The Deeper Meaning of Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to Kings

     The artwork in question for this blog post, as per the full title, Jahangir Preferring a Sufi Shaikh to Kings, Bichitr, Jahangir, Mughal dynasty, 1615-1618, opaque watercolor, gold and ink on paper. The contents of the artwork include the floral border, the prominent, seated Jahangir, the four male figures on the left, both smaller and partially obscured by the borders of the piece, and the large hourglass that Jahangir sits upon. Both above and below the central image of the painting are phrases written in the Perso-Arabic script. There is also writing on the lower half of the hourglass. There are cupids, two on the bottom of the hourglass, clothed, and two above Jahangir, nude. This artwork is a representation of the goals that the Mughal court held, the most notable one being to uphold their legitimacy to rule the vast territories that had been conquered by previous emperors, and the power projection that the Emperor wields in international diplomacy. 

                                                                Figure 1

    The composition of the color differentiates between the center and the border. The colors of the center are dominated by shades of blue, such as the background and its border. The border of the whole painting has much more vibrant and brighter colors, to accentuate the floral design. The use of line in this painting seems to order the painting, with line clearly defining the objects and subjects in the painting. These objects include the clothing of the figures, such as Jahangir and the others, as well as the pillow behind Jahangir’s back. The subjects also have line defining them from the other figures and the background rug, with it being obvious where the men end and the rug begins, and vice versa. The texture of the painting looks smooth, as the material that it was painted on paper, and the gold leaf used would be smooth to the touch as well. The scale of the figures to one another reveals Jahangir’s size to be proportionally bigger than the other four men to the left. It is clear that the artist emphasizes Jahangir, fitting given that he was both the Mighal Emperor, and the commissioner of the artwork. The viewpoint ties into the scale, as the viewpoint appears to be focused on Jahangir. He is the only one whose full body is shown, albeit in a sitting position. The other human figures are not shown fully, being obscured by each other and the border. Expanding upon the scale and viewpoint of Jahangir, the position and preference that the artist gives to Jahangir makes it clear the intention for this painting was to exemplify Jahangir, and raise him above the other men to the left. The original viewing context would have been in a book, as the painting looks like it was a page in a book. The page would have served as an accompanying image along with whatever text the book would have in telling its story, or the book told its story through images exclusively, which would have been beneficial in reaching out to an illiterate audience, which would have made up many of Jahangir’s subjects. 

    The artist is Bichtir, a Mughal artist who lived during the reign of Jahangir. The painting was composed between 1615-1618. During this time, the Mughal Empire was nearing the height of its power and influence, with massive wealth flowing into the Mughal court. That wealth financed the commissioning of many artworks, such as this artwork. The Mughal Emperors also wished to continually prove their legitimacy to rule, as the Empire had grown to encompass large parts of the Indian subcontinent. One of the main ways the Mughal Emperors attempted to legitimize their rule was through the patronage of art. As stated prior in this essay, the position of Jahangir commands the viewer to his presence. It is clearly intentional, given the context, as Jahangir wanted to appear to be bigger and more powerful as a ruler. He also wanted to appear open and benevolent, suggested by the seated position, and the figures seated below him, as they are present to give Jahangir a position of even greater authority, as not only is there is Sufi Shaikh, but the Ottoman man, a European man, and an Indian man stand below his seat. The foreign men give Jahangir the legitimacy that other countries recognize his greatness, a message to his subjects that he holds sway over lands beyond the reach of the Mughal Empire (Corinne). As the title implies, however, Jahangir is making a choice, choosing the knowledge of the mystic Sufi Shaikh, over the knowledge and offerings from the Ottoman and the European. 

    The purpose of this painting is to serve as a sort of propaganda piece in service of the promotion of Jahangir’s legitimacy to rule. The composition of the piece serves to define Jahangir’s presence and separate it from the other figures of the painting. The presence of the foreign emissaries, along with the Shaikh, represents both the power that the Emperor has over other countries in the world, and the respect that the Emperor has for faith within the empire. All of these points serve as reasons for the subjects of Jahangir to respect him, his rule, and his dynasty, as they are the legitimate ruler of the Mughal Empire for reasons of faith and power projection that the Mughal Empire wields in international diplomacy. 

    As I live in Merced, I have chosen an architectural feature of the adjacent apartment complex to where I live. The office building of that complex has a flat doorway that resembles an arch, even if it is simply the idea of a stone doorway, rather than a curved entrance, like an arch truly would be. Admittedly, where I live and where I shop for essential necessities, the architecture is rather limited and tends to be more utilitarian than anything else. 

                                                                Figure 2

Bibliography:

Cantone, Cleo. “Affect, Emotion, and Subjectivity in Early Modern Muslim Empires-New Studies in Ottoman, Safavid and Mughal Art and Culture Ed. by Kishwar Rizvi (Review).” Journal of Shi’a Islamic Studies, vol. 11, no. 3/4, Summer/Autumn2018 2018, p. 245–N.PAG. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1353/isl.2018.0012.

Corinne, Lefèvre, and Ines G. Županov. “Introduction: Cultural Dialogue in South Asia and Beyond: Narratives, Images and Community (Sixteenth-Nineteenth Centuries).” Journal of the Economic & Social History of the Orient, vol. 55, no. 2/3, June 2012, pp. 215–219. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1163/15685209-12341234.

D’Alleva, Anne. “The Fundamentals of Interpretation: formal and contextual analysis.: Look! The Fundamentals of Art History, Prentice Hall Inc, 2004, pp. 23-61.

Keating, Jessica. “Metamorphosis at the Mughal Court.” Art History, vol. 38, no. 4, Sept. 2015, pp. 732–747. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/1467-8365.12178.

Koch, Ebba. “The Symbolic Possession of the World: European Cartography in Mughal Allegory and History Painting.” Journal of the Economic & Social History of the Orient, vol. 55, no. 2/3, June 2012, pp. 547–580. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1163/15685209-12341245.

 

Group 8

Tarquin Haussermann

Word Count: 975