Two Important Late Mughal Group Portraits

o l i v e r b r e n da n

forge lynch

Two ImporTanT LaTe mughaL group porTraITs


forge lynch


Co n S u LtA n t S I n A n t I q u I t I e S A n d I S L A m I C A n d I n d I A n A r t


forge lynch


Front and back coverprInce mIrza FakhruddIn enTerTaIned by musIcIans In a saLon aT The zaFar mahaL In mehrauL, deLhI, cIrca 1852

LeftprInce mIrza FakhruddIn enTerTaIned by musIcIans In a saLon aT The zaFar mahaL In mehrauLI (Detail )

Inside Back CoverprInce mIrza FakhruddIn and enTourage In processIon by The rIver Jumna, deLhI, cIrca 1840 (Detail )

J . p. L o s T y a n d J . r o b e r T a L d e r m a n

2 Georgian House10 Bury Street

St James’sLondon SW1Y 6AA

www.forgelynch.com

mIrza FakhruddIn, LasT crown prInce oFThe mughaL empIre, enTerTaIned by musIcIansIn a saLon aT The zaFar mahaL In mehrauLI

PAINTING

HeIGHt: 45.2 Cm, 17 3⁄4 In

WIdtH: 57 Cm, 22 1⁄2 In

opaque pigments heightenedwith gold and silver on paper

aTTrIbuTed To ghuLam ‘aLI khan and assIsTanTs deLhI, cIrca 1852

ghulam ‘ali khan Ghulam ‘Ali Khan is one of the most intriguing of all Indian painters, and duringhis long career (active 1817-52) he developed different styles suited to the taste andrequirements of his patrons.1 He was the originator of the delhi topographicalschool with his painting of the divan-i Khas of the red Fort in 1817 that is stillmostly in a mughal tradition.2 He was also the first mughal artist to exploit thetrend towards the picturesque in other paintings such as the shrine at Panipat andan exterior view of the red Fort, both dated 1822, in which he places the mughalbuildings of delhi in their ‘picturesque’ surroundings.3 Ghulam ‘Ali Khan’s poorcommand of figural drawing, in these otherwise exquisite early architectural studies,indicates that it is impossible for him to have been the major artist of the Fraser Albums - as has often been suggested - especially since his earliest known portraits,on ivory, of Akbar II (reg. 1806-37) and his son mirza Salim (1799-1836), datefrom as late as 1827.4 ese are his first known works definitely painted for themughal court and the Persian inscriptions refer to him as ‘His majesty’s painter.’His next known works for his imperial master are not until 1838, when he produced at least three versions of an accession portrait of Bahadur Shah Zafar (reg. 1838-58) seated on a lion-throne and flanked by two of his sons: mirzaFakhruddin (1816-56) and a much younger son mirza Farkhunda (circa 1830-42).5

As in earlier mughal paintings, all of these portraits make political statements.Akbar II for instance wanted mirza Salim to succeed him, not his eldest son mirzaAbu Zafar Sirajuddin, but was forced to give way in the face of British insistence on the rights of primogeniture which favour the eldest son. is had never been the mughal way, when those princes surviving their father’s or indeed grandfather’sdeath traditionally and literally fought to the death. When Abu Zafar inherited the throne and reigned as Bahadur Shah II, he too wanted a younger son, mirzaFakhruddin, to succeed him, not his eldest son mirza dara Bakht. Ghulam ‘AliKhan’s accomplished portraiture for the mughal court blends traditional pictorialconventions with Western influences, and a sharp psychological insight into his sitters, as well as a full awareness of the political significance of the choice andgroupings of the characters.

during the 1820s Ghulam ‘Ali Khan was inspired by the painters who worked onthe Fraser Album towards the development of a hybrid Indian-european style inwhich he produced his most original work. In the late 1820s a primary patron was Colonel James Skinner. A series of large watercolour and gouache paintings illustrates Skinner’s military career as founder and colonel of the irregular cavalryregiment of Skinner’s Horse, as well as day-to-day life on his estate outside of delhiat dhana, near Hansi.6 Sweeping vistas with hundreds of figures are combinedwith a microscopic interest in detail and a narrative desire to convey the importanceof an occasion. His fascination with internal and external architectural settings andlandscape are striking traits of his work. Whereas principal figures are carefullyportrayed, his elongated and respectful servants are more stereotyped. e gouachecan be thin and the brushstrokes loose, or where necessary, tightly controlled.

