The Indian Conquest of Catholic Art: The Mughals, the Jesuits, and Imperial Mural Painting

Author(s): Gauvin Alexander Bailey

Source: Art Journal, Vol. 57, No. 1, The Reception of Christian Devotional Art (Spring, 1998),
pp. 24-30
Published by: College Art Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/777989
Accessed: 27/11/2010 09:30

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
 The Indian Conquest
Catholic Art
ofTheMughals,the Jesuits,and ImperialMuralPainting
Gauvin Alexander Bailey
The Encounter
Recent scholarship has acknowledgedthat the art of early
colonial Latin America was often the product of a partner-
ship between indigenous and conquest civilizations, and
not merely a provincial variation on European models.1
24
Either covertly or with the tacit encouragement of their
European employers, Amerindian artisans perpetuated
pre-Conquest iconographies, ideals, and rituals in their
Catholic art commissions. Nahua artists in sixteenth-
century New Spain, for example, introducedpre-Conquest
glyphs and styles into conventual mural cycles, making it
possible for them not only to understandthe new faith on
their own terms but even to assert their own identity or
resist church authority.Nevertheless, amongthe peoples of
the former Aztec and Inka empires-along with other
groups under Spanish rule from Hispaniola to Luzon--
conquest was the reality.The importedcivilization had the
upper hand, and the art of these regions became increas-
ingly dominatedby Europeanforms and meanings.
What would have happened if the situation had been
reversed; if the non-Europeans had chosen to patronize
Catholic religious art on their own initiative rather than
having it forced upon them against their will? What if the
encoding was overt, and it was the missionaries who were
scrambling to preserve their doctrinal integrity? Imagine
for a moment that Cuauht6moc or Atawallpa, the last
emperorsof Mexico and Peru, had invited Spanish mendi-
cants to their courts and ordered them to conceive and
direct Catholic mural cycles in their own palaces, appro-
priating the foreign iconographyas a vehicle for their own
propaganda. We need not look far for this fantasy to
become reality. Sixty years after the conquest of Tenochti-
tlin (Mexico City), and while the Inka Empire was still
being subjugated, a prince with a passion for world reli-
gions and late Renaissance art invited a Jesuit mission to
live at his royal palace in India and direct his art projects.
The result was the most visually potent figuraliconography
ever devised by an Islamic power.
The prince was the Mughal EmperorAkbar (1556-
SPRING 1998
1605), followed by his son Jahangir (1605-27), descen-
dants of Ghengis Khan and rulers of the richest and most
powerfulMuslim state on earth, a nation that a few decades
later would produce such wonders as the Taj Mahal
(1632-43) and the Red Fort of Delhi (1639-48). In open
defiance of Islam's traditionalabjurationof figural art, the
Mughal royal family evinced an active interest in-and
even open worship of-Catholic devotional images. After
inviting the first Jesuit mission to court in 1580, Akbar
ordered his artists to paint hundreds of iconic portraitsof
Jesus, Mary,and a panoply of Christiansaints in the styles
of the late Renaissance to adorn books, albums, jewelry,
and even treaties (fig. 1). These images were used in court
rituals and majorroyal festivities such as coronations.The
dramatic culmination came when imperial throne rooms,
harems, tombs, and gardens were prominently adorned
with mural paintings of Christian figures. Astounded and
delighted, European travelers wrote home declaring that
the Muslim regime was on the verge of conversion. They
could not have been more wrong. Far from capitulating to
Western cultural superiority, the Mughals took European
materialculture and put it to workfor themselves.2
Like the Portuguese strongholds in the south and
west of India, the MughalEmpire (1526-1707) had arrived
only recently, and as Muslims its rulers were also a reli-
gious minorityin a predominantlyHindu continent. Unlike
the Portuguese,however,the Mughalspromoteda policy of
religious tolerance and political alliance in the hopes of
maintaining harmony between themselves and their sub-
jects. In a subtle and erudite combination of Muslim and
Hindu beliefs, philosophical inquiry, and spiritual con-
sciousness that drew deeply on the mystical branch of
Islam called Sufism,the emperorsforged a syncretic ideol-
ogy of kingship that would reflect the multiculturalmakeup
of their growingempire, while promotingtheir own unify-
ing image as divinely chosen rulers of a new millennium.3
What they lacked, however,was a visual manifestationof
this ideology.

