181
SYNTHESIS AND SYMBIOSIS: AKBAR’S AESTHETIC VISION
FOR INDIA
MARGARET RICHARDSON
GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY
The conquest of the Mughals in 1526 began a period of profound change in the
culture and politics of India. Not only did it mark the beginning of a more centralized,
established Muslim rule, but it also ushered in a cultural renaissance of the arts, most
particularly in painting. Combining Persian, indigenous and European elements, the
Mughal painting style virtually dominated India for about the next 200 years and
produced a change in aesthetic values, a new painting style, and an innovative way of
perceiving and understanding the world.
One of the most influential and perceptive rulers of the Mughal Empire was
Akbar (r. 1556-1605). Solidifying Mughal control in Northern India by 1572, he was then
able to focus on the creation of a new culture and a new way of thinking about art and the
world. As the patron of the arts, Akbar established an unprecedented imperial atelier that
was engaged in the production of sumptuous manuscript illuminations that illustrated
court life, hunting and battle scenes, flora and fauna, portraits, history painting, and
religious and cultural works. His evolution as both a ruler and a person was crucial to the
development of Mughal painting. It was his charismatic, curious nature that brought
about more tolerance and exchange between Hindus and Muslims, opened India to more
profound European aesthetics, set the foundations for a modern India, and established the
values and vocabulary, with the help of his courtiers and painters, of the new Mughal
painting style.
The abundant literature on Mughal painting is rich in historical documentation
and biographical information of the ruler-patrons like Akbar. Numerous catalogs and
general histories explain this art form, often to a Western audience. The secular Mughal
paintings that record courtly life and the exploits of imperial leaders are more comparable
to the Western naturalistic aesthetic as well as Western painting genres such as history
painting and portraiture. However, works that relate Hindu themes and concepts, foreign
to the average Western viewer and distinct from Judeo-Christian and Islamic
iconography, seem less accessible.
After reviewing the major literature on Mughal painting, it is this visual
accessibility that has tended to limit the interpretation and appreciation of Mughal
painting to its content and context. Some historians have focused on dating the works
properly and identifying the artists of these works. Others compare the Mughal style to its
sometimes more indigenous counterpart Rajput painting, a distinction which tends to
ignore the many connections and interrelationship of the two. For many scholars, the
paintings are simple artifacts and historical documents. These studies emphasize how the
paintings represent the time period and imperial patrons.1 In these texts, Akbar and the
Mughal Empire as a whole are often aggrandized to emphasize the profound impact of
182
the Mughal Empire in Indian history. By focusing on the evolution of the superior
Mughal painting style as their primary foci, these authors assume the ruler-patron’s
desires are supreme and are the sole reflections of the world. The paintings thus indicate
reflections of a worldview and they support it and are part of it. As a result, they are less
a product of the world and times and dismissed as mere artifact and documentation.
Ultimately, these sources provide invaluable collections of historical facts and dating
confirmations, yet they often stop short of specifically relating this information to the
actual paintings. The focus on the patron and history diminishes the works’ overall power
as art.
While there is much discussion of subject matter and general characteristics, a
close formal examination of specific paintings in relation to Akbar’s political and
personal agenda is lacking. In light of this predicament, this paper will explore two
issues: first, it will investigate the political, philosophical, and personal motivations
behind Akbar’s interest in Hinduism. In this section, the discourse of kingship and power
in the Mughal court will be addressed as well as Akbar’s philosophical and religious
curiosity. Secondly, this paper will relate these findings to specific paintings from various
Imperial and Sub-Imperial manuscripts in the collection of The Virginia Museum of Fine
Arts.2 By examining the visual vocabulary of the paintings themselves, their original
purpose as educational, political, and power tools is revealed. Much more than mere
historical documents, the paintings are dynamic and profound expressions of power and
synthesis. They were more directly involved in Akbar’s political program of control,
organization, and stability that sought to unite Hindus and Muslims by promoting
understanding and social harmony. Thus, they are not simply evidence of history and
context but products and producers of discourse.
Akbar’s interest in and acceptance of Hinduism has been well documented in
much of the literature, including contemporary chronicles. These studies generally relate
Akbar’s interests to the translation and illustration of ancient Sanskrit texts in the 1580s
and 1590s such as the Bhagavad Gita (Song of the Lord), Harivamsa (Genealogy of
Krishna), Yogavasistha (an exposition of Vendanta philosophy), and the epics, the
Mahabharata and the Ramayana.3 In addition, the political and philosophical motivations
behind his interest have also been explored.4 The translation of these Sanskrit texts is a
point of departure for the discussion of Akbar’s interest in Hinduism. However, they are
much more than indications of interest; they are also tools of power and control.