during the 1840s Ghulam ‘Ali Khan seems to have left the impoverished mughalcourt to work for other Indian patrons. For maharao raja Binne Singh of Alwar(reg. 1815-57), he contributed paintings to an illustrated manuscript of the Gulistan

1 For an overview of his career, see Y.Sharma, ‘In the Company of the mughalCourt: delhi Painter Ghulam Ali Khan’ in Princes and Painters in Mughal Delhi,1707-1857, ed. William dalrymple andYuthika Sharma, Asia Society museum, new York, 2012, pp. 44-51.

2 British Library, see J.P. Losty and roy,m., Mughal India: Art, Culture and Empire -Manuscripts and Paintings in the British Library, London, 2012, pp. 217-19, fig. 153.

3 British Library and a private collection,see Sharma, op. cit., figs. 2 and 3. e wholemovement is examined in J.P. Losty, Delhi:Red Fort to Raisina, new delhi. 2012, pp. 14–86.

4 Both in the British Library, Losty and roy, op. cit., pp. 219-20, figs. 154-55.

5 e signed version is in the Art and History trust, Smithsonian Institution,Washington d.C., see dalrymple andSharma, op. cit., no. 79; version two is in theKhalili Collection, London, see r. Crill and K. Jariwala, e Indian Portrait, London,2010, no. 58; and for version three, formerlyin the Knellington Collection, Cambridge,mass., and now in the museum for IslamicArt, doha, see S. Welch, India: Art and Culture 1300-1900, new York, 1985, no. 284.

6 In the national Army museum, London,dalrymple and Sharma op. cit., pp. 144-49,nos. 58-60.

3

of Sa’di that shows his mastery of traditional mughal composition and technique for the illustration of manuscripts, combined with the architecturalviews that he had perfected for his european patrons in delhi. is last greatexample of the illustrated mughal manuscript was in production 1840-53.7

Stylistically and chronologically, mirza Fakruddin and company is a work from the last years of Ghulam ‘Ali Khan’s career and compares closely to his paintingsproduced for another local patron, the nawab of Jhajjar, ‘Abd al-rahman Khan(reg. 1845-57), particularly two splendid court scenes from 1849 and 1852,8 andthe image of the nawab astride his pet tiger dated 1849-50 (see pp.10 & 11).9

Identity of the principal subjects ough our painting bears no inscriptions, it almost certainly represents mirza Fakhruddin (1816-56) in a salon of the mughal summer palace, or Zafarmahal, outside delhi at mehrauli, near the qutb minar complex. e youngerprince seated on the carpet is probably Fakhruddin’s eldest son, mirza Abu Bakht.Both man and boy are clearly princes from the emerald and pearl necklaces theyare wearing. e two men on the right are not seated on carpets and wouldseem to be retainers. e two women to the left of the prince are seated on acarpet and hence of some importance while a female attendant sits on the floorbeside them. Four musicians are seated in front of them. two are playing sitars,unusually left-handed, one a sarangi, and the last a double-ended drum. twostanding attendants complete the ensemble. e prince holds the snake of amagnificent silver huqqa and a dagger concealed in its scabard. Before him are the usual paraphernalia of such scenes – pandan, spittoon and a bowl of garlands with which to reward the musicians – while one of the women has the same things.

two europeans are depicted in oval portrait miniatures above the mantelpiece.Considering their close alliance (see below), the one on the left, though damaged and difficult to distinguish, might show the balding pate of mirzaFakruddin’s patron Sir omas eophilus metcalfe, the British Agent at delhi,1835-53, and that on the right one of metcalfe’s assistants.10 e two oval portraits hanging above the cornice represent Fakhruddin himself wearing a court turban and an unidentified Indian lady. ese would appear to beframed oil paintings of a type that had begun to appear of Indian sitters fromthe 1830s, painted by artists such as raja Jivan ram and Ghulam Husayn Khan.