FIG. 1 Attributable
to KesuDas.Crucifixion,
c. 1585-90. Opaquewatercolorsand gold on
77/8x 7 inches(20 x 18 cm).
paper,approximately
LucknowStateMuseum,Lucknow,India.
In Asia, the newly formedSociety of Jesus was in the
vanguardof mission activity, combining rigorousscholarly
training with an approachto mission work that privileged
tolerance and accommodationover the bigotrythat was all
too common in other orders. By treating their mission
encounters as a dialogue instead of a harangue,the Jesuits
earned a reputationas skilled debaters and were welcomed
to the courts of some of Asia's most powerfulregimes, such
as Mughal India.4 They were also known as purveyors of
fine arts.
Akbar capitalized on both of these skills. First he
amassed an astounding collection of Renaissance visual
and literary artifacts. The Jesuits presented him with an
extensive library of printed books comparable to the col-
lections of the great Italian preachers of the day;5 a vast
number of engravings of the work of artists ranging from
25
Michelangelo, Raphael, and TaddeoZuccaroto Dtirerand
Martin de Vos; oil paintings donated by the great aristo-
cratic families of Rome; and even a Portuguese painter.6
With Akbar's encouragement, and in close consultation
with the Jesuits, Mughal artists deftly and selectively co-
opted European subjects as well as stylistic conventions
and pictorial realism. Mughal paintings influenced by
Catholic art ranged from iconic representationsof individ-
ual saints with an overtly propagandisticfunction to narra-
tive groups containingboth sacred and profanefigures that
served as entertainment during literary gatherings.7 As
Akbar's royal panegyrist wrote, "His Majesty ... looks
upon [the art of painting] as a means, both of study and
amusement."8
The Mughals,however,were not just interested in art
lessons. By holding regular debates with the Jesuits in the
ARTJOURNAL

26
FIG. 2 School of Kesu Das. The Philosopher King, c. 1585-90. Mughal mural
painting, approximately 13 x 15 inches (33 x 38.1 cm). Khwibg•lh, Fatehpur
Sikri,India (reconstruction). The image is copied from an engraving by Georg
Pencz, Joseph Telling His Dream to His Father (1544).
imperial forum called the Ibnadatkhana(Debating Hall),9
and by submittingtheir beliefs to a thoroughinterrogation,
the court acquired a deep understanding not only of the
narrative meaning of Christian pictures, but of justifica-
tions for the use of images being formulatedat the time by
Catholic churchmen at the Council of Trent (1645-63).lo
The emperors' European library also included recent
works stressing the power of images, which Akbar had
translatedby secretaries such as Abd al-SattarIbn Qasim
Lahorr (active 1597-1615).11 It is hard to say to what
degree Catholic thought influenced the Mughal'sown atti-
tudes to the figuralarts, but since the two cultures already
shared a similar horizon of expectation due to ideas that
derived from a common Neoplatonic cultural heritage, it
was probablymore a case of concurrence than influence.12
This affinity,likely perceived by Akbar before he met the
Jesuits, was probably one of his main incentives to invite
them to court.
The Murals
Murals(and sculptures) depicting Christiansubjects were
executed in the principal rooms of at least four imperial
palaces, the tomb of Akbar in Sikandra,several royal gar-
dens, and also in a number of buildings belonging to
prominent nobles.13 Akbar initiated the practice in the
1580s, when he began imitating Catholic ritual by appear-
ing in person (or representedby a portrait)in the company
SPRING 1998
of Europeandevotional oil paintings during religious festi-
vals. At the same time he (and possibly his mother) com-
missioned permanent murals depicting Jesus, Mary,and
various prophets for the royal palace at Fatehpur Sikri,
including a portrait of a prince taken from a German
engravingof the sixteenth century (fig. 2).14 Nevertheless,
it was Jahangir who commissioned the largest number of
devotional murals, beginning in 1608 and continuing until
about 1621, when Catholic influence began to wane after
the arrivalin 1615 of an official English embassy.