Stability was a major concern for Akbar who inherited a politically ill-governed
India that was in economic shambles and divided. At the time of Akbar’s accession to the
throne, India was a divided nation of local loyalties and kingdom warfare.5 Gradually,
between 1560-1570, Akbar extended his authority over the whole of Northern, Western,
and Central India as well as territories in Afghanistan, Balochistan, Kashmir, Sind,
Orissa, and the Deccan. By the late 1570s with his empire secure and with the birth of his
successor, Salim (later Jahangir) in 1569, Akbar turned his focus to the expression of his
power and stability as well as intellectual and personal concerns.
183
Akbar’s reign and those of his immediate successors, his son, Jahangir and his
grandson, Shah Jahan, were in fact periods of great stability and organization. Akbar
formed a strong centralized bureaucracy with elaborate organizational systems as a
means of control, all loyal to and dependent upon him. Officials were organized into
military ranks, or mansabdars, which were based on merit and owed sole allegiance to
Akbar. This nobility consisted of Turks, Persians, Afghans, Rajputs and Indian Muslims,
as Akbar succeeded in integrating and consolidating power over all the peoples of India.
Replacing the quasi-feudal land-holding system of the Delhi Sultanate Period, this system
was based on loyalty and favors and prevented defiance of Akbar’s imperial regime.
Economically and politically, Mughal India was managed and controlled by Akbar. With
these aspects of society under control, Akbar could turn his attention to a more pressing
problem—the division of the people. It is in this social realm of society that Akbar could
exert control through religious and artistic innovations.
After the birth of his son in 1569, Akbar moved his capital to Fatehpur Sikri in
1571, the site of many radical religious and artistic innovations. The period at Fatehpur
Sikri was a time of exploration and searching. Here, Akbar explored Indian and Islamic
concepts of religion and royalty and distanced himself from dogmatic Islamic faith. He
also established his position as the sovereign over both material and spiritual worlds.
Michael Brand and Glenn Lowry explain this period in terms of the philosophy of
the day. They cite two key issues that shaped Akbar conceptions of his native Mughal
heritage and this new synthesis of cultures that fundamentally began at Fatehpur Sikri.
Not only was Akbar concerned with living up to the expectations of his ancestors, namely
Chingiz Khan and Timur, but he also sustained Islamic concepts of kingship despite
interest in Indian and European traditions.6 According to Brand and Lowry, the polarity
between the material world (surat) and the spiritual world of inner meaning (manavi)
with which Akbar struggled explains the emperor’s character and ambitions.7 This
concept is supported by Abu’l Fazl’s own words:
He [the leader] is a man of high understanding and noble aspirations who,
without the help of others, recognizes a ray of the Divine power in the
smallest things in the world; who shapes his inward and outward character
accordingly, and shows due respect to himself and to others….True
greatness, in spiritual and in worldly matters, does not shrink from the
minutiae of business, but regards their performance as an act of Divine
worship.8
The leader thus is responsible for both the outer, material world and the inner, spiritual
realm. The new artistic language and synthesis of traditions and religions sought at
Fatehpur Sikri reveals this conception of the leader and would allow him to explore and
reveal this relationship between outer and inner meaning.
During this period of power consolidation, the king was conceived to be not only
the physical leader of the empire but also the spiritual advisor. The Islamic view of
kingship saw the leader as God’s deputy on earth. Abu’l Fazl relates:
184
Royalty is a light emanating from God, and a ray from the sun, the
illuminator of the universe, the argument of the book of perfection, the
receptacle of all virtues. It [this light] is communicated by God to kings
without the intermediate assistance of anyone, and men, in the presence of
it, bend the forehead of praise towards the ground of submission. Again,
many excellent qualities flow from the possession of this light. 1. A
paternal love towards the subjects…In his wisdom, the King will
understand the spirit of the age and shape his plans accordingly. 2. A large
heart….3. A daily increasing trust in God….4. Prayer and devotion.9
In this statement, the conception of the king’s responsibilities and duties are outlined as
God’s representative on earth who loves his people and directs them with his
understanding of the needs of the age. Akbar embodies these attributes and then takes this
view of the king a step further with divine kingship, challenging Islamic views of the
King as a mere vessel. Abu’l Fazl writes of Akbar:
Whenever…the time arrives that a nation learns to understand how to
worship truth, the people will naturally look to their king, on account of
the high position which he occupies, and expect him to be their spiritual
leader as well; for a king possesses independent of men, the ray of Divine
wisdom, which banished from his heart everything that is conflicting. A
king will therefore sometimes observe the element of harmony in a
multitude of things, or sometimes reversely, a multitude of things in that
which is apparently one; for he sits on the throne of distinction, and is thus
equally removed from joy and sorrow.
