unreliability of the names on these paintings, one picture in the Bankipur *Timūrnāma* bears the name of Bihzad. It has no resemblance to the work of this painter. At all times the Persian master’s name was one to conjure with, and we see it imposed on miniatures which could not by any stretch of the imagination have belonged even to his school. See Plate LI, on which his name has been clumsily inscribed by a recent hand. Nothing could be more remote than the style of this painting from that of Bihzad.

c18.22

As in the two previous instances the next group of manuscripts illustrated by Akbar’s school of painters is also composed of two books, the *Bahāristan* in the Bodleian Library, and the *Khamsah*, the property of Mr. Dyson Perrins. They represent this art in its maturity. Much of the high quality of the painting is due to the fact that, with a few exceptions, each picture is the sole handiwork of one artist. Both books are also somewhat smaller than the others, contain considerably fewer illustrations, and each picture is evidently a supreme individual effort on the part of the artist whose name it bears. It is true that in some cases this effort has not been an unqualified success, but on the whole the majority of the pictures are good examples of the miniature painters’ art. The *Bahāristan* is a collection of poems in praise of the season of spring, and was composed by the famous Persian poet Jami. Sixteen of Akbar’s leading painters assisted in the embellishment of the Bodleian copy, of whom five are included in Abu’l Fazl’s list and have each contributed a full-page picture; they are Miskin, Madhu, Mukund, Basawan, and Lal. By far the finest miniature in the book is the one by Basawan, which is reproduced on Plate XXXV. It fully bears out Abu’l Fazl’s praise of this artist, and, although there are miniatures bearing his name in other works, usually however with a collaborator, it is probably one of the best examples of his brush. Another picture from the same manuscript, by the artist Lal, is shown on Plate XL, Fig. 1. For brilliant colouring, careful drawing, and minute finish, the paintings in this book are only equalled by those in Mr. Dyson Perrins’s *Khamsah*, the other volume of the group. The *Khamsah*, or Five Treasures, is a collection of five *mathnawis* by Nizami, a Persian poet of the twelfth century. The writing of Mr. Perrins’s copy was executed by Abd ur-Rahim, a calligraphist under the Mughal emperor, who, on account of his excellent workmanship was styled *Ambar-i-qalam*, or ‘amber-pen’. It bears the date equivalent to A. D. 1593, and was therefore executed towards the end of Akbar’s reign, so that it is probably one of the latest of this series of illustrated books that have been handed down to us. Thirteen of the most prominent painters at Akbar’s court were employed in the illumination of this manuscript, seven of whom are mentioned in the *A’in*. One of the pictures, reproduced on Plate XXXVI, is inscribed with the name of the Persian artist Abdus Samad, who must have been an old man, over seventy years of age at least, when the book was finished. Yet the handling shows all the vigour and spirit of youth; there is no sign of failing in the clear outline and sense of vitality which are its outstanding features. It is difficult to believe that it is an original work by one who, many years before, began his career in the Safavid school at Tabriz under Shah Tahmasp. Two other miniatures from this work may be studied on Plates XXXVII and XL, Fig. 2. The former is by Farrukh Chela (not to be confused with Farrukh Beg) and depicts an incident in the story of *Laila and Majnun*; the latter is by Lal.

c18.23

Of the list of illustrated manuscripts one volume only now remains to be discussed. This is the copy of the *Akbarnāma* in the Indian Section at South Kensington. On the fly-leaf it bears an inscription, which has every appearance of being authentic, relating that ‘on the fifth Azar of the first year (1605) this book was entered in the library of this suppliant at the gate of God. Written by Nur ud-Din Jahangir, son of Akbar Padshah.’ With few exceptions each picture in the series is the handiwork of more than one artist, the names of those concerned being written on the margin of each folio by a scribe. It is doubtful whether the writing is contemporary with the painting. The artists whose names are on these pictures were all the principal painters at the court of Akbar, and were practically the same staff that illustrated the Jaipur *Razmnāma* and the Bankipur *Tīmūrnāma*. As a whole the paintings in the *Akbarnāma* display a similarity in treatment and an evenness in technique which, in view of the number of artists employed on the work, is somewhat singular. While there are some differences between an illustration inscribed with the name of Basawan and another on which may be read that of Farrukh Beg, the pictures, in their actual craftsmanship, might have been painted by the same hand. The criticism may be pushed even farther. While the picture by Farrukh Beg illustrated on Plate XXXVIII, recording an historic interview between Mir Mu‘izz ul-Mulk and Bahadur Khan in 1567, is reminiscent of the Kalmack’s style, in its handling it is very different from the picture ascribed to the same artist and reproduced on Plate XIV.