e identification of mirza Fakhruddin as the central character is based on hisportraits in five other paintings, three of them (mentioned above) being nearlyidentical versions of the same accession scene of Bahadur Shah II (Zafar) enthroned between mirza Fakhruddin and mirza Farkhunda, his youngerbrother, probably all by Ghulam ‘Ali Khan and dated 1838. In them the twenty-two year old prince stands on his father’s right, a handsome wide-eyedfigure of solemn mien with fine features apart from an overlarge nose, a neatmoustache, arched eyebrows, and a shaded indentation between lips and chinwhich the artist has emphasised, and is recognisable as the same figure, now inhis thirties, in the present painting. mirza Fakhruddin also appears to the rightof the emperor along with mirza Farkhunda in two other darbar scenes of thecourt of Bahadur Shah II of circa 1839.11 ese two princes were obviously Bahadur Shah’s favourite sons. His official heir, mirza dara Bakht, stands onthe other and less favoured side of the emperor along with mirza Shah rukh,older than Fakhruddin but the son of a less favoured wife or even concubine.

7 Sharma, op. cit., pp. 46-50.

8 In the British Library, Losty and royop. cit., pp. 230-32, figs. 165-66.

9 In the Polsky Collection, new York, see dalrymple and Sharma op. cit., pp. 172-73, no. 76.

10 An oil painting once at the BegumSamru’s palace in Sardhana is believed to be of Sir omas eophilus metcalfe of the Bengal Civil Service (see Sir evan Cotton, e Sardhana Pictures at Government House, Allahabad, Allahabad,1934, pl.4). most of metcalfe’s possessions and portraits were destroyed in 1857 when his house was ransacked, so portraits of him are rare.

11 In the Chester Beatty Library and in the San diego museum, see L.Y. Leach,Mughal and other Indian Paintings from the Chester Beatty Library, Vol. II, London 1995,p. 812, no. 8.58; and omas W. Lentz, Jr., ‘edwin Binney, 3rd(1925-1986),’ in American Collections ofAsian Art, ed. P. Pal, Bombay, 1986, pp. 93-116, fig. 14.

e identification of the younger princeseated next to mirza Fakhruddin as his eldest son, mirza Abu Bakht, (born before1835, died 22 September 1857), is conjectural as there are no known portraits.He bears, however, a close resemblance tomirza Fakhruddin and the figure is the rightage for a boy in his late teens. e identityof the attendant nearest to the princes hasbeen suggested to be mirza Ilahe Bakhsh(1809-78), the prince’s father-in-law, but

the fact that both he and his neighbour sit on the white floor spread and not in a more honourable place on a carpet belies this suggestion, since Ilahe Bakhsh too was a prince of the imperial line.12

e zafar mahale Zafar mahal at mehrauli was built close to the shrine of the Sufi saintBakhtiyar Khaki or qutb Saheb as he was affectionately called from his dargahbeing so close to the qutb minar. is was the summer retreat of the last emperor, away from the heat and claustrophobia of the red Fort in the centre ofShahjahanabad. ere is little doubt about the setting of the painting for, thoughin ruins, such a room still recognisably exists on the first floor at the corner of theZafar mahal in what were the private apartments (see above). Its floor has collapsed but the fireplace insert and mantelpiece are still suspended in mid-airabove the visitor’s head. to the left of the fireplace, just as in the painting, are the two doorways that flanked a mirror with a gilt-wood or stucco frame. e two pairs of closed wooden doors on either side of the fireplace are in front of anexternal wall and possibly fronted shallow cabinets that stored precious objects.e wall to the right has collapsed, but the domes seen through the balcony doorsin the painting are those of the moti masjid, or Pearl mosque, built by BahadurShah I in the early eighteenth century and containing within its precinct thetombs of the later mughal rulers. is is where Bahadur Shah had already prepared his tomb.