He [His Majesty Akbar] is now the spiritual guide of the nation, and sees
in the performance of this duty a means of pleasing God. He has now
opened the gate that leads to the right path, and satisfies the thirst of all
that wander about panting for truth.10
Through his indifference and divinity, the king, namely Akbar, has the power to
direct and control the people’s material and spiritual life. The standard Muslim
invocation “Allahu Akbar!” or “God is Great” by coincidence of his name, can also be
read, “Akbar is God.” While he denied such blasphemy, Akbar most certainly enjoyed
the conflation of his name with that of God. Just as Akbar took control of the land,
people, and history he also controlled the religious direction his empire would take. In
doing so, he allowed for a greater synthesis of culture that in turn affected the art.
Akbar not only instituted a political revolution with his broad, long-term plans; he
enacted a religious one as well. Akbar was curious and thoughtful, wanting to know the
world and its people. Unlike his forefathers, he was born in India and was interested in
and concerned with the different groups of people that composed the country. If he was to
rule all of the land, he believed he needed to be more aware and sensitive to the needs of
all of the people. His promotion of religious toleration grew out of his sympathies and
respect for and fascination with the people of India. There are numerous stories of the
185
emperor going out into the towns in disguise to mingle and interact with the people.11 He
also was sincerely interested in Indian styles, traditions, and customs. He celebrated some
Hindu festivals and enacted various religious meetings to promote understanding and
toleration.12 Through his inquiries, he recognized one of the greatest problems of the
country was the disunity and rift between Muslims and Hindus.
Many of Akbar’s resulting policies were directed at lessening the discrimination
against Hindus. In 1562, Akbar married the Hindu princess of the Rajput raja of Amber.
Her family was then inducted into the Mughal hierarchy as nobles (amirs), who retained
their ancestral lands and their Hindu practices on the promise of allegiance and military
support to the emperor. Such agreements were then rewarded with high-ranking court
positions and riches. Akbar thus established marriage and imperial promotion as ways of
uniting and controlling Hindu and Muslim courts. In 1563 and 1564, he abolished taxes
on pilgrims worshipping at Hindu holy places and the jizya, or poll tax, on all nonMuslims, alleviating some of the legal discrimination.
In addition to these legal reforms, Akbar also created various establishments that
promoted not only the unification of Hinduism and Islam, but also other religious faiths.
In 1575, he established the House of Worship (Ibadat Khana) where men of different
religious persuasions could meet and debate. In 1579, he issued the Decree of Infallibility
in which he gave himself sole power to interpret Islamic doctrine, further supporting his
position as spiritual and divine leader. In that same year, he invited Jesuits at Goa to send
a mission to the Mughal court where he received holy books and European engravings.
Jesuits visited again in 1580, 1590, and 1595. Because of his interest in various religions,
Akbar created the Divine Faith (Din-I-Ilahi) in 1582, a synthetic religious system that
attempted to combine disparate religious elements into one new sect with Akbar as the
representative of God or God himself.
These various religious decrees were the result of Akbar’s intense curiosity and
sensitivity, but it cannot be forgotten that they served as a means of control and
unification of his lands to promote stability. His actions can also be seen in light of the
conception of the king as divine ruler and controller of both material and spiritual realms.
As stated earlier, this unprecedented action followed in the Timurid traditions of his
ancestry. As he is described in the Akbarnama, “Lord of the world, decipher of the
external, revealer of the internal,”13 Akbar was truly working to establish himself as the
supreme authority over and fashioner of the reality and spirituality of his empire. As a
result, his art is a synthesis of his will to sovereignty and power.
These notions of material and spiritual well-being created and administrated by
Akbar were manifested in literary and artistic form. Despite the ruler’s own illiteracy,
Akbar’s reign was well documented by various contemporary chroniclers. His friend and
admirer, Abu’l Fazl recorded in A’in-I Akbari every aspect of Akbar’s reign, always in
flowery and praising terms. While this is an invaluable source of information, it is also a
form of propaganda which elevates Akbar to godlike and infallible status. Bada’uni, a
devout Muslim who was forced to translate various texts and was especially opposed to
Akbar’s fascination with Hinduism, produced a more critical discussion of Akbar’s reign.
186
However different, both of these men record the translation of Hindu texts, relating the
political motivations behind them. As Bada’uni relates:
Now he ordered those Hindu books, …which were the very pivot on
which all their religion, and faith, and holiness turned, to be translated
from the Indian into the Persian language, and he thought to himself,
“Why should I not have them done in my name?” For they are by no
means trite, but quite fresh, and they will produce all kinds of fruits of
felicity both temporal and spiritual, and will be the cause of circumstance
and pomp, and will ensure an abundance of children and wealth, as is
written in the preface of the books.14
Obviously, these translations served multiple purposes. Not only were they
important for understanding; they would serve to indicate Akbar’s benevolence and
produce both worldly and spiritual benefits. One can infer their purpose was to bring
about peace through greater understanding between the Muslims and the Hindus. This
purpose is more explicit in Abu’l Fazl’s introduction to the Razmnama, the manuscript of
the translated Mahabharata: “Although this work contains numerous extravagant tales
and fictions based on imagination, it affords many instructive moral observations, and is
an ample record of felicitous experience.”15 The texts not only provided instruction, but
the commissioning of them is evidence of Akbar’s view of them as didactic and political
tools. Abu’l Fazl states further: “Having observed the fanatical hatred between the
Hindus and the Muslims and being convinced that it arose only from mutual ignorance,
the enlightened monarch wished to dispel the same by rendering the books of the former
accessible to the latter."16 Akbar not only recognized the need to instill confidence
through legal reform in the vast majority of the population who were Hindus; he also
realized the necessity to quell sectarian unrest between them and his fellow Muslims.