c18.24

Incidentally the former painting is one of the few folios in the South Kensington *Akbarnāma* bearing only one artist’s name, a fact which aids considerably in any comparison with other specimens of Farrukh’s handiwork. The contrast, however, between these two examples, as proved by the reproductions, is too obvious to need any detailed description. Of another painter whose style is distinctive the same remarks apply. Plate XXXIX shows a stirring incident from the South Kensington collection in which the Emperor Akbar is depicted as taking a prominent part. The ‘Great Mogul’ may be seen in the picture mounted on an elephant engaged in madly pursuing another across a bridge of boats, to the damage of this frail structure and the injury and fright of many people who were unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity. Basawan collaborated with Chatar in the production of this picture, which is one of the most spirited of the whole series. In its details it bears some resemblance to an illustration on folio 34 in the British Museum *Dārābnāma*, also attributed to Basawan, but otherwise there is no noticeable similarity. Many other artists’ works in this copy of the *Akbarnāma*, whose styles are less familiar, may be subjected to the same process of comparison with the same unconvincing results. This volume of pictures, therefore, although inscribed with the names of the most famous of Akbar’s book illustrators, does not as a whole seem to correspond in quality to the other groups known to belong to the Akbari school. The actual workmanship may be as good, but in its general character the South Kensington series is undeniably inferior. From this it may be inferred that it is a copy, nevertheless a contemporary copy, as the inscription on the fly-leaf, the authenticity of which is unquestionable, plainly demonstrates. And in the wording of the inscription probably lies a clue to the otherwise unaccountable character of the work. It records that Jahangir placed the book in the imperial library on his accession in A. D. 1605, thus leading to the assumption that it was his own personal copy. Such a copy must have been made for him towards the end of the sixteenth century, while he was yet a prince, and prepared at his own request from the original volume previously executed for the Emperor Akbar. The original, on which all the leading artists of the state were employed, has disappeared; Jahangir’s duplicate only has survived. For the preparation of this copy Prince Salim, as he was then, was not in a position to claim the service of the best painters, and was obliged to fall back on a secondary group, not sufficiently skilful to be included in Akbar’s state school. This staff was retained by the prince while the commission was in hand, and it comprised a number of workmen capable Illustration from the Khamsah (folio 82); painted by Farrukh Chela A.D. 1593 Subject—Laila and Majnun; collection of Mr. Dyson Perrins Malvern, England; size 8½" × 5½".

c18.25

Illustration from the Khamsah (folio 82); painted by Khwaja Abdus Samad A.D. 1593; subject—Khusrau hunting; collection of Mr. Dyson Perrins Malvern, England; size 8½" × 5½".

c18.27

of producing an acceptable duplicate, but not men of the first rank. The original pictures prepared for Akbar were most probably executed by the artists whose names are in Jahangir’s copy, as traces of their style are occasionally discernible, but it is hardly possible to regard the South Kensington *Akbarnāma* as the actual handiwork of Akbar’s school of book illustrators.

c18.28.1

From this general survey of the illustrative art of Akbar’s school of painting, we may now turn to a study of the painters themselves. It must be realized, however, that information with regard to these is distinctly fragmentary; of the majority little more than their names is known, and then only because Akbar’s industrious, but not always reliable, clerical staff wrote them, like labels, on their pictures. Except for Abu’l Fazl’s description of a few of the leading ones, the Mughal painters are very vague personages, articulate only in their art, which on its part tells more of the royal circle around them than of their own individuality. Unlike the artists of almost all other oriental schools, the Chinese or Japanese for instance, no details of their lives have been preserved, no characteristic sayings have been recorded, no anecdotes related, even portraits of them are rare, although they painted likenesses in profusion of those for whom they worked; undescribed and undefined they stand, a shadowy group in the background of the royal drama in which they took such a noteworthy part, never once stepping out into the light. The only member of the school whose career can be traced from beginning to end is the pioneer of the movement, Abdus Samad. Some details of his early years have already been given, but his subsequent progress is interesting.