Identity of the women e two women seated on the carpet appear to be ladies of high status and particularly the younger character seated to Fakhru’s right against the yellow bolster has the same princely paraphernalia of huqqa, pandan and spittoon asmirza Fakhruddin, while next to her the lady in white counts her prayer beads. e large round box at the feet of the older woman is no doubt full of replacement pan and other necessities. e third female figure off the carpet istheir lady’s companion.13 It would, however, be unthinkable for mughal ladies to be seen in public company with the prince’s male attendants and musicians, so that they are almost certainly high-class courtesans or tawaifs, women of many talents including singing, dancing and poetic composition, whose servicescommanded a high price in late mughal delhi and Lucknow - and who expectedto be treated with due respect even by princes. A splendid painting of suchwomen is in the San diego museum, perhaps by Ghulam ‘Ali Khan himself,showing the princely state in which they lived and how they expected to betreated if they actually visited a client.14 e occasion in our painting is perhaps a musical and poetical evening, as the women are not wearing dancing costumes.Like his father, mirza Fakhruddin was a poet, writer, patron of the arts and an

12 Shahzada muhammad Hidayat Afza,Ilahi Bakhsh Bahadur, was descended onboth sides from Bahadur Shah I. is earlier identification was on the basis of aportrait in the two durbar scenes of 1839 in the Chester Beatty Library, dublin, andin the Binney Collection in the San diegomuseum, but both paintings in fact bearinscriptions identifying the man as Bakhshimuhammad ‘Ali Khan (in nagari in theBeatty portrait and in nasta’liq in the Sandiego one). See Leach 1995, no. 8.58, p. 812, and Lentz 1986, fig. 14, p. 109.

13 While previously they have been tentatively identified as Shahzadi SarwarSultan Begum Sahiba, mirza Fakhru’sthird wife and the daughter of Ilahe Bakshwhom he married in April 1852, and hermother, Abadi Begum Sahiba, this is onthe basis of the identification of IlaheBakhsh in the painting which has beenhere rejected. For a complete list of Bahadur Shah’s wives and family seehttp://www.royalark.net/India4/delhi20.htm.

14 ere too the senior lady has a largeround box full of replacement necessitiesfor the pandan. See Goswamy, B.n., andSmith, C., Domains of Wonder: SelectedMasterworks of Indian Painting, San diegomuseum of Art, 2005, no. 117, but surelysecond quarter of the 19th century, not first as in the catalogue.

e ruins of the Zafar Palace today,with the fireplace visible at centre, to the left of the Pearl Mosque.

76

intellectual. He was one of the most respected and talented poets of the period,writing under the name ramz. He is depicted in Farhatullah Beg’s Dehli ki akhrishama, translated by Akhtar qamber as e Last Musha’irah of Delhi (new delhi,1979), presiding over the forty poets gathered in the courtyard of a great house for a night of poetry.

court intrigue and the anglophilia of mirza Fakhruddin e year 1852 was one of tremendous upheaval at Zafar’s court. mirza Fakhruddinhad become the obvious heir on the death of his eldest brother, mirza dara Bakht,in 1849. For the first time in the nineteenth century the emperor’s favourite for the succession and the British obsession with primogeniture coincided. His mostpowerful enemy, however, was one of his father’s innumerable wives, Zinat mahal,who ruthlessly pushed the idea that her own son, mirza Jawan Bakht, should replace him as heir apparent. Whereas Zinat mahal hated the British and foughtto restore the emperor’s authority, mirza Fakhruddin and his father-in-law mirzaIlahe Baksh formed a close alliance with them. Without British approval, however,his status as Heir Apparent could not be ratified and it was not until January 1852that he was recognized officially by the British government of India and grantedthe title of Wali ‘Ahad Bahadur, after what must have been tortuous negotiations.Fakhruddin signed a radical agreement with Sir omas metcalfe and the Britishauthorities. He agreed that upon his father’s death he would move his court to thepalace at mehrauli, vacate the red Fort in delhi to the British, and henceforthmeet the British Governor-General on terms of equality. e reaction of the anti-British faction at court was immediate and violent, and Fakhruddin’s titles andprivileges were withdrawn, though faced with this fait accompli on the part of hisson and heir and the British, Zafar never formally changed his preferred choice inthe line of succession. Farkhruddin would have succeeded had he not succumbedto cholera in 1856.

e iconography of the painting and its interpretationA close examination of the setting of the painting reveals an iconography meant to proclaim this new political dispensation. What is most significant about the

15 now in San diego, see Goswamy andSmith, op.cit., 2005, no. 118.