Searching for a way to unite these two opposing factions, he set out to construct a society
as well as a visual vocabulary with which to deal with this issue.17 It is clear the texts
themselves as well as the display of acceptance were to promote understanding and social
harmony, thus ensuring the stability of Akbar’s empire.
The art produced by Akbar’s atelier became ways in which Akbar could
communicate in a new visual language his radical political, social, and religious synthesis
and his power as divine ruler. Books themselves were indications of power. Because the
materials were valuable and the preparation time was enormous, books represented
tangible evidence of wealth, intelligence, and power. They were spoils of war, as well as
ceremonial presentation objects.18 At his death in 1605, Akbar left a library of about
24,000 books. Abu’l Fazl relates this library in the Ain-I-Akbari:
His Majesty’s library is divided into several parts…Each part of the
library is subdivided, according to the value of the books and the
estimation in which the sciences are held of which the books treat. Prose
books, poetical works, Hindi, Persian, Greek, Kashmirian, Arabic, are all
separately placed. In this order they are also inspected. Experienced
people bring them daily and read them before His Majesty, who hears
187
every book from beginning to end….there are no historical facts of the
past ages, or curiosities of science, or interesting points of philosophy,
with which His Majesty, a leader of impartial sages, is unacquainted.19
Akbar’s library reflected a similar organization as the one he enacted on society. As
historian and poet Asaf Khan Ja’far Beg wrote of the emperor in Tarikh-I-Alfi, he
“accordingly ordered, that the rational contents of different religions and faiths, should be
translated in the language of each, and that the rose garden of the traditional aspect of
each religion should, as far as possible, be cleared of the thorns of bigotry….”20 Akbar
approached society as he approached information—it was to be classified, organized, and
thus controlled by the keeper of the knowledge, himself. In addition, owning books
represented the power and knowledge of the possessor. Despite Akbar’s illiteracy, he was
said to be ignorant of nothing reinforcing his supreme power as leader.
The value of books within Mughal and Persian tradition helps to explain the
importance of Akbar’s atelier of painters. As symbols of power and for his own personal
interests of curiosity, Akbar certainly promoted the production of illustrated manuscripts
that not only revealed his power through their mere existence but also through
documentation of his greatness. The manuscripts produced during the early years of his
reign reflect the adventurous spirit of the age in dramatic and violent scenes of battles and
conquests. Later images coincide with Akbar’s intellectual and spiritual pursuits
discussed in depth above.
The translated books not only glorified the ruler’s knowledge and acceptance but
served an additional purpose—to promote social harmony, to instruct, and to reinforce
this new society of religious and artistic amalgamation with Akbar as its prophet and
leader. The manuscripts were to serve as models of moral behavior, and more
importantly, of the new synthetic style. Mughal nobility collected manuscripts like that of
the imperial atelier as social fashion, self-promotion, and genuine interest. Various
members could borrow the imperial books for a time to study and/or make a copy for
themselves. This explains the existence of various Sub-Imperial manuscripts that were
commissioned and owned by courtiers. While they range in style and quality due to
differences in funds and resources of the individual patrons, their purpose was to emulate
the look and ideals of the imperial model as closely as possible. They would thus
communicate, pass on, and transform the visual signs of Akbar’s innovative style and
message.
As he was concerned with the relationship between the material, outer, and the
spiritual, inner, worlds, the arts of his courts undoubtedly were involved with the creation
of signs that could communicate these principles. In order to reveal inner meaning
through outer form, Akbar emphasized the observation of nature and drawing from life as
well as the study of European techniques brought by the Jesuits. European and
indigenous techniques were transformed and synthesized into a new visual language that
used realism combined with strong emotional content to convey Akbar’s ideas and
actions. In addition, in Rajput portraiture, which was a product of Mughal influence, one
of the major concerns of the artist was to capture the inner essence of the figure over the
188
exterior visual appearance. This notion also applies to deities whose powerful,
superhuman image requires distinction from the human realm. This inner essence is
similar to Akbar’s own beliefs, and would surely have been applied to Hindu subjects.
Abu’l Fazl writes: “What we call form leads us to recognize a body; the body itself leads
us to what we call a notion, an idea. Thus, on seeing the form of a letter, we recognize
the letter, or a word, and this again will lead us to some idea. Similarly in the case of
what people term a picture.”21 Akbar’s religious inquiries and pursuits were given form
and communicated through image where the spiritual inner was made manifest in the
outer material forms of form and color. The images created by Akbar’s atelier under his
direction are thus signifiers (form) of ideas—most prominently notions of power and
cultural synthesis.