Catholic-inspired murals appeared in two general
areas: a semipublic, official setting, such as the imperial
thrones and tombs, and a more intimate context often asso-
ciated with women-for example, garden pavilions or the
apartmentsof the zenana (harem).The imperial haremwas
the setting not only for musical and other entertainments
but also for importantceremonies such as royal marriages,
funerals, and religious festivals; and the harem housed as
strict a hierarchy as the male household. Royal women
wielded great political powerin this period and were them-
selves avid patronsof the arts.
The earliest of Jahangir's public saints' murals
appeared in Agra Fort around the emperor'sthrone in his
Hall of Public Audience, where he would sit every day
before the nobility to give promotionsand receive petitions
(fig. 3). Soon afterward, similar murals appeared at his
palaces at Lahore and Mandu. Typically, the saints were
arrangedinto a frieze on the wall over the throne, usually
focusing on a pairedportraitof the VirginMaryand Jesus as
Salvator Mundi. Other saints' portraitsadorned the upper
walls of interiorreceptionrooms,and domes were frequent-
ly painted with angels (fig. 4) and images of Christin bene-
diction, or Crucifixions.The Crucifixion,a theme popularin
Mughal miniature painting as well, was especially abhor-
rent to Muslims,who deny that Jesus was crucified.
Privateroomsin the haremand gardenpavilions were
also extensively paintedwith saints' portraits-for example,
in the harem in Lahore Fort and the garden of Jahangir's
consort, the Empress Nur Jahan, at Agra. Recent cleaning
at Lahore Fort has uncovered an important collection of
original paintings of male and female saints in a small
pavilion of the period. They include St. Gregoryreading a
book (fig. 5) copied froma late sixteenth-centuryengraving
by Anton Wiericx, and St. Anthony Abbot (fig. 6) and St.
Dorothyoffering a tray of fruit, also after Flemish engrav-
ings.15These images originally flanked miniatureportraits
of princes, only one of which-a picture of the future Shah
Jahan-survives.16 The juxtaposition of holy images with
actual members of the royal family lent the latter palpable
spirituallegitimacy.
Nur Jahan's Bagh-i Nur Afshan at Agra (1621), a
miniatureharemin a gardensetting, was also adornedwith
saints' murals. Twoof the eight figuralpanel paintings that
FIG. 3 Payag.TheEmperor FinalEncounterwith ShahJahanbeforethe Latter'sDeparturefor the Deccan(detail),c. 1640. Opaquewatercolorson
Jahangir's
paper,117/8x 8 inches(30.0 x 20.3 cm). The RoyalCollectionof HerMajestyQueen ElizabethII.

FIG. 4 Schoolof Abo'l-Hasan. Qubbatal-Khadrac. 1610-20. Mughalmural
painting,approximately16 x 16 feet (4.9 x 4.9 m). Vaultof the KalaBurj,Lahore
Fort,Lahore,Pakistan.
FIG. 5 Schoolof AbW'l-Hasan. St. Gregorythe Great,c. 1610-20,
Mughalmuralpainting,approximately 523/4x 23%5/inches(134 x
60 cm). Northspandrelof the west wall,the "sehdrTi"pavilion,
Quadrangle,LahoreFort,Lahore,Pakistan.
Jahangir's
 originally adorned its pavilions can be identified today:
they include an introspective portraitof Jesus (fig. 7) and
a female saint (fig. 8), which bring to mind the combina-
tions of Jesus and Mary in the audience room paintings.
The Bagh-i Nur Afshan murals are echoed in a miniature
painting from the period that shows Jahangir and Nur
Jahan in a similar garden setting, possibly in Mandu.Here
the more typical Jesus and Mary duo is repeated in the
pavilion'supper frieze.
Clearly, these ensembles of saints' pictures were
intended to convey a distinct iconographicalmeaning. As
we have seen, images of saints were consistently arranged
in rows in the upper register of the wall, or on the ceiling.
This would suggest a symbolic division between heavenly
and earthly spheres, which conforms to a prevalent Sufi
doctrine that depicts the heavens as consisting of several
tiers of angels and saints who transmit God's light to cog-
nizant mortals." Islamic tradition also accepted Jesus'
apostles as prototypes for pious Muslims, and some even
28
believed that they accepted Islam. Therefore,many of the
saints arranged around images of Jesus may have repre-
sented the apostles, used here to parallel the devotion of
FIG. 6 Schoolof AbW'l-Hasan.