iconography is probably what is missing. e central and most important of theportraits above the mantelpiece, directly over the vertical axis of the compositionand the prince’s head, is hidden behind a green hanging lamp. is would almostcertainly have been of the prince’s father, Bahadur Shah Zafar himself, on themodel of a another interior painting where a framed portrait of the emperor hangs over the central architectural feature in the painting and over the principal character, nawab Zulfiqar al-din Haidar.15 Given that late mughal paintings are as full of political symbolism as those of Jahangir and Shah Jahan, this must be adeliberate patronal and artistic choice, for the ornate frame of the gilded mirror onthe left is topped by two facing lions holding a shield with the cross of St George.e coat-of-arms of the east India Company, symbolic of British dominance inIndia, has supplanted the line of mughal emperors descended from timur.

e objects in the room also show a fascination with english taste: the glass wallsconces and the candleholders on the mantelpiece were probably purchased from F. and C. osler of Birmingham, who had begun to display their wares in Calcuttain the 1840s, and the Blackamoors that support the sconces were widely seen at thetime. e two white figurines of dogs are perhaps Staffordshire ware, and the glassdomes with vases and flowers were popular Victorian mantelpiece ornaments.

e gilt-framed picture of a prince in procession - another work of Ghulam ‘Ali Khan for mirza Fakhruddin, see below - above the mantelpiece along with the two portrait miniatures of europeans completes the composition of the mantelpiece, an exotic version of what might have been seen a contemporary english drawing room. of course, the traditions and customs of the mughal courtare also in evidence: the huqqas, pan boxes, spittoons, incense burners and jewelleddaggers and swords are all items present throughout the tradition of mughal portraiture. e hanging glass lanterns were extremely popular in nineteenth century Indian interiors. e figures sit at ease on the floor against their bolsters in the oriental manner. e way in which the women are shown together with the men recalls the english tradition of ‘conversation pieces’ showing domesticfamily life. e english painters Arthur devis and John Zoffany had both produced such scenes for their British clients in India, as did Indian companyartists, for example the famous painting of Lady Impey in her Calcutta drawingroom. mirza Fakhruddin would undoubtedly have seen or possessed widely circulated prints of queen Victoria and Prince Albert with their family in a domestic setting.

bahadur shah I’s pearl mosque and the zafar mahal e view of the mosque domes outside the window further underscores the significance of the setting. not only was the Zafar mahal a beloved summer retreatto escape the claustrophobia of the red Fort, its position next to the burial groundof their ancestors and the dargah of the twelfth century Chisti Sufi saint, qutubuddinBakhtiar Kaki, one of the holiest sites in delhi, spoke to the deepest spiritual sentiments of Bahadur Shah and mirza Fakhruddin. two highpoints of their annual calendar were the urs celebration of the saint’s birthday at the dargah, andthe monsoon Phool Walon ki Sair, or procession of the flower sellers, celebrated atboth the dargah and the nearby Yogamayaji Hindu temple. For these princes steepedin mysticism, the flower festival and its weeklong playful festivities of games andamusements symbolised the communal harmony of all their people that transcendedreligion. For mirza Fakhruddin, residing at the Zafar palace also meant he had as aneighbour his patron Sir omas metcalfe whose country residence, the dilkusha,was a nearby large octagonal mughal tomb transformed into a house.

Detail of mirror with the coat -of-arms of the East India Company

98

comparisons with ghulam ‘ali khan’s other paintingsis is one of the finest interiorscenes to survive from latemughal delhi. e many different types of lamp, the portraits, the mantelpiece ornaments, the bracket clock set at 10 o’clock in the morning, allpainted with consummate skill(note especially the beautifulglobes of the hanging lamps),mark this as one of the great Anglo-Indian paintings. It immediately strikes an accordwith two other of the artist’s interior scenes painted contemporaneously for the nawabof Jhajjar referred to above.16

Both however are relatively bareof interior fitments and are set in a typically Indian audience chamber. Baluster columns frame the nawab but their linking arch is concealed beneath the hanging awnings so that the ceiling is not visible. only in the later of the two Jhajjar paintings of 1852 does the artist attempt a large gilt mirror in a perspective view on the left, as here, but its top disappears beneath the frame of the painting. Here for the first time Ghulam ‘Ali Khan attempts to include the upper part of the room, perhaps even a ceiling, which is one of the most difficult technical things for an Indian artist to attempt, when they usedperspective only to indicate in a general way spatial relationships rather than to suggest an illusion of reality. Above the heavy pediments of the doorways there issurely a gilded cavetto, marked by the forwards tilt of the small portraits at the sidesand the oeil-de-boeuf windows which normally are pierced in sloping or mansard roofs.