Turning now to specific works, these signifiers will be addressed. As stated
earlier, one of the ways of dealing with Mughal painting is to compare it to its more
Indian counterpart, Rajput painting. However, the problem with such an approach implies
these two traditions are clear, simple opposites. In reality, the interaction between the two
kingdoms was more fluid and complex as the below analysis will reveal. The
characteristics of Mughal and Indian painting have been generalized and categorized in
numerous sources.22 My purpose here is not to analyze these informative studies but to
focus on specific examples. However, it is useful at this point to generalize some
characteristics from each school.
Mughal painting is generally characterized by its fine draftsmanship, meticulous
application of colors and details, realistic figuration and scenes, and a secular and/or
historical approach. Like its Persian relative, it typically employs a sense of space and
depth through overlapping zones delineated by architectural motifs. Scenes are usually of
battles, portraiture, or court settings. Decorative designs proliferate in borders, in
landscape and interiors, and in clothing. Typically, the composition is lively, dynamic,
and of a single moment.
To contrast this general image of the Mughal style, more indigenous Indian
painting is seen as more “medieval” or “primitive.”23 Looking to a Rajasthani example,
one can see the obvious differences in the Rajput style. As Joseph Dye points out, the
Rajasthani Rajput style was “firmly rooted in the Hindu religion and the timeless world
of Indian village and folk painting” and “was created by artists for whom the eternal
order underlying human existence was ultimately more important than its fleeting,
particularized manifestations.”24 The story is intended to be immediately and profoundly
felt and symbolic. Thus, the scenes are minimal and flat to heighten the pictorial impact,
gestures are dramatized and conventionalized, outlines are heavy, and color is strong and
intense.25 The symbolic nature of the scene or story, as opposed to the visual reality, is
emphasized producing a more abstract, poetic quality.26 A painting from the Bihari
Satasai series from Mewar, a region that most strongly resisted Mughal influence,
typifies these notions. These elements can be seen in the flat areas of hot, intense reds,
blues and yellows, decorative suggestions of foliage, and the continuous narrative
showing basically three scenes—the heroine descending from the sky to a swing, into her
lover's arms, and then into his bed. Events are not linear; instead, several sequences are
189
illustrated in one frame. While the scene appears straightforward and secular, the
religious reference to Lord Vishnu alludes to the divine, intimate relationship with
Krishna and Radha or the union of the divine with the devotee. The newlyweds are
personified by the amorous divine couple of as indicated by the blue skin of the hero. The
symbolic and religious takes precedence over the physical and the visual reality. While
there are obvious differences between the Mughal and Indian traditions as generally
illustrated above, both styles were in contact with and influenced by one another.
Most of the scholarship explores the varying degrees of Mughal influence on
Rajput schools; however, the Hindu elements in various Mughal works have for the most
part been neglected. Since Akbar was so interested in Hinduism for both personal and
political reasons and taking into account that his atelier consisted predominantly of Indian
artists, such influence cannot be overlooked. Focusing on Akbar’s Mughal images of
various Hindu texts, these interactions will now be addressed.
Indian elements in Mughal painting are most strong in Hindu texts. As seen in a
page from the Harivamsa (Figure 3), 1586-1590, a genealogy of Vishnu, there is a subtle
fusion of styles. Typical Mughal attributes such as the layered, dynamic landscape and
meticulous detail in the numerous figures paired with an elaborate border create a riotous
composition of color and movement. Gestures are expressive, as seen in the two men in
the lower center, and faces are individualized and detailed. These mingle with subtle
Indian elements—the dotting of hot, flat red in the lower portion of the page diagonally
arranged in three women’s skirts, the horses’ blanket, the fragmented canopy entering on
the right, and the small male figure at the bottom; the proliferation of the cow, sacred to
Hindus; the colorful saris of the bejeweled, large-breasted, gopi-like figures in profile;
and the presence of the divine—the deep blue skinned Krishna and his white brother
Balarama. Such religious invocations of the divine are strictly forbidden in Islam and are
thus not typical of Mughal illustrations. Thus, subtle references to Indian styles and
motifs can be recognized in more Hindu-inspired imperial works. These inclusions reflect
Akbar’s knowledge of Hinduism as well as his artist’s backgrounds in Indian painting.
They can also be explained in terms of Akbar’s politics. Because he wanted to unite the
two sections of society and noting the book as an emblem of power and knowledge, such
a synthesis, however superficial or subtle, suggests this notion. As a result, not only were
Mughal courtiers exposed to the beliefs and stories of the Hindus; this synthesis was
visually manifested in the combination of two aesthetic sensibilities. This effect can be
seen more profoundly in the Sub-Imperial forms of Mughal painting.