c18.28.2

Soon after arriving in Kabul, Humayun was so impressed with the Persian painter’s skill that he gave him the title of *Shirin-qalam* or ‘Sweet Pen’, while shortly after Akbar came to the throne he conferred on him the high official rank of *chaharsadi*. The latter monarch also, ‘on account of his former services, paid him great honour and reverence’. The respect that Akbar showed to the artist, and of which Abu’l Fazl makes a special note, arose from the fact that Abdus Samad had been his tutor, having taught him drawing at Kabul. The deference that an Indian, throughout the whole of his life, displays towards those, however humble, who have at any time acted as his instructors, is one of the most attractive traits in his character. Abdus Samad excelled in portraiture, notably in delineating the features and expression of the emperor, so much so that it is recorded that ‘his perfection was mainly due to the wonderful effect of a look of His Majesty, which caused him to turn from that which is form to that which is spirit’. It was, however, in his capacity as a teacher, of which his royal patron had personal knowledge, that he achieved the greatest renown. For Abu’l Fazl remarks that ‘from the instruction they received, the Khwajah’s pupils became masters’.

c18.28.3

But his crowning success was when he had trained and brought out the famous Hindu artist Daswanth, who, having been ‘handed over to the Khwajah, in a short time surpassed all painters, and became the first master of the age’. Afterwards his services seem to have become so valuable that he was withdrawn from the school, and promoted about the year 1577 to the appointment of Master of the Mint, which distinguished position he filled with great credit for several years. The result of his association with this department may be observed in the high character of the Mughal coinage of the period, which is not only remarkable for the purity of its metal and fullness of weight, but for its very fine artistic appearance. It is not difficult to see how such perfection was attained. In its production the leading poet was commissioned to compose the couplet, the most skilful calligraphist inscribed it, the ablest sculptor modelled it, and the best engraver fashioned the die. And over all was placed the first artist of the state, so that the coin should be the most finished artistic production of its kind. Under such unique conditions it is not surprising that the work of Akbar’s mint is considered superior to that of any other country of the period. The action of the Mughal emperor in this connexion is significant of his attitude generally towards the subject of art, and his application of it to such practical purposes.

c18.28.4

Abdus Samad completed his career by becoming Diwan or Revenue Commissioner of Multan, apparently an honour given to him in his old age. After this nothing further is known except that the family name was maintained in even greater dignity by his son Sharif, but not in the sphere of art. It was as an administrator that the young Persian made his reputation, rising above all his contemporaries, and, as Akbar had honoured the father so Jahangir rewarded the son, conferring on him ‘the lofty title of Amir ul-Umara (premier noble of the realm), to which no title of any servant is superior’.

c18.29

Of the remaining painters of foreign origin or extraction, very few details are available in addition to those already given. Mir Sayyid Ali, the other member of the Safavid school, does not appear to have attained to the high official position of his colleague Abdus Samad, although he was probably the better artist. Abu’l Fazl certainly honours him with the first place in his list, and alludes to him in glowing terms. ‘From the time of his introduction at Court, the ray of royal favour shone upon him. He had made himself famous in his art, and has met with much success.' But beyond the historian's reference to his ability we know nothing further of the Sayyid's life or his later connexion with the Mughal school. Another foreign painter, Farrukh Beg, as we have seen, is briefly mentioned in Akbar's reign, and remarks about his skill are made by Jahangir in his memoirs, which have been already quoted. His work should not be confused, however, with that of two later artists, Farrukh Khurd and Farrukh Chela, who although they might have been his disciples, and accordingly took his name, never approached the status of their Kalmack master. Among other painters who figure in the inscriptions on the Akbari pictures, but who are presumed to be not of Indian birth, are Khusrau Quli and Jamshid. The former was apparently of Turki descent, while the latter was probably a Persian; both contribute illustrations to the British Museum Bāburnāma. A very able Muhammadan artist, who went by the name of Miskin, may not have been a native of India. He was responsible for a number of pictures which are to be found in most of the Akbari manuscripts, including one forceful example in the Bodleian Bahāristan. To complete the list of Muhammadan artists at Akbar's court, although not exactly of alien origin, we may include a group of five painters from Kashmir, a country which for centuries has maintained a high artistic tradition.