moving our attention downwards, one notes immediately how the floors in all threepaintings are covered with a spotless white sheet. All have their sides and front castinto shadow from no possible light source within the painting, and exhibit similar uncertainty about where the floor ends and the walls begin. Just as the nawab of Jhajjar is framed by the baluster columns of his durbar hall, so mirza Fakhruddin is placed exactly between the pilasters supporting the mantelpiece directly beneath the clock and the obscured portrait of - as we have suggested - his father. Althoughslightly off-centre, his placement on the rectangular carpet viewed in western perspective is meant to lead the eye of the viewer straight to the principal figure, afunction also performed by the long mat underneath the spectacular hookah. Boththese devices are found in the 1852 Jhajjar painting. most of the figures are set firmlyon the sheet or the carpet, as in the 1849 Jhajjar painting, but not as in the 1852 onewhere the overly high viewpoint creates problems for the artist. An exception here isthe group of musicians, whose placement is rather awkward and who are depictedsomewhat smaller than they ought to be for this position in the painting, obviously so that they do not obscure our view of the women behind them. e three main musicians although with different heads are very similarly positioned to the three in the 1849 Jhajjar painting, except that extraordinarily both sitar players appear to beleft-handed and their sitars rest on their right shoulders. Surely here a charba hasbeen used the wrong way round? A study of similar musicians attributable to the studio of Ghulam ‘Ali Khan is in the Indian museum, Calcutta (Ahuja 2013, no. 416)

and has this same left-handed peculiarity. e additional sarangiplayer has somewhat awkwardly beenpositioned too closely behind them.All this suggests that some parts of the painting may be by assistants.

nadir of the mughal dynasty and it culture Whatever is happening in the painting, it shows a moment of calmbefore the storm. e following year,1853, brought the death of Sir omas metcalfe and that of the two other men who had negotiated the treaty of 1852, Sir Henry miers elliot, theforeign secretary in the government of India, and James omason, Lieutenant-Governor of the north-West Provinces based at Agra.

All three were widely believed to have been poisoned at the instigation of the queen,Zinat mahal. Sir omas predicted that mirza Fakhruddin himself would be thenext victim, though he lived for another three years, officially dying of cholera in1856 at the early age of forty. He is buried near the beautiful mosque outside thewindow of the room in this painting. mirza Fakhruddin therefore did not live tosee the complete catastrophe for his dynasty and culture that followed the rebellionin 1857. His son, the impetuous mirza Abu Bakht, became a leader of the insur-rection whereas his father-in-law mirza Ilahe Baksh continued to serve the Britishcause and became their leading spy and informant. After the collapse of the revolt, it was Ilahe Baksh who led major William Hodson to his cousin theemperor Bahadur Shah Zafar’s hiding place in the tomb of Humayun, and laterbetrayed the three mughal princes who were shot in cold blood by Hodson, amongthem Abu Bakht, the son of mirza Fakhruddin.

e moving and romantic, if politically impotent, high muslim culture of old delhi – the poetry, mysticism, music and long, perfumed, sensuous nights of the last mughals – was swept away forever. Still the illusions and aspirations of some of the participants lingered on. Zinat mahal had finally eliminated most of her rivals only to head off to a life of miserable exile in Burma with Zafar and her son mirza Jawan Bahkt. Zafar was never buried in the tomb he had prepared for himself in the mosque beside the palace at mehrauli where it still lies empty.despite his immense services to the British, mirza Ilahe Baksh found his properties ransacked and confiscated along with those of everyone else. But after a few years, with the British Government of India securely in place, he was givenestates and named titular head of the House of timur, a title officially held by his descendants until 1975.

e courtiers and events depicted in the great mughal paintings of the sixteenth-eighteenth centuries are known in far greater historical detail than those who appear in the few images from the end of the dynasty. revealing adramatis personae worthy of Shakespeare, this glimpse of the private life of the last mughal crown prince, by arguably the last great mughal painter, is a preciousimage of the dying days of their world.