Wanting to emulate the imperial atelier and encouraged by Akbar to explore new
religions, courtiers could borrow imperial models of manuscripts and commission their
own copies. These Sub-Imperial works vary in quality depending on numerous factors
including the patron, artist, and funding. While the Imperial model may have been more
sumptuous and subtle in its synthetic new style, Sub-Imperial examples tended to be
more “Indianized,” and as a result, a more pronounced synthesis was realized.
In a Sub-Imperial painting from the Ramayana series, one can see this synthesis.
While the landscape is layered spatially by rocks and detailed foliage in typical Mughal
190
fashion, the composition has been reduced to the essential, both in colors and figures. The
blue hero Rama meets his brother Lakshama in the forest to which they have been exiled.
According to the story, in the interim of this meeting, Rama’s beloved consort, Sita, is
being kidnapped by the evil demon Ravana.27 In terms of style, the divine figures are
markedly more flat and linear, as volume is expressed not in shading but in the swell of
color. Such treatment of the figure can be seen in traditional Indian painting dating back
to the 5th century at Ajanta. The colors of the figures are also more intense and primary
yellow and blue in stark contrast to the more naturalistic and subdued green of the
background. Here the figures seem to lie on top of the landscape instead of being
integrated into it like the earlier example. Thus, one can see the varying degrees of
synthesis as well as the diffusion and transformation of Akbar’s new painting formula. In
it, Indian tradition flourished and was transformed.
A more complete example of a Sub-Imperial Ramayana text shows further
synthesis. The Ramayana commissioned and owned by a close courtier of Akbar’s, ‘Abd
al-Rahim, shows numerous examples of Akbar’s new painting style. Using the Imperial
Ramayana as a direct model, 'Abd al-Rahim’s atelier employed Akbar’s images while
further expanding the new visual vocabulary. In the Imperial model, compositions are
more complex, dynamic, and spatial. Depth is portrayed in overlapping figures and
layering of landscape elements, and figures are more detailed and volumetric. The battle
scene is a popular motif in Mughal manuscripts, and this knowledge is referenced to
portray the heroic exploits of Rama. The Indianization can be seen in the strange,
imaginative, and all-powerful divine/demonic characters, a more flattened use of color,
and mythic subject matter. Comparing this to the Sub-Imperial copy, these distinctions
between styles become blurred.
Comparing an Imperial and Sub-Imperial page of the same scene, one can see the
changes in style. The Imperial example of girls visiting a sage is more complex with nine
figures set into a naturalistic, detailed, three-dimensional space. In the Sub-Imperial
work, the primary focus is on three central figures, and the composition has been
simplified to the essentials of the story. The figures are in a more shallow space, upturned
and flattened by the soft green ground. Trees in the immediate background prevent a deep
spatial recess. The female figures, for the most part in profile, are more curvilinear and
voluptuous, while all of the figures are delineated by outline rather than shading. There is
less variety of pose, gesture, and facial expression and less overlapping of figures. The
text is also less prominent, in a smaller box at the bottom.
These basic characteristics—flat space and planes of pure color; more vibrant,
hot, and sometimes contrasting coloration; outlined figures, swelling through shape and
color with volume; profile figures; more focused, essentialized compositions with less
figures and more empty space; mythic divine figures that are fantastic and
conventionalized to express the particular deity's attributes; and religious figures and
subject matter--combine with Mughal architectural elements; landscape and figural
details; and naturalistic figures and space. Together, what is created is a new synthetic
visual vocabulary. The fact that this is oftentimes more pronounced in Sub-Imperial
examples can be explained by numerous factors: the individual patron who may have
191
been Muslim or Hindu; the predominantly Hindu artists who may have been more free to
express their Indian traditions fused with their Mughal court training; as well as the
numerous possibilities of interpretation of Akbar’s acceptance, interest in, and application
of Hindu beliefs, stories, and aesthetics. These paintings illustrate the profound
intermingling of these two cultures that, under Akbar, were at least visually united in
profound images of synthesis and imperial and religious discourse. They signify the
power and eminence of Akbar and his visions of his empire, his people, and himself,
which were ultimately his greatest creations.
Akbar is quoted by Abu’l Fazl as asserting,
There are many that hate painting; but such men I dislike. It appears to me
as if a painter had quite peculiar means of recognizing God; for a painter
in sketching anything that has life, and in devising its limbs, one after the
other, must come to feel that he cannot bestow individuality upon his
work, and is thus forced to think of God, the giver of life, and will thus
increase in knowledge.28
In his creation of form, the artist engages in the original impulse of the creator, thus
gaining a more intimate knowledge of God. This intimate relationship with the Divine is
similar to the Hindu notion of bhakti. Bhakti involves intense devotion to a particular
deity in which the devotee seeks a union with the divine as personified in the images of
the amorous consorts, Radha and Krishna and Sita and Rama. Akbar wanted to partake in
a similar communion, creating an empire and fashioning a history that supported his
position as its material and spiritual leader. Through this exploration of the various
discourses that shaped and revealed Akbar’s understanding of the world, one begins to
see a clearer picture of the context of his particular painting style. What is revealed is a
multitude of concerns hinging on Akbar’s rule and involved in his own creation of an
image of power, intellect, and synthesis. Through his ascent and consolidation of power
to his religious and political reforms, Akbar ultimately was searching for a better
understanding not only of his position in the world but of his relationship with the Divine.