St. AnthonyAbbot,c. 1610-20. Mughalmural
painting,approximately 523/4x 235/8inches(134 x 60 cm). Northspandrelof
the east wall,the "sehdari"pavilion,Jahangir's
Quadrangle,LahoreFort,
Lahore,Pakistan.
SPRING1998
Mughalsubjects to their emperor.The pairing of Jesus and
Maryis consistent enough to suggest that it is a reference
to monarchy,or to the actual person of the emperorand his
divine lineage throughthe female line, a theory borne out
by Jahangir'suse of these images on his royal seal.18
A brief examinationof Islamic and Hindu traditions
provides a key to this motif. First of all, Jesus and Mary
both figure prominently in the Koran and are revered by
traditional Islam. Jesus was especially associated with
asceticism and moral leadership, and he became a model
and proto-masterfor Sufis. Mughallegitimacy drewheavily
upon Sufism. Jesus also fit into Jahangir'smessianic ideol-
ogy, since Muslims believed that he would reappear on
Judgment Day to slay the Antichrist (dijjal) and usher in
the Golden Age.19The royal genealogy,a vital pedigree for
royal prerogative,included a mythical proto-mothercalled
Queen Alanqoa, who was impregnated by a divine light
from God and whom royal panegyristsopenly comparedto
the Virgin Mary and to Akbar's mother, whose name was
Mary.20Jahangir,whose motherwas also called Mary,was
praised as one whose breath is Jesus.21
The pairingof a male and female figurealso relates to
FIG. 7 Schoolof AbI'l-Hasan. Jesus,c. 1613-21. Mughalmuralpainting,
317/ x 247/sinches(81 x 63 cm).Westwall,northpavilion,Bagh-iNur
Afshan,Agra,India.
 FIG. 8 School of Abu'l-Hasan.
Female Saint, c. 1613-21.
Mughal mural painting,
317/8x 247/8 inches (81 x 63 cm).
West wall, north pavilion,
Bagh-i Nur Afshan, Agra, India.
an importantHindu traditionof kingship in which the king
is the husbandof the earth, and togetherthey are the father
(pita)and mother(mata) of their people.22The division into
tiers and the combinationof earthly and heavenly images
aroundthe thronealso reflect the Hindu practice of treating
thrones and palaces as microcosms of the universe. On a
more basic level, the inclusion of the emperor's person
among holy pictures suggests a retable in which he is the
principal object of devotion, a notion underscored by the
open practice of both Hindu and Muslim traditionsof wor-
ship before the monarch's person. These few examples
should give us an idea of the many levels of meaning
employed in creating a new hybrid allegorical language of
kingship. The Hindu context is especially importantin a
nationwhere Hindus formedthe majority;it is quite possi-
ble that the Mughalschose Catholicimagerybecause Islam
itself did not provide an iconographictraditioncapable of
combatingthe visually potent pantheonof Hindu deities.
Whetherin a formalor a gardensetting, these murals
were meant for a limited audience. Christian devotional
pictures were painted on a small scale and never appeared
on the exteriors of buildings, perhaps so as not to offend
the religious sensibilities of the general public. They were
intended only for the select group of elites who gained
entranceto the Hall of Public Audiences and would be suf-
ficiently immersed in palace culture to comprehend their
message. They specifically echo the blend of esoteric
Hindu, Muslim, and Mongol ideologies professed by a
courtly brotherhoodfounded by Akbar in 1583 called the
Den-i Illahi.23 The Dzn-i IllahT consciously abandoned
public prayerand otherformalaspects of orthodoxworship
29
in favor of direct homage to their leader. Although they
came from different backgrounds, faiths, and languages,
these courtierscould be united in their fealty to the emper-
or through a complex, many-layered ideology of kingship
that drew on India's heterogeneous traditions. Catholic
devotional art provided the perfect visual manifestationof
this fealty since it was perceived as culturally neutral; its
realism and immediacy were believed to be universal and
allowed it to transcend cultural and ethnic boundariesand
embrace the whole of humanity.In this context, therefore,
Catholic devotional art was produced and received in a
profoundlydifferent manner than in Europe and many of
its colonies and challenges our traditional understanding
of reception as somethingpassive and derivative.