16 Losty and roy 2012, op.cit., figs. 165and 166.

Ghulam Ali Khan (fl. 1817-55),e Nawab of Jhajjar astride a pettiger, dated A.H. 1266/1849-50 A.D.

Reproduced courtesy of Cynthia Hazen PolskyCollection

Nawab ‘Abd al-Rahman Khan in courtwith the envoy of the Raja of Alwar, Capt. Alexander Heatherly. By Ghulam ‘Ali Khan, 1852. British Library, Add.Or.4681.

Reproduced courtesy of the British Library, London,Add.Or.4681

1110

prInce mIrza FakhruddIn and enTourageIn processIon by The rIver Jumna

aTTrIbuTed To ghuLam ‘aLI khan and assIsTanTs deLhI, cIrca 1840

e subjectencased in a gilt frame over the mantelpiece in the painting of mirza Fakhruddin inhis reception room at the Zafar mahal (as discussed above), is a processional scenewith a young prince on horseback with attendants on foot, namely the paintingunder discussion. Again without any inscriptions, its position of honour in the roomsuggests that it depicts the same prince, and in fact it is not difficult to determinethat the young prince is indeed mirza Fakhruddin himself based on the five knownportraits discussed above dated in 1838 and 1839. His small moustache here is perhaps slightly more pronounced than in the 1838 accession portraits, allowing usto date this processional scene to around 1840. e large liquid eyes, the pronouncedeyebrows, large nose and long hair curling on the nape of his neck are the same inboth. Indeed the artist has turned the prince’s face a little more towards the viewerthereby disguising a little the size of his nose. A loose red turban is upon his headand he wears a delicately sprigged muslin jama of chikan work. His cummerbund is

a shawl secured round hiswaist with a knot and itsends hang loosely at hisside. An ivory- or jade-handled dagger isthrust through his cummerbund and secured by a sash with a tassel. A cord slunground his neck reachingdown to his waist is amost unusual type offashion accoutrement and is a little mysterious.It looks as if it might beconnected to the reins ofhis horse but its purposeis obscure. e prince is riding a beautifully caparisoned stallion with an elegantly plaitedmane and a Kashmirshawl knotted into its bridle.

Identification of the settinge scene is set on the banks of the river Jumna. In the distance across the rivermay be seen a small domed shrine and beyond a diminutive representation of thequtb minar, some ten miles distant from the river. e prince is preceded by a crowdof attendants on foot carrying swords, wrapped up arms and lances, artistically crossingeach other as in some of the pages of soldiers from the Fraser album.17 Behind himare a chowrie bearer and a parasol bearer, carrying their insignia of royalty, as well asanother party of retainers, this time mounted and carrying swords and pennants.

PAINTING

HeIGHt: 35 Cm, 13 3⁄4 In

WIdtH: 44.3 Cm, 17 1⁄2 In

opaque pigments heightenedwith gold and silver on paper

17 Archer, m., and Falk, t., India Revealed: the Art and Adventures of Jamesand William Fraser 1801-35, London,1989, nos. 61-62.

e artiste painting is in the style of Ghulam ‘Ali Khan, and he would seem to havebeen responsible for the principle figures. ese include the prince himself,whose mournful gaze seems to prefigure the approaching end of the dynasty, as well as his immediate attendants behind him and those in the foreground.ese figures recall the studies of castes and tradesmen in James Skinner’s manuscript Tasrih al-Akvam in the British Library which was produced by Ghulam ‘Ali Khan and assistants.18 Ghulam ‘Ali Khan does seem to have had some assistance with the rest of the attendants on foot in front and themounted attendants behind. ere is a certain sameness about the retainersthat the master would have varied, for instance all the bearded ones have exactlythe same kind of fluffy beard and small upturned moustache. Ghulam ‘Ali Khanwas always careful to individualize even the minor figures in his group portraits,as in the durbar of James Skinner in the national Army museum and the twodurbars of the nawab of Jhajjar in the British Library.19 Some of the studies ofnamed troopers and orderlies in the Skinner Album, also in the British Library,can reliably be attributed to the master, since they are studies for his great paint-ing of Colonel Skinner’s durbar painted in 1827, and are marked by an individ-ualised character and alertness not so obvious here.20