The paintings he commissioned are thus less historical documents of a particular age and
more the complex expressions of both painter and patron concerning their pursuit in
understanding and communicating the inner ideas of power, unification, and God.
1
See Percy Brown, Indian Painting Under the Mughals: 1550-1750 (1924. Reprint. New Delhi: Cosmo
Publications, 1981); Ananda Coomaraswamy, Rajput Painting (London, Oxford University Press, 1916);
Richard Ettinghausen, Paintings of the Sultans and Emperors of India in American Collections (New Delhi:
Lalit Kala Akademi, 1961); Linda York Leach, Paintings from India (New York foundation in association
with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press Inc., 1998); Pratapaditya Pal, Court Paintings of India:
16th-19th Centuries (New York: Navin Kumar, 1983); and Stuart Cary Welch, Imperial Mughal Painting
(New York: George Braziller, 1978).
2
The works that will be discussed are in the The Nasli and Alice Heeramaneck Collection (Gifts of Paul
Mellon) at The Virginia Museum of Fine Arts and include: Page from a Manuscript of the Chinghiz-nama:
Hulagu Khan Destroys the Fort at Alamut. Basawan (Designer) and Nand Gwaliori (Colorist). Mughal
192
(Akbar), 1596. 15 1/8 x 9 13/16 in. (38.4 x 24.9 cm); Page from a Bihari Satasai Series. Mewar, 17101720. 12 7/16 x 9 1/8 in. (31.6 x 23.2 cm); Page from a Manuscript of the Harivamsha: The Arrival of
Nanda and His Family in Brindaban. Mughal (Akbar), 1586-1590. 16 1/16 x 11 13/16 in. (40.8 x 30 cm);
and Page from a Ramayana Series: Rama and Lakshmana Meet. Subimperial Mughal, 1600. 10 7/8 x 6½
in. (27.6 x 16.5 cm). All are opaque watercolor and ink on paper. See Joseph Dye III, The Arts of India:
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (Richmond,VA: The Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, 2001).
3
Indian texts had been translated sporadically in the Islamic Sultanate courts of North India in the 13th-15th
centuries. However, during Akbar’s reign, the translation of Hindu works greatly multiplied revealing a
newfound interest in Hindu literature. See John Seyller, Workshop and Patron in Mughal India: The Freer
Ramayana and Other Illustrated Manuscripts of ‘Abd al-Rahim (Zurich: Artibus Asiae Publishers, 1999),
13-14.
4
See Vishakha N. Desai’s article, “Painting and Politics in Seventeenth Century North India: Mewar,
Bikaner, and the Mughal Court” Art Journal 49 n4 (Winter 1990), 370-378; Milo Cleveland Beach, Early
Mughal Painting (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1987); and Michael Brand and
Glenn D. Lowry, Akbar’s India: Art from the Mughal City of Victory (New York: The Asia Society
Galleries, 1985).
5
Bengal had been independent for two centuries under Mughal rule; Rajput clans had regained their
territories after Babur’s invasion and controlled Rajasthan unchallenged; Malwa and Gujurat were also
independently ruled and Gondwana and Orissa were rather wild regions with no central masters; Goa and
the coast were occupied by Portuguese traders; the northern border states of Kashmir, Sind, and
Balochistan were completely free from central control; the Deccan states retained their own sultans; and the
far South, never fully conquered, was controlled by the sovereigns Vijayanagars. Vincent A. Smith, Akbar
the Great Mogul 1542-1605 (Delhi: S. Chand and Co., 1958), 23-24.
6
Brand and Lowry, 11.
7
Ibid.
8
Abu’l Fazl Allami, Ain-I Akbari, trans. H. Blochmann (New Delhi: Naresh C. Jain, 1965), 1.
9
Ibid., 3.
10
Ibid., 172.
11
John Keay, India: A History (New York: Grove Press, 2000), 312.
12
Emmy Wellesz references a Jesuit portrayal of Akbar: he had “entirely overturned the Mohammedan
faith. In Lahore there is no Mosque and no copy of the Koran. People were condemned to death for killing
cows (revered by Hindus). Whatever his actual faith was now, it was not Islam. He was a Hindu. He
followed the tenets of the Jains. He worshipped the Sun like the Parsees. He was the founder of a new sect
and wished to obtain the name of a prophet….” As quoted in Wellesz, Akbar’s Religious Thought Reflected
in Mogul Painting (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1952), 18.