Notes
1. Recent studies in English include James Lockhart,"Some Nahua Concepts
in Postconquest Guise," History of European Ideas 6, no. 4 (1985): 465-82;
Sabine MacCormack, "Pachacuti: Miracles, Punishments, and Last Judgment:
Visionary Past and Prophetic Future in Early Colonial Peru," AmericanHistorical
Review93, no. 4 (October 1988): 960-1006, and Religion in the Andes (Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1991), esp. 249-80; Cecelia F. Klein, "Editor'sState-
ment: Depictions of the Dispossessed," Art Journal 49, no. 2 (Summer 1990):
106-109; Gabrielle Palmer and Donna Pierce, Cambios:The Spirit of Transforma-
tion in Spanish Colonial Art (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press,
1992); Jeanette Favrot Peterson, The Paradise Garden Murals of Malinalco
(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1993); Serge Gruzinski, Painting the Conquest
(Paris: Flammarion, 1992), and The Conquestof Mexico, trans. Eileen Corrigan
(Cambridge: Polity Press, 1993); James Kiracofe, "Architectural Fusion and
Indigenous Ideology in Early Colonial Teposcolula,"Anales del Instituto de Inves-
tigaciones Estiticas 66 (1995): 45-84; and Carol Damian, The Virginof the Andes:
Art and Ritual in Colonial Cuzco(Miami Beach: Grassfield Press, 1995).
2. This article is an extract from my 1996 dissertation for the Fine Arts
Departmentat HarvardUniversity, entitled "CounterReformationSymbolism and
Allegory in Mughal Painting," which I am currently expanding into a book com-
paring Jesuit mission art in Asia and Latin America. See also my "Unto the Indies:
The Jesuits and the GreatMogul,"Company13, no. 2 (Winter 1995): 8-10; "In the
ART JOURNAL
 Mannerof the Frankish Masters:A Safavid Painting and Its Flemish Inspiration," A Captain remarked,"[Doyou pay courtesy]to an image of the Virgin,or to the Vir-
Oriental Art 40, no. 4 (Winter 1994-95): 29-34; "The Catholic Shrines of Agra," gin herself?". . . I answered, "Sir,we do not venerate the imagesfor what they are,
Arts of Asia 23, no. 4 (July-August 1993): 131-37; and "The Lahore Mirat al- because we are well aware that they are merelypaper or canvas with pigments; it is
Quds and the Impact of Jesuit Theater on Mughal Painting," South Asian Studies because of those whom they represent.Just as with your fermans [decrees]:you do
13 (1997): 95-108. not touch them to yourforeheads because they arepapers coveredin ink, but because
3. The millennium of the Muslim hijra took place during Akbar's reign, in you know that they contain your orderand will." The King... replied... "he rea-
1591-92. Akbar responded in 1584 by beginning a new millennium, known as the soned well."
Divine Era, based on the solar calendar, in contrast to the lunar calendar used by
[British Library,Add.MSS9854, f. 67a; for an extract of this discussion, see Fer-
Muslims. Akbar assumed all of the ideology of a mahdi, or messiah, who would
nao Guerreiro,Jahangir and the Jesuits, trans. C. H. Payne (London:G. Routledge
usher in a Golden Age of justice and peace, and his panegyrists complied. For a
and Sons Ltd., 1930), 59.]
discussion of Akbar's millennial movement, see Abfl'l-Fazl, Ain-i Akbari, vol. 2,
13. Palaces include the forts at Fatehpur Sikri, Agra, Lahore, and Ajmir, the
trans. H. Blochmann (Rpt. Delhi: Low Price Publications, 1989), 29-30; and S. A.
royal palace at Ahmedabad, and the Perimahal palace at Lahore;gardens include
A. Rizvi, "Philosophical Traditionsat Akbar'sCourt,"in Michael Brand and Glenn
the Bagh-i Nur Afshan at Agra, Nur Jahan's garden at Mandu; and subimperial
D. Lowry,FatehpurSikri (Bombay:MargPublications, 1987), 185-98.
examples appear at the house of Asaf Khan (the brotherof Nur Jahan) and the Car-
4. See Andrew C. Ross, A Vision Betrayed: The Jesuits in Japan and China,
avanserai of Mehr Banu Agha in Delhi. Manyof the sources are well knownto spe-
1542-1742 (Edinburgh:Orbis Books, 1994); and Dauril Alden, The Making of an
cialists and are listed in E. D. Maclagan, TheJesuits and the GreatMogul (London:
Enterprise:The Society of Jesus in Portugal, Its Empire, and Beyond, 1540-1750
Burns, Gates and Washbourne, 1932). I have found several new references in
(Stanford:StanfordUniversity Press, 1996).