c18.30

XXXVIII. Illustration from the Akbarnāma, from an original picture painted by Farrukh Beg the Kalmack at the end of the sixteenth century; subject—an interview between Mu'izz ul-Mulk and Bahadur Khan in A.D. 1567; (fol. 96) Victoria and Albert Museum, South Kensington, Indian Section.

c18.31

XXXIX. Illustration from the Akbarnāma, from an original picture painted by Basawan and Chatar, at the end of the sixteenth century; subject—Akbar in an elephant fight on a boat bridge across the Jhelum; (fol. 22) Victoria and Albert Museum South Kensington, Indian Section.

c18.32

But with one or two exceptions, as for instance two Muhammadans from Lahore, the remaining members of Akbar's school of painters were all Hindus. Most of these were drawn from four castes, the Kayastha, Chiterā, Silāvat, and Khātī, of whom the most renowned were the Kayasthas, or writers. It may be remarked that the Chiterās were originally metal-workers, the Silāvat or Salāt, stone masons, and the Khātī, wood-carvers. On the other hand at least four of Akbar's artists were the Kahār, or palanquin-bearer caste, including the famous Daswanth. The Kahār is of lowly origin, and, although a 'clean Sūdra', is not numbered among the 'twice-born'. But Daswanth rose superior to his humble birth, and by sheer genius came to be regarded as the ablest painter of his time. His artistic gift displayed itself early in life, and in his efforts to find expression he used 'to draw and paint figures even on walls'. By accident his natural ability was first revealed to the emperor himself, for 'one day the eye of His Majesty fell on him; his talent was discovered', and he was handed over to Abdus Samad for training. In a short space of time he surpassed all the other painters, and became 'the first master of the age'. Unhappily he was subject to fits of depression, and finally his mind became unhinged. One day he stabbed himself with a dagger, and died two days later. This tragic circumstance apparently took place in the year 1584, and, although he barely attained to middle age, yet he ‘left many masterpieces’. It is to be regretted that no works by the hand of this artist alone have survived, but there are many in which he has collaborated with others. In the Jaipur *Razmnāma* at least twenty-four pictures bear his name, and there is also one in the Bankipur *Tīmūrnāma* (fol. 2), in which he combined with Jag Jīwan, but none of these is a convincing example of his art. Daswanth’s caste-fellows all distinguished themselves in their profession, as the Kesus, father and son, are both mentioned in the *A’in*, while Paras and Ibrahim also did good work; their pictures may be studied in the *Bāburnāma* and *Dārābnāma* in the British Museum, and in the Bankipur *Tīmūrnāma*.

c18.33

An artist who competed with Daswanth for the premier place in the school was his co-religionist Basawan. Of the individuality of this painter little is known except Abu’l Fazl’s brief note which says ‘in backgrounding, drawing of features, distribution of colours, portrait painting, and several other branches, he is most excellent, so much so, that many critics prefer him to Daswanth’. But of his work there are sufficient examples extant to enable us to study his style with some success. He possessed a peculiar touch which distinguishes his work from all others. Plate XXXV, taken from the Bodleian *Bahāristan*, is an example, from which we can see what a very able artist he was. It depicts, as the inscription states, a noted saint named Shaikh Abu’l Abbas Kassab addressing some sage remarks to a dervish who is engaged in repairing his garments. In general effect the picture is not striking: for an Indian painting it is chiefly remarkable for its subdued and harmonious colouring and softened outlines. The dervish is dressed in an olive green garment, while the Shaikh is in blue with an orange shawl. From the plumage of the peacocks one would expect a brilliant note, but even this is toned down slightly to accord with the general scheme. There is some careful drawing in the goats in the foreground, and the whole picture shows signs of studied refinement. If it is compared with others bearing the same name, as for instance fol. 34 in the British Museum *Dārābnāma*, although there are differences, a certain similarity in handling may be discerned. Except these two examples, however, in all the other pictures by Basawan he is associated with another artist, as in the Jaipur *Razmnāma*, where his name occurs twenty-nine times, and although here and there his distinctive touch may be identified, these do not add much to our knowledge of his style.

First 41 of 52 passages. Read on

Linked texts (2)

Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa — Vālmīki, Sanskrit

Indian Painting under the Mughals, A.D. 1550 to A.D. 1750 c18: V. Akbar's School of Book Illustrators

Contents

V. Akbar's School of Book Illustrators

Linked texts (2)