13
Abu’l Fazl, Akbarnama, vol. II, p. 502, Brand and Lowry, 22.
14
Bada’uni, as quoted in Seyller, Workshop and Patron, 14.
15
Abu’l Fazl, as quoted, ibid.
16
Ibid.
17
Abu’l Fazl recounts Akbar’s sentiments in Ain-I Akbari, II, “Although I am the master of so vast a
kingdom, and all the appliances of government are in my hand, yet since true greatness consists in doing
the will of God, my mind is not at ease in the diversity of sects and creeds; …I await the coming of some
discreet man of principle, who will resolve the difficulties of my conscience.” As quoted in Wellesz, 9.
Akbar is obviously troubled by his predicament and is searching for an answer to the communal problems
in India. The translations and subsequent illustrated manuscripts of Hindu texts are one way in which
Akbar can project his possible solution to these problems. His interests in various religions also reveal his
quest to find such a “discreet man of principle.”
18
Welch, Imperial Mughal Painting, 9.
19
Abu’l Fazl, 109-110.
20
Asaf Khan Ja’far, as quoted, Welch, Imperial Mughal Painting, 19.
21
Abu’l Fazl., 102.
193
22
See Brown, Ettinghausen, Pal, Welch, Coomaraswamy, Leach, beach, and Joseph Dye III, The Arts of
India: Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (Richmond,VA: The Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, 2001).
23
Wellesz described Indian painting as having a “medieval character, full of feeling and vitality” while
Mughal painting is “in direct opposition to the trends of a ‘medieval,’ primitive [Indian] art.”, 42. By
contrast, the nationalistic Ananda Coomaraswamy extolled the virtues of Rajput painting as truly
indigenous and Indian. He describes Mughal painting as “splendid and attractive, but it rarely touches the
deep springs of life” like that of Rajput painting. Rajput Painting (London, Oxford University Press, 1916),
4-6.
24
Dye, 269.
25
Ibid.
26
Ibid.
27
See Dye for a complete explanation of the story, 245.
28
Abu’l Fazl, 115.
Bibliography
Abu’l Fazl Allami. Ain-I Akbari. Translated by Hermann Blochmann. New Delhi: Naresh
C. Jain, 1965.
Beach, Milo. Early Mughal Painting. Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard
University Press, 1987.
Brand, Michael and Glenn D. Lowry. Akbar’s India: Art from the Mughal City of Victory.
New York: Asia Society Galleries, 1985.
Brown, Percy. Indian Painting Under the Mughals 1550-1750. 1924. Reprint. New
Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 1981.
Coomaraswamy, A.K. Rajput Painting. London, Oxford University Press, 1916.
Desai, Vishakha. Life at Court: Art for India’s Rulers. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts,
1985-86.
_____________. “Painting and Politics in Seventeenth-Century North India: Mewar,
Bikaner, and the Mughal Court.” Art Journal v. 49 (Winter 1990) p. 370-8.
Duran, Jane. “Naturalism and Mannerism in Indian Miniatures.” The Journal of Aesthetic
Education 35 no4 (Winter 2001), 57-63.
Dye, Joseph. M. III. The Arts of India: Virginia Museum of Fine Arts. Richmond:
Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, 2002.
Ettinghausen, Richard. Paintings of the Sultans and Emperors of India in American
Collections. New Delhi: Lalit Kala Academi, 1961.
Keay, John. India: A History. New York: Grove Press, 2000.
194
Kossak, Steven. Indian Court Painting: 16th-19th Century. New York: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, 1997.
Leach, Linda York. Paintings from India. London : Nour Foundation in association with
Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press, 1998.
Pal, Pratapaditya. Court Paintings of India: 16th-19th Centuries. New York: Navin
Kumar, 1983.
Seyller, John. “Codicological Aspects of the Victoria and Albert Museum Akbarnama
and Their Historical Implications.” Art Journal 49 (Winter 1990) p. 379-387.
__________. Workshop and Patron in Mughal India: The Freer Ramayana and Other
Illustrated Manuscripts of ‘Abd al-Rahim. Zurich: Artibus Asiae Publishers, 1999.
Smith, Walter. “Hindu Ascetics in Mughal Painting Under Akbar.” Oriental Art 27 n1
(1981), 67-75.
Smith, Vincent A. Akbar the Great Mogul 1542-1605. Delhi: S. Chand and Co., 1958.
Welch, Stuart Cary, Annemarie Schimmel, Marie L. Swietochowski, and Wheeler M.
Thackston, The Emperors’ Album: Images of Mughal India. New York:
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1987.
Welch, S.C. Imperial Mughal Painting. New York: Braziller, 1978.
Wellesz, Emmy. Akbar’s Religious Thought Reflected in Mogul Painting. London:
George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1952.