unpublished Jesuit letters in Rome and Madrid. Akbar's tomb was rebuilt by
5. The Jesuits furnished Akbar with a library designed specifically with reli-
Jahangir in 1613, and the paintings date from this period. Although sculptures of
gious debating in mind, since it reproduced the kind of library owned by the great
Jesus, the Crucifix, and the Virgin Mary are mentioned in published sources and
Jesuit preachers in Rome, who discoursed by means of commentary,or explication
Jesuit letters, I have published the only surviving example, a life-sized statue of
de texte. The collection was heavily scholastic, with an emphasis on works aimed
the Virgin (c. 1600) which is presently in the compound of Agra Cathedral.See my
at non-Christians and texts justifying the use of images, and it also included the
"Catholic Shrines of Agra."
fundamentalJesuit writings, as well as books on Portuguese history and law to sat-
14. A Jesuit letter dated 1600 mentions these biblical pictures at Fatehpur
isfy Akbar's interest in that nation. Particularlyinfluential was the lengthy history Sikri (ARSI, Goa 55, f. 20b).
of the world by the Dominican bishop of Florence, St. Antoninus, which was exten-
15. Because these paintings were in the harem, they were never described by
sively translated by Akbar'swriters.
contemporaryEuropean travelers.
30 6. Many of these images survive in the original or in copies. Others are men-
16. See Ilay Cooper, "Sikhs, Saints, and Shadows of Angels: Some Mughal
tioned in the missionaries' letters, which constantly refer to the emperor'sinterest
Murals in Buildings along the North Wall of Lahore Fort," South Asian Studies 9
in religious images and include a litany of requests for pictures, whether retables,
(1993): 20-27.
large and small engravings, illustrated books, and even a copperplate to make 17. This tradition comes from the twelfth-centuryPersian mystic and philoso-
engravings from (e.g., in the Jesuit archives in Rome [ARSI] Goa 14, f. 288a
pher Shihabuddin SuhrawardiMaqtul, the founder of the Eastern or Ishraki School
[August 20, 1595]; f. 344a [August 18, 1597]; Goa 461, f. 64a [September 24, of philosophy. See J. F. Richards, "The Formulation of Imperial Authority under
1607]). The third mission broughta Portuguese painter to court, and Akbar and his
Akbar and Jahangir,"in Richards, Kingship and Authorityin South Asia (Madison:
son commissioned so many Christian images from him that he had no time for the
University of Wisconsin Press, 1978), 265-66.
father'swork (ARSI, Goa 14, f. 288a [August 20, 1595]; Goa 461, f. 30b [Septem-
18. British Library,Add.MSS9854, f. 72a.
ber 8, 1595]).
19. According to the medieval Muslim historian Ibn Khaldun, "After (the
7. Both genres of painting were produced at the same time and by the same
Mahdi), 'lsa (Jesus) will descend and kill (the Antichrist), and have him as the
artists, although some specialized in pastiches while others tended to make direct
leader in his prayers." See S. A. A. Rizvi, The WonderThat WasIndia (London:
copies of European pictures and more serious works of an ideological nature.
Sidgwick and Jackson, 1987), 258.
8. Abtf'l-Fazl,Asn-Akbar, vol. 1, 113.
20. The Akbarnama, for example, compares Alanqoa to the Virgin Mary (vol.
9. These debates were common in the last decades of the sixteenth century,but
1, 179) and to Miryam Makhani (vol. 1, 179-80). See Abii'l-Fazl, Akbarnama,
under Jahangir only one lengthy debate took place in 1608 (British Library,
trans. H. Beveridge (Calcutta:Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902-39).
Add.MSS 9854, fols. 64a-76b). In addition, the emperor frequently asked the
21. The reference is from the Ma'a-sir-i by 'Abd al-Bclqi Nahavandi,
fathers to explain pictures on a more spontaneous basis. Rahrnmi
ed. M. Hidayet Hosain (Calcutta:Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1927), bk. 3, p. 12: "In
10. For example, Gabriele Paleotti, Cesare Baronio, and Antonio Possevino. In
breath he is Jesus, the brightest moon; In heart he is a sea with abundantwater."It
fact, the Jesuits at the Mughal court sent accounts of these debates directly to such
was cited by Ebba Koch in "The Influence of the Jesuit Missions on Symbolic Rep-
prominent reformersas Cardinal Bellarmino (1542-1621) and Claudio Aquaviva resentations of the Mughal Emperors,"in Christian Troll, ed., Islam in India, vol.
(1543-1615). Most of the letters in the Roman archives are addressed to Aquavi-
1 (New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House, 1982), 27. This is a reference to Jesus'
va, since he was the General of the Society, and one letter from Francisco Corsi
breath, which gave life to a clay bird with God's permission (Koran, 5:110), an
(dated June 18, 1607) was sent to Cardinal Bellarmino (e.g., ARSI Goa 461, fols.
image that became popular in poetry, as, for example, in a line from Hafez: "Ah,
60a-63a). On Bellarmino's reforms, see Stefania Macioce, Undique Splendent where is someone inspired with Jesus's breath to inspire me?" See Javad Nur-
(Rome: De Luca Edizione d'Arte, 1990), 22-37.
bakhshi, Jesus in the Eyes of the Sufis (London: Khaniqahi-Nimatullahi Publica-
11. These included the spiritual exercises of Ignatius of Loyola, the meditative
tions, 1983), 57.
picture book Adnotationeset meditationes in evangelia of Jer6nimo Nadal, as well 22. Ronald Inden, "Ritual, Authorityand Cyclic Time in Hindu Kingship," in
as a good representation of the scholastics (St. Thomas wrote prolifically about the
Richards, Kingship and Authority,30.
use of images). See E. D. Maclagan, "The Jesuit Missions to the EmperorAkbar,"
23. This was consistent with a new social contract instituted by Akbar. To
Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 65 (1896): 68-69. The sources tell us that
cement loyalties within their far-flung and heterogeneous empire, the emperors
Akbar had at least some of his Europeanworks translated-for example, a copy of
enforced an allegiance with their most prominentcourtiers modeled after the mas-
the history of Greek and Roman philosophy by St. Antoninus of Florence (1458),
ter-disciple tradition of Sufism (and by extension the affiliation of Jesus with his
which he had rendered into Persian by his court historian 'Abd al-Sattar ibn
apostles), which they called the Din-i Illahi, or "Divine Faith." This discipleship
Qasim Lahori as part of the latter's Thamratal-Falasafa (The Fruit of Philosophy),
was similar to a present-day fraternityor masonic lodge and depended upon con-
written in Lahore in 1603 (National Archives of India, New Delhi, 2713; India stant personal contact, a system of promotions,a rigid hierarchy,and even regular
Office Library,London, Or. 5893). That same work included material "mixed in
prostrationsbefore the emperorin imitation of prayer.See Richards, Kingship and
from other histories" (2713, f. 3b; Or.5893, f. 7). Akbar also ordered Xavier him-
Authority,267-68; and Rizvi, Wonder,195ff.
self to translate "some histories" and Bible stories into Persian (ARSI, Goa 461
[September 8, 1596], f. 32). A letter written by Jerome Xavier on September 16,
1603, reports that Jahangir (he was still a prince at the time), read Nadal's book
(ARSI, Goa 461 [September 16, 1603], fols. 52b-53a).
12. Both Mughal and Counter-Reformationnotions about images come from GAUVINALEXANDERBAILEYis assistant professor of
Neoplatonism and ancient writers such as Pseudo-Dionysus. Shared concepts
Renaissance and Baroque art at Clark University.He is
included the educational and mnemonic powerof images, their potential as an emo-
tional stimulus to piety and meditation, and the ability of an image to show the completing a book entitled A Global Partnership in the
invisible (or spiritual) by means of the visible, the latter deriving from a Neoplaton- Arts: Jesuit Mission Art and Ethnic Identity in Asia and
ic concept prevalent in Sufism. This quotation from the great religious debate of
1608 shows how Jahangirand Jerome Xavier agreed in their justification of images: Latin America, 1542-1773.

SPRING 1998