e painting adds a new type of composition to Ghulam ‘Ali Khan’s knownwork. unlike most of his other paintings with landscape elements, the horizonhere is very low. one of the Fraser Album paintings, but not by the majorFraser Artist, has this same low viewpoint, namely the portrait of the Burmese ambassador with attendants, where the red Fort at delhi is seen across the river behind the figures.21 It is also found occasionally in the Tasrih al-Aqvammanuscript mentioned above. If Ghulam ‘Ali Khan was responsible for the composition, it can be seen that he had some difficulties with reconciling this

18 Losty and roy 2012, op. cit.,pp. 225-26.

19 dalrymple and Sharma 2012, op. cit., nos. 58, 77-78.

20 Losty and roy 2012, op. cit., pp. 222-24.

21 Archer and Falk 1989, op. cit, no. 82.

1514

viewpoint with his traditional overhead one, as can be seen in the massed groups of attendants, and it is not something he tried again.

painting within a paintingIt is an extraordinary coincidence that the two paintings, so closely linked in subject and style, should have survived, and their importance in documenting the nadir of the imperial family cannot be understated. In addition to their individual merits and the fact that they depict the same subject, a decade apart,the pictures are further linked by the depiction in miniature of Prince MirzaFakhruddin and entourage in procession by the river Jumna within Mirza Fath-ul-Mulk Bahadur entertained by musicians in a salon at the Zafar Palace inMehrauli in such a unique way. e equestrian portrait hangs above the fireplacein a Victorian gilt-wood frame with foliate corner-pieces and beaded inner border. When magnified it is identical in every visible detail, from the horse on the extreme left with its head turned back, to the royal fan, distant palm tree and even the shawl suspended from the prince’s horse.

reFerences

Ahuja, naman P., e Body in Indian Art and ought, europalia, Brussels, 2013Archer, m., and Falk, t., India Revealed: the Art and Adventures of James and William Fraser 1801-35, London, 1989 Cotton, Sir evan, e Sardhana Pictures at Government House, Allahabad, Allahabad, 1934Crill, r., and Jariwala, K., e Indian Portrait, London, 2010dalrymple, W., and Sharma, Y., ed., Princes and Painters in Mughal Delhi, 1707-1857, new York, 2012Goswamy, B.n., and Smith, C., Domains of Wonder: Selected Masterworks of Indian Painting, San diego museum of Art, 2005 Leach, L. Y., Mughal and other Indian Paintings from the Chester Beatty Library, London 1995Lentz, t. W., Jr., ‘edwin Binney, 3rd (1925-1986),’ in American Collections of Asian Art, ed. P. Pal, Bombay, 1986, pp. 93-116 Losty, J.P., delhi: Red Fort to Raisina, new delhi. 2012Losty, J.P., and roy, m., Mughal India: Art, Culture and Empire – Manuscripts and Paintings in the British Library, London, 2012Sharma, Y., ‘In the Company of the mughal Court: delhi Painter Ghulam Ali Khan’ in dalrymple and Sharma, ed., 2012, pp. 44-51Welch, S.C. India: Art and Culture 1300-1900, new York, 1985

CoPYrIGHt |

oLIver Forge and brendan Lynch LTd 2014

text BY | J.p. LosTy & J. roberT aLdermandeSIGned BY | peTer keenanPHotoGrAPHY BY | rIchard vaLencIa rePro BY | rIchard harrIs PrInted BY | deckerssnoeck nv

Detail of present painting, as it appears in ‘Mirza Fakhruddin entertained by musicians in a salon at the Zafar Mahal in Mehrauli’

9 east 82 Streetnew Yorkn.Y. 10028

2 Georgian House10 Bury StreetSt James’sLondon SW1Y 6AA

www.forgelynch.com

9 east 82 Streetnew Yorkn.Y. 10028

2 Georgian House10 Bury StreetSt James’sLondon SW1Y 6AA

www.forgelynch.com


forge lynch


forge lynch

Two Important Late Mughal Group Portraits

